Inventory and Money Management

For all Bard's Tale IV discussion that does not fit elsewhere, suggestions, feedback, etc. No spoilers allowed.

Moderator: Bard Hall Bouncers

Post Reply
User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2973
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Gizmo » April 19th, 2017, 5:01 pm

I'll definitely second this!

And on the topic of "Inventory and Money Management" I will attempt to clarify with the following (which is still the same as before):
  • Money depicted separate from inventory space
    IE. Not in a bag item that occupies an inventory slot; that is not something I asked for —Diablo had that... it was mentioned
    Visually done somewhat like FO2, and BG series (or BT series) would be fine with me
    Though preferably with some restriction against carrying tens of thousands in raw coins
That said, if the game atmosphere is more like Witcher than King's Bounty, then I think mobs shouldn't only have gold pieces, and perhaps not have them at all —If gold is the game world's dollar [ :( ] then I think they should have some of the game world's nickels; or else why aren't they at the tavern getting fed & drunk?

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8804
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Drool » April 19th, 2017, 11:11 pm

Gizmo wrote:
April 19th, 2017, 12:14 pm
Do you not realize that from day one of development Interplay was making "GURPS on the PC", and they spent three years on the game.
The sad stupid tale of Fallout and GURPS has been mentioned at least two dozen times on these forums (probably a dozen times by you since you somehow manage to bring up Fallout in every conversation). Furthermore, I have no lived under a rock my whole life. So yes. I'm well aware of the story, Captain Condescension.

Of course, you have yet to actually make this point relevant. Do you not realize you were responding to a comment about a useless skill? Would you like to address my actual point, or will you just whine about Bethesda some more, thus indirectly proving my point?
I had 24,000 posts on their earlier forum, before the switch; not nearly that amount now
I find that number equal parts unlikely and utterly irrelevant to this discussion.
Woolfe wrote:
April 19th, 2017, 4:38 pm
So.... frankly this thread is just a confused mess.
Indeed. What I want is roughly what noblesse and Zombra have advocated for. Specific to money, the simpler the better. Unless you're going to make the mechanic interesting and engaging, don't bother doing anything aside from having a mark on the character sheet that says "Gold: XXX". Likewise, just make it a party resource unless it's going to serve a purpose. Gold pooling in the originals served little purpose aside from busy work. Multiple currencies in Fallout: New Vegas served no purpose at all (no, coin shot doesn't count). Perhaps if NCR and the Legion only accepted their own currencies, and maybe if there were differing exchange rates then it might mean something, but as implemented it was pointless.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2973
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Gizmo » April 19th, 2017, 11:25 pm

For inventory, the original games were just lists. Even if BT4 were to just use a simple text list [unlikely?], I think it should still show an image of the item; whether or not you can move it with the mouse like Fallout or WL2. I think 2D rendered sprites of the 3D world model could be fine.
Image
**Possibly there could be two inventory screens open at once, to facilitate easy item trading.

____
Drool wrote:
April 19th, 2017, 11:11 pm
Of course, you have yet to actually make this point relevant. Do you not realize you were responding to a comment about a useless skill?
The point should be obvious. They were making a GURPS cRPG for years; and they had skills from the GURPS skill system. It was not thrown in arbitrarily; it did end up under used ~so what? The Traps skill was in the first edition rules.
I find that number equal parts unlikely and utterly irrelevant to this discussion.
Why would it be? It has to do with Bethesda, and past experience there.
Would you like to address my actual point, or will you just whine about Bethesda some more, thus indirectly proving my point?
What was your actual point?
Also, I guess I just hallucinated all those mines and traps in FO3 that you could disarm and get better at disarming as you raised the appropriate skill.
You said it yourself... YOU can disarm them (by mouse click) —not the PC. If that had been a skill check, (one with possibility of failure based on the PC's skill level) it would have reflected the PC's insight and aptitude for the task (or lack of same). I do not recall there being a disarm traps skill in FO3. Do you mean the Explosives skill? (edit: Perhaps the most egregious skill merger they've done yet; see below)

FO3 had actual traps, but no skill for detecting them as far as I recall. Bethesda decided instead that the player should tip off the PC about them.
IMO the traps should have been invisible until located by at least a passive skill check, but preferably an active one; because the PC should have to carefully look for those. (Perhaps passive detection within 2' of one.)

As it is... The player was the only influence —irrespective of the PC's expertise, or lack of any.
(And it probably didn't take into account crippled arms if the PC had any at the time; which should have made it any almost impossible task.)

**That's right, now I remember [via wiki ;) ]. The Explosives skill in FO3 is an implausible hybrid for throwing grenades and magically affecting land mines at a distance. Neither of which has any relation to explosives Image
  • The higher your skill, the higher the damage you inflict.
  • The higher your skill, the farther you throw [!?] and the better the accuracy for thrown bombs
  • It determines how close you can get to a mine before it detects you, and somehow extends the time the mine takes to explode
  • No minimum Explosives skill necessary to disarm a mine; just point & click
This is a snapshot of their treatment of once a great RPG series.

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 915
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by thebruce » April 20th, 2017, 6:39 am

ETA: Now caught up on comments. I agree this line of discussion about development practice is an offshoot from the OP subject. This is my last comment on it.
Gizmo wrote:
April 19th, 2017, 3:25 pm
> Of course you do. But it's a HUGE risk if you have zero input about what will and won't be successful. Any marketing dept that says it's ok to develop without any market research would not be a marketing dept. No market research, no feedback, no focus groups? ... Good luck with your game!

It's only a risk if it matters to you.
Well I hope it matters to them, because it matters to us. So.
it occurred to me to ask [as an aside], whether you knew the concept of begrudged respect; and I included an example of it. You could have said 'yes' or 'no'.
And I explained more than merely yes/no, because I found the question irrelevant, or at least inaccurate. I could have just ignored it. Probably should have.

I'll say this: [Also as an aside] I've had more fun playing 'Super Monkey Poop Fight' and 'Magic Sand', than many games I've bought from companies that did market research to try to make them palatable.
And I responded by saying that I find it highly highly improbable that the team did zero market research and testing to determine what would be good development practice in order to be successful in the direction that they wanted to go. Even if their target was not mass acceptance. If the game is cheap to make, they likely don't care much at all for research, and the chance of not finding any audience is slim to none for cheap niche games. So they made a choice and found their balance point. If they wanted mass market success, I'm confident they would have had to make some very, very different decisions. But I'm guessing that 'mass market success' isn't your point. And I agree - that's where the creators defining "success" is key. SMPF and MS had a very different goal in their game development than inXile (presumably) has in BTIV.
*UI playtesting to ensure it's understood, and potentially improved by it, is a good use of research IMO. Survey research about user interests are useful to make the gaming equivalent of mall food-court fare; and you'd never get the fully spiced experience of the local flavor —the way they'd prepare it themselves.
A chef making food they like, their own way, will eventually find a market for it unless it's shut down for health/safety; but hopefully big enough to sustain the business. But if a chef wants to be very successful they'll do research to find a great location to drop their restaurant to maximize that market.

Look, we're arguing about business practices vs artistic expression. Game development isn't and cannot be either/or. For community, there has to be interaction and understanding of your target market - even if that market is a reflection of your own gaming preferences; for the business, there has to be research about what is popular, what is current, what is acceptable, and the contrary to each. And above all that, the creators decide how much of that research will influence their design decisions. It may be none at all, it may be through and through. There is no universal "right" or "wrong" in this decision.

As fans, we have a "right": what we enjoy; and if we don't enjoy it we don't buy it. As devs, they have a "right": satisfaction at the product they created, a self-defined goal for "success" whether that's purely artistic expression with no return or purely profit or somewhere in the middle.

---
All this to, again, say - you have gaming preferences which are different than ours. You prefer more simulatory mechanics in various aspects, whereas we enjoy more abstract mechanics in some areas because some specific mechanics we have found tedious and unnecessary. The devs may not, and if we disagree, then for myself at least I hope that what ever they do create instead is something I will find enjoyable. But I would not like it if they simply created their game with no consideration of input from us whatsoever, because this is Bard's Tale - it's a pre-existing brand with a dedicated fan-base. Now they have to make a decision about where on the spectrum their design decisions will fall, and hope their end product is enjoyed. That's it.

I'm pretty sure the tangent was achieved because one or more people expressed their opinions as a "should" instead of "I prefer".
A) I like this.
B) I like that.
A) But that doesn't make sense to me because it should be like this.
B) Why should it be like that? I don't like that.
A) But this makes sense, that doesn't.
B) But it makes sense to me so I like it, yours isn't good.
yadda yadda...

Let's all (including myself) try to keep it to "why I like and would like to see..." rather than "why you are wrong..."
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 915
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by thebruce » April 20th, 2017, 6:46 am

Gizmo wrote:
April 19th, 2017, 11:25 pm
For inventory, the original games were just lists. Even if BT4 were to just use a simple text list [unlikely?], I think it should still show an image of the item; whether or not you can move it with the mouse like Fallout or WL2. I think 2D rendered sprites of the 3D world model could be fine.
**Possibly there could be two inventory screens open at once, to facilitate easy item trading.
I wouldn't have a problem with that.

I'd love to see inventory mechanic designed similarly to BT1-3. But I haven't had many distasteful experiences with graphic grid-inventory management. I don't like the idea of money taking up inventory space and capped per space. I'm pretty flexible on inventory mechnic, but I feel the more we move away from BT1-3 style (such as dummy equipping with inventory squares and item juggling to make room, item condition that degrades value and lifetime*), obviously, the less Bard's Tale it'll be.

* BT1-3 used # of uses remaining which effectively mimicked 'condition'. Use it the last time and the item disappears. But its value was the same at 1 use left or 100 uses.
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

_noblesse_oblige_
Explorer
Posts: 447
Joined: July 13th, 2015, 7:18 pm

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by _noblesse_oblige_ » April 20th, 2017, 6:55 pm

Drool wrote:
_noblesse_oblige_ wrote:
April 18th, 2017, 5:57 pm
Now, if I attack some of the things Gizmo has attempted to use to support his position, because they are incogent, have a weak chain of logical inference, demonstrate the fallacy of Affirming the Consequent, deflections, deviations from the point, or what have you
Don't forget the fallacy of the excluded middle: people don't want a burdensome system, therefore they want no hindrances whatsoever.
Gizmo wrote:
April 18th, 2017, 7:10 pm
Within the software industry, there is an entire field known as user experience (UX). My proposal comes from a desire to improve the UX of the game. If Gizmo can argue for degraded UX to make a game's rote-playing experience seem more real to him, then I can argue for something else rather than just merely against him.
I do not, and have not ~period. To claim that is puzzling, and could come of either a gross misunderstanding, derisive malice; or bad sarcasm. Which is it?
To the list, we can add the Fallacy of False Dilemma (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma).

To answer your False Dilemma, how about none of those options? You have repeatedly stated that you want the game to provide resistance to the player in the form of mandatory money-handling and inventory management actions. The field of user experience (UX) seeks to create designs which minimize resistance or remove unnecessary obstacles to good user experience - good player experience, in this case. You have also argued that the game is about the game world and not about the player and have used that argument to advance a form of simulationism which trumps the software's ease-of-use. You have, in fact, argued for a degraded UX. To point this out is not bad sarcasm or derisive malice. And, it is not gross misunderstanding either, no matter how much you dilute your argument with partially relevant to totally irrelevant examples, anecdotes, and statements of philosophy. I do understand what you are advocating and have pointed out some of results of implementing what you advocate. I do not desire those results, as they do not provide good UX, and have pointed this out. That is all.
Gizmo wrote:So it does seem to be derisive malice IMO
That statement from you is an example of Insinuation/Innuendo.
Gizmo wrote:
April 18th, 2017, 7:10 pm
Why would you insult a speaker and an argument rather than choose to disprove it?
And that statement from you is an example of the Loaded Question Fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question).
Gizmo wrote:
April 18th, 2017, 7:10 pm
In the latter case, there is hope that the person with the untenable position would choose a more tenable one. :)
Does this mean one you agree with?
Does my statement say that? No, it does not. It means exactly what it says.

You know what, Gizmo? I really do try to engage in respectful debate with others, but your way of debating others is rather trollish at times. This is not the first thread where you've not known when to stop, where you've wanted to have the last word, even though your arguments have been cut down for lack of cogency or factual support. (I can cite one or two famous examples from the past couple of years, if your memory needs jogging.)

Yes, you can have your own preference for how a game should be, but so can the rest of us. You don't need to invoke shaky inferences about the state of 1980's computing power to support your opinion, nor do you need to invoke a personal dogma about how games should be to support it either. Those kinds of things are assailable in the court of public debate and, as long as you attempt to press them on others as part of your attempt at argument, they are likely to be assailed.
cmibl<enter>

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2973
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Gizmo » April 20th, 2017, 10:22 pm

_noblesse_oblige_ wrote:
April 20th, 2017, 6:55 pm
You have repeatedly stated that you want the game to provide resistance to the player in the form of mandatory money-handling and inventory management actions.
What —exact and specifically... do you think that I've asked for?

*I recall somewhere mentioning 'no choice in the matter', but what did you think that applied to?
(This is just to clarify; so we're both on the same page ~for each other's contention. Image )

You have also argued that the game is about the game world and not about the player and have used that argument to advance a form of simulationism which trumps the software's ease-of-use.
My singular preference is that software ease-of-use does not create loop-holes, and logical fallacy in what actions the PC has and doesn't have available to them. This extends well beyond gold & inventory concerns.

This reminds me of a line in Hitchhiker's Guide, where Ford is told to 'Address the [committee] chair", and he points out that it's a rock; where he's then asked, "Why not call it a chair", and he say's "because it's a rock". :D

"The PC can't accomplish that!"
" Why not allow them to anyway?"
"Because it's not something they are capable of."

—[It's an option for a different character than the one that they have.]
Gizmo wrote:So it does seem to be derisive malice IMO
That statement from you is an example of Insinuation/Innuendo.
It was originally part 2 of an honest question. I often go through posts linearly and reply as I read them [a habit picked I up on Bethsoft], and so came to the next statement, and took it as an answer.
If I was genuinely mistaken, then I genuinely apologize.
Gizmo wrote:
April 18th, 2017, 7:10 pm
Why would you insult a speaker and an argument rather than choose to disprove it?
And that statement from you is an example of the Loaded Question Fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question).
Very likely... but not necessarily intentional; it's just how I think, and questions occur.

**I do not put stock in fallacies, and freely admit to using 'No True Scotsman' with wild abandon; for no other reason than —honestly believing it at the time.
You know what, Gizmo? I really do try to engage in respectful debate with others, but your way of debating others is rather trollish at times. This is not the first thread where you've not known when to stop, where you've wanted to have the last word, even though your arguments have been cut down for lack of cogency or factual support. (I can cite one or two famous examples from the past couple of years, if your memory needs jogging.)
Do, but please do so in PM or a new thread. I have never seen it happen; but I have seen it claimed.

I have not insulted you [to my knowledge], unless you have interpreted insult. If you have, then I am sorry for that, but not really understand why, until you explain it a bit more specifically.
Last edited by Gizmo on April 20th, 2017, 10:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8804
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Drool » April 20th, 2017, 10:51 pm

Gizmo wrote:
April 19th, 2017, 11:25 pm
The point should be obvious. They were making a GURPS cRPG for years; and they had skills from the GURPS skill system. It was not thrown in arbitrarily; it did end up under used ~so what? The Traps skill was in the first edition rules.
And that stopped them from removing a useless skill... how? It's not like the license was pulled the day before the game shipped. They were already tinkering with core mechanics, they could have removed it, but they didn't.
I find that number equal parts unlikely and utterly irrelevant to this discussion.
Why would it be? It has to do with Bethesda, and past experience there.
It's kind of adorable how you think post counts matter.

Do you mean the Explosives skill?
Yes. The higher the skill, the longer you had to disarm the mine. And yes, it was you and not the character, just like Lockpicking, Computer Use, and... you know... combat.
Bethesda decided instead that the player should tip off the PC about them.
IMO the traps should have been invisible until located by at least a passive skill check, but preferably an active one; because the PC should have to carefully look for those. (Perhaps passive detection within 2' of one.)
So... traps should have worked different from every other system in the game.
That's right, now I remember [via wiki ;) ]. The Explosives skill in FO3 is an implausible hybrid for throwing grenades and magically affecting land mines at a distance. Neither of which has any relation to explosives
Because, as everyone knows, neither grenades nor land mines explode. They're made entirely of peanut butter and sardines.
This is a snapshot of their treatment of once a great RPG series.
Maybe they should have included used condoms as loot...
Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2973
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Gizmo » April 20th, 2017, 11:03 pm

Drool wrote:
April 20th, 2017, 10:51 pm
And that stopped them from removing a useless skill... how? It's not like the license was pulled the day before the game shipped. They were already tinkering with core mechanics, they could have removed it, but they didn't.
Perhaps they wanted it in. :?
It's kind of adorable how you think post counts matter.
They don't, but they indicate a level familiarity from the time spent in the community.
Do you mean the Explosives skill?
Yes. The higher the skill, the longer you had to disarm the mine. And yes, it was you and not the character, just like Lockpicking, Computer Use, and... you know... combat.
And that was the problem with it. That is why the PC itself seems like vestigial tail in their not-really-an-RPG products. They make sandbox-sims that are ironically lax in the simulation. They make [digital] package tours for the curious. They do it well, and they usually sell well.
So... traps should have worked different from every other system in the game.
Most systems in their game worked differently from every other game in the series. :|
Because, as everyone knows, neither grenades nor land mines explode. They're made entirely of peanut butter and sardines.
Now who has the irrelevant point? What does it have to do with manual arm strength, and pitch accuracy? How in the world could it add time or affect the detection range to something not even being touched by the PC? I can accept abstraction of action if the mine was in their hands, but this is not them knowing that a particular model can be fooled by slow pauses, or other esoteric conditions... It's the player being given more time during their mad dash to grab it. That's a cheat. The expert would know when to run like hell —away from it.
This is a snapshot of their treatment of once a great RPG series.
Maybe they should have included used condoms as loot...
It worked in Fallout 2. :mrgreen:

IRRC, if the male PC didn't have one during relations with Mrs. Bishop, it changed the ending of the game.

Yokohamalama
Novice
Posts: 46
Joined: September 20th, 2015, 2:50 am

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Yokohamalama » April 21st, 2017, 11:09 am

Gizmo wrote:
April 19th, 2017, 11:25 pm
For inventory, the original games were just lists. Even if BT4 were to just use a simple text list [unlikely?], I think it should still show an image of the item; whether or not you can move it with the mouse like Fallout or WL2. I think 2D rendered sprites of the 3D world model could be fine.
I really wonder what approach they take for displaying inventory items...

If they model every possible inventory item in 3d, then they have these choices:
a) they create a 2d icon for every 3d model (lots of work)
b) they don't create any 2d icons and show the items as 3d preview like in Skyrim

or c) they don't make any 3d models for inventory items and items only exist as 2d icons (i.e. opening a chest opens a small window which shows the items as 2d icons). I believe Might & Magic X had it this way.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8804
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Drool » April 21st, 2017, 8:24 pm

Gizmo wrote:
April 20th, 2017, 11:03 pm
So... traps should have worked different from every other system in the game.
Most systems in their game worked differently from every other game in the series. :|
But they were internally consistent.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2973
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Gizmo » April 22nd, 2017, 11:06 am

Drool wrote:
April 21st, 2017, 8:24 pm
Gizmo wrote:
April 20th, 2017, 11:03 pm
So... traps should have worked different from every other system in the game.
Most systems in their game worked differently from every other game in the series. :|
But they were internally consistent.
Not much of a consolation IMO; and in FO3's case its consistency has some really nasty side effects where interaction with water is concerned.
(To the point of being downright stupid)

Image Image

Image Image

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8804
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Drool » April 22nd, 2017, 8:32 pm

Gizmo wrote:
April 22nd, 2017, 11:06 am
Not much of a consolation IMO; and in FO3's case its consistency has some really nasty side effects where interaction with water is concerned.
And if it was inconsistent, you'd be here complaining. If Fallout 3 was anything other than Van Buren, you'd complain.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2973
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Gizmo » April 22nd, 2017, 9:15 pm

Drool wrote:
April 22nd, 2017, 8:32 pm
If Fallout 3 was anything other than Van Buren, you'd complain.
Actually...that's not so; but why would you think of that as being a bad thing? :shock:

Do you not agree —at least presentation and mechanics-wise, that WL2 is about the best and closest to a Fallout title, of any commercially released game since? Though not intended as such, and lacking the finer points of the IP... I cannot point to a better [unofficial] Fallout 3 than WL2.*

Do you think Bethesda's FO3 is better; better suited; and better Fallout?

*I haven't played Underrail yet, but I've heard good things about it.

For sympathy sake, for those than demand some measure of 3D FPP... I think the guys that did the Ground Zero demo using the D00M 3 engine, had a better foundation for a Fallout game than Bethesda ever wanted to make.

Alas, Troika's own "Fallout 3 —If you give us a minute..." technical demo didn't get a chance to become a reality. :(

That's two games [besides Van Buren] that I would have greatly preferred to have been made as the official Fallout 3, rather than Bethesda's own unrelated FO3; and even if it had to be done on a shoestring budget.

User avatar
Crosmando
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5018
Joined: January 3rd, 2013, 8:48 am

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Crosmando » April 24th, 2017, 1:11 am

Gizmo wrote:
April 22nd, 2017, 11:06 am
Drool wrote:
April 21st, 2017, 8:24 pm
Gizmo wrote:
April 20th, 2017, 11:03 pm
Most systems in their game worked differently from every other game in the series. :|
But they were internally consistent.
Not much of a consolation IMO; and in FO3's case its consistency has some really nasty side effects where interaction with water is concerned.
(To the point of being downright stupid)

Image Image

Image Image
To be honest, none of these really bother me much, it's a video game.
Matthias did nothing wrong!

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2973
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Gizmo » April 24th, 2017, 3:06 am

Crosmando wrote:
April 24th, 2017, 1:11 am
To be honest, none of these really bother me much, it's a video game.
I was bothered because of the utter silliness that the PC would drink from the toilet while still living in Vault 101. What annoyed, was that the developers left it that way instead of at least making it a special case environment; that's a first impression of their game that they shouldn't want.

I'm surprised though, to see that the other these don't bother you —when existent in an RPG.

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 915
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by thebruce » April 24th, 2017, 6:22 am

Maybe they left it in as a sort of humorous tidbit, that people would be so desperate and willing to drink toilet water (presumably the 'clean'ish stage).

But heck, how many games in the past had the same sort of simplified health mechanic? And they were still fun. In my mind, there's a conflict here because the game is tangibly more realistic and so it's more out of place, as it were, to drink water to restore health, especially when there may be loads of drinks and scrap food laying around the geometry which are purely visual, for example.
So for me it comes back to how the game presents itself and what it owns. Be an abstract game? Drink water, drink toilet water. Be a literal environment? Toilet water, really??
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2973
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Gizmo » April 24th, 2017, 10:41 am

thebruce wrote:
April 24th, 2017, 6:22 am
Maybe they left it in as a sort of humorous tidbit, that people would be so desperate and willing to drink toilet water (presumably the 'clean'ish stage).
In the vault, they have a working diner, and the working bathrooms have sink faucets next to the toilets. No, it's slothful consistency.

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 915
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by thebruce » April 24th, 2017, 11:09 am

Or perhaps a humorous tidbit.
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8804
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Inventory and Money Management

Post by Drool » April 24th, 2017, 10:39 pm

So how about that money management, hey?
Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests