61 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

Having a gold bar be junk and only worth two coppers was a designer's attempt at trolling. I'm convinced this is the case.

[MillKill]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

The junk category is fine. Auto Junk items is stupid.

I don't understand this. I could see rather picking up coins than vendor trash. To me, that would be best. However, if you're going to include it, automatically sorting vendor trash makes things much more convenient. In Origins, I ended up carrying around tons of gems, vellum, trade manifests, and other useless trash because I wasn't sure if it would eventually be useful my first time through. When I discovered it was just vendor trash, I was annoyed I had cluttered up my inventory the whole game.

Either remove vendor trash entirely or keep the autosort function. Filling our inventory with pointless items, but not telling us they're pointless is not a good idea. Transparency and ease-of-use are always paramount in an inventory system.

[The Baconer]

Keep the trash folder, but get rid of all the trash items. Blank vellums, wooden legs, moth-eaten scarves... Just scrap all of it.

[Cutlass Jack]

MillKill wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

The junk category is fine. Auto Junk items is stupid.

I don't understand this. I could see rather picking up coins than vendor trash. To me, that would be best. However, if you're going to include it, automatically sorting vendor trash makes things much more convenient. In Origins, I ended up carrying around tons of gems, vellum, trade manifests, and other useless trash because I wasn't sure if it would eventually be useful my first time through. When I discovered it was just vendor trash, I was annoyed I had cluttered up my inventory the whole game.

Either remove vendor trash entirely or keep the autosort function. Filling our inventory with pointless items, but not telling us they're pointless is not a good idea. Transparency and ease-of-use are always paramount in an inventory system.

The stupid part is creating items with the express purpose of being junk. Thats what I mean by auto junk. If it has no value aside from copper, just give us copper. If you're going to make it an item, give it some possible function with an option to sell.

[MillKill]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

MillKill wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

The junk category is fine. Auto Junk items is stupid.

I don't understand this. I could see rather picking up coins than vendor trash. To me, that would be best. However, if you're going to include it, automatically sorting vendor trash makes things much more convenient. In Origins, I ended up carrying around tons of gems, vellum, trade manifests, and other useless trash because I wasn't sure if it would eventually be useful my first time through. When I discovered it was just vendor trash, I was annoyed I had cluttered up my inventory the whole game.

Either remove vendor trash entirely or keep the autosort function. Filling our inventory with pointless items, but not telling us they're pointless is not a good idea. Transparency and ease-of-use are always paramount in an inventory system.

The stupid part is creating items with the express purpose of being junk. Thats what I mean by auto junk. If it has no value aside from copper, just give us copper. If you're going to make it an item, give it some possible function with an option to sell.

Oh, I see what you meant. I actually agree. Vendor trash is pointless. Just give more coin instead. However, if they do include it, I'd prefer it was auto-sorted as junk.

Modifié par MillKill, 05 octobre 2012 - 08:32 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

MillKill wrote...

It's better than Origins. At least here, you know they're useless and don't end up carting blank vellum around the whole game, wondering if there's ever going to be a point to it.

I'm of the opposite opinion.  I'd like to have to make the junk/not junk determination myself.

Similarly, I'd like to see quest items mixed in with the regular inventory, too (like they were in NWN), so that we'd need to pay attention to item descriptions before we mindlessly sold things.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MillKill wrote...

It's better than Origins. At least here, you know they're useless and don't end up carting blank vellum around the whole game, wondering if there's ever going to be a point to it.

I'm of the opposite opinion.  I'd like to have to make the junk/not junk determination myself.

Similarly, I'd like to see quest items mixed in with the regular inventory, too (like they were in NWN), so that we'd need to pay attention to item descriptions before we mindlessly sold things.

Yes, I agree. It should be left up to the player to decide what is useful and what is not.

[Squeeze the Fish]

It was just weird...I'd look in my junk folder and it would have something like, 'discarded pocket lint,' or 'bit of broken vase,' and I'm like, "Okay. Why would Hawke pick that up?"

Modifié par Squeeze the Fish, 05 octobre 2012 - 08:48 .

[Nerevar-as]

They could look to Drakensang. Some junk items turned out to be useful for crafting, or to trade it for some useful items, while other was worthless (well, 1 copper). But in DA2 it wasn´t worth the backpack space.

[Realmzmaster]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MillKill wrote...

It's better than Origins. At least here, you know they're useless and don't end up carting blank vellum around the whole game, wondering if there's ever going to be a point to it.

I'm of the opposite opinion.  I'd like to have to make the junk/not junk determination myself.

Similarly, I'd like to see quest items mixed in with the regular inventory, too (like they were in NWN), so that we'd need to pay attention to item descriptions before we mindlessly sold things.

I agree with you, but in the case of blank scrolls you knew there was a purpose for them. Spells could be written on the scrolls. The blank vellum in DAO served no purpose.

When I first played DAO I thought the blank vellum would serve that purpose of recording spells. After reading though the documentation I knew it had no purpose, because there was no mention of it.

I could only assume at one time DAO was going to allow spellcrafting or give the spellcaster the ability to make spell scrolls like runecrafting in Awakening but it was cut.

[MillKill]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MillKill wrote...

It's better than Origins. At least here, you know they're useless and don't end up carting blank vellum around the whole game, wondering if there's ever going to be a point to it.

I'm of the opposite opinion.  I'd like to have to make the junk/not junk determination myself.

Similarly, I'd like to see quest items mixed in with the regular inventory, too (like they were in NWN), so that we'd need to pay attention to item descriptions before we mindlessly sold things.

Yes, I agree. It should be left up to the player to decide what is useful and what is not.

Not. It is up to the designer to make something useful or not. If not, either don't add it to the game or label it as useless vendor trash. Do not obfuscate the purpose of items just for the sake of confounding the players. We are not psychic. We cannot know the purpose or lack thereof of every bauble we come across when the designers don't even hint at them. Don't expect the players to know that blank vellum is pointless, but they'll need 10 garnets for a quest later and there are a limited number in the game. There's no way they could have forseen either without having alredy beaten the game or been told about it from an outside source.

Being upfront and transparent about mechanics is extremely important, especially in feature-rich games like rpgs.

[Welsh Inferno]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MillKill wrote...

It's better than Origins. At least here, you know they're useless and don't end up carting blank vellum around the whole game, wondering if there's ever going to be a point to it.

I'm of the opposite opinion.  I'd like to have to make the junk/not junk determination myself.

Similarly, I'd like to see quest items mixed in with the regular inventory, too (like they were in NWN), so that we'd need to pay attention to item descriptions before we mindlessly sold things.

Yes, I agree. It should be left up to the player to decide what is useful and what is not.

+1

Origins did it fine.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

MillKill wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MillKill wrote...

It's better than Origins. At least here, you know they're useless and don't end up carting blank vellum around the whole game, wondering if there's ever going to be a point to it.

I'm of the opposite opinion.  I'd like to have to make the junk/not junk determination myself.

Similarly, I'd like to see quest items mixed in with the regular inventory, too (like they were in NWN), so that we'd need to pay attention to item descriptions before we mindlessly sold things.

Yes, I agree. It should be left up to the player to decide what is useful and what is not.

Not. It is up to the designer to make something useful or not. If not, either don't add it to the game or label it as useless vendor trash. Do not obfuscate the purpose of items just for the sake of confounding the players. We are not psychic. We cannot know the purpose or lack thereof of every bauble we come across when the designers don't even hint at them. Don't expect the players to know that blank vellum is pointless, but they'll need 10 garnets for a quest later and there are a limited number in the game. There's no way they could have forseen either without having alredy beaten the game or been told about it from an outside source.

Being upfront and transparent about mechanics is extremely important, especially in feature-rich games like rpgs.

If it's something I'll never use or can't be used at all, it's junk. The stuff labeled "junk" cannot be used and seems to be designed and put in the game for no reason other than to clutter up inventory. I'm all for useful loot, but there is nothing useful about "junk".

[Scitenik]

My only problem with the Junk label is that it's called Junk.

At the very least, the tab should be called 'Loot'.

[Patchwork]

I'd like the option to flag items I intend to sell and be able to sell those things by clicking one button.

It would be nice if the junk items could be used as crafting materials. Like 9 moth eaten scarves equals 1 yard of cloth and I can use it to craft a robe. The first is something you can find anywhere and it's free but the second is brought from a merchant.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Scitenik wrote...

My only problem with the Junk label is that it's called Junk.

At the very least, the tab should be called 'Loot'.

The "junk" folder serves as a way for the player to discard multiple items all at once. I think the name fits.

[Scitenik]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Scitenik wrote...

My only problem with the Junk label is that it's called Junk.

At the very least, the tab should be called 'Loot'.

The "junk" folder serves as a way for the player to discard multiple items all at once. I think the name fits.

While true, 'sell all loot' works just as well I think.

[Realmzmaster]

Welsh Inferno wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MillKill wrote...

It's better than Origins. At least here, you know they're useless and don't end up carting blank vellum around the whole game, wondering if there's ever going to be a point to it.

I'm of the opposite opinion.  I'd like to have to make the junk/not junk determination myself.

Similarly, I'd like to see quest items mixed in with the regular inventory, too (like they were in NWN), so that we'd need to pay attention to item descriptions before we mindlessly sold things.

Yes, I agree. It should be left up to the player to decide what is useful and what is not.

+1

Origins did it fine.

Origins did it to a point. Origins did not allow the gamer to sell quest items. DA2 continued that trend. For example in DAO if you found Sten's sword you could not sell it before it was given to Sten. The same with the Blade of Mercy for Fenris. The PC has the sword but it cannot be sold until the quest is complete.

What Sylvius is saying and I agree with is that the PC can come across an item and sell it without knowing that later it may be attached to a quest because the gamer failed to read the description. Example you come across the Ream-Rot knife. The PC sells it (I know DA2 does not allow this, but for example sake lets say you can) . That quest cannot be completed. The quest never shows up in the quest log and the PC is none the wiser.

The only way that quest should have been initiated is if the PC examines the knife and reads the description. If that is not done then the knife could be sold and the quest would be lost.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Welsh Inferno wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MillKill wrote...

It's better than Origins. At least here, you know they're useless and don't end up carting blank vellum around the whole game, wondering if there's ever going to be a point to it.

I'm of the opposite opinion.  I'd like to have to make the junk/not junk determination myself.

Similarly, I'd like to see quest items mixed in with the regular inventory, too (like they were in NWN), so that we'd need to pay attention to item descriptions before we mindlessly sold things.

Yes, I agree. It should be left up to the player to decide what is useful and what is not.

+1

Origins did it fine.

Origins did it to a point. Origins did not allow the gamer to sell quest items. DA2 continued that trend. For example in DAO if you found Sten's sword you could not sell it before it was given to Sten. The same with the Blade of Mercy for Fenris. The PC has the sword but it cannot be sold until the quest is complete.

What Sylvius is saying and I agree with is that the PC can come across an item and sell it without knowing that later it may be attached to a quest because the gamer failed to read the description. Example you come across the Ream-Rot knife. The PC sells it (I know DA2 does not allow this, but for example sake lets say you can) . That quest cannot be completed. The quest never shows up in the quest log and the PC is none the wiser.

The only way that quest should have been initiated is if the PC examines the knife and reads the description. If that is not done then the knife could be sold and the quest would be lost.

But you knew not to throw it away because it said Sten's sword and was labeled as a gift.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 05 octobre 2012 - 10:19 .

[The Train]

MillKill wrote...

It's better than Origins. At least here, you know they're useless and don't end up carting blank vellum around the whole game, wondering if there's ever going to be a point to it.

I think this was the point of it.

You want the players to be able to sell stuff to make money to buy things they need to not die.

BUT

You want people who don't play CRPGs to play your game without having to think too hard about what to do or how to play, so that they finish the game and buy DLC and maybe buy DAO or DA3.

So you give people junk loot and then make it easier for people to navigate the inventory by labeling it "junk" so they know they can sell it or drop it.

Just like how they streamlined the inventory system so that everything was Hawke only and you didn't have to think about which shoes went with which gloves so that you could get a bonus.

[TCBC_Freak]

Squeeze the Fish wrote...

It was just weird...I'd look in my junk folder and it would have something like, 'discarded pocket lint,' or 'bit of broken vase,' and I'm like, "Okay. Why would Hawke pick that up?"

Because you told him to search the barrel, box, or body it was in?

[Sylvius the Mad]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

But you knew not to throw it away because it said Sten's sword and was labeled as a gift.

But you still couldn't sell it, regardless of whether you'd wanted to.

Ideally, I'd like Sten's sword to still exist in the game and be findable even if Sten was never rescued from Lothering.  Whether Sten comes looking for the sword or not should affect where it is.

[Si-Shen]

The junk items were designed to flesh out the loot, its not like you had to pick up most junk items and you could destroy them. Frankly they were needed to flesh out the inventory in DA2, if it had been more like DAO where you could get more regular gear to fill those spots it would not be needed. I personally don't care either way if the items go or stay, they resulted in more gold for me so meh. Its not a major concern.

[scootermcgaffin]

Si-Shen wrote...

The junk items were designed to flesh out the loot, its not like you had to pick up most junk items and you could destroy them. Frankly they were needed to flesh out the inventory in DA2, if it had been more like DAO where you could get more regular gear to fill those spots it would not be needed. I personally don't care either way if the items go or stay, they resulted in more gold for me so meh. Its not a major concern.

Only if by "regular gear" you mean "elfroots and deep mushrooms"