I still say we should not be carrying 9002 weapons at a time...

Honestly, what is the point of weapon switching when we can just pick 1 of the hundred weapons we have on our inventory to switch, especially when players are often safe after they clear out the enemies in the immediate vicinity. I think we shouldn't be allowed to change our equipment unless we are at a bonfire, because this aspect ruins the point of preparation and planning ahead.

Many times I never have to worry about what to pick for the journey ahead because I can always switch my shield/weapon/armor whenever I wish. This can be even applied to places you never gone to before, seeing as most enemies can be spotted just before you confront them, save the occasional ambush or two. "Oh hey! A pyromancer! Let me just turn back and switch to anti-fire equipment for extreme convenience!"

Here is for DS2 solving this problem.

I miss the weight limits strangely enough, for two reasons really:
1. Realism *GASP* its kind of nice to have humanistic touches, even in a fantasy game. and besides why bother to carry only one armor set for the occasion when you can bring your whole wardrobe with you!
2. I have about 12 tower shields and 7 penetrating swords and 2 white bows from people/suckers who forgot to empty their bags.

I think you're wrong actually. I like being able to swap out my equipment for noticing certain enemies. Although there should be a weight limit i'll admit that

I hate weight limits. They're tedius and take the game out of the game. Any such systems feel like I'm doing my taxes.

I'm all for realism, but I'd rather play Souls than Inventory Management 2: The Sequel.

I do think OP has a point about having to be prepared, and I'd go for a per-category limit (you can only carry X # of weapons, Y # of head armors, etc)

I agree. Limit inventory to what fits in the HUD inventory. It adds a survival/prep aspect. To me this simplifies, not complicates. A weight system complicates, and carrying a boat load of gear is too convenient.

But then i wouldn't be able to satisfy my OCD and upgrade every piece of equipment i come across to max and leave it my inventory with default sorting

Weight limits add nothing to the game. The way they're designed, most consumables have negligible weights and can be stacked to 99 (is that realistic?) and you can usually still carry 3-4 weapons, maybe closer to 6 weapons and 2 sets of armor when you get to higher levels. Rings also typically weigh very little, and yet I ask: where the hell are you keeping all these rings?

Item burden mechanics are rarely anything close to realistic. It makes no difference if you can carry 6 swords or 99 swords, both are absurd.

Well, I'm gonna be honest, while I don't really like the idea because I like to carry a weapon for every situation, I really believe that it would make PvP richer as people would have to fight with what they are able to carry according to limits, instead of having all the weapons in the game they can use in their inventory and quick switch and desired.

BUT there is huge flaw in it, and it's not related to PvP: what if you're killing everyone in a dungeon you just found and you can't loot the treasure you found because weight limits stops you? Items disappear forever if you leave them floating in the ground...

That's something I hated about Demon's Souls to happen, I remember going to 1-1 in Pure White World Tendency and I found that the door to the left was open, after some hard fights I reached the ending and I couldn't loot the entire armor set of Biorr because it was too heavy, and I don't like that to be honest.

I have said it before and I shall say it again. In my opinion, it is wrong to state that it adds nothing to the game. That is not true. It would add depth to the choice of itemization.
I understand some people may find it incredibly frustrating, but it sure as hells makes items more valuable just on its own. The idea that you would have to pick what you want to carry carefully makes obtaining items much more rewarding. The fact that it would 'disappear forever' would make it hard for you to choose exactly what you want, which again, would add more value to items.

As far as I'm concerned, I would like it to return. It feels more realistic that you need to choose what you carry, and really when you think about it, it's silly for any one individual to be carry all existent items in a place, and de-values them by making them available at all times once obtained.

Perhaps... a weight limit, but items would stay where you leave them and not disappear? That would at least balance it out a bit.

If they do use a weight limit, they can also plan ahead and not put something so heavy as the entire Brushwood Set and shield in one spot/area because that was so heavy that, combined with the gear the player was already wearing, depending on the character's SL, it can be just unfair to expect the character to have that much of his/her weight limit left. With a little better planning, I think the problem that the Brushwood set presented can be fixed while still keeping a weight limit.

Fossil wrote:Weight limits add nothing to the game. The way they're designed, most consumables have negligible weights and can be stacked to 99 (is that realistic?) and you can usually still carry 3-4 weapons, maybe closer to 6 weapons and 2 sets of armor when you get to higher levels. Rings also typically weigh very little, and yet I ask: where the hell are you keeping all these rings?

Item burden mechanics are rarely anything close to realistic. It makes no difference if you can carry 6 swords or 99 swords, both are absurd.

I used to think bringing back weight limit was something we should have for reasons as you'd expect, but your argument is very true, and while you could perhaps allow some room for the 'fantasy' setting, I actually agree with your argument. They're both equally ridiculous.

I see the benefit in PvP, but again if you can still carry 4 swords, 2 shields, maybe 2 different sets of armor how much are you really limiting someone's choices?

How do you feel about this instead:

You can only equip gear at a bonfire via an armory. Anytime you pick up a new item you will be given the option to send it to the armory or examine it. Examining brings up side by side stat comparisons and you can then choose to send it to the armory or equip it and send your old gear there.

It would effectively limit your gear choices without most of the other annoying aspects of item burden. However, there are still things I don't like about that system. For example 99% of the time I never use a bow, but I still carry one for those times it comes in handy. Do we add more weapon slots? Are we expected to run back to a bonfire, change equipment and then fight our way back?

It just seems to me that item burden has more downsides than benefits in a PvE game, but I do understand why you'd want to limit someone's gear choices in PvP.

Edit: Realized this is more or less what the OP suggested. Either way I'd like to stay away from item burden.

How is it that all I suggest is that we can only modify our equipped gear/items while resting at a bonfire, yet everyone seems to be talking about weight limits and item burden. Seriously, what did I say wrong? All I proposed is that things like gear and quick-select can only be modified at bonfires, since it serves practically the same purpose of Burden without any drawbacks of burden!

That's potentially too limiting. Carrying around a little more than four weapons and/or shields (depending on the exact weapons) isn't necessarily unrealistic and doesn't necessarily give a player too many options. In fact, many builds rely on that many for just ONE strategy. On the other hand, as it is, a player can have an entire armory in his/her inventory and always have everything, which does remove the planning and adapting aspect. I don't like the idea of just limiting how many items we can carry, especially if there's no way to increase the limit. Weight limit gives solves the issue this thread brings up (while bringing in others) in a way that actually explains the reason, adds a sense of realism, and can scale for people who may want to build a character specifically to be a jack-of-all-weapons. (to an extent)

this has turned into a debate about bringing back the weight limit, which I personally would not like to see back because I like to aquire all weapons and armor and choose between them.
Now having to use a bonfire to choose your equipment is a genious idea and would fit perfectly in a Souls game. I love the idea!

Well despite the negatives of weight limit, it meant people couldn't do a suicide run and get all of the powerful armor and weapons in an area at low level, just by being good at avoiding enemies.

Conrack wrote:Well despite the negatives of weight limit, it meant people couldn't do a suicide run and get all of the powerful armor and weapons in an area at low level, just by being good at avoiding enemies.

That is a good point.
Maybe it could be tweaked in certain areas. Like instead of having an NPC that can store items, you can use the bonfires to store items instead. Having to return to your last bonfire to unburden yourself before pressing on. I really like the idea of using the bonfires to prepare for whats ahead.

Fossil wrote:Weight limits add nothing to the game. The way they're designed, most consumables have negligible weights and can be stacked to 99 (is that realistic?) and you can usually still carry 3-4 weapons, maybe closer to 6 weapons and 2 sets of armor when you get to higher levels. Rings also typically weigh very little, and yet I ask: where the hell are you keeping all these rings?

Item burden mechanics are rarely anything close to realistic. It makes no difference if you can carry 6 swords or 99 swords, both are absurd.

+1 and seconded...Equip burden adds NOTHING into gaming experience, it is just simply a pain in the *** and doesn't reward you as a player in any way.

Juutas wrote:

Fossil wrote:Weight limits add nothing to the game. The way they're designed, most consumables have negligible weights and can be stacked to 99 (is that realistic?) and you can usually still carry 3-4 weapons, maybe closer to 6 weapons and 2 sets of armor when you get to higher levels. Rings also typically weigh very little, and yet I ask: where the hell are you keeping all these rings?

Item burden mechanics are rarely anything close to realistic. It makes no difference if you can carry 6 swords or 99 swords, both are absurd.

+1 and seconded...Equip burden adds NOTHING into gaming experience, it is just simply a pain in the *** and doesn't reward you as a player in any way.

^^

Sigh. YES IT DOES add something to the game. YOU might not like it, but it DOES ADD something to the game. I can't understand how you people keep on coming up with the same empty argument that it adds nothing. It adds DEPTH to items by making them harder to get and TAKE WITH YOU, and also adds MORE POWERFUL CHOICES to the stuff you pick up because you can't carry everything. How is that nothing!?

Just because it terrifies the **** out of you people that you can't grab everything and carry around everything at all the freaking time, doesn't mean that its existence is meaningless. Learn to appreciate the subjectivity of things huh? Jesus.

sinspaw wrote:Sigh. YES IT DOES add something to the game. YOU might not like it, but it DOES ADD something to the game. I can't understand how you people keep on coming up with the same empty argument that it adds nothing. It adds DEPTH to items by making them harder to get and TAKE WITH YOU, and also adds MORE POWERFUL CHOICES to the stuff you pick up because you can't carry everything. How is that nothing!?

Just because it terrifies the **** out of you people that you can't grab everything and carry around everything at all the freaking time, doesn't mean that its existence is meaningless. Learn to appreciate the subjectivity of things huh? Jesus.

These are just peoples opinions.
Learn to appreciate the subjectivity of things huh? Jesus

I do think weight limits add something. Or rather, they take something away- convenience. It is very convenient to be able to swap to whatever weapon suits the situation.

I am with the OPers idea, allow unlimited items to be carried, but equip menu can only be altered on bonfires. Its the most balanced option that retains the benefits of both choices. You get the tactical decision making of only being able to use two weapon slots per area, but you get the convenience of not having to worry about dropping and rearranging gear held in storage. It is the perfect compromise.

BIG TIME MASTER wrote:I do think weight limits add something. Or rather, they take something away- convenience. It is very convenient to be able to swap to whatever weapon suits the situation.

I am with the OPers idea, allow unlimited items to be carried, but equip menu can only be altered on bonfires. Its the most balanced option that retains the benefits of both choices. You get the tactical decision making of only being able to use two weapon slots per area, but you get the convenience of not having to worry about dropping and rearranging gear held in storage. It is the perfect compromise.

exactly^^

Can you imagine how much fun FROM is having making these games?

Its fun to just sit here and talk about things we would like, they get to actually create it.

Again, no it's not. Some outfits and playstyles actually make sense to have more than four weapons-even realistically. Honestly, I will find that to be a much bigger problem than weight limit EVER was. (and I usually have a low weight limit)
As for the comment on accessing the 'bank' while at checkpoints, (bonfires) that goes with it being an open world. Dark Souls 2 has been said to be an 'open world' like Dark compared to Demons Souls. I always imagined the bottomless box as a bottomless container that took too long or was too dangerous to use except for in safe radius of a bonfire. (or whatever form of checkpoint is used) As long as the loot and checkpoints are placed and planned well, then players usually will be able to pick up everything important unless the player is just carrying around too much.
And Oh_The_Humanity, you weren't saying it subjectively, such as "I think it has no value." You simply said it as an absolute- "It has no value," which does depict you as self-righteous and/or arrogant. Now, enough with calling on Zeus to smite each other with lightning; please be polite.