this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
118 points (100.0% liked)

Gaming

30553 readers
179 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Starfield and Baldur's Gate 3 both weigh the player down with encumbrance. Love it or hate it, it seems like it's here to stay.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lowered_lifted@beehaw.org 56 points 1 year ago (4 children)

It's such a trash game mechanic because it forces realism where there is none. You have faster than light travel in your game? Why don't you have teleporters? You have magic in your game? Why don't you have a Bag of Holding? If you are going to impose the constraint on the player for balance or gameplay reasons then at least make it fun, have a mechanic that is interesting in some way. Maybe teleporters and bags of Holding are expensive to build or don't get unlocked until you collect 10 flippityboos but at least reward progression and picking up objects and don't turn every decision into agony.

[–] LunarLoony@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

RuneScape has an excellent fast travel system. In fact, it has a whole bunch of 'em, and you have to work for them; either by completing quests, or by training your skills. You can also get items to expand your inventory somewhat, but they only work for specific item types.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] li10@feddit.uk 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Even if they think it’s a fun mechanic, they fundamentally fucked the amount you can carry imo. Should be higher than it is by default, because I straight up don’t want to waste skill points on that.

Then they’ve fucked the amount of cargo you can have on a ship. Either make it infinite, or ridiculously high even for a small ship.

I’ve got multiple freight containers on my ship, and apparently each can only carry about the same amount as my character??

[–] erwan@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Also you're limited in weight but holding 5 heavy armors and 7 two handed swords in fine.

Picking up that silver spoon can tip you over the limit however.

[–] Whisper06@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A bag of holding still has limits.

[–] mrnotoriousman@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

One of the voice lines is "I wish I had a bag of holding" too haha

[–] delmain@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

And the character says it so fucking often

[–] TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip 51 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

It’s not “here to stay” it’s a feature that is used or not used depending on the level of realness wanted. Some are fine with hand waving away encumbrance, some are not.

If you’re playing a walking simulator, it is kinda part of the immersion.

If you’re running around killing every Greek god under the Sun, but suddenly you pick up your 7th weapon that’s just chains with something at the end of it, and BOOM you can’t move anymore cuz your too heavy, then it’s getting in the way. Instead of implementing encumbrance they just, limit you to 6 weapons and tada, they could explain it as “it’s too much weight” but they won’t give you the option for it to happen as slowing you down would kill the pace and feel of the game.

Baldurs gate is a DND based CRPG and Starfield is a ~~loadscreen~~walking simulator. Of course they have encumbrance.

[–] bob_lemon@feddit.de 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Baldurs gate is a DND based CRPG

Although DND games usually handwaive encumbrance with bags of holding.

[–] TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 year ago

Fair, depends on the game. CRPG’s will tend to have it in. I mean for example WotR and Kingmaker you can get a bag of holding if you buy it or put stuff into strength on characters or etc in order to not have to worry about it much but it’s still there, and not spending the money on it or building any characters with strength means you will be limited.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RickRussell_CA@beehaw.org 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And you've got KOTOR and Pillars of Eternity and others that are clearly D&D derivatives, but solve the problem handily with a "stash" whose contents are never accessible in combat.

I have never understood the fascination with inventory management. I just want to find stuff, and use that stuff later on. If I wanted something as boring as my actual job, I'd just do my actual job and get paid for it instead of buying a game.

[–] Schlock@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

In BG3 it is a balance mechanic. Heavy objects tend to be completely OP and are used to cheese combat. encumberance limits this and even allows building your character specifically for this playstyle.

In Bethesda games encumberance is in part there to protect players from themselves. If every object can be picked up (and that is a design principle in those games) and every object has a Value, then the optimal strategy is always to grab every single object you can find and then sell everything at once. If that does not sound like fun to you that is because it is not, but still i know multiple people who play those games this way even with encumberance in place. Players will always find a way to ruin their own fun, the only hing you can do is to put systems in place that disincentivise these behaviors.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just because you don't like inventory management doesn't mean others don't.

as boring as my actual job

Again, subjective, considering the popularity of job simulator games, like truck sim.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Erk@cdda.social 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

My issue with it in Starfield (and any game in its genre) is that the game seems to be confused about how it feels about encumbrance. Am I supposed to be looting everything I see? If not, then why is it the major income source, why are so many random objects worth selling and taking? If so, why do merchants have such low credit stores? Am I supposed to be collecting cool stuff to display? If not, then why all the display objects? If so, why have my companions constantly nag me about bringing junk? Why make ship storage so low? Or, am I supposed to be carefully considering what I want to bring as loot? If so, why is there so much of it and why isn't there some way to quickly see what's worth taking? Am I supposed to spend an hour after each combat carefully weighing what to take home?

It's entirely unclear what they want. If they want looting to be less of a game loop, junk items should have no sell value and missions should be more of a reward, and item value/kg should be easy to assess. We should be quickly able to discard valueless items from inventory. Otoh if they want looting to be a bigger part of the game, I should be able to readily carry and sell my loot and doing so shouldn't make me so rich it breaks the economy.

It's one of my main complaints, not so much about starfield, but pretty much anything in this genre. It feels like they can't tell if they want me to loot everything or not, the design is fundamentally at odds with itself.

[–] LoamImprovement@beehaw.org 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I have a friend who says it needs to go one of two ways - either encumbrance matters hard and is super realistic, where you can reliably carry 30-60 lbs of gear for long distances, and that's it, or it just doesn't exist and you can lug around as much shit as you want and abstract out the rest, because the middle ground where PCs can carry like 250 lbs of shit leads to a game where you're constantly just sorting through your inventory about the best vendor trash you think you can packrat to sell while moving through a dungeon, and that's slow and unfun. The low carry weight turns every interaction into "is it better than my current gear?" which is really easy to answer in the moment, and when weight doesn't matter, you just hoover it up and sell it when you get a chance.

[–] Erk@cdda.social 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't agree with that dichotomy in a game like this. Certainly in the deeply simulationist roguelike I stan (cataclysm dark days ahead plug), that's appropriate, but this game is fundamentally silly and arcade style so I don't think the trouble has anything to do with realism. The solution I'd have personally in something like this is to eg. allow you to carry up to 6 weapons, 1 of each wearable type of item, and a certain amount of aid items in your "active" inventory, and then have everything else you loot automatically go to your ship inventory which is huge or infinite, but restricted in how you can access it (personally I'd still have ship inventories be finite, but enormous). Let perks increase your number of slots in a particular category, rather than increasing carry weight. Have resources and 'notes' go to the ship automatically as well, since it doesn't really have any impact on the game to be carrying these on your person. Plus, I'd do what modders have been doing for a while and make decorative junk items have no value or weight. Let me pick up as many blenders as I want, I'm just going to use them to decorate my juice bar and play house, who frigging cares.

I'd also remove vendor credit caps, but make the amount of cash you get from loot pretty trivial compared to what you get from missions, so it's just not that appealing to sell 15 cheap machineguns. And while I'm wishlisting, I'd love to be able to set up an auto-sell filter, eg. 'sell non-unique weapons below a particular dps'

[–] FarceOfWill@infosec.pub 4 points 1 year ago

Yes and it flows through to the skill system too. 8 points for carrying more crap across yourself and the ship, and 4 more for increasing companion inv. Even more if you include pockets upgrades on suits.

Are these good skills? Not for the player to choose but to be available in the game. What's the balance here? What's the decision, carry more crap at the expense of doing more damage? Is that good choice to give the player? How do you balance encounter difficulty around that? You can't the player has to choose encounters based on their gimped pack rat skills.

Every part of the game needs a single big mod overhaul to pick a coherent direction.

[–] Sina@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago

Am I supposed to be looting everything I see? If not, then why is it the major income source, why are so many random objects worth selling and taking?

This is so true!

[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Amazing people make articles on... Nothing, essentially? It's just encumbrance, right?

I was expecting it would at least go into detail and explain or compare how many items or units of weight you can carry, if it slows you down gradually or if it pretty much freezes you on the spot, differences with previous well known franchise games but no, none of that either.

[–] Crismus@lemmynsfw.com 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I love how in Starfield your encumbrance and movement are aided or harmed by planetary gravity.

On a low gravity world I have had over 800/200 and run along with no issues. While on a planet with 1.6 or higher and you really can't ignore the slowdown. You just can't fast travel, but you don't stop like in Skyrim, so I think that's a positive step in the right direction.

[–] Rhaedas@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

That's not even realistic. I know that Starfield isn't meant to be a simulator, but if you put in something to try and be "real", you should do it right. Gravity would affect the weight of something, but the inertia is still the same. Moving and stopping a big object in space with no gravity at all is still hard to do.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DudeBro@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago

I really wish Baldur's Gate 3 had a shared party inventory. It's already partway there, I can still move a potion from Astarion's inventory to Shadowheart's inventory now matter how far apart they are. It'd just be nice if I could save a few minutes of inventory sorting if everyone just pulled from one mega inventory that added everyone's encumberence together. The way its implemented now just adds several unneccessary steps that don't even matter because of the magic pocket system.

[–] Perfide@reddthat.com 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I get the complaint with starfield since transferring stuff to your companions or ship is such a pain with their awful UI, but it's not even an issue in BG3.

99% of the time my party members have plenty of room to store all my shit, and in the rare occasion they don't it's a sign I have tons of shit to sell. On the even rarer occasion I run out of room in a situation where I can't easily leave, I can just send my extra crap to camp. Mind you, besides Shadowheart(Str 18) me and my party members all have base strength.

[–] hh93@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The only thing annoying with BG3 is that "sell all wares" only refers to those at the current character

I'd have liked it if stuff marked as wares would always be automatically distributed between the characters (or that there was a button to do this)

Also why can I select multiple items at once and move them between characters but not mark multiple items as wares?

Why can't I save that every cup I pick up should go to wares automatically?

I feel as if BG3 could've made the whole carrying thing far less annoying with ways to do less inventory management

[–] Lowbird@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can multi-select items and mark them all as wares at once, just only for one character at a time. I agree all wares should be pooled between characters though, or we should have the option at least.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Fafner@yiffit.net 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Playing a barbarian with bear aspect: "What encumbrance?"

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] kobold@beehaw.org 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I got sick of the constant quick travel back to merchants in BG3 and decided to just install the mod that multiplies my encumbrance by 9000x. the item management in that game is a giant pain and the gold economy plus encumbrance is an artificial barrier to getting them from merchants that simply adds playtime for no actual benefit.

Realistically speaking, if you want a useful encumbrance system, you should be thinking: what is the goal of an encumbrance system in the context of this game?

In BG3, it serves a few purposes:

  1. physical consequences. reduced movement speed, damage from jumping, etc are all part of D&D rules, which is useful when you're in a kind of situation where, say, you need to get a giant boulder across a huge gap and put it on top of a button that opens the gate while in combat. but outside the context of combat, doing this is meaningless, as the player can simply overcome this problem with time, which is annoying more than fun.
  2. limit access to the number of options a character has when confronting an encounter. it's not feasible to carry 99 potions of greater healing on you, and encumbrance is a general strategy that prevents this from being as effective. at the end of the day it does not solve this problem
  3. express limitations on what a character can do with their environment. encumbrance affects how much else you can carry, such as throwing a big rock at an enemy to do a lot of damage. this is irrelevant in the context of inventory vs. how much you can affect your environment; it can easily exist independently of an encumbrance system.

I don't like encumbrance in games in general. It makes games more fiddly, and forces the player to engage the system with no real addition to the fun of it. Limited inventory slots are similarly frustrating in games to the scale of Baldur's Gate. BG2 solved both of these problems by giving the player a billion bags of holding, which also had the added benefit of making inventory organization easier in a system that was largely left the same from its predecessor since it probably was built on the same codebase. BG3 had no such codebase restriction, and its type sort system sucks (the search bar is a lifesaver). Encumbrance very much feels like a "This is how it works RAW in 5e, so we're going to do it this way" decision, which is funny because in plenty of other situations the devs decided to stray away from RAW to make the game a lot more approachable.

I don't know if the goal of encumbrance is to prevent players from taking everything as much as possible or not - but if it is, it utterly fails at that goal

[–] ursakhiin@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

BG3 does give the ability to send stuff from lootable locations directly to camp, which solves half the problem. If I could sell stuff directly from camp the other side would be solved.

There is a valid argument of part of thee reasoning being determining what is really important to you prevents you from picking up literally everything and breaking the economy. But Starfields economy already seems pretty broken in my favor. I significantly upgraded my ship on both my first and second visits to New Atlantis. So I'm having a hard time feeling overwhelmed by the encumbrance.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mrnotoriousman@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

I finished my first run the other day and had no inventory issues. I did stop picking up every single thing not bolted down about halfway through the game and still ended with a surplus of 25k gold. You can select multiple items and send to camp/stronger party member or add to wares for quick sell. I was a low STR sorceror so just sorted by weight and sent it all over to lae'zel whenever I was carrying too much. Didn't really go out of my way to go to merchants

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If I'm playing an immersive misery simulator like a heavily modded S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Anomaly then encumbrance and inventory space plays a vital role in not only immersion but also gameplay systems like loadout choices and how much supplies and medicine you chose to bring and what that means in terms of how long you can stay out and how much loot you can carry back to base.

In games like Starfield and BG3 I find encumbrance mostly meaningless and annoying, and just exists as a means to slow down early game economy by preventing you from picking up literally everything not nailed down and selling it off. And in the end I typically end up thinking there are probably better ways to accomplish this that doesn't leave you with an annoying encumbrance system as a byproduct.

[–] Schlock@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In BG3 encumberance is absolutely needed to balance the game. Heavy Objects are still the best way to cheese combat and that is with you being limited in how many you can carry. Building a Character in a way to work around this is absolutely possible and a valid choice for a character build. It is definitely not a meaningless aspect of your character.

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 5 points 1 year ago

That's true. I forgot about Barrelmancy since I had a team of low STR characters and didn't really abuse that facet but you're absolutely right.

[–] sederx@programming.dev 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Tbh I could do without in most games. I spent more time throwing stuff than shooting enemies in starfield so far

[–] CraigeryTheKid@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Inventory mods are often the very first thing I go after. I don't care how unrealistic it is, I'm not playing a storage simulator.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Spicy@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago

They're always the first mods I installed in skyrim. So many times you get a surprise dragon fight after just clearing out and looting an entire dungeon. I hate killing it and then not being able to pick up the bones because oooh no you're already carrying too much!

[–] Hillock@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In BG3 encumbrance is so pointless. The increased carry capacity and reduced armor weight make it a non-factor. The few times you actually reach it you just sort by weight and send some of the heavier stuff to camp. You can even do it during combat. So they should have just gotten rid of it. You are bringing all your resources at all times anyhow and the inventory manamgent is still terrible.

The current system is just a minor inconvenience because you will have to go to your camp when you reach a vendor and want to get rid of some of the extra stuff. I would much prefer it if they either stick to the base rules, with base weight values and encumbrance starting at 5x the strength value. Then one would have to make actual decisions on what to bring. But right now, even with 8 strength you never have any issues. Or they just get rid of it.

And that's how I feel about encumbrance in general. Most games have such absurd high carry limits that the system doesn't add anything and just becomes an inconvenience and annoyance.

[–] MrBusiness@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago

I kinda disagree, keeps me from keeping a barrelmancer in my party at all times.

[–] HatchetHaro@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I played a Barbarian with the bear aspect (and before that, the gear that granted you double carry capacity), and I still found myself encumbered since I kept looting all the heavy stuff I could sell.

Even after clearing out all the loot, I was still left with a ton of scrolls, potions, poisons, etc. that I was "saving up" for a potentially difficult encounter, all taking up 75% of my carry capacity.

It's certainly a way to discourage hoarding and encourage you to use those consumables, especially since BG3 has an end, but I wish there's a better method for it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LunarLoony@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Thing is, what's the alternative? Either you put a hard limit on the inventory, or you give players an infinite inventory. The latter can be made to work, but it also takes away the element of risk.

Perhaps 'inventory size' could be tied with difficulty settings. If you want a Deus Ex-type experience where you really have to be picky about what you bring, maybe that should be down to the player; and so should a huge inventory that lets you bring everything everywhere.

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I actually really like what starfield does. It's a rolling scale, the more encumbered you are the more you have to pause and "recharge" O2. So being over by 2 won't affect you a lot, but over by 100 sure will

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] mojo@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

There's two online games I play. Guild Wars 2 and Genshin Impact. Guild Wars has you filled with your inventory a lot, especially as a new player. It's a massive turn off. Genshin just has a big mega inventory where items are sorted by tab (like character upgrade material tab), and has practically infinite inventory size. It technically has a limit of like 9999 but that's not going to be anywhere close to what a normal person gets. Definitely prefer that system.

Both those games should label a ton of unusable items as trash, so when you pick them up, they go to a separate tab. Just today I spent like 20 minutes managing my inventory in Balders gate, and it was a pain to survive until I found another vendor.

[–] Sina@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago

My approach to this problem is that I just select the easy difficulty & just throw away all the crap that would make the game easier. (if I picked up 100x random shit from goblins I could make my character stronger from the extra gold, but I choose not to) Also I just disregard crafting as well. I know that I could play on normal (or hard), fiddle with all these systems & make my team strong enough to deal with any challenge. it's a choice, since I'm playing a single player game for my own enjoyment, might as well make it challenging on my own terms.

load more comments
view more: next ›