709
We've all done it (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 10 months ago by to c/rpgmemes@ttrpg.network
79 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 10 months ago* (13 children)

I don't mind encumberance that much. I think it's necessary if you're making any attempt at balancing the economy. Without it the player returns back to town with every bit of loot from the dungeon to sell, and the economy doesn't matter anymore.

However, any game that has an encumberance mechanic absolutely has to have a weight/value sort and display. I don't know why this is so hard for them to implement. Bethesda games never do, and I'm playing Tainted Grail (I've heard lots of good things, and it's alright so far) and it doesn't. With any amount of playtesting they'd get overencumbered, try to figure out what to drop and instantly realize they want to drop the highest weight/value items, and there's no way to view this! How do you not add it?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    Easy fix: Have more money as loot instead of otherwise nearly worthless items that sell for small amounts of money for flavor.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (3 children)

    Well, for most games it isn't useless items. Most of it just isn't useful to you. Either your gear is better, or it's for a combat style you don't use, or it's consumables like potions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

    I'm talking about the things you can't use, like bowls and trinkets and other stuff that games frequently include as 'white' items that literally cannot be used. Those things that exist to be sold to vendors.

    They have been in many of the rpgs I have played. In the rpgs that don't have them, there isn't a vendor that buys stuff and no 'economy' that exists.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    That's almost exclusively a Bethesda thing, at least to the extent it's an issue. Technically it's in Tainted Grail some, and Larian games a very small amount, but never in enough quantity or weight to be an issue, nor are they ever worth enough to bother with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago

    Look, you started by saying Bethesda games don't have encumbrance but Skyrim was the first game I thought of that had stuff you couldn't use but had some kind of value and weight and encumbrance was a huge part of Skyrim when wearing heavy armor. There is even a whole strategy of figuring out value for the weight to increase the amount of value you get when selling. Baldur's Gate 3 and I assume earlier ones have the same thing.

    We are talking about the games that have those things when saying they are an issue. Of course it isn't an issue in games that don't have it, but when it exists it absolutely is an issue, especially when game mechanics include a 'loot all' option. There you need to drop what you don't want.

    Hell, inventory management by space and encumbrance have been a thing for all the years I have played rpgs. Not having either seems more like the exception to me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago (7 children)

    In SP RPG games it's stupid. I'm just going to make however many trips back and forth it takes to empty the dungeon anyway. Might as well let me do it in one shot so I can get on to the next thing. I get it in survival crafting type games (within reason) but no reason games like skyrim or fallout need an encumbrance mechanic when you need a fuckload of stuff to level your crafting skills.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (6 children)

    Will you really go back? I suspect that 99.99% of players won't. It's more effective to go somewhere new, where you get XP, a fresh shot at better loot, and maybe different quests.

    Sure, you can ruin the economy in many ways, such as hoovering up every bit of loot. It isn't balanced around that though, and can't be. It's the correct assumption almost always that players won't return for loot that was left, because it's less valuable than doing a new dungeon.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    Yes, I go back. Why would I say it's annoying and wastes a ton of time if I didn't have experience with it? I've had a lot of conversations with other people who are the same way so I think you are underestimating how annoying it is. As far as moving on to the next place, what do you get? One boss chest, with a single magic item that may or may not be good for you? You still have to pick up the incedental crap to sell for gold and crafting materials. If you just rely on the few decent items you get that would take even longer. Regardless, there's no economy to ruin in games like skyrim or fallout. You're the only one there with a bunch of mindless NPCs, they don't trade with each other and their inventory resets after a few days. Selling them a ton of crap is completely meaningless to the world as a whole.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (4 children)

    I don't think you understand game design if you can't understand what's meant by "ruining the economy." It means that the player gets so much money that there's essentially no use for it anymore. They can buy anything that's available without concern. For example, in Morrowind you can craft potions with ridiculous value, then use that to pay for levels from trainers and buy the best items, then pay for enchanting to make them even better. It trivializes the game.

    The only option at that point is to just limit what can be purchased. That's a much worse solution than balancing the game's economy so the player has options to spend money on, but critically they can't buy everything. Video games are about making decisions. If you don't have to decide anything than why not just watch a movie? The game needs to present you with options, and you need to choose what you will and won't do. The economy is a great place this can happen in a game that's balanced well.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    Morrowind you can craft potions with ridiculous value, then use that to pay for levels from trainers and buy the best items

    Did you actually play Morrowind? I can't think of a single one of the best items in Morrowind that was available for sale. You either had to steal them or they were loot. Also most of the vendors in that game were pretty broke. To sell anything of "ridiculous value" You had to find the mudcrab merchant out in the middle of nowhere. Gold didn't trivialize that game at all. Exploiting alchemy did.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (2 children)

    No, the best items in the game are enchanted by the player easily. It's not required, but enchanting you can create better magical items than are available to find, and with the specific enchantments that you want.

    I agree selling stuff was annoying, but it wasn't that hard. You just sell as much as you can and buy back other light valuables. Then when you buy something you use the valuables first.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    No, the best items in the game are enchanted by the player easily.

    Okay so they're still not coming from the merchants, so having a lot of gold still isn't messing up the "economy". You have to acquire good equipment to enchant and track down the spells and powerful enough souls to make something useful. Merchant equipment stops at mid tier stuff. You have to go exploring to get the highest tier stuff. You don't need a ton of gold for any of that.

    I agree selling stuff was annoying, but it wasn’t that hard.

    And you are arguing that is good game design? I don't want to waste time doing tedious time consuming shit. I want to do cool challenging things. I'm playing games to have fun. If the obstacles put in my way to try and force me to play the way the devs want are just taking more time they're not really obstacles, they're just annoying and un-fun.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago

    The clothing with the best enchantability are exquisite clothes. They can be purchased from merchants. You can also pay merchants to do the enchanting instead of doing it yourself (expensive, but when money isn't an issue it doesn't matter).

    And you are arguing that is good game design?

    When did I say that? I only said that selling items is something that's done by almost all players. Sure, the system sucks to engage with, but it doesn't mean that it isn't an option.

    I don't want to waste time doing tedious time consuming shit. I want to do cool challenging things. I'm playing games to have fun.

    You're literally the one who just said they return to dungeons they already finished to clear out almost valueless items instead of going and doing actual content. Be consistent at least.

    Anyway, the point is that balancing the player economy is important so they can actually challenge you and do interesting things. If you can just purchase power, and money is easily available, then there's no challenge. If you can't purchase power then money is useless; and money is usually the reward for doing content.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent