You guys don't realize how much you are actually sacrificing by getting rid of inventory management.
You are reducing the game's world and your character's involvement in it and thus sucking the life right out of the game.
I know Gamers don't always see it, but sometimes a negative quality in a game actually genuinely improves the game. Sometimes an annoyance enhances the experience.
The fact that each house is littered with objects for you to pick up, sell, or use enhances the game far more the inventory management hampers it.
----
I'll tell you a story. A long time ago I used to go to a restaurant every Wednesday.
I would order the same thing every time it was the Nachos with cheese, tomato, and lettuce. I was kind of annoyed because the only part of it I liked was the Cheese, the tomato and lettuce didn't really taste good. It was weakening the dish.
So one day I ordered it with only cheese and... It wasn't good, suddenly the cheese was overpowering and just wasn't pleasant to eat. What I thought was ruining the dish was in fact improving it the whole time.
---
A lot of classic games have annoying aspects to them. Yet notice how modern games basically took everything from them and streamlined them to the point where it just stopped mattering anymore?
You need to fix the problems with the game, but make sure you identify the problem first.
Now the less you involve the player the less they will feel involved. Which is the major issue with a lot of these suggestions.
YES a automatic switching mechanism to the most competent character would be very convenient, it would probably save a few minutes of gameplay. Yet that also makes your characters more interchangeable and less unique in their eyes because the game already switches them for you.
You fixed a problem by creating a much bigger problem without even knowing it.
