Christmas is all about loot and we recently had a vigorous discussion in the forums about different inventory systems, so here's a poll on the topic.

What inventory philosophy do you prefer? Yes, I've simplified the choices - add your comments for more detail.

Balanced is the only option for me. The amount of loot carried should not be totally rediculous but the inventory system should'nt come in the way of having fun. If I play a game I want to be entertained.

The Realms of Arkania games were bad in this regard. I always was worrying about weight (and movement points) while looting, especially for those characters w/o belts of strength.

Dragon Age got the balance perfectly, methinks.

Balanced here as well. For the reasons very similar to SB's.

Looter

I am quite of a pack rat , and will get everything i can find (hoard it and never use it) Which makes me spend half of the game inventory managing.

If the game is not survival simulation (like Stalker for example) I just not see the point. And find inventory management a horrible waste of time.

Looter for me, I know its not the most realist way but being able to carry 10 sets of armor but not number 11 seems just as unrealistic to me, so why not take it all the way and allow the player to take all the nice things he find.

Also it can be done in a game realistic way usually, like D&D bags of holding.

Balanced. I hate the inventory management minigame as much as the next guy but it's just plain silly to be carrying around unlimited items unless the game itself compensates by not having many lootable items in the first place… something I dislike even more.

Looter, the Gothics have spoiled me to the point of using 90% of the thinking needed in Beth games on trying avoid hitting the weight limit. I didn't have such a big problem in older games (or in the Witchers and DA:O) but the more there is to loot the more annoying the limits are.

I'm usually all for realism and immersive boundaries but inventory limits are, for me, the worst kind.

Realism in the game world is vital for immersion.

I'm missing one particular distinction as there are two ways to go (or even combine them).

Ofcourse you have stat weight (Elder Scrolls). But also a visual grid on which you have to try and fit the objects in (Dungeon Siege and Neverwinter Nights).

I guess I'm going for balanced, which I think the TES system is. You always have an option to work on certain stats so you can carry more so it adds to the progression and your decision making.

At some points 'realism' and gameplay collide. To have a realistic inventory system you would need to have harsh limits. As a consequence they probably would decrease the amount of loottable things to accomodate. But then again that ruins the realism of having to option to loot everything that is not nailed down.

I like that I have to make a decision on what to pick or not or what to drop.

I think I'm witholding from voting because I'm not sure what exactly the Elder Scrolls use. I'll pick whatever the TES one is. I don't think it's hardcore and it's not even close to realistic (although more realistic than no weight limit). I think ballanced becaus it does impose a limit, but it's not entirely a realistic one.

No vote. I'm happy with any loot system IF it's done well. If you're going to let me vacuum up everything in the game you better have great sorting so I can find what I want quickly. If you're going to limit by weight then you better make it easy for me to quickly figure out things like cash per pound so I can figure out what to drop.

P.S. I have yet to see an inventory system that could be called realistic.

Nothing warms my heart like being able to loot EVERYTHING. But I still appreciate games where inventory management is required.

Originally Posted by TheMadGamer
Nothing warms my heart like being able to loot EVERYTHING. But I still appreciate games where inventory management is required.

Same here, I like not having to worry about inventory management in the Gothics for example, but if the game designers include a limit in their design then I'm not going to mod it out. It's part of the game.

I prefer the "balanced" approach, mainly to protect me from myself . Without any carry limits, I end up carrying just about everything I can find, to the point that my inventory regularly becomes an ungodly mess. Even with a good auto-sort mechanic, it still becomes a major headache after many hours of looting.

I love "realism" in games, but I also like to have fun while playing a game. This is why "balanced" appeals to me; there is enough of a limit in place to ensure some form of believability and it helps players manage their inventories (and also helps balance the in-game economy) without feeling so heavy-handed that looting is no longer enjoyable. The Elder Scrolls series is a great example of a loot/carry limit approach that balances some form of believability with "fun."

The only exception where I could see a hardcore/realism loot approach working would be in a game that is designed around survival. In a setting like Fallout, for example, I can definitely see a more "hardcore" or realistic approach being a logical design choice. There would have to be consistency to make this work though; just about everything in a hardcore survival-type game would need to be designed around this type of approach in order for a realistic loot system to make sense.

The only one I dislike is the "fixed space" system like in Baldur's Gate. You can carry 55,000 pounds as long as it is small enough.

'looter' i loved it in KOTOR1&2 and Risen and many others i like to loot everything possible with no limitation or any sort of restriction, but if you really i mean REALLY have to do it then 'balanced' that more like favors that you carry more items it annoys me in skyrim and fallout that i have to go everytime to a trader to sell things i don't like to just drop them just like that because thats money wasted also its annoying having to spend(waste) extra stat points on strength for only that reason.

Realism for me. It's much harder to break the economy that way which is a sure-fire way to ruin a game for me. Also, with a tight inventory, I'm always asking myself:
Which is more valuable to me the thing I can use, or the thing I can sell?
Do I want to keep the things I can use now or the things I can use in the future?
Should I try to complete this set?

My response is similar to Zloth - I'm quite tolerant and able to adapt to the circumstances whatever inventory system games throw at me. Whether that be Gothic's infinite inventory or managing encumberance in AD&D games, I have no preference and will adjust my playing/strategic thinking accordingly.

To be honest I've been playing games in the genre long enough for it to be a non-issue, though I do dislike the streamlining of inventory management in some modern games.

Thus if I had to simplify, I'm a looter in early phases of open world games, enjoy the hardcore elements where presented (New Vegas) and like to consider the philosophical overlap between balanced and realistic inventory systems.

I checked 'unlimited' because it's the closest answer to 'don't care' - inventory size is a non-issue for me as well. I'll take whatever inventory system I get and learn to cope with it.

Realism for me. Hardcore is cool too, when it's an interesting part of the gameplay. Deus Ex 1 is a good example.

Definitely Realism for me.

Originally Posted by BillSeurer
The only one I dislike is the "fixed space" system like in Baldur's Gate. You can carry 55,000 pounds as long as it is small enough.

That doesn't describe Baldur's Gate. BG also had encumbrance limits based on character strength.

Games like Deus Ex or the System Shocks would be better examples.