Larian Studios
Posted By: Roethen Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 11:23 AM
The idea that a barrel of oil or water only weighs 10 lbs is absolutely absurd. They should be 70 lbs at least, and inventory should have a limited number of slots. Where are my characters getting all this room for stuff, and why doesn't it slow them down? Because it doesn't weigh what it should. I'm not asking for the devs to make this game impossible, just realistic within reason. The rules are already laid out. I want to open the floor for people to discuss what logistical improvements should be added to the game and why.
Posted By: Bufotenina Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 12:19 PM
There's no need for limited (and thus frigginly annoying to manage for casual players) number of slots when you have weight to limit what you can brought with you (for the reality check to me inventories are magic crafted by default or a gift from the various deities to their followers or creations. that's the only way I can explain why killing a vendor, or any npc to be fair, never gaves, as loot, all the actual stuff they have. The inventory is not a bag or a container wich, indeed, have a limited number of slots, but a kinf of a pocket dimension, that still is limited by weight).

In my party the int/wis/char based can brought up very few items if they take up a baril.

The weight system is still a puzzle to me. There is no direct correlation between the dimensions of objects and their weight, let's take for example the health positions, those are litteraly bottles big as two or three litters bottles. Furthermore while in DOS and other games when you reach the limit of weight your strenght allows you feel the overweight malus, in BG 3 I noted how characters can go over the 50% of the maximun weight set in the character tab.
Posted By: Roethen Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 01:21 PM
Originally Posted by Bufotenina
There's no need for limited (and thus frigginly annoying to manage for casual players) number of slots when you have weight to limit what you can brought with you (for the reality check to me inventories are magic crafted by default or a gift from the various deities to their followers or creations. that's the only way I can explain why killing a vendor, or any npc to be fair, never gaves, as loot, all the actual stuff they have. The inventory is not a bag or a container wich, indeed, have a limited number of slots, but a kinf of a pocket dimension, that still is limited by weight).

In my party the int/wis/char based can brought up very few items if they take up a baril.

The weight system is still a puzzle to me. There is no direct correlation between the dimensions of objects and their weight, let's take for example the health positions, those are litteraly bottles big as two or three litters bottles. Furthermore while in DOS and other games when you reach the limit of weight your strenght allows you feel the overweight malus, in BG 3 I noted how characters can go over the 50% of the maximun weight set in the character tab.

It’s been said before in other threads, but I’ll reiterate: if devs claim this is to be a truly D&D based game, it should adhere to the rules of D&D. A core aspect of that includes the element of resource management. D&D characters have ruck sacks and adventurer packs with limited space. Many of us play D&D and BG for the challenge and cognitive stimulation, not for simple casual fun. We aren’t looking for a BG game through the lens of DOS, we’re looking for one through the lens of D&D, as conceived by the original devs. Attitudes like these are the types that enable lazy difficulty adjustments by simply bloating enemy stats as opposed to increasing tactical and logistical difficulty.
Posted By: Etruscan Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 01:51 PM
Originally Posted by Roethen
The idea that a barrel of oil or water only weighs 10 lbs is absolutely absurd. They should be 70 lbs at least, and inventory should have a limited number of slots. Where are my characters getting all this room for stuff, and why doesn't it slow them down? Because it doesn't weigh what it should. I'm not asking for the devs to make this game impossible, just realistic within reason. The rules are already laid out. I want to open the floor for people to discuss what logistical improvements should be added to the game and why.

I agree. I was a bit mystified why my character could lug around 50% above their weight threshold. And honestly why do we need such large inventories?

It’s probably of little worth as a comparison but I think the inventory with a rather limited amount of slots from previous BG games made far more sense. It breaks immersion somewhat to be able to carry around several large weapons on each party member. I’d like to see a more limited inventory to force players to make a decision on what really is worth carrying around rather than this have your cake and eat it too loot smorgasbord.

I appreciate such a mechanic would probably not appeal to casual players however.
Posted By: Bufotenina Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 01:54 PM
Many. But not the average player. Again this are not the times of when BG I and II came out when videogames were so much a stuff for nerds that a sit com like The big bang theory built its own succes on this fact, neither is this a tabletop game with its limited audience.

Creators that aim to sell to wide platform of players and exploit the more diffuse use of consoles, computers, and tablets can not focus on niches of players.

Furthermore a studio can not and will not simply ignore the motor and vision that brought them to fame, Larian rose from the indy playthrough area to the big game producers exactly because of the DOS, to pretend that they develop games that are not filtered by that is naive (and a bit arrogant, just like it would be if I asked that in the full release there were no difficulty levels and the game to stack with this level of difficulty).

And as I said and will say again and again do you seriously like cognitive stimulation (even if I somehow find it a bit contradictory to accept magic, spells that allow communication with corpses, living corpses, demons, spells that allow communication with animals, immortal and eternal beings, reincarnation, but then decide that a limitless inventory, a fast travel system, are something impossible to accept) you can try to find a justification that add up with the dnd dogma and rule, or just like a player did put a set of rules and respect them.

Said player decided to do a run with no more than two characters, no long rests, and stick to them.

That's a serious take on willpower and use of the freedom the game give to players.

Set yourself a limit to the inventory and stick to it, to me that will really make you a player that thrives for cognitive stimulation. For instance there are various bags that can be picked up during the scouting of the map and those are limited in slots and can be use as an instrument for "credibility".

Obviously I'm not talking about the barrels weight problem that is more an error made by programmers.

[Furthermore: if limited slots must be then I want that the dimentions of a due item is considered, when I put things in my backpack when I prepare for work if I put inside my laptop the space that remains for other stuff is less, so if I put in it the change of shoes for the gym the space further reduce, that is if a slot system has to be used it has to be like the one in Diablo where an armor occupied six slots, a ring one, a spear for and so on.. .. ]
Posted By: Icelyn Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 02:01 PM
No need to limit my ability to get loot. grin I would like the inventory weight restrictions removed entirely. The use of barrels in combat can be addressed separately from general loot.
Posted By: Roethen Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 02:44 PM
Originally Posted by Bufotenina
Many. But not the average player. Again this are not the times of when BG I and II came out when videogames were so much a stuff for nerds that a sit com like The big bang theory built its own succes on this fact, neither is this a tabletop game with its limited audience.

Creators that aim to sell to wide platform of players and exploit the more diffuse use of consoles, computers, and tablets can not focus on niches of players.

Furthermore a studio can not and will not simply ignore the motor and vision that brought them to fame, Larian rose from the indy playthrough area to the big game producers exactly because of the DOS, to pretend that they develop games that are not filtered by that is naive (and a bit arrogant, just like it would be if I asked that in the full release there were no difficulty levels and the game to stack with this level of difficulty).

And as I said and will say again and again do you seriously like cognitive stimulation (even if I somehow find it a bit contradictory to accept magic, spells that allow communication with corpses, living corpses, demons, spells that allow communication with animals, immortal and eternal beings, reincarnation, but then decide that a limitless inventory, a fast travel system, are something impossible to accept) you can try to find a justification that add up with the dnd dogma and rule, or just like a player did put a set of rules and respect them.

Said player decided to do a run with no more than two characters, no long rests, and stick to them.

That's a serious take on willpower and use of the freedom the game give to players.

Set yourself a limit to the inventory and stick to it, to me that will really make you a player that thrives for cognitive stimulation. For instance there are various bags that can be picked up during the scouting of the map and those are limited in slots and can be use as an instrument for "credibility".

Obviously I'm not talking about the barrels weight problem that is more an error made by programmers.

[Furthermore: if limited slots must be then I want that the dimentions of a due item is considered, when I put things in my backpack when I prepare for work if I put inside my laptop the space that remains for other stuff is less, so if I put in it the change of shoes for the gym the space further reduce, that is if a slot system has to be used it has to be like the one in Diablo where an armor occupied six slots, a ring one, a spear for and so on.. .. ]

It sounds like you’re saying difficult games don’t sell, which is objectively false. Difficult games are good, and unique games are even better. Larian is at liberty to make this game identical to DOS2, but it doesn’t make sense to call it Baldur’s Gate 3 if it does, and only shows a lazy lack of effort by the development team.

BG3 is going to be a PC game first and foremost, but I’m still not sure exactly what your point is about consoles and “niches of players.”

A good studio will and must venture away from the familiar if it intends to continue to make sales. People get bored of playing the same gaming mechanics repeatedly through different titles, and that was a huge complaint in the revival of the Tomb Raider series. I personally don’t even like the mechanics of DOS2, and am still very much more impressed by the diluted systems we have in BG3, even if they are currently very closely related. The team is doing well, but I want them to do better. That’s why they opened Early Access, and that’s also why I opened this thread. It’s fine if you don’t have any tips for improvements to logistics, but don’t attempt to silence players who do.

Cognitive stimulation in video games is not compromised by the presence of magic when rules are implemented, understood and followed. Fearun may be magical but it’s not anything-goes, and to imply it is only signifies how new you are to the rules of D&D, which isn’t your fault, but the implication that a game must accommodate whatever game-breaking conveniences the player desires because magic is childish and ridiculous. The Resident Evil remakes have been wildly popular and they have limited space for inventory. Their fans enjoy the challenge. The question now becomes, “who is the intended audience for Baldur’s Gate 3?”
Posted By: Roethen Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 02:45 PM
Originally Posted by Icelyn
No need to limit my ability to get loot. grin I would like the inventory weight restrictions removed entirely. The use of barrels in combat can be addressed separately from general loot.

That would destroy an important part of the purpose for the Strength ability. It sounds to me like some people don’t want to play a game with D&D rules despite having bought a D&D title, and that’s disconcerting.
Posted By: RagnarokCzD Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 02:53 PM
Originally Posted by Icelyn
No need to limit my ability to get loot. grin I would like the inventory weight restrictions removed entirely. The use of barrels in combat can be addressed separately from general loot.
Just right click and "Send to camp" everything you see ... and you have kinda limitless inventory. :P
Posted By: Maximuuus Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 02:55 PM
I'd love a limited Inventory with bags for potions and quiver for arrows and so on... but this is really an unpopular opinion. Even Pathfinder, Pillars of Eternity, Wasteland and every games like this have "things" so players can nearly pick everything.
(Teleport items to camp...)

But I totally agree with the weight.
At the moment it really looks buggy and items doesn't have a "realistic weight" at all.

I don't really know the rules of D&D about that but I'm not against a custom rule... Let's say something like you can carry 1.5x (or 2x) what you could in D&D... But I absolutely agree that the system at the moment is very cheap.

Inventory management should be a thing in such a game.
It shouldn't be too tedious, but it shouldn't be nothing.

(And we shouldn't have a big bag for the party instead of 1/character because whatever the UI, this is what happen atm)
Posted By: Icelyn Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 03:01 PM
Originally Posted by Roethen
It sounds to me like some people don’t want to play a game with D&D rules despite having bought a D&D title, and that’s disconcerting.
I just want a fun rpg. I don't care about every single rule being followed exactly.

Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Just right click and "Send to camp" everything you see ... and you have kinda limitless inventory. :P
grin
Posted By: RagnarokCzD Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 03:11 PM
Originally Posted by Roethen
Originally Posted by Icelyn
No need to limit my ability to get loot. grin I would like the inventory weight restrictions removed entirely. The use of barrels in combat can be addressed separately from general loot.
That would destroy an important part of the purpose for the Strength ability. It sounds to me like some people don’t want to play a game with D&D rules despite having bought a D&D title, and that’s disconcerting.
This both combined sounds like great points for adding "inventory limit" to dificiulty settings ...
I can imagine it as: Strict > loosened > none. laugh

//edit:
(And possibly you can add dificulty Hardcore, that will give you disadvantage, or penalties in combat, if you are carying more than half of your maximum cary capacity ... after all its kinda weird that Rogue that is draging with himself only two daggers, five potions and vial of poison ... is the same effective in combat as other rogue that is also carrying ten ringmail plates, five halberds, ten swords and barell of firewine :D)
Posted By: Icelyn Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 03:14 PM
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Originally Posted by Roethen
Originally Posted by Icelyn
No need to limit my ability to get loot. grin I would like the inventory weight restrictions removed entirely. The use of barrels in combat can be addressed separately from general loot.
That would destroy an important part of the purpose for the Strength ability. It sounds to me like some people don’t want to play a game with D&D rules despite having bought a D&D title, and that’s disconcerting.
This both combined sounds like great points for adding "inventory limit" to dificiulty settings ...
I can imagine it as: Strict > loosened > none. laugh
Perfect! up
Posted By: Zarna Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 03:54 PM
I definitely want the barrels to be less immersion breaking - heavier, can only move them with both hands rather than in inventory, and smarter enemies need to react to you moving furniture by attacking you or moving barrels back where they belong or at least moving away from them. How they are now is ridiculous and I won't use them. I also don't want to take them away from people who need to use them, there should be menu options to toggle realistic barrels on or off.
Posted By: Mat22 Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 04:51 PM
+1 for the option to have more complex item weight rules (I agree that one of the core gain from high Strength would be lost without this). I like that when in a game your inventory is to be managed carefully (and items have weight, ammunition for ranged weapons is limited) especially at the beginning especially if you did not build your character that way but there are ways during the game (completing certain sidequests, meeting with certain npcs, obtaining certain magical items, joining or being part of a group) to make it easier (bag of holding, extra item storage options or loot delivery options) and reaching those points feels rewarding and not tedious even for those who did not build their characters towards this can get to this point by playing the game more. These just add more colour and spice to a game but thats just my 2 cents and i understand some people doesn't like to deal with this, so better to be an option.
Posted By: Nyloth Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 08:05 PM
Originally Posted by Roethen
It sounds like you’re saying difficult games don’t sell

This is usually indicated by sales statistics.

A new audience may not like the overly complex mechanics from old games.

When we talk about mechanics, people don't want something too complex or too original. They usually look for something like that in the characters and the plot. But about mechanics, people prefer something familiar and easier for understand this.

Larian uses usual inventory system for modern games. This is why most players don't have any questions about "why is there so much space", because it is convenient for them.

I agree that it is not unclear why the characters can get 50% more weight. But it's EA so... maybe they fix that.

Not really worried about DnD rules, it's still a video game.
Posted By: Roethen Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 08:53 PM
Originally Posted by Nyloth
Originally Posted by Roethen
It sounds like you’re saying difficult games don’t sell

This is usually indicated by sales statistics.

A new audience may not like the overly complex mechanics from old games.

When we talk about mechanics, people don't want something too complex or too original. They usually look for something like that in the characters and the plot. But about mechanics, people prefer something familiar and easier for understand this.

Larian uses usual inventory system for modern games. This is why most players don't have any questions about "why is there so much space", because it is convenient for them.

I agree that it is not unclear why the characters can get 50% more weight. But it's EA so... maybe they fix that.

Not really worried about DnD rules, it's still a video game.

This game isn’t too complex or original for actual fans of tactical RPG’s.... which is their exact audience.

Plenty of games do perfectly fine with limited inventory space. Larian is showing cowardice and utter lack of originality by sticking to the same boring script it did with DOS2.
Posted By: Nyloth Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 06/02/21 09:11 PM
Originally Posted by Roethen
This game isn’t too complex or original for actual fans of tactical RPG’s.... which is their exact audience.

Plenty of games do perfectly fine with limited inventory space. Larian is showing cowardice and utter lack of originality by sticking to the same boring script it did with DOS2.

I've seen BG2 inventory system and believe me, I haven't seen this system anywhere else. So I can't say it's 'fine'. It wanst fine for me it was like 'WTH??'.

Even if some games have similar systems it's not same and It's still get you 'more space'. Like in Tyranny(???) there is some kind of "bank" in inventory, this just adds another button for the same large inventory, which is conventionally called "bank". Like yes inventory small and you have limits but not really cuz it's illusion and u have this special button for more space. LUL

So yes, I think weight limit works fine.
Posted By: Niara Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 07/02/21 12:32 AM
Options are a good thing; Arbitrary restrictions that make the player feel like they're fighting the UI itself are not... and BG3 already has far too many instances where the player is forced to do exactly that. Inventory management is assuredly one of them.

Adding in a hard slot limit would actually help in this regard, since it would allow them to lock in display dimensions for things and make sure they're all easily visible, or easily accessible at a click, and remove that "fighting the UI" feeling. the actual number of slots can be functionally large enough that no-one ever really has to worry about it except in extreme cases - You could take a look at what NWN2 did in this regard. The inventory system there was slot based as well as weight based, but you have a very neat six tabbed pages of slots to play with, and functionally it just allowed for the player to file and sort things as they wanted, easily and cleanly, without ever having to really think about whether they had space for something too often... weight limit was still the most common limiting factor.

Options are a good thing; innately implementing an obscure or obfuscated version of a system and giving no recourse from it is not... and BG3 currently is doing exactly that.
Right now, in BG3, your carrying limit is displayed as being 10 times your Strength Score. However, this number means nothing because nothing and you can carry over it with no effect at all. Nothing actually happens until you are carrying 20 times your Strength score, at which point you become "encumbered". The character cannot run, when not in combat, but it doesn't seem to actually have ANY other effect; certainly no mechanical one. It's just... annoying. It's just a hassle to make the player fight their inventory UI and serves no real purpose. If you load up even more, you become heavily encumbered (though the tooltip still says encumbered), and unable to move at all, but no other actual disadvantages. The point at which this happens is... slightly murky, but it looks as though it kicks in at about when you start carrying more than 24 times your strength. (An 8 Str Astarion displays a carry capacity of 80, becomes encumbered at 160, and becomes heavily encumbered at 192)

Core rules give you a Carrying Capacity 15; no debuffs or disadvantages, just a flat yes/no binary. If you have more than that, you can't carry it all... in game this would be normally be paralleled by the inability to move, which BG3 does at 24 times Str.

Variant Encumbrance in the rules adds gradients with penalties: the fort point is that you ignore the strength requirement of armour; normally this means that if you wear armour (regardless of proficiency) that you don't meet the strength requirement for, your speed is reduced. If using Variant Encumbrance, this no longer occurs. Under this system, you lose 10 feet of speed as soon as you carry more than 5 times your strength score (so for 8 Str Astarion, this would be at 40lb), and if you carry more than 10 times your strength score, you lose another 1o feet of movement, and you have Disadvantage on all checks and saves that use your physical stats (Str, Con, Dex). Your maximum capacity is still 20 time Str.

So, to bullet point:

Core:
- Carry 20 x Str Score; absolute limit, no other penalties.

Variant:
- Ignore Strength Requirement on armour.
- Carry > 5 x Str Score; -10 feet movement
- Carry > 10 x Str Score; -20 feet movement, Disadvantage on all checks and saves using Str, Dex or Con.
- Carry 20 x Str Score; absolute limit.

BG3 Current:
- Visual display carry 10 x Str Score; seemingly meaningless.
- Heavy armour has no visible Strength requirement at any point (though our heavy armour options are limited).
- Carry > 20 x Str Score; Can only walk outside of combat, can still jump, no in-combat penalties.
- Carry 24 x Str Score; absolute limit (can't move), no other penalties (can still jump around (or be thrown if you're a halfling with a strong friend) when carrying in excess of this amount)

Overall, they let you carry more than any 5e system, without any actual penalties other than pointless annoyances. It acts like variant encumbrance, by having two grades, but the grade penalties are just aggravations, not actual considerations; penalties for encumbrance should be meaningful, or they should not exist, one or the other.

Right now, the current system is unclear and murky in its display, but more than that, it should be either simple and user-friendly, without adding extra aggravation to playing the game, or else it needs to have options so players can choose how in-depth they want their inventory management to have to be.

Along with clearer carry capacity rules that don't antagonise the players needlessly, I'd support a limited number of inventory slots that is still large enough to rarely be an issue - but a fixed umber and display so that it's a known commodity for Larian's coding and display UI. All on screen at once, or searchable through tabs would be ideal - remove the risk of things getting lost in long scrolls of empty spaces, and other such UI wrestle points.
Posted By: fallenj Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 07/02/21 12:49 AM
Pretty sure this was already talked about, weight for items seems all over the place. There was a post about how much food you can carry around and the weight for 80+ stacks were low. Going to guess it'll get worked on eventually, if not a mod will.
Posted By: Roethen Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 07/02/21 03:40 PM
Originally Posted by Niara
Options are a good thing; Arbitrary restrictions that make the player feel like they're fighting the UI itself are not... and BG3 already has far too many instances where the player is forced to do exactly that. Inventory management is assuredly one of them.

Adding in a hard slot limit would actually help in this regard, since it would allow them to lock in display dimensions for things and make sure they're all easily visible, or easily accessible at a click, and remove that "fighting the UI" feeling. the actual number of slots can be functionally large enough that no-one ever really has to worry about it except in extreme cases - You could take a look at what NWN2 did in this regard. The inventory system there was slot based as well as weight based, but you have a very neat six tabbed pages of slots to play with, and functionally it just allowed for the player to file and sort things as they wanted, easily and cleanly, without ever having to really think about whether they had space for something too often... weight limit was still the most common limiting factor.

Options are a good thing; innately implementing an obscure or obfuscated version of a system and giving no recourse from it is not... and BG3 currently is doing exactly that.
Right now, in BG3, your carrying limit is displayed as being 10 times your Strength Score. However, this number means nothing because nothing and you can carry over it with no effect at all. Nothing actually happens until you are carrying 20 times your Strength score, at which point you become "encumbered". The character cannot run, when not in combat, but it doesn't seem to actually have ANY other effect; certainly no mechanical one. It's just... annoying. It's just a hassle to make the player fight their inventory UI and serves no real purpose. If you load up even more, you become heavily encumbered (though the tooltip still says encumbered), and unable to move at all, but no other actual disadvantages. The point at which this happens is... slightly murky, but it looks as though it kicks in at about when you start carrying more than 24 times your strength. (An 8 Str Astarion displays a carry capacity of 80, becomes encumbered at 160, and becomes heavily encumbered at 192)

Core rules give you a Carrying Capacity 15; no debuffs or disadvantages, just a flat yes/no binary. If you have more than that, you can't carry it all... in game this would be normally be paralleled by the inability to move, which BG3 does at 24 times Str.

Variant Encumbrance in the rules adds gradients with penalties: the fort point is that you ignore the strength requirement of armour; normally this means that if you wear armour (regardless of proficiency) that you don't meet the strength requirement for, your speed is reduced. If using Variant Encumbrance, this no longer occurs. Under this system, you lose 10 feet of speed as soon as you carry more than 5 times your strength score (so for 8 Str Astarion, this would be at 40lb), and if you carry more than 10 times your strength score, you lose another 1o feet of movement, and you have Disadvantage on all checks and saves that use your physical stats (Str, Con, Dex). Your maximum capacity is still 20 time Str.

So, to bullet point:

Core:
- Carry 20 x Str Score; absolute limit, no other penalties.

Variant:
- Ignore Strength Requirement on armour.
- Carry > 5 x Str Score; -10 feet movement
- Carry > 10 x Str Score; -20 feet movement, Disadvantage on all checks and saves using Str, Dex or Con.
- Carry 20 x Str Score; absolute limit.

BG3 Current:
- Visual display carry 10 x Str Score; seemingly meaningless.
- Heavy armour has no visible Strength requirement at any point (though our heavy armour options are limited).
- Carry > 20 x Str Score; Can only walk outside of combat, can still jump, no in-combat penalties.
- Carry 24 x Str Score; absolute limit (can't move), no other penalties (can still jump around (or be thrown if you're a halfling with a strong friend) when carrying in excess of this amount)

Overall, they let you carry more than any 5e system, without any actual penalties other than pointless annoyances. It acts like variant encumbrance, by having two grades, but the grade penalties are just aggravations, not actual considerations; penalties for encumbrance should be meaningful, or they should not exist, one or the other.

Right now, the current system is unclear and murky in its display, but more than that, it should be either simple and user-friendly, without adding extra aggravation to playing the game, or else it needs to have options so players can choose how in-depth they want their inventory management to have to be.

Along with clearer carry capacity rules that don't antagonise the players needlessly, I'd support a limited number of inventory slots that is still large enough to rarely be an issue - but a fixed umber and display so that it's a known commodity for Larian's coding and display UI. All on screen at once, or searchable through tabs would be ideal - remove the risk of things getting lost in long scrolls of empty spaces, and other such UI wrestle points.
+1
Posted By: Gustavo R Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 10/02/21 07:10 PM
An easier way to resolve this is with a separate difficulty for these mechanics. The 'easy mode' would be what we already have. And in the 'hard mode', you would have a carrying capacity, encumbrance by armor, penalty to sneak, hunger and thirst, etc. So, it would please everyone.
Posted By: Tuco Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 10/02/21 11:28 PM
A lot of people don't like good design and will always advocate for immediate convenience above anything. Even when that convenience will turn out to be absolutely disruptive for any internal coherence, immersion, difficulty balance and what else.

I've recently got into Conan Exiles for some reason after basically owning it in my Steam library for more than two years and imagine my surprise when I realized that, aside for some glaring flaws, it turned out to be one of the best single-player exploration-focused open world games I've played since the first two Gothic games.
And that was PRECISELY because it doesn't serve the player with all these "small conveniences" that sound sweet at first but kill any sense of being part of a fictional world.
You don't have a shitty minimap constantly telling you about the surrounding, you don't have an omniscient GPS constantly point the next quest, NPC or resource, you don't even have ANY FORM of fast travel until way late into the end game when you can "craft" a building specifically for that purpose.

You know what? It made going around that world AMAZING. Tense, dangerous, at times cumbersome and inconvenient. But amazing. Because deciding if climbing up or down from a perilous cliff had stakes, because the choice between trying to fight a tough enemy or avoid it mattered, because entering a dungeon or facing a boss required to come prepared, because wondering in the middle of the desert asked to the player to have a supply of food and water or starve badly at the worst possible moment. Because going in for an expedition exploring some place far away from your base (and respawn point) required commitment and preparation.

And yet pick any random videogame forum and ask a bunch of casual players what they think of "convenience above design" and you'll get the sort of people who think getting the ability to warp between bonfires from the get go in Dark Souls 2 and sequels was an "improvement" (even if it killed a lot of what made obtaining the Lordvessel so special), that every open world game should have quest markers and GPS, That if you don't allow them to conveniently teleport in and out of anywhere at any time you are not "respecting their time" and similar bullshit.


Well, ranting aside, here's the TL;DR: fuck being able to carry dozens of barrels and exploit every single fight in the game "because it's fun :D". Nah, it's not.
Posted By: Icelyn Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 11/02/21 12:17 AM
Yes, I will pick convenience over what some call immersion any day! biggrin I don't care about barrels, though.
Posted By: Tuco Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 11/02/21 12:54 AM
Originally Posted by Icelyn
Yes, I will pick convenience over what some call immersion any day! biggrin I don't care about barrels, though.
I was just thinking about scum of the earth like you and that other shady guy who doesn't like time limits when going on my tirade.
Posted By: Icelyn Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 11/02/21 01:35 AM
Originally Posted by Tuco
I was just thinking about scum of the earth like you and that other shady guy who doesn't like time limits when going on my tirade.
Unfortunately, that other person was turned to stone by an elf god. However, I still have the option of fast traveling to camp at any time to restore my full health and magic.
Man I miss the days *90s, when devs could do basically whatever they wanted without having so satisfy everyone's opinions on whats fun or not.

Weight limits and slots were amazing. Made you think, this was part of being an RPG game. I think its IMMENSE FUN to be limited on your inventory.
BG2 got it right. You couldn't carry 5 suits of armors with your greatsword of demon slaying, axe of bloodroar and mace of ultimate agony, and a full complement of potions and scrolls. *unless your were a buffed up str 20 plus orc barbarian destroyer!
You still had the rare bottomless bags though. A great solution to satisfy everyone.

Larians implementation of items is just silly, weird, and at worst idiotic. For ALL their games. The items UI is awfull, for ALL their games. The vendors are awfull, for ALL their games.
But people seem to like it...?!? It just does not make sense in a Baldurs gate game.

Oh and If people want convenience just...lol...oh nevermind. This is 2021, I give up...no point arguing.
Posted By: Peranor Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 13/02/21 11:41 PM
Originally Posted by mr_planescapist
Oh and If people want convenience just...lol...oh nevermind. This is 2021, I give up...no point arguing.

Yepp. It's tough having a discussion on forums these days. If you strongly disagree with something another person say you can't argue against it without being labeled "confrontational" or "toxic" and risk getting banned. They don't want discussion forums any more, they want echo chambers.
Posted By: Roethen Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 14/02/21 12:41 AM
Originally Posted by mr_planescapist
Larians implementation of items is just silly, weird, and at worst idiotic. For ALL their games. The items UI is awfull, for ALL their games. The vendors are awfull, for ALL their games.
But people seem to like it...?!? It just does not make sense in a Baldurs gate game.

Oh and If people want convenience just...lol...oh nevermind. This is 2021, I give up...no point arguing.
Thanks for bringing up the vendors. What's the point of showing the price of an item if it isn't the actual price of the item? And trade becomes more about selling as much armor as you can from random looting rather than about selling valuable rare items which should arguably earn you more of a profit.
Posted By: Icelyn Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 14/02/21 02:14 AM
Originally Posted by Roethen
Thanks for bringing up the vendors. What's the point of showing the price of an item if it isn't the actual price of the item?
Yes, the vendors are all crooks!
Posted By: Aishaddai Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 14/02/21 03:14 AM
For vendors: isn't it for showing base price before attitude price/charisma modifier?

Also aren't the games some people want labelled survival rpg's. Why not just stick with those? I heard Outward was decent. I've been curious about it myself actually. I've noticed alot of arguments are simply for realistic survival flavor.
Posted By: Icelyn Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 14/02/21 02:18 PM
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Also aren't the games some people want labelled survival rpg's. Why not just stick with those? I heard Outward was decent. I've been curious about it myself actually. I've noticed alot of arguments are simply for realistic survival flavor.
Yes, there are a lot of fans of survival games on this forum.
Posted By: Dexai Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 14/02/21 02:20 PM
Having limited inventory space =/ survival games
Posted By: CJMPinger Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 14/02/21 04:17 PM
Originally Posted by Dexai
Having limited inventory space =/ survival games

It is a staple of the survival game genre so many now associate it with that genre even though many other games have it in some way.

Tbh I think weight is all we need for there to be a limitation in inventory and just that they should update some weights to be more... correct. Cause as things are right now I can carry around multiple barrels with no penalty on a character with 8 strength. I tend to not like limited slots cause it starts to feel like everyone can carry the same amount or it adds a tiny bit of padding in having to drop things off at a stash whereas just having weight restrictions allows you to feel like your fighter or barb can really carry a lot and that maybe the wizard should just stick with scrolls, still having the need to manage your inventory occasionally while not causing anyone to be forced to spend a long time in the inventory screen micromanaging stacks to try to get the most out of what can be carried.
Posted By: Zarna Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 15/02/21 04:56 AM
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Also aren't the games some people want labelled survival rpg's. Why not just stick with those? I heard Outward was decent. I've been curious about it myself actually. I've noticed alot of arguments are simply for realistic survival flavor.
I like having a variety of games to play, so don't tell me to just stick with survival games. :P I get enough of that from the FO76 anti pvp types trying to tell people like me to go and play other games when it is supposed to have pvp and pve. I do play SCUM a fair amount, it is also an EA game with a lot of promise. I mod games like Skyrim with survival stuff and my current DnD game uses common sense, which apparently is being called "survival elements" nowadays I guess. smile I have Outward, Deadside, and DayZ but haven't had time to play them yet. Valheim looks interesting as well.

BG3 was supposed to be based on 5e and there are some survival elements or realism or common sense, whatever you want to call it there. I would be fine with having these things as an option only, but how it is now just seems a bit ridiculous to me. Regardless of having this or not, the inventory system needs some serious rework.

Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Originally Posted by Dexai
Having limited inventory space =/ survival games

It is a staple of the survival game genre so many now associate it with that genre even though many other games have it in some way.
The funny thing is BG 1 and 2 had limited inventory space but no one seems to be complaining about that. smile
Weight would make more sense to use for this game than inventory slots I think.
Posted By: Mat22 Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 15/02/21 07:15 AM
Just to add my 2 cents.

I dont really enjoy survival games like Long Dark, Subnautica, Minecraft etc... however personally i really like RPGs like Dragon Age, Witcher, Pathfinder, Elder Scrolls, Baldurs Gate, Kingdom Come, Gothic, Fallout and all of those have more than a couple of elements like inventory complexity, in depth crafting, traps, no infinite arrows, alchemy, weight system etc. Im not saying these all should be part of BG3, just that i agree that some of these would make sense to be included in the game.

I like when a game throws you these challenges (some of these as an option you can switch off if it frustrates some people) and these make the game tougher at the beginning but you have multiple ways to overcome them by playing the game more (building your char to a certain way, pick a companion who can help you with that, meet certain npc, buy/found certain item, join certain guild, do certain sidequest, any of these to accomplish your goal). That's basically Larian's motto so the more systems they give me the more i will enjoy this game. I understand thats not everybody's cake but i want to be able to at least customize my playthrough to be more in-depth at full release.

Im patient and hopeful Larian will add some of these, as these can really add more flavour, especially to a 100+ hours game where at certain times you need to detach from combat a little bit. I think making certain proficiencies and classes more use by adding some outside-of-combat activities would be also a big + for single and coop play too. Its a cool feature if party members can contribute to the team's welldoing not just via spells but other class/skill specific ways, like hunting, cooking, singing, crafting, polishing weapons/armor etc. so you feel its a team and you help each out for your common goal. Again, im okay if these are set up to be skippable on normal difficulty and you only need the extra buffs coming from these on higher diff, i usually play on higher diffs anyway. This is a little like in the Witcher where you have some complex systems you dont need to touch if you are running on normal diff and you just want to enjoy the story, but you have the option to use those if you want more tactical play and immersion.
Posted By: Gustavo R Re: Sizes, inventory, and proportions - 27/02/21 03:36 PM
I just want to enjoy the best aspects of the game, like the story, the setting, and the combat, instead of spending my time micromanaging the inventory screen. That's why I like Pathfinder Kingmaker's shared inventory (stash) and why I always look for mods to reduce the weight of items in other games. In my D&D campaigns, for example, I never bothered to count how many arrows the PCs carry. The history is important, the inventory is not.
© Larian Studios forums