Inventory and Weight Limits - What happened?

NeitherFirstnorLast

Good morning,

I am very confused about the change up in character carry weights - or apparent lack thereof. We all know that in Skyrim, everything had an assigned weight - including your worn armor. If you wanted to play a "tank", you had the benefit of a high armor rating, and the drawback of encumbrance. It certainly stands to reason that someone wearing a full set of steel armor can't move as fast or carry as much as someone dressed in cloth or leather armors. This was reasonable and forced players to make strategic choices about what they carried or wore.

In the ESO system, on the other hand, everything has an "inventory" point. I can carry 60 pts, and it doesn't matter what those points are. In ESO, apparently, 60 recipes or grapes or worms or butterfly parts count for just as much weight as 60 war hammers, or 60 sets of iron curiasses, or 60 great swords. To be blunt, that's absolutely stupid - and if a player's main goal is to get powerful, there is now no longer a reason to NOT dress your character like a tank.... unless you really are in the game to role play.

Why the change, Bethesda? And is there anything in the works to change the inventory system back to something that makes sense?

NeitherFirstnorLast

AlnilamE

Ooohhh... There are many reasons not to dress your character like a tank. Unless you are a tank, of course.

The way the inventory is set up has nothing to do with that.

Also, worms and grapes will actually stack up to 200 on the same slot. Recipes and armor pieces occupy an individual slot each.

Gidorick

I think it has more to do with MMO tropes. They use slots instead of weight. I have suggested some changes to make it a bit more Elder Scrolls like:

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/162693/more-bags-and-encumbrance-concepts/p1

slipHAZARD

NeitherFirstnorLast wrote: »

Good morning,

I am very confused about the change up in character carry weights - or apparent lack thereof. We all know that in Skyrim, everything had an assigned weight - including your worn armor. If you wanted to play a "tank", you had the benefit of a high armor rating, and the drawback of encumbrance. It certainly stands to reason that someone wearing a full set of steel armor can't move as fast or carry as much as someone dressed in cloth or leather armors. This was reasonable and forced players to make strategic choices about what they carried or wore.

In the ESO system, on the other hand, everything has an "inventory" point. I can carry 60 pts, and it doesn't matter what those points are. In ESO, apparently, 60 recipes or grapes or worms or butterfly parts count for just as much weight as 60 war hammers, or 60 sets of iron curiasses, or 60 great swords. To be blunt, that's absolutely stupid - and if a player's main goal is to get powerful, there is now no longer a reason to NOT dress your character like a tank.... unless you really are in the game to role play.

Why the change, Bethesda? And is there anything in the works to change the inventory system back to something that makes sense?

NeitherFirstnorLast

Encumbrance systems work fine for single player games but for multiplayer, especially MMO's not so much. Say you're doing a dungeon with a group of six with one tank. All the other players are then forced to move as slow as the tank because of encumbrance. It slows down the group and slows down the game. Plus with Armor passives there are tons of reasons not to equip like a Tank.

Aett_Thorn

Because it's a different game, and they need to think about the various mechanics that separate a single-player game and an MMO. In a single-player game, you can basically take all the time you want going through your inventory and dropping things that you don't need. In an MMO, if you're in a tough fight, and accidentally pick something up to the point that you become 'encumbered', then you, and your party by extension, might be screwed. In PvP, this could become an even bigger headache.

But like the poster above said, you can expand your inventory with in-game gold, and most light items stack to a high degree (either to 100 or 200), so no, 60 worms will NOT take up the same amount of space as 60 hammers.

Akavir_Sentinel

It's astounding how many players still think that ESO was supposed to Skyrim 2, or Skyrim Online....

ESO is an MMORPG, not a single player RPG. There are things that work great in single player games that simply don't translate well to MMO's.

Sallington

Why do people constantly try to compare ESO to the worst single player ES game?

Merlin13KAGL

Slots produce less encumbrance on a database, and that ties directly to game performance.

And it's not Bethesda's game, in this case. They only consulted for lore.

Ulaidian

Perhaps it was terrible to some of you, but to a lot of people, myself included, it was the door that opened the Elder Scrolls World, and was much loved.
Why shouldn't they, consumers just like you, have an opinion on what they expect(ed) or want?

Aett_Thorn

Sallington wrote: »

Why do people constantly try to compare ESO to the worst single player ES game?

Because, for many of us, Skyrim was our first entry point into the series. I actually played Skyrim first, then went back and played Morrowind and Oblivion. But Skyrim was still my first Elder Scrolls experience, and I am betting that I am far from alone on that. Even if you say it was the "worst" of the series, I still liked it, and some of the things that I liked there aren't here. Not that I was expecting them to be, but I can certainly understand how people who are new to MMOs might have expected them.

Sallington

Aett_Thorn wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

Why do people constantly try to compare ESO to the worst single player ES game?

Because, for many of us, Skyrim was our first entry point into the series. I actually played Skyrim first, then went back and played Morrowind and Oblivion. But Skyrim was still my first Elder Scrolls experience, and I am betting that I am far from alone on that. Even if you say it was the "worst" of the series, I still liked it, and some of the things that I liked there aren't here. Not that I was expecting them to be, but I can certainly understand how people who are new to MMOs might have expected them.

True. I can see why people who only know RPGs as Skyrim, especially with no MMO experience, would expect certain things. I've been loving MMOs and RPGs for well over a decade so my opinions and expectation are probably completely different.

arena25

I like the encumbrance idea, but again, in groups and in dungeons, it would actually slow down the game and your group, and that would make things less fun. In a singe player game like Skyrim, sure, I can take the time I need. But in an MMO...forget it.

Aett_Thorn

arena25 wrote: »

I like the encumbrance idea, but again, in groups and in dungeons, it would actually slow down the game and your group, and that would make things less fun. In a singe player game like Skyrim, sure, I can take the time I need. But in an MMO...forget it.

It would also heavily burden tank characters while light-armor casters would barely feel it. In a single-player game, this isn't much of a problem, but in an MMO, it certainly is.

TheEmoVampire

you realize encumbrance is based on stamina there for you'd have to be a stamina build to hold items

Noomfy-Mop

Personally I really like the slot system.
I don't like the fact that I just paid 5900 for 10 extra slots but I'll get over that.. Probably when I have to pay double that for another 10 slots lol.

All in all I'm loving this game.. Probably a bit TOO much lol

Ulaidian

Oh wait till you have to pay 20k for the ones after the next set!

Merlin13KAGL

TheEmoVampire wrote: »

you realize encumbrance is based on stamina there for you'd have to be a stamina build to hold items

Actually, encumbrance was based on strength, an attribute non-existent in the game's current form.

Stamina dictated things like Sprint, Block, Dodge, and holding Bow at full draw. (These were affected, in turn, by Athletics/Acrobatics, leading to differing jump heights and sprint speeds.)

Being overencumbered simply meant you had no option to sprint, and if you took it too far, no option to move.

idk

NeitherFirstnorLast wrote: »

Good morning,

I am very confused about the change up in character carry weights - or apparent lack thereof. We all know that in Skyrim, everything had an assigned weight - including your worn armor. If you wanted to play a "tank", you had the benefit of a high armor rating, and the drawback of encumbrance. It certainly stands to reason that someone wearing a full set of steel armor can't move as fast or carry as much as someone dressed in cloth or leather armors. This was reasonable and forced players to make strategic choices about what they carried or wore.

In the ESO system, on the other hand, everything has an "inventory" point. I can carry 60 pts, and it doesn't matter what those points are. In ESO, apparently, 60 recipes or grapes or worms or butterfly parts count for just as much weight as 60 war hammers, or 60 sets of iron curiasses, or 60 great swords. To be blunt, that's absolutely stupid - and if a player's main goal is to get powerful, there is now no longer a reason to NOT dress your character like a tank.... unless you really are in the game to role play.

Why the change, Bethesda? And is there anything in the works to change the inventory system back to something that makes sense?

NeitherFirstnorLast

Welcome to the world of an MMO. It's not a exactly skyrim and wasn't intended to be.