Starfield - No Man's Bethesda

[Ag3ma]

Inventory weight limit is one of those staple mechanics that makes less and less sense as time goes on. It feels like it's an old concession to "realism" that originated in TTRPGS, which ultimately serves little to no point in a CRPG.

Yes and no. This is about game design and implementation.

Inventory management is a key aspect of some RPGs. They are designed about forcing strategic choices on you, and that's fine, if the game is designed for it. In many cases, it's just not properly structured. People wanting to loot every sword, necklace, suit of armour etc. can be a representation that the devs just haven't designed the economics of their game properly (and to be fair, RPG economics generally is utterly fucked). Some get round this by enemies simply not dropping loot except currency. Yeah, they were hitting you with a sword a minute ago, but the sword's disappeared and you've got 6gp instead.

 

[Bartholen]

Yes and no. This is about game design and implementation.

Inventory management is a key aspect of some RPGs. They are designed about forcing strategic choices on you, and that's fine, if the game is designed for it. In many cases, it's just not properly structured. People wanting to loot every sword, necklace, suit of armour etc. can be a representation that the devs just haven't designed the economics of their game properly (and to be fair, RPG economics generally is utterly fucked). Some get round this by enemies simply not dropping loot except currency. Yeah, they were hitting you with a sword a minute ago, but the sword's disappeared and you've got 6gp instead.

TBH, I've yet to play a single RPG where I'd have felt inventory weight limit as a mechanic enhancing the experience in some way. RPGs, especially party-based ones, already have enough management as is, I don't really want to have to stop every now and then to consider what to drop. It only ever feels like games implement some sort of workaround for it to minimize having to think about it: Witcher 3 only has weight for items like armor and weapons. Miscellaneous crap and consumables are effectively weightless. BG3, as mentioned, gives you so much inventory space between 4 party members that if you're ever encumbered, you just toss some stuff onto another member. I can see the point of inventory weight limits in something like survival games where resource management and scavenging is a core part of the experience, or in dungeon crawlers like Diablo where you're expected to be constantly switching gear. But in RPGs where you can pick up basically anything that's not nailed down I just don't see the point.

Can you mention some examples of RPGs with weight limits that actually use the mechanic well? I'd be curious to know.

Also, Dragon Age: Origins has IMO the most balanced economy of any RPG I've ever played, and it surprised me just how much it enhanced the experience. I wish more devs would pay such care to that aspect.

 

[wings012]

TBH, I've yet to play a single RPG where I'd have felt inventory weight limit as a mechanic enhancing the experience in some way. RPGs, especially party-based ones, already have enough management as is, I don't really want to have to stop every now and then to consider what to drop. It only ever feels like games implement some sort of workaround for it to minimize having to think about it: Witcher 3 only has weight for items like armor and weapons. Miscellaneous crap and consumables are effectively weightless. BG3, as mentioned, gives you so much inventory space between 4 party members that if you're ever encumbered, you just toss some stuff onto another member. I can see the point of inventory weight limits in something like survival games where resource management and scavenging is a core part of the experience. But in RPGs where you can pick up basically anything that's not nailed down I just don't see the point.

Can you mention some examples of RPGs with weight limits that actually use the mechanic well? I'd be curious to know.

Also, Dragon Age: Origins has IMO the most balanced economy of any RPG I've ever played, and it surprised me just how much it enhanced the experience. I wish more devs would pay such care to that aspect.

I really liked how Wasteland 3 just did away with all the inventory management. You have an infinite shared super bag that everybody loots into. Done. No more twatting about. I still have nightmares from back in Fallout 2 just how much of a pain in the arse it was to ferry shit about, open conversation and trade menus(then later I realized you could just use the steal menu on your party members and they won't protest ever, but it was still janky).

I think the "idea" of weight tying into some sorta strategy around inventory management just sounds good on paper but we'd just have so much more fun just lugging everything around and looting with complete reckless abandon.

I think maybe immersive sims come the closest to your inventory management being important. In something like Deus Ex, it's impossible to carry every heavy weapon along with you(or at least incredibly awkward when it comes to having to sacrifice way too much to do it) so you do need to pay some mind as to what you bring with you and what you choose to specialize in. Though you never need to loot a whole lot in those games, generally you're just looking for more ammo, money or healing items which generally stack and don't take up a whole lot of space. This ain't weight limits either, it's grid based inventory. The inventory serves as one way to 'cap' your build so you're not so omnipotent(though it's still more than easy enough to become omnipotent through other means....).

In Bethesda games which are just a shallow massive sandbox, I do think that encumbrance is just a whole lot of fannying about.

 

[Bartholen]

I think the "idea" of weight tying into some sorta strategy around inventory management just sounds good on paper but we'd just have so much more fun just lugging everything around and looting with complete reckless abandon.

This is why I mentioned it originating in TTRPGs, where it's still present (though often ignored). Because unlike in video games, where the devs have utmost control about how the players can interact with the world, in a purely make believe world there are no such constraints. The players can, in principle, start lugging around the 4-ton head of the giant statue they found in the wilds, or chisel off the entire tiling of a temple floor and take it with them. That's where a carry weight limit makes sense. And since RPGs originated in copying those mechanics, importing weight limits alongside everything else also makes sense. And I'd guess it just became an automatic assumption of RPG mechanics.

 

[Satinavian]

This is why I mentioned it originating in TTRPGs, where it's still present (though often ignored). Because unlike in video games, where the devs have utmost control about how the players can interact with the world, in a purely make believe world there are no such constraints. The players can, in principle, start lugging around the 4-ton head of the giant statue they found in the wilds, or chisel off the entire tiling of a temple floor and take it with them. That's where a carry weight limit makes sense. And since RPGs originated in copying those mechanics, importing weight limits alongside everything else also makes sense. And I'd guess it just became an automatic assumption of RPG mechanics.

In a TTRPG you usually just buy a couple of pack horses (or depending on the setting pack dinosaurs, pack ogre skelettons, pack golems or even cars ) and call it a day. Hardly anyone ever has time and interest in managing inventory at the table by hand. It is excatly as fun and engaging as in video games.

The problem is that video games don't want the party to have a baggage train. So it is either "carry it on person" or "drop it/leave it behind".

 

[Ag3ma]

Can you mention some examples of RPGs with weight limits that actually use the mechanic well? I'd be curious to know.

You've already sort of touched on them - survival / scavenging games, and where there are other specific reasons to try to mimic reality as part of gameplay.

I think inventory limits play a key gameplay role in a lot of Rogue variants, too - some games deliberately create "grinding" loops - arguably, this is the sort of mechanic in Rogue variants. Go out, collect loot until you reach a point of satisfaction, pop back to the town level to sell, etc. Restricting PC access to items can be a form of difficulty setting or balance. There's a Steam EA game called Stoneshard where the inventory is really limited. It's designed to restrict you, and make you think about what you need and make trade-offs accordingly. Sometimes, of course, they're just controlling the rate at which you amass money and go into a shop and buy absurdly OP equipment for your level.

Also, Dragon Age: Origins has IMO the most balanced economy of any RPG I've ever played, and it surprised me just how much it enhanced the experience. I wish more devs would pay such care to that aspect.

Money is difficult. Many players collect money as an aim in and of itself even if it's useless - they'll never spend it. But it feels like an achievement to many players, and a lot of games are geared around amassing pointless amounts of money. Sometimes, money is heavily constrained at the start so the player gets in the habit of hyper-looting. If you're casual about looting, eventually it drops a "You need 10k gold to advance this quest [ha ha]!" or you see that magic halberd you really, really want is in a shop at a really high cost. Games can therefore punish you for not being sufficiently aggressive looting.

The values of many things in-game are hopelessly out of whack with history. Even a cheap sword was a couple of day's work for a skilled craftsman. Historically they were affordable even to many peasants, but still a very significant expenditure. You loot 10, even with second hand prices you could live comfortably for months. You definitely shouldn't be selling them for the price of a fish stew. A chainmail shirt was a fuckton of work - a month, maybe more? Really expensive. Why are gems often so cheap in games? If you raid a temple and get a small gold figurine of a cat with emeralds for eyes, it should make you instantly rich. Like, several years annual pay for a skilled craftsman rich. If you did, you wouldn't need to be carting round 10 swords. Sure, some people would try anyway, but.

Games are not necessarily reality simulators, of course, but I wonder if they were more realistic whether it might actually improve things.

 

[Kyrian007]

TBH, I've yet to play a single RPG where I'd have felt inventory weight limit as a mechanic enhancing the experience in some way. RPGs, especially party-based ones, already have enough management as is, I don't really want to have to stop every now and then to consider what to drop. It only ever feels like games implement some sort of workaround for it to minimize having to think about it: Witcher 3 only has weight for items like armor and weapons. Miscellaneous crap and consumables are effectively weightless. BG3, as mentioned, gives you so much inventory space between 4 party members that if you're ever encumbered, you just toss some stuff onto another member. I can see the point of inventory weight limits in something like survival games where resource management and scavenging is a core part of the experience, or in dungeon crawlers like Diablo where you're expected to be constantly switching gear. But in RPGs where you can pick up basically anything that's not nailed down I just don't see the point.

Can you mention some examples of RPGs with weight limits that actually use the mechanic well? I'd be curious to know.

Well, this comment will be promptly hated. But I can answer. Fallout 4. It didn't make a lot of sense in Fallout 3, but if I had to guess it was put there to reinforce building a character with specializations. You COULD make a character with every weapon proficiency and ALL the martial skills to go with it. But without cheating, you couldn't carry enough weapons to make that effective. Same answer for NV, although the package service meant once you got something to a home base, you could send it wherever. Which cut down time sink dramatically if you were moving your primary base. Although it was kind of pointless because NV's overworld was so boring you had to use fast travel to get any kind of enjoyment out of it anyway. So warping around was just something players got used to.

But encumbrance had that and another real definite use in Fallout 4. It encouraged engagement in a couple of the game's systems that otherwise might get overlooked entirely. It helped in stopped players from minning CHA to max something else. Local Leader and its supply lines were hugely useful in cutting down transport time and massively helpful in building settlement. But it took a 6 charisma to get Local Leader. It made mid to high level charisma builds way more attractive to attempt. And that in turn encouraged players to engage with settlement building. Because the more settlements you had, the easier it was to get stuff to wherever you needed it.

And of course, the reason I liked it so much was also related. It really triggered the ire of folks who just wanted Fallout 4 to be a shooter with some RPG elements and Fallout wallpaper and who whined and cried mightily about how much they hated settlement building. "You always have to defend them," they sob. Nope, build them right and you don't. "But Preston Garvy keeps badgering me about settlements." Ok, why do you keep talking to him then? You know you don't have to... right? "But I can't carry everything and all the weapons and armor and all the things all at once!" Nope, you can't. But I'm almost too full of those bitter tears... so tasty, yet I'm so sated I can hardly enjoy just one more sob. Or, put another way. I see hating encumbrance as a punishment for players who don't play the game in what I consider to be the "right way." Or, people hate encumbrance because they are playing the game wrong. And that's why I relish their anguish. Never fails to put a smile on my face.

 

[Drathnoxis]

Can you mention some examples of RPGs with weight limits that actually use the mechanic well? I'd be curious to know.

Agema already mentioned roguelikes, but I want to go into a bit more detail. In Nethack weight limits definitely enhance the challenge and heavily impact your decision making in the early game. Especially for a low strength character you can't simply take everything you want with you so you need to decide what will increase your survivability the most. Yes you could wear that crystal plate mail since it has good magic cancellation and the second best armor stat in the game, however, it's so heavy that you won't be able to carry much else, and you'll be constantly hovering on the edge of being overburdened, which can easily lead to being dead. It also prevents you from having access to every potion and scroll you've ever found at any time, and you need to be more strategic about what you are going to bring with you and what you are going to come back for later. Back tracking also has a cost in Nethack because of the hunger system, in some situations you might not be able to afford to go back to a previous stash if you are low on food, this makes decisions about what you are going to carry with you all the more critical.

Of course, once you have a bag of holding the weight limit is made a lot easier, but it comes with its own challenges. Anything you are holding in a bag needs an extra turn to be able to use, so taking an extra turn to dig out your potion of full healing could mean the difference between life and death. Also, if a bag of holding becomes cursed it increases item weights instead of reducing them, so if it suddenly is cursed during a tough fight with a lich, you might suddenly find yourself in a pretty bad situation where you need to drop the bag that contains everything you own in order to escape with your life.

Honestly, the weight limit is so integral to the game, I think it would be a significant detriment if it was removed.

 

[Bartholen]

Games are not necessarily reality simulators, of course, but I wonder if they were more realistic whether it might actually improve things.

Which is why I used the word "balanced" instead of "realistic". Because let's face it, the moment you start trying to apply real world logic and dynamics to fantasy, it all breaks down. All Dragon Age needed for me to be compelled by its economy was make me actively consider what to spend money on by making valuable items pricey enough, and handing out gold in equally balanced amounts. Which is much harder than it sounds to be fair.

I do wonder though what applying some degree of "real world logic" would do to RPG economy mechanics. Larian's econ system for Divinity OriSin 2 and BG3 gets the job done, but it's certainly not immersive: you can sell any piece of junk or priceless artefact to any merchant anywhere, whether they be a fishmonger or a magic merchant. Which is just silly. What if, for example, you could only sell weapons and armor to blacksmiths or forges? That would give a reasonable excuse for why a crappy goblin sword is only worth 2 bucks, because hey, who else are you gonna sell it to? Or if there was a general wares merchant, who would accept stuff like bags, candles, cutlery and other everday stuff? I'm just spitballing here, of course it'd need to be more than that.

 

[NerfedFalcon]

Can you mention some examples of RPGs with weight limits that actually use the mechanic well? I'd be curious to know.

Runescape is explicitly balanced around having 28 inventory slots and 11 equipment slots; pretty much every boss, dungeon, raid and skilling activity would be broken with one more or one fewer slot for consumables, switches and loot. That's not exactly what you're talking about, but it takes item weight into account too.

Weight isn't a hard limit, but carrying a lot of weight also makes your run energy drain faster, which is also taken into account in several situations (e.g. Waterbirth Island). It would definitely be a worse game if either or both of those were fundamentally changed to be more lenient, or removed entirely - especially considering that stackable items like coins and runes have no weight, and that there already are ways to pack multiple items into one slot (e.g. the rune pouch) or to extend your run time (energy and stamina potions, weight-reducing gear).

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

More time spent shuttling crap back and forth means more "play time" for Bethesda to brag about including in their game.

So that must’ve been what they meant…that it basically takes 130 hours to collect the shit that makes the game “fun”, and then the game officially starts. Amazing.

 

[meiam]

Which is why I used the word "balanced" instead of "realistic". Because let's face it, the moment you start trying to apply real world logic and dynamics to fantasy, it all breaks down. All Dragon Age needed for me to be compelled by its economy was make me actively consider what to spend money on by making valuable items pricey enough, and handing out gold in equally balanced amounts. Which is much harder than it sounds to be fair.

I do wonder though what applying some degree of "real world logic" would do to RPG economy mechanics. Larian's econ system for Divinity OriSin 2 and BG3 gets the job done, but it's certainly not immersive: you can sell any piece of junk or priceless artefact to any merchant anywhere, whether they be a fishmonger or a magic merchant. Which is just silly. What if, for example, you could only sell weapons and armor to blacksmiths or forges? That would give a reasonable excuse for why a crappy goblin sword is only worth 2 bucks, because hey, who else are you gonna sell it to? Or if there was a general wares merchant, who would accept stuff like bags, candles, cutlery and other everday stuff? I'm just spitballing here, of course it'd need to be more than that.

Underrail has a decent economic system, merchant will only buy a certain amount of limited selection (ie a merchant will say "I'm willing to buy 3 firearm, 2 armor, 1 grenade and unlimited amount of ammunition". Different area use different currency too so the money kinda "reset" in between area so that even if you grind a lot in one area you won't necessarily be instantly rich in the other.

Limited weight is a decent compromise to make money still matter a bit while letting the player loot everything and not make them all worthless to resell. And its very easy to disable with a mod for people who don't like it (but then they'll probably complain that they have nothing to do with all their money).

 

[Ag3ma]

Which is why I used the word "balanced" instead of "realistic". Because let's face it, the moment you start trying to apply real world logic and dynamics to fantasy, it all breaks down. All Dragon Age needed for me to be compelled by its economy was make me actively consider what to spend money on by making valuable items pricey enough, and handing out gold in equally balanced amounts. Which is much harder than it sounds to be fair.

I do wonder though what applying some degree of "real world logic" would do to RPG economy mechanics. Larian's econ system for Divinity OriSin 2 and BG3 gets the job done, but it's certainly not immersive: you can sell any piece of junk or priceless artefact to any merchant anywhere, whether they be a fishmonger or a magic merchant. Which is just silly. What if, for example, you could only sell weapons and armor to blacksmiths or forges? That would give a reasonable excuse for why a crappy goblin sword is only worth 2 bucks, because hey, who else are you gonna sell it to? Or if there was a general wares merchant, who would accept stuff like bags, candles, cutlery and other everday stuff? I'm just spitballing here, of course it'd need to be more than that.

I'm certainly in favour of the idea that people won't buy your stuff. No, the fruit merchant isn't going to buy your swords.


The other idea (related to Underrail, @meiam) might be a simple limitation on what people will buy. Even supply and demand: "No, I'm not buying your swords because the last 20 you flogged has saturated the market". Or even that the merchant just doesn't have much money lying around to buy your junk.

I like an element of immersiveness, and I like inventory limits, because it feels faintly stupid carrying around 8 suits of chainmail (think upwards of 60kg weight, never mind the difficulties from the sheer bulk). And whilst I'm on bulk, I also sort of like inventory systems with a pane, to reflect size as well as weight: because we've all experiencing things that are pain to get around because they're large rather than heavy.

I suppose my way of looking at it is that players should learn to have to leave stuff behind - that's my preferred style. But at the same time, they need not to feel like they have to grub after penny. So either allow them to become very comfortable easily, or give them the rewards in uncommon-rare items (jewellery, etc.) that so comprehensively outvalue generic tat that people feel happy(ier) to leave the tat behind.

 

[CriticalGaming]

The more I play Starfield the more I'm pulled out of the experience by the outdated design and tech on display. Most annoying is the lifeless stares of the NPC's when you have to talk to them. Their eyes sometimes looking in random directions, their heads turning away for no reason. There is no acting in the character models, nothing to resemble the performance of the voice actors who are all doing a really good job.

If Starfield came out in 2015 instead of the 18th re-release of Skyrim, it would be a Masterpiece of gaming. But in 2023 it feels like a relic trying to be relevant.

 

[Silvanus]

This sounds an enormous amount like No Man's Sky again. Procedural generation, the exaggerated promise of endless exploration, the... shallowness under that premise.

Is this just No Man's Sky again, and if not what're the biggest differences?

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

This sounds an enormous amount like No Man's Sky again. Procedural generation, the exaggerated promise of endless exploration, the... shallowness under that premise.

Is this just No Man's Sky again, and if not what're the biggest differences?

Think “AAA” No Man’s Sky, and instead of the devs eventually fixing the game it’ll be modders.

 

[CriticalGaming]

This sounds an enormous amount like No Man's Sky again. Procedural generation, the exaggerated promise of endless exploration, the... shallowness under that premise.

Is this just No Man's Sky again, and if not what're the biggest differences?

16 TImes the budget.

 

[meiam]

This sounds an enormous amount like No Man's Sky again. Procedural generation, the exaggerated promise of endless exploration, the... shallowness under that premise.

Is this just No Man's Sky again, and if not what're the biggest differences?

Can't speak for the game as I've not played it but from most in depth review I've read, comparing it to no man sky would be like comparing Fallout 4 to sims city because you can make settlement in it. The procedural generation seems to just be a side activity and most of the game is just a bethesda RPG with a space setting.

 

[Bartholen]

The other idea (related to Underrail, @meiam) might be a simple limitation on what people will buy. Even supply and demand: "No, I'm not buying your swords because the last 20 you flogged has saturated the market". Or even that the merchant just doesn't have much money lying around to buy your junk.

I think Witcher 3 had a good idea in this regard with its crafting system: every item you found could be broken down to crafting components at a blacksmith, and those components could often be combined with others to create higher-tier components you needed for the special items you could only get through crafting. I dig the idea of selling the swords for scrap to be melted down, and perhaps turned into materials instead of players being basically a wandering arms dealer.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

Intel Launches 'Emergency' Driver Update To Improve Stability In Starfield

This is a temporary patch to enable Arc GPUs to run the game.

www.tomshardware.com