530 réponses à ce sujet

[AngryFrozenWater]

Fexelea wrote...

I vote for adding a pet that you can send to town with your loot! Some areas are just too big for the inventory space we get... *Orzmar*
Or a horse... or an option to at least get some of the valuable mats out of junk you find that occupies less space... or an option to have your companions have proper inventory as well... But yeah, pet that goes to town for you is best, as demonstrated by torchlight. My cat rocks lol

Hehe. About Orzammar.... BW thought of everything. There's even a merchant stuck in the middle of nowhere. Saves you from going back to the city or camp.

[Sir JK]

Personally I've never really liked inventories and looting. At best it was basic resource management, but mostly it was just a chore. I generally respond better to inventory systems with a weight and/or size limit, rather than list of an arbitrary number of items of undefined nature (where a gemstone takes up as much space as a full suit of armour). I think the reason I'm not so fond of inventories and loot systems boil down to two reasons:

1. Space. Weightlimit doesn't concern me as much as volume really. An extra weapon is just another 2,5-5 kg really, but the volume it takes up is another story alltogether. It is just as large as the one you're carrying in your hands. It's not going to fit in your backpack. So where am I carrying the looted weapons (not to mention armour, which will be rigid enough to take up the same volume as your torso)? Why can't I see them? If I have a packmule or some sort of baggage, why is there a limit to have many items I can have and why can I use them in a combat situation?

In fact, many iconic fantasy weapons weren't really carried by soldiers outside of battles but stored on the huge lumbering carts that make the baggage train (polearms were of course carried on the shoulder when marching. But longswords, which is to say twohanders, were often transported on carts. As were crossbows, warbows. lances, maces, swords, and so on).

2. Something that bugs me about looting junk is the fact that it can be dropped off in any store for a reasonable price... despite that there's often no forseeable use for the junk in question. Why are the shopkeepers buying the stuff? What use do a blacksmith have of elfroot? Why would a fence be interested in wolf pelts? Sure, I can imagine a battered piece of armour being sold for it's metal, but not for very much (and certainly not to someone outside the metallic professions). It'll need extensive repairs at best and reforging at worst, so a few coppers at best for the whole piece. But on the whole my biggest gripe with looting isn't the looting itself, but that people are buying the junk...

Just my personal opinion and hardly anything that'll affect my opinion on the game as a whole, but I do think that the inventory and looting system of most rpg is very flawed in it's premise. I've yet to see any system that have seemed real or even useful (as opposed to a time sink). I understand the purpose of it however and wouldn't advocate removing it (fully or partly) without good cause.

[Ortaya Alevli]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Fexelea wrote...

I vote for adding a pet that you can send to town with your loot! Some areas are just too big for the inventory space we get... *Orzmar*
Or a horse... or an option to at least get some of the valuable mats out of junk you find that occupies less space... or an option to have your companions have proper inventory as well... But yeah, pet that goes to town for you is best, as demonstrated by torchlight. My cat rocks lol

Hehe. About Orzammar.... BW thought of everything. There's even a merchant stuck in the middle of nowhere. Saves you from going back to the city or camp.

But the catch? Ruck rips you off. Don't sell him your sin.

[SpiriT_Of_Jazz]

Sir JK wrote...

Personally I've never really liked inventories and looting. At best it was basic resource management, but mostly it was just a chore. I generally respond better to inventory systems with a weight and/or size limit, rather than list of an arbitrary number of items of undefined nature (where a gemstone takes up as much space as a full suit of armour). I think the reason I'm not so fond of inventories and loot systems boil down to two reasons:
1. Space. Weightlimit doesn't concern me as much as volume really. An extra weapon is just another 2,5-5 kg really, but the volume it takes up is another story alltogether. It is just as large as the one you're carrying in your hands. It's not going to fit in your backpack. So where am I carrying the looted weapons (not to mention armour, which will be rigid enough to take up the same volume as your torso)? Why can't I see them? If I have a packmule or some sort of baggage, why is there a limit to have many items I can have and why can I use them in a combat situation?
In fact, many iconic fantasy weapons weren't really carried by soldiers outside of battles but stored on the huge lumbering carts that make the baggage train (polearms were of course carried on the shoulder when marching. But longswords, which is to say twohanders, were often transported on carts. As were crossbows, warbows. lances, maces, swords, and so on).
2. Something that bugs me about looting junk is the fact that it can be dropped off in any store for a reasonable price... despite that there's often no forseeable use for the junk in question. Why are the shopkeepers buying the stuff? What use do a blacksmith have of elfroot? Why would a fence be interested in wolf pelts? Sure, I can imagine a battered piece of armour being sold for it's metal, but not for very much (and certainly not to someone outside the metallic professions). It'll need extensive repairs at best and reforging at worst, so a few coppers at best for the whole piece. But on the whole my biggest gripe with looting isn't the looting itself, but that people are buying the junk...
Just my personal opinion and hardly anything that'll affect my opinion on the game as a whole, but I do think that the inventory and looting system of most rpg is very flawed in it's premise. I've yet to see any system that have seemed real or even useful (as opposed to a time sink). I understand the purpose of it however and wouldn't advocate removing it (fully or partly) without good cause.

They are traders, and can resell junk to other people who need it, for a bigger price. Basic middle-age economics, plus this is still a game, we shouldn't be too realistic.
I think that the Dungeon Siege inventory system is the best. Relatively small inventory space, and a mule for carrying the rest. What bugs me more is the ridiculous droppings on some creeps - I mean, a wolf dropped a lyrium potion? The dogs drop weapons... I was really pleasantly surprised when I killed the first dragon, I think it's in the Brescilian forest dungeon, but he drops no loot, instead you get it from his hoard. That was cool.

[Sir JK]

SpiriT_Of_Jazz wrote...
They are traders, and can resell junk to other people who need it, for a bigger price. Basic middle-age economics, plus this is still a game, we shouldn't be too realistic.

The problem that I see with this statement is that often the traders you sell to are presented as craftsmen in their workshop. So in order to sell the junk you just sold them, they'll have to close to shop, haul the junk to another craftsman and then sell it. Or pay someone to do that for them.
So either you're selling the items at a ludicrous loss given that the ones you sell it to apparently are willing to pay you for extra work on their side or it's just an excuse to hand the player money (but not going so far to remove looting alltogether).

But yes. It's just a game and it's not something I'm going to lose any sleep over, just wanted to voice that opinion here in this topic since it seemed suitable

Modifié par Sir JK, 07 octobre 2010 - 01:32 .

[B3taMaxxx]

hangmans tree wrote...

My latest concern...maybe.
I have to say I was kind of put off with DAO inventory. Hoarding all that junk in the inventory was nothing more than source of income. I began to question who is my warden by proffesion? Most time consuming was playing with vast inventory, checking what was useful and what I could sell. Always stuck with insufficient funds for those special items I wanted to buy. Where's the point in that kind of item selection which in 80-90% cases is just space consuming currency?

 I suppose you could argue the mundane items add to 'realism'. I didn't really mind the junk, well, when I had enough backpack upgrades that is.

[k9medusa]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I'd limit it not with a lore-breaking restriction on commerce, but instead by instituting realistic inventory limits based on weight rather than item numbers.
Gems are small and easy to carry. Greatswords not so much.

My main gripe about so call "realistic inventory" there is not fun (at least to me).  I want to play a game and do RL work.   No I do not wan to carry 100 pounds of firewood and 4 tents just to rest my magi and Yes I do like to rest my magi after every battle.  I know some people who don't want to play like that.. I say good for them, but that system is not for me. I like the NWN 1 or 2 inventory system, it is weight base (may be not realistic) and size based.  Why can't we have  a system like that in other games as well? ME3, DA2, etc

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Gems are small and easy to carry. Greatswords not so much.

From a design standpoint, the Witcher had a really solid inventory system. With non-weapons it was effectively a list (thought the UI was that of a grid), so there was a reasonable restriction on your carrying capacity and your potions were capped at 10 per slot. Weapons were heavily restricted, and you could only carry two extra weapons at most, even as loot.

The only thing I would like Bioware to borrow from the Witcher is their inventory grid. It strikes a good balance between inventory tetris and agravating list.

[The Hardest Thing In The World]

In Exile wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Gems are small and easy to carry. Greatswords not so much.

From a design standpoint, the Witcher had a really solid inventory system. With non-weapons it was effectively a list (thought the UI was that of a grid), so there was a reasonable restriction on your carrying capacity and your potions were capped at 10 per slot. Weapons were heavily restricted, and you could only carry two extra weapons at most, even as loot.

The only thing I would like Bioware to borrow from the Witcher is their inventory grid. It strikes a good balance between inventory tetris and agravating list.

I like this, it's quite similar to what I suggested. There really should be a restriction on the weapons you can carry and you shouldn't be able to carry extra armor with you. I need to play The Witcher one day.

Modifié par The Hardest Thing In The World, 07 octobre 2010 - 03:01 .

[SirOccam]

What I'd like to see is for looting corpses not to be a matter of course. It's a staple of RPGs, traditionally, but if you think about it, what kind of story includes the heroes rifling through the pockets of every single foe they've defeated for any tiny thing of value they can find, then lugging it all to a merchant?

I'm not saying that should never happen, but it seems weird that that's standard operating procedure. It's like all RPG heroes are necessarily scavengers.

I've said before that I'm really only interested in things that contribute to the story. That's why I play on the easiest difficulty level, and also why I use a console command to give myself like 1000 gold at the beginning of each playthrough. Now if being poor was a plot point, and not just a restriction on you as a player, then I would happily endure poverty. In fact, I'm a little surprised that it wasn't a plot point for city elves. They excel at poverty, or so I'm told.

But your group never remarks about how much money you have, and whether you can buy something or not never figures into the story in a meaningful way.

What I'd like to see is a different way to make money besides looting corpses/stealing from people (and besides monetary rewards for completing quests). It can figure into the story and be an interesting plot point. Just look at the book The Name of the Wind by Patrick Rothfuss. Kvothe's finances get a lot of attention for much of the flashback part of the book, and they drive him to do certain things and meet certain people that he may not have otherwise.

There should still be looting, sure, but it should only be things that stand out, like a sword or particularly valuable/useful artifact or piece of armor, or if you're desperate and need something for survival (like when you lose your gear in Ft. Drakon or the Silverite Mines). Looting a hundred darkspawn daggers for resale isn't exactly thrilling storytellilng. Maybe some merchants could be looking for particular items, so if you come across one, you know a particular merchant will pay big bucks for it, and so you don't need to loot absolutely everything. Or perhaps you could invest in a merchant's new business venture (hi Varric) or something else.

Modifié par SirOccam, 07 octobre 2010 - 03:57 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

From a design standpoint, the Witcher had a really solid inventory system. With non-weapons it was effectively a list (thought the UI was that of a grid), so there was a reasonable restriction on your carrying capacity and your potions were capped at 10 per slot. Weapons were heavily restricted, and you could only carry two extra weapons at most, even as loot.

The only thing I would like Bioware to borrow from the Witcher is their inventory grid. It strikes a good balance between inventory tetris and agravating list.

Could you leave gaps in the grid (thus allowing you to place an item in a specific spot and always be able top find it there)?

If so, then I'd say it's just as good as inventory tetris.  Thats' not really a compromise for me at all.

Vaeliorin wrote...


First of all, don't freak out at me about the numbers. They're mostly unimportant. What we have here is the character inventory on the left (the 8 spaces below the party's portraits), and the party inventory on the right. The only items that are immediately usable in combat are those in the character's inventory. The items in the infinite scrollable inventory on the right are the party items. The items in the character's inventory are the only ones immediately usable in combat. Being a turn-based game, Wizardry 8 will let you use a turn to move things from party inventory to character inventory and vice versa, but only for the character who's using the inventory option. Since that isn't really doable in a non-turn-based game, we could drop that in DA2.

First of all, Vael is probably the person on the forum with whom I most consistently agree about game design.  So it's no surprise I like this suggestion.

To replace the turn-based inventory access, Vael, why not steal from Baldur's Gate and prohibit pausing while the inventory is open.  So you an open your inventory during combat if you want, but while you're in there you might get killed.

I'd also wouldn't object to prohibiting armour changes during combat.

The only important number for this discussion is the "Load" number (it's just to the right of the character portrait.) This number represents the weight of the items in the character's inventory plus their share of the party inventory, where weight is distributed among the party such that they each are carrying an equal percentage of their total load (unless their character inventory contains more weight than would be their share, in which case the weight of the party inventory is distributed among the other five characters.)

In this system, there are accumulating penalties for carrying too much weight (they occur at 50%, 70%, 90% and 100+% of a character's load.) Obviously, for optimum party performance, you're not going to want each character to have more than 50% load. This is easy to accomplish as any container in the game can be used for storage by the characters (you can also just drop stuff on the ground and it generally won't go away, but that's messy...unless you have an entire empty house devoted to piles of ammo like I usually end up doing...)

Yes, please bring back encumbrance.

Honestly, that game pretty much has my favorite inventory system ever, and I'd love to see some game replicate it.

I agree wholeheartedly.  The only way I could see to improve it would be to display more of the party inventory in the screen at once.

[Sylvius the Mad]

SirOccam wrote...

What I'd like to see is for looting corpses not to be a matter of course. It's a staple of RPGs, traditionally, but if you think about it, what kind of story includes the heroes rifling through the pockets of every single foe they've defeated for any tiny thing of value they can find, then lugging it all to a merchant?

Realistic load limits would help with this.  Every enemy you kill might have a sword you could take, but actually taking them all would be impossible.

And trying to take some of them, visit a merchant, and then come back could easily be prevented by a time-based decay system where other scavengers take some of the items (starting with the most valuable ones) the longer you leave the corpses alone.  If the game quantified the travel time between zones, this would get really easy.

[jhawke]

In regards to the inventory system, there are 2 things I'd like to see implemented.



1. A way to earn money to buy items, without resorting to glitches or cheating.



When I played Origins, it always seemed like most of the items were beyond your reach in terms of price. And since not all enemies dropped money, there didn't seem to be a consistent way to make money to afford the items. In most of my playthroughs, I resorted to using the money glitch to amass a fortune to afford the items I wanted.



In DA2, while I wouldn't mind if that money glitch returned, I would like to see some legitimate ways to earn money. For example, you take on a job or complete a task, you earn money. And it wouldn't be just a one time thing or quest. It would be consistent. So, if you need more money, you do that job or perform that task again.



2. And please give us a storage chest in the regular game. It made no sense that your party camp in Origins had no storage chest!! Don't make us buy a DLC just to have a storage chest.

[Sylvius the Mad]

jhawke wrote...

In regards to the inventory system, there are 2 things I'd like to see implemented.

1. A way to earn money to buy items, without resorting to glitches or cheating.

When I played Origins, it always seemed like most of the items were beyond your reach in terms of price. And since not all enemies dropped money, there didn't seem to be a consistent way to make money to afford the items.

Keep in mind that you're not supposed to beable to afford everything you want.

What if you only played with a 2-person party?  That party would be cheaper to outfit, and you could probably afford to do so.

What if you didn't bother upgrading your Thief's armour?  She's not supposed to draw aggro anyway, so you can maximise her damage output by only spending money on weapons.

There are tradeoffs to be made.  If there's too much money around there ceases to be any reason to make them.

[hangmans tree]

In Exile wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Gems are small and easy to carry. Greatswords not so much.

From a design standpoint, the Witcher had a really solid inventory system. With non-weapons it was effectively a list (thought the UI was that of a grid), so there was a reasonable restriction on your carrying capacity and your potions were capped at 10 per slot. Weapons were heavily restricted, and you could only carry two extra weapons at most, even as loot.

The only thing I would like Bioware to borrow from the Witcher is their inventory grid. It strikes a good balance between inventory tetris and agravating list.

I agree, TW inventory system is neat. While I was often frustrated there is not enough space for all the stuff I coud gather there was no need to do so. Most of the time I got my inventory filled with potions/oils/bombs, booze and some valuables, maybe some food. Two extra weapons picked up for selling. And thats it. I was file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/SEBAST%7E1/USTAWI%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot.pngvery happy when I obtained some new named sword. It felt as an acomplishment, as something rare. And its kind of rewarding. I like that kind of system/pace of  upgrading. And another part of the inventory for alchemy ingridients.

Only 3 armour sets, and more than enough...but its different kind of game really, so...
I think DA2 will stick to the same inventory system as DAO but lets hope the loot will be handled way better, I want to decide if I want to play scavenger and drag all this scrapyard with me, or miss on the loot and do some jobs/hazard to pay for what I need...

[hangmans tree]

Another nice solution was to have a storage in an inn you are staying. Accesible almost at any moment..when you visit and the inn keeper is stil alive that is.

[SirOccam]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

What I'd like to see is for looting corpses not to be a matter of course. It's a staple of RPGs, traditionally, but if you think about it, what kind of story includes the heroes rifling through the pockets of every single foe they've defeated for any tiny thing of value they can find, then lugging it all to a merchant?

Realistic load limits would help with this.  Every enemy you kill might have a sword you could take, but actually taking them all would be impossible.

And trying to take some of them, visit a merchant, and then come back could easily be prevented by a time-based decay system where other scavengers take some of the items (starting with the most valuable ones) the longer you leave the corpses alone.  If the game quantified the travel time between zones, this would get really easy.

This could work, I think. But a lot of it would depend on prices and how easy it is to make money. If the load limit just meant you couldn't make money very easily, and it was very difficult to purchase things you wanted, it would just be frustrating.

[upsettingshorts]

SirOccam wrote...
This could work, I think. But a lot of it would depend on prices and how easy it is to make money. If the load limit just meant you couldn't make money very easily, and it was very difficult to purchase things you wanted, it would just be frustrating.

Fallout 3 and previous Fallout games did just that.  It made investing in Strength or perks like Strong Back potentially useful even for non-melee characters. 

It presents a roleplaying choice by adding realism to he inventory, isn't that what so many people ask for in the first place?

By totally abstracting the inventory system into a vast magical bag... it removes the issue more or less entirely.

..my personal choice was to max out Repair early so I could more efficiently combine items into more complete and therefore more valuable, but lighter, pieces.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 octobre 2010 - 06:07 .

[SirOccam]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

SirOccam wrote...
This could work, I think. But a lot of it would depend on prices and how easy it is to make money. If the load limit just meant you couldn't make money very easily, and it was very difficult to purchase things you wanted, it would just be frustrating.

Fallout 3 and previous Fallout games did just that.  It made investing in Strength or perks like Strong Back potentially useful even for non-melee characters. 

It presents a roleplaying choice by adding realism to he inventory, isn't that what so many people ask for in the first place?

Perhaps, but for me, realism is only useful when it adds to the fun (by "fun" I mean fun for me). Realism for the sake of realism usually just adds tedium, I find.

I don't mind things like being able to carry 7 or 8 bags or whatever. I'm okay with things like that. Or things like never having to make your character eat or drink or sleep or urinate. Those things are pretty unimportant, so I'm okay with them happening off-screen. Now if they wanted to make a game where one or more of those things might affect the plot (like on the way to the restroom you get ambushed, or you must attend a high society dinner to play politics, or someone might poison your drink, or not getting enough sleep might affect your dialogue options), then that would make these things interesting enough to include.

With an inventory system, it all depends on the balance. If you have to invest in strength or else be crippled financially, that doesn't sound like a fun choice to me. When it comes to money, I'd rather just have as much as I need or have the amount I have figure into the story somehow (again, see The Name of the Wind for a good example of that). Having to scrounge for money just to play the game sounds like a chore, and it felt like a chore in DAO, having to loot and sell everything in order to afford to buy some nice things.

[captain.subtle]

SirOccam wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

SirOccam wrote...
This could work, I think. But a lot of it would depend on prices and how easy it is to make money. If the load limit just meant you couldn't make money very easily, and it was very difficult to purchase things you wanted, it would just be frustrating.

Fallout 3 and previous Fallout games did just that.  It made investing in Strength or perks like Strong Back potentially useful even for non-melee characters. 

It presents a roleplaying choice by adding realism to he inventory, isn't that what so many people ask for in the first place?

Perhaps, but for me, realism is only useful when it adds to the fun (by "fun" I mean fun for me). Realism for the sake of realism usually just adds tedium, I find.

Good. I have a sympathizer in this mess.

[Apollo Starflare]

Generally I like inventories to be kept apart from any form of realism and to just be designed to do their job in the best way possible etc. That said I did find the amount of junk items in DAO (and ME) excessive, and have seen inventories that try for a tad more realism that work (I kinda loved Deus Ex's inventory, but would never want something similar for DA).



I certainly don't want to see it reduced to the level of ME2's inventory if it does get changed, I think ME2's inventory works for the ME franchise (although even then it could be more in depth) however DA would definitely not feel right without something similar to Origins system (hopefully refined and polished).

[SirOccam]

Honestly, for DA2, I'd be happy with less but more valuable loot. Even if nothing else changed at all.

[upsettingshorts]

Tedious isn't how I'd describe Fallout 3's inventory system at all.

Because I like my clutter reduced, either by force - I simply can't carry it all - or by design, in that I can use my Repair skill to merge like items together into a better condition item.

That's not realism - not really - it just replaces the "inventory as vast bottomless pit" abstraction with an "items can be combined to be worth more" abstraction. The Strength and Strong Back options to me always seemed like cheap quick fixes. I relied on other means to make money.

The problem with making money through tedious corpse looting ought to be solved by introducing more imaginative ways to make money, in my opinion. Or to provide a variety of paths to acquire goods.

Personally I found the easiest way to make money - and save money - in DA:O was levelling up Herbalism on one of the toons and then just fast traveling and selling potions. Since they and their ingredients stacked, it was pretty easy to do. Then I just stopped bothering to loot most dead NPCs because I didn't need the near-worthless garbage they were carrying.

All that being said, Fallout isn't a perfect counter example because the nature of the setting kind of demands that items and inventory space be scarce.  It is an apocalyptic wasteland.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 octobre 2010 - 07:07 .

[SirOccam]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

The problem with making money through tedious corpse looting ought to be solved by introducing more imaginative ways to make money, in my opinion. Or to provide a variety of paths to acquire goods.

Agreed. I really liked how in Fable 2 you could get an actual job and work at it. Even if the execution was somewhat flawed (it gets pretty old after a while), I like that the option was there. You can also gamble, buy and sell property, become a landlord, invest in businesses, or just do quests, or even just rob homes and businesses. And then of course you can sell loot as well.

Freedom is sort of Fable 2's "thing," though, and clearly a game like DA2 couldn't implement all of them. But it would definitely be nice to be able to do something outside the standard looting and selling or earning quest rewards.