[GreggTheGrimReaper]

It has to be the same people that enjoy backtracking.

[Lancehead]

Personally, I quite like how Dragon's Dogma does it. 5 tier carry weight vs agility system (no encumberance, light, medium, heavy, slowed to a walk). Plus team mates - to distribute stuff among. Also carry weight and agility that's dependent on character size - the larger your character is, the less agile they are by default, but also the more they can carry. And finally stuff in your home stash is accessible from any other home stash around the world - and crafting stuff is accessible from the stash at all times. So the end result is - you get a carry limit, but it's really only for the items of the current trip + your personal equipment... every time you go back to town, you deposit all the stuff and start with a fresh load again. It's probably one of the most elegant and most underrated (or at least least talked about) features of that game - especially when you compare it to how countless other RPGs do it. Additionally, items are sorted automatically into relatively intelligent and useful categories, which is always a useful design feature that people don't think too much about... until they have to tediously sort through hundreds of objects without categories.

I like the sound of this system. It seems to get two things right.

Carry limit is tied to your character profile, which is how I think such limits should work.
And it has measures in place to make inventory management less of a hassle.

[patapuf]

It has to be the same people that enjoy backtracking.

i just like having to prioritize, why do you need to pick up everything? Pick up the 5 most valuable treasures and you often have 75% of the value in the dungeon anyway, why bother with the junk?

[Bisnic]

I hate it, but thankfully i play on PC and some games will allow me to put a ridiculous limit of 150/9999 rather than 150/200, so i dont have to worry about anything.

[Y2Kev]

The problem with dd is that I had to stay in very light because there is no fast travel really. There's no taxi system that I saw either, so you have to run everywhere. And to keep run stamina, I stayed in the bottom class. Had to.

[Graphics Horse]

Yes. I love inventory management, especially grid-based inventory systems like RE4, STALKER, and Deux Ex etc. So Good.

2D? pfff

[PatrickLyons]

For me it depends entirely on the game. Item limits work very well in Deus Ex: HR or RE4, but it becomes an absolute pain in the ass in a game like The Witcher 2. Inventory Tetris > random equipment load limit.

i gotta say, the "limits" in deus ex HR and re4 were barely there. maybe early in the game when you don't know what you're doing it could be a little annoying, but by the time you're halfway through those games you had expanded your inventory size and decided which weapons were worth using, and then you never had to worry about space again for the most part. It helped that both those games feature almost nothing to be picked up besides ammo and healthpacks, and the healthpacks stack (after a fashion in re4), and most of the ammo should just be sold, a design decision I heartily applaud. the real "limit" was the designers limiting themselves to not making every fork and nail acquirable and then sellable.

[Zaptruder]

The problem with dd is that I had to stay in very light because there is no fast travel really. There's no taxi system that I saw either, so you have to run everywhere. And to keep run stamina, I stayed in the bottom class. Had to.

Which are all more related to flaws with the travel system... but the issue of having to hold yourself at the lightest weight range personally is somewhat mitigated by the fact that you have party members that you can load up (and also get big party members that can carry heaps).

Personally... I think travel in DD was kinda cool. It was at least for a good portion of the game legitimately threatening and adventurous... until you figured that all spawns were stationery and didn't level.

If they had better randomized spawns and some degree of level variation (not necessarily level scaling, but rather the classical trick of story event causing location/environment/monster updates to an area), as well as faster travel mechanics - including horses, carts, and flying carpets (or something flying) would've turned any perceived negatives of no fast travel into a decided plus.

[eXistor]

I like 'em. I like having to limit myself, figuring out what to carry and what to leave behind and where. I liked it in Dragon's Dogma where if you carried almost nothing you were a lot faster. Whereas a heavily stocked person would be slow and sluggish. I like physicality like that things like inventory have an actual effect on the game.

/edit I see I' m not the only one that likes that aspect of DD, nice!

[flyinpiranha]

Nope. I don't give a shit about limits and I don't want them in my game. I'm already bending space and time in most RPGs or genres that would be known to have limits so why can't I have deep pockets?

"Why yes, I'd love to teleport 15 miles away right to my destination magically"
"You cannot carry Stick X2 as your carry limit has been reached"

I don't mind it if it's done correctly like some games it's part of the structure like FPS with ammo limits and only 2 weapons and such ... but in RPGs? No, it's stupid. I want to have fun and I'm already challenged by the enemies, does it really matter how many Rare Gems or Axes of I'm Going To Sell This that I'm carrying? No, it doesn't.

[Firebrand]

It has to be the same people that enjoy backtracking.

Backtracking when you get new abilities to reach new places and treasure is great.

Inventory limits are just frustrating though. Either have it so I can only carry a handful of things and I can't amass junk items, or give me nearly unlimited space.

[Patryn]

I think the limits are necessary in games like Fallout and Skyrim, simply because there are so many items that you can pick up. I'm sure that if they didn't have them, you'd have people complaining that it's too difficult to navigate the inventory menus.

They also make you face hard decisions like in the Fallout games where you find Power Armor, but don't have the training to use it. It's damn heavy, so do you carry it around until you get the training or what?

[subversus]

Either have it so I can only carry a handful of things and I can't amass junk items, or give me nearly unlimited space.

this is actually a good point.

Skyrim/The Witcher and other "realistic" looking games should be balanced that way. I mean I understand that hoarding stuff is a big appeal of these games but I would prefer if you could carry 3/4 potions (more with the special belt), 1-2 weapons and some books in the backpack and you would be ALMOST OVERBURDENED.

[Valygar]

I don't really like inventory limits. I think the games with inventory limits, and then a category of "trash" that you can autosell are an improvement. Curiously enough, there are not a lot of those kind of games.

Now I am playing Legend of Grimrock, since it seems there is no Merchant/Shop I am not hoarding stuff. If i find some helmet better than the one I have, I just put it on and drop the old one. I find it very good. Of course, I still hoard plants to make potions, and to a less extent, food, but that's a good mechanic.

If I ever play Skyrim again, I will roleplay that way. So much freedom...

[Sulik2]

In RPGs where you are picking up lots of loot carry limits drive me nuts. I don't want to micromanage what I pickup when you are throwing thousands of items at me. The first thing I did in Witcher 2 was install a no item weight mod.

Inventory limits can work in actions games with inventories, like Deus Ex, to make you specialize on your items and not unbalance the game.

[Like the hat?]

The only thing that bothers me is have tons of things with you, run freely. Pick up a cup? Can't even walk.

[Gustav]

Yeah I do. Makes me weigh the importance of what I want to take and what I need

this.

[ihearthawthats]

i'm a huge hoarder and have some ocd tendencies, so while i feel annoyed and not particularly enjoy it, i still prefer having these systems in place because it keeps me in check. a question like this one, i feel is a bit tricky to answer. i don't think many people "enjoy" reloading, or travelling times, or dying, etc, in games either. but they're kind of necessary to dictate the rules of the game.

much like anything and everything, a mechanic is only as good as how well it is designed and implemented. some games have terrible inventory systems and others have great ones. can't think of any terrible ones off the top of my head right now, but i like resident evil's briefcase.

[Maastricht]

this.

Same, but only insofar as it fits that game world. For instance, in something like Resistance, the more restricted setup of Resistance 2 didn't work that well, and was worsened by level design.

I also like them a lot in real life by the way. For instance, the one in my country about not being allowed to carry a gun, or even a knife with a blade larger than a few cm under some circumstances.

[Firebrand]

Dragon Age drove me absolutely crazy with its limits. The game has 5 armor classes, 7 qualities of each, set bonuses for equipping matching gear, a large number of party members to gear up, it has a crafting system with ingredients to find if you care about that... and even with all backpack expanders the inventory limit is no more than 125 item types. Items in stores are also super expensive so if you just don't pick up loot you won't be able to afford much.

[HarryHengst]

Not at all, and if at all possible i mod it out. Im a packrat in games. Got to steal everything!

[kodt]

No but they're a necessary evil. Adding some management and sometimes making you make tough choices is important to me in RPGs. It's not realistic or fun to just run around care free with magical infinite pockets picking up thousands of junk items on the way to a dungeon just because I have no weight to worry about. Sometimes I think people put too much stock into needing every ounce of a game to be "fun" and that results in people diluting games. In order to have a higher challenge level you need things that stress you and force you to think hard, and that's not always going to be "fun".

The problem is in games like Skyrim, I would just end up fast traveling back and forth between dungeons and cities and selling every single last Steel Shortsword I found and storing all ingredients (b/c someday I'll do alchemy) and these stupid magic staves I'll never use. I guess this is my own fault, but I never needed to make a hard decision about what loot to keep, just had to keep warping back and forth.

[Derrick01]

^ Yeah we've discussed this already but Skyrim is incredibly poorly balanced. The faults you listed don't really have too much to do with the actual weight limit (although they give you too much in that game) as much as other balance problems it has.

[nel e nel]

having ten pockets full of swords, armor and potions isn't that realistic either...

"Dammit! Where did I put my Swiss Army knife?!?!"

[ilnadmy]

OMG I seriously hate carry limits, specifically in The Witcher. A huge part of the game is crafting potions and oils to use in combat, but oh hey all the ingredients have weight. So, you know, you get punished for picking them up. But wait, maybe if I craft them into potions they will weigh less than the the combined ingredients? Maybe that's an incentive to craft potions!

Nope. Same weight. Screw you gamer, enjoy walking at 1 mile-per-hour to the nearest vendor one continent over.

[James Woods]

I fucking hate inventory limits so much. HATE HATE HATE.

Except Manhunt. It created tension and allowed you to see Cash carrying the weapons around on his person. So good.

[SaberVulcan]

Hate em. I mod out inventory limits on every game I play with them (Witcher 2, Fallout, or really any game with crafting).

For Witcher, it is dumb because enemies can drop 10 pounds worth of organs each, and you kill like 10 at a time. There is no point in having a Nekker Brain weigh like 3 pounds when your gloves weigh .5, othen then unnecessary realism.

In Fallout, I like to feel like a real scavenger of the wastes, and pick up shit I find, and deal with it when I get back to a town. If I find a room full of Flamethrowers, Im gonna pick that shit up, lug it back to camp, then figure out what to do with it. Not gonna worry about being over-encumbered every time I leave a goddamn town. I did that the first time I ran through Fallout 3 and NV, and I had mailboxes everywhere filled with shit. This was actually how you have to play when you dont mod out the weight limit.

[Dennis]

The weaksauce is strong in here.

It is no wonder that gaming isn't what it used to be.

I genuinely fear for the future of my hobby.

[mclem]

No but they're a necessary evil. Adding some management and sometimes making you make tough choices is important to me in RPGs. It's not realistic or fun to just run around care free with magical infinite pockets picking up thousands of junk items on the way to a dungeon just because I have no weight to worry about. Sometimes I think people put too much stock into needing every ounce of a game to be "fun" and that results in people diluting games. In order to have a higher challenge level you need things that stress you and force you to think hard, and that's not always going to be "fun".

I posted something on this subject some time ago:

So how would you account for, say, Fallout 3, where any bit of random junk may turn out to be a useful component for one of the craftable items, but you don't know yet because you don't have those plans? How do you make an *informed* decision in such a situation without relying on out-of-game information?

I'm not inherently opposed to the idea of the player having to make difficult decisions - far from it. However, I *am* opposed to the idea of the player having to make difficult decisions from a position of ignorance. It's shitty if you fight your way to the centre of the enemy base and *then* find out that you should have brought a frag grenade with you to blow up the central computer. That just ends up giving the player needless busywork, which isn't challenge.

[GungHo]

Yeah I do. Makes me weigh the importance of what I want to take and what I need

Of course, they could just not give you a ton of useless shit to carry around...

[Phatcorns]

You know, this is a great question. Limitations are what make games. For example, the limitation of a clip of ammo makes it really exciting and challenging to balance how much ammo to use in a battle and when to reload. That is an interesting and fun limitation and I think few people would say they would prefer unlimited ammo.

But never in my life have I said that inventory limitations are fun. They are pretty much universally frustrating and annoying.

Makes me wonder how much designers actually think about what they are doing. Are they just doing things because it's the way it's always been done or are they actually deciding whether it's fun/interesting (or whatever the goal they are after) or not.

[Hollywood Duo]

Of course, they could just not give you a ton of useless shit to carry around...

Doesn't everyone love sorting through 500 sacks of grain in every dungeon?

[dokish]

Backtracking when you get new abilities to reach new places and treasure is great.

Is not. Play Monster Tale. I immediately fell in love with the game, but afters 2-3 hours of backtracking I gave up.

[Akuun]

I like it when it's well done and adds a decision-making element to the game, like in DXHR or Deus Ex 1.

I don't like it if there is way too much crap to deal with, like in Skyrim.

[Rolf NB]

D* Souls gets it right. Equip limits? Yes. But inventory limits can die in a fire.

[SatelliteOfLove]

This reminds me of some Yahtzee Crenshaw said about Red Dead Redemption a few years back: Wait...that's not it. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/arti...ead-Redemption RDR is an example of what a game becomes (or loses) when it throws away limits, be they in regards to weapons, items, stamina, health, etc. You have all of your weapons with you at a given moment. You never need to worry about dehydration, sleeping or eating (even though you come across other characters in the game world who are starving/lost in the desert). You never have to regularly spend money on anything. Money is worthless since you never need to buy food/water, the meat and herbs you hunt for/harvest are worthless beyond selling it (which nets you more worthless money), buying horses is a novelty at best since you can just whistle for a replacement horse even after your current one dies, the infinite-horse call ability makes it almost pointless to steal horses, the wanted system is worthless because you barely feel the need to break any laws through normal game progression/survival and you can fast travel, almost making it so you don't have to ride a horse outside of missions. The game is awesome, yet the option to have it be more hardcore in terms of survival would've given worth to just about every other aspect of the game. It's not completel analogous, but the carry limit of RPGs and this theoretical RDR survival mode seem akin. There's no problem with preferring no carry limit, but don't just hate on it as if there's no point. Devs already cater to that point of view enough as it is. It has its worth.

Restrictions aren't fun, but neither are games with too few.

It's part of my warning against people putting creature comforts and ease of play as the goal of designing great gameplay rather than a tool to get great gameplay.

[willooi]

I'd also like to mention Max Payne 3's carry limits, which aren't at all similar to the RPG-inventory carry limits in that you're only able to carry one two-handed weapon and 2 single-handed weapons at any one time. Dual-wielding both of your single-handed weapons then makes you drop the two-handed weapon through physical practicality.

I definitely admire the aim of realism here rather than having an entire arsenal at your disposal as seen in the first two games, and it makes gunfights much more exhilarating when you have to scour for new weapons once you're out of ammo, adding a new dimension of forward-planning for weapon pickups to the already intense battle tactics.

[Jac_Solar]

You're back from work and have 30min to play some Skyrim, the last thing you'd wanna do is unloading your inventory.

So, theoretically, you want every single game to throw away restrictions and limits (Or the incentives to keep people playing and enjoying them.) that might bother you to ensure that IF you do pick it up, it'll be suited to your playing schedule?

Doesn't everyone love sorting through 500 sacks of grain in every dungeon?

People would only do that if there was a chance of finding something valuable -- and since 500 sacks is a lot, the game did an excellent job of establishing value. People wouldn't play such a game if the reward systems weren't designed very well.

[MikeE21286]

I don't like it as a player, but I guess I understand it as a game mechanic.

The part that annoys me (and I'm thinking of Skyrim specifically) Is when I have to juggle new items that I may come across while adventuring, and I do not have adequate information to know their relative within the world.

My example is when I started killing dragons in Skyrim. They always drop dragon scales and dragon bones, which early in in the game can take up to 20% of your total encumbrance. Of course I pick them up though, because I don't know if they're useful or not and do not want to lose out on them (at this point you have no idea how many dragons you will kill throughout the course of the game). I have turned my housecarl Lydia into a glorified walking chest. Sure she helps in battles, but the bigger tragedy for me if she died would be what I would do with the 200+ lbs of inventory items I have to find something to do with.

So while I understand it. I wish there were ways to make it so I wasn't juggling my encumbrance values in the game all the time, while letting it still play a role within the world.

[dekline]

I like carry limits. It makes things easy to manage. I carry both what I need and the best of what I want. Sometimes it can be difficult choosing between two equal yet very different items but that's what makes it fun imo.

[test_account]

I dont like it. I dont mind it if the nearest dumping place is not that far off though. Like in Demon's Souls, i think it worked pretty well. This is one think i was kinda missing in Dark Souls, a place where you could dump all the stuff. I know about the monster where you can exchange items for souls, but then the items are destroyed/eaten, not stored.

[SamVimes]

I like grids, weighted inventories not so much.

[Jac_Solar]

I dont like it. I dont mind it if the nearest dumping place is not that far off though. Like in Demon's Souls, i think it worked pretty well. This is one think i was kinda missing in Dark Souls, a place where you could dump all the stuff. I know about the monster where you can exchange items for souls, but then the items are destroyed/eaten, not stored.

You can also place all items in a box that lets you take/place items at bonfires. Not sure if that was what you meant though.

[subversus]

as much as I hate grid inventories I think they are pretty elegant solutions to weight limit.

[test_account]

You can also place all items in a box that lets you take/place items at bonfires. Not sure if that was what you meant though.

Ah, you're right, i forgot about those boxes actually. Thanks for reminding me :) I wasnt really affected/bothered by in Dark Souls, but i still prefer the dumping ground (with no limit) in the Nexus that Demon's Souls has.

[Lord Phol]

It's needed in some games, and just like with everything else it's been done better and worse.
I think it's needed most of the times.

[Lancehead]

as much as I hate grid inventories I think they are pretty elegant solutions to weight limit.

Games where items have weight values need weight allowances. Grid inventories will not work there, unless you want to get rid of weight values. They're also not a good solution for games with plenty of loot, unless you want to cut back significantly on the loot available in games.

[Zaventem]

Ah, you're right, i forgot about those boxes actually. Thanks for reminding me :) I wasnt really affected/bothered by in Dark Souls, but i still prefer the dumping ground (with no limit) in the Nexus that Demon's Souls has.

The box can contain 99 of each weapon/item that's why the call it bottomless box.You can buy it at the first merchant in the burg.Unless you just prefer Demon's Souls level layout.

[diamount]

Yep, I find it far too easy to make gold otherwise. Since you can just loot the whole dungeon, go back to town and sell. Means you have to be picky and choosy - always go for the low weight but high value items and ect.

[mclem]

I'd also like to mention Max Payne 3's carry limits, which aren't at all similar to the RPG-inventory carry limits in that you're only able to carry one two-handed weapon and 2 single-handed weapons at any one time. Dual-wielding both of your single-handed weapons then makes you drop the two-handed weapon through physical practicality. I definitely admire the aim of realism here rather than having an entire arsenal at your disposal as seen in the first two games, and it makes gunfights much more exhilarating when you have to scour for new weapons once you're out of ammo, adding a new dimension of forward-planning for weapon pickups to the already intense battle tactics.

Ah, but compare and contrast with a situation I was in in Uncharted 3; it's towards the end of the game, I'm in a fight with some difficult enemies and without much cover, with one good weapon that's low on ammo plus a peashooter. I die many many times... then I find a stash of ammo for the good weapon hidden off to one side. It still takes me several tries to do it, but the *knowledge* that that weapon pickup exists makes it significantly easier for me.

The problem? Planning wouldn't have helped; there wasn't a store of ammo earlier as far as I'm aware, I went in with what I had to hand. Should I have sacrificed a few attempts at the start of the encounter in the name of reconnaissance? Perhaps, but that's hardly in the spirit of the game.

That's a risk with carry limits, ultimately: Making the player feel forced into trial-and-error decisions without being well-informed. Maybe they can carry *either* anti-curse , anti-disease or anti-venom, but not all of them. If you're going to a swamp, anti-venom's probably the safe choice... but if you're going to a graveyard, would you be better off with anti-curse or anti-disease? Maybe you can just about squeeze out both at the cost of some ammo, which is fine if there's not *that* many enemies there, but you can't know it in advance.

Ultimately, that's my fundamental problem with carry limits: Knowledge of what's coming up gives you a *massive* advantage, and that's not always adequately conveyed within the environments of the game. I *strongly* dislike the idea that metagame abilities - save/reload, dying and respawning, advance knowledge of what's coming up - confers a significant reward on the player. Carry limits breach that.

I liked Legend of Grimrock's inventory, having it split up between your characters was kinda fun. I only played a few hours of the game, but it seemed like the inventory caps worked well.

Grimrock is *mostly* okay, but the food is a bit heavier than it strictly needs to be, and given the scarcity of armour there's significant issues with hanging on to heavy armour until you actually have the opportunity to make use of it.

There is one other thing, but that's the domain of late-game spoilers. First spoiler will be a vague general comment, but the second will be a corollary for it which - by necessity - is more specific.

There's a puzzle in a late-game level - Level 8, if memory serves me correctly - which heavily rewards hoarders. You need to supply four mundane items to proceed; items a hoarder is likely to have, but non-hoarders will likely have to traipse back to get unless they happen to be using the right sort of specialisation. Fortunately said items can be found in nearby levels... provided you've explored enough to know where to find them.

Shortly after that is that level's iron door - optional secret area - which operates on the same principle - except the required item is an apparently useless item from Level 2. I did not appreciate - on realising what it was asking for - having to slog back to collect it. On the brighter side, it is purely optional.