Review SciFi reviews Metalheart and comments on Fallout

[Saint_Proverbius]

I think you are the only knucklehead who couldn't figure it out without a manual.

Yeah, no shit. If you can't figure out "I" is for INVENTORY, then you're a dumbfuck, Sarvis. That works is pretty much every single CRPG ever made.

 

[Sarvis]

Another rule of good interface design is that it should be simple to use and figure out without reading a manual. Since it took three of you to come up with hitting 'I' to sort, I'd wager Fallout failed in that regard.

Ya know, I actually haven't ever used this function, and had NO problem with interface whatsoever.
One should better focus on gameplay, rather than on interface. INterface is just that - interface, it doesn't define an RPG.
Just as with graphics -- some ppl are just too obsessed with it that they completely ignore or refuse to focus on other features, which are clearly superior.

I didn't say interface defined an RPG, I said that a BAD interface detracts from the experience. It's like having a bad DM that goes ooc all the time... sa you're sitting there playing the best module of all time, with the best roleplayers of all time... and the DM interrupts every 3 seconds to ask people if they want pizza. It would just break the mood.

It just <b>wasn't</b> influential, <b>if</b> it had been then LOTS of games would have that freedom these days...

Lots?
I can only name a very limited number of such great RPGs - Arcanum, Gothic, BG2 (too linear tho) and a couple of other remarkable games, but surely not lots.
I take it that your definition of freedom is once again quite different...

<b>IF</b> it had been influential. I'm arguing that it wasn't, so of course there are not lots of games with that freedom. That is my point!

 

[Atrokkus]

IF it had been influential. I'm arguing that it wasn't, so of course there are not lots of games with that freedom. That is my point!

Shit, my bad again! ^_^
Caught up a little...

I didn't say interface defined an RPG, I said that a BAD interface detracts from the experience. It's like having a bad DM that goes ooc all the time... sa you're sitting there playing the best module of all time, with the best roleplayers of all time... and the DM interrupts every 3 seconds to ask people if they want pizza. It would just break the mood.

Well, my point was that many people didn't find interface clunky or however else it seems to you.
You gotta play it a lil more and get a hang of it, that's all. It's not IMPOSSIBLE or totally fucked up, ya know?

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

Pizza? I like that DM.

 

[Sandelfron]

A few people mentioned sorting items in inventory. In 'Divine
Divinity' and 'Sacred' there is an icon you can press that sorts
the inventory to take (near) least space.

I was curious about writing an algorithm to sort items of
different sizes into the optimum minimum space and sat
up late one night thinking about it (annoying the missus).

I think a 'greedy' algorithm would work (i.e. one which takes
the biggest item that it can find space for each time). It's
hard to tell without testing it out.

 

[RGE]

Arcanum had autosorting inventory as well, but I still don't like those kinds of inventories. Fallout's inventory would've been great if it hadn't contained so many items. After NWN, all I want to ever see again is big, empty inventories...

 

[Avé]

I hated fallout's interface, but I didnt play it until 2002 or 2003, so it's not fair to judge.

 

[Sarvis]

A few people mentioned sorting items in inventory. In 'Divine
Divinity' and 'Sacred' there is an icon you can press that sorts
the inventory to take (near) least space.

I was curious about writing an algorithm to sort items of
different sizes into the optimum minimum space and sat
up late one night thinking about it (annoying the missus).

I think a 'greedy' algorithm would work (i.e. one which takes
the biggest item that it can find space for each time). It's
hard to tell without testing it out.

You could look into defragmentation and file system algorithms probably. I remember a bit of that stuff from my Operating Systems classes:

First Fit: Find the first free space large enough for your item and use it.
Best Fit: Try to find a space that fits your item the closest, and use that.
Last Fit: Basically the exact opposite of First Fit.

They all create fragmentation, but work best under certain conditions I think. Hard to remember stuff from so long ago... but mayube that's a place to start at least.

 

[Sandelfron]

They all create fragmentation, but work best under certain conditions I think. Hard to remember stuff from so long ago... but mayube that's a place to start at least.

A dormant neuron fired and I remembered that it's called the 'Knapsack
Problem' - there's an established algorithm for it. It's not trivial! :shock:

 

[bryce777]

File fragmentation is a one dimensional problem and this is two, and also they have nothing in common anyhow because there you are trying to minimize file movement in that problem and here we don't care if things are moved.

The largest block first will work ok if your items are all squares, but otherwise probably not.

I don't remember the knapsack problem, but an optimum solution to this would not likely be easy to think of off the top of your head.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Just a guess, but.. You take the width of the inventory, then start plopping in the items with the longest width. You sum up the plopped widths and you make sure you're only plopping in items with widths of less than total_width - sum_of_widths. When one row is finished, drop down to the next.

 

[Shagnak]

Yeah, that's an easy algorithm that assumes that that one dimension of the items being placed is fixed, and the other dimension is variable (i.e relevant to this argument, fixed height and variable width - or vice versa ).

When both dimensions can be variable (i.e. 2x3, 3x2, 1x2, 4x5, etc etc) the problem is, as Sandelfron pointed out, certainly not trivial.

This is related to the knapsack problem, which has lead to plenty of study in the Comp Sci and Mathematics fields, for example look here:
http://www.irisa.fr/cosi/HOMEPAGE/Rajop ... psack.html

This particular case is often known as the 2D variant of the Bin Packing problem:
http://wwweng.murdoch.edu.au/EngModules ... 0102c.html

One of the classic problems which is difficult, if not practically impossible to solve

Lots of brainiacs who should really get out and get a life spend time trying to optimise solutions to these problems!
e.g. they create papers like "Recent advances on two-dimensional bin packing problems"
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=772394

Of course these are all about some sort of optimal solution. I'm not certain your average backpack stuffer requires that :wink:

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Yeah, that's an easy algorithm that assumes that that one dimension of the items being placed is fixed, and the other dimension is variable (i.e relevant to this argument, fixed height and variable width - or vice versa ).

Actually, it doesn't assume that either is variable or fixed, nor does it even care. The big problem with it is that you'll have to check to see whether or not the space is already occupied for any row after the first one. That's not that hard a thing to do if you consider the inventory a fixed width value. You can just use some int values in a one dimensional array and AND in the bits for the size of the thing.

 

[Atrokkus]

Diablo2 would have had a great inventory system, if it had the weight limit.

I like inventories where the volume of an item really matters, not just weight.

Deus Ex had the best inventory i've ever seen, i guess.

 

[Shagnak]

Saint:
Sorry, I took your algorithm as being exactly as stated (no more, no less :wink.

Let me rephrase:
Without your addendum, then one dimension would always have to be fixed (e.g. items of variable width (horizontal length) and always 1 row high (vertical length)) for it to work in the way you originally stated.

My point was that there are other things to look out for. Just as you have mentioned, there would have to also be some mechanism for ensuring that no already occupied spaces after the first row are occupied (given that vertically long objects could easily transgress on several rows below them).

Also, you have to consider that the depth/height of the area is fixed also, and when you have a reasonably full pack, given that your "greedy" algorithm is only taking into account one dimension, there is no guarantee that you won't end up in a situation where the packing is not optimal and a couple of awkward objects are left over (e.g low width but long height - if your greedy algorithm assumes "long width first").

There are technicalities like this that have ensured that the problem has stood up to years of study looking for optimisations of "best solutions".

A basic algorithm with "occupation check" like you state would work fine in most situations though.
However, finding a "best" solution can lead to massive headaches due to the combinatorial explosion that occurs as the number of items (and dimensions!) increase.

 

[Shagnak]

Anyway, how dare you lot get me thinking about Computer/Computational Science on a Saturday!!

Tsk tsk

I'm off to get drunk :D

 

[Spazmo]

I think the engineer's approach to the backpack problem is the best: just cram stuff in there until it fits. Cursing is optional but reccommended.

 

[bryce777]

The cursing is O(n^2)

Some pretty impressive analysis for coffee shop discussion, btw.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Deus Ex had the best inventory i've ever seen, i guess.

There were only two things I would have liked to see it use, though. One would have been an increase in inventory size for each increment of the Microfibral Muscle augmentation. The only problem is that the augmentation was active and so its effects were only felt when it was used; this would be much more reasonable to include if it also had a passive effect. I think the sequel does something like this.

Two, that it allowed players to rotate objects. While the inventory was fairly easy to use there were times when I had to play Tetris with it so I could store all I was carrying. Having to access it, drop a couple of items then plan out how to store them, then picking it all up got boring.

 

[Sandelfron]

Saint/Shag/Sarvis/Bryce:

Because of it's dimensional nature (width and height of the items), it's
actually a variant of the Knapsack Problem (as Shagnak pointed out).
These are collectively called "Cutting and Packing" problems/algorithms.

 

[Section8]

Personally, I think the best solution would be to harness the power of the human mind to solve the problem. Simply add a "repack" function to the inventory that spawns a UI to an empty inventory "container" (identical to the player's own) that can then be used to arrange the inventory in whatever way the character so desires without the irritation of "shuffling" items within a cluttered space. When they're done, they click a button and the newly repacked inventory "container" overwrites the existing one, but only if the original is empty.

Maybe it's just a personal preference, since I need an order that appeals to my own individual rationale rather than the whims of a sorting algorithm that is designed to be space efficient, and doesn't necessarily take into account the clustering of common items (like a nice neat row of potions).

Likewise, an inventory filter can be helpful too. It's far simpler in implementation, and can be used to great effect. I've only ever seen very limited filtering options like (show only potions, show only weapons) etc, but the ability to sort according to price, attribute bonuses, weight or any other variable would greatly streamline a phat loot system in a game like Diablo. In a more RP focused game, I'd hope that such a feature would be almost entirely unnecessary since the player should be putting at least a tiny bit of thought into what the character accumulates.

 

[Atrokkus]

Two, that it allowed players to rotate objects. While the inventory was fairly easy to use there were times when I had to play Tetris with it so I could store all I was carrying. Having to access it, drop a couple of items then plan out how to store them, then picking it all up got boring.

This is the point actually. Not to make an uber magic bag like in Gothic, in which you can put anything in any order and any weight.
Deus Ex offers a realistic approach. ANd "tetris' is part of it.
Just think of it: would it be easy to carry so much load in real life? To put it in a pack? You gotta organize it well, ya know?

So there is no need to invent a bicycle again. There are very good inventory system, and future games just need to keep their concepts in mind, and use their advantages and adjust them to match the game's specifics.

Just a checkered box and visual representations of items. The bigger the item the more squares it occupies. Then the standart encumbrance check - if the total weight is more than max weight (defined by strength), then the character is either slowed or incapacitated. Also, I think the total volume (number of squares) must vary depending on a race or other unique properties of a character. Say, a supermutant will have much more squares than a human, and a human will have more squares than a ghoul etc.
And, of course, containers may be implemented, just as they are in ADND rpgs.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

This is the point actually. Not to make an uber magic bag like in Gothic, in which you can put anything in any order and any weight.

My suggestion has nothing to do with wanting it to be an "uber magic bag" so no, its actually not the point. Apparently oblivious my suggestion was not made with an intent of being able to carry everything I wanted, but rather to facilitate moving the objects in the inventory screen without having to drop them and pick them up again because I can only place them in one single position.

Deus Ex offers a realistic approach.

How realistic it is to carry a flamethrower, a plasma rifle, a plasma sword, explosives and medkits in a trenchcoat again?

Just think of it: would it be easy to carry so much load in real life? To put it in a pack? You gotta organize it well, ya know?

I know players have to organize items in an inventory, thank you very much for your lesson but I'm not braindead. That is not the issue I'm talking about. What I am talking about is adding a feature that would enable players to organize their inventory without having to resort to continuously dropping items on the ground and picking them up again.

Also if you're going to throw realism again into a conversation, look closely at your own example of real life and tell me if it's unrealistic to organize items in a pack by rotating or overal maneuvering them inside the pack, instead of constantly needing to take them out and place them inside again? Or are you suggesting that in real life, when I place an item in a given position inside a pack I can never place it in any other position? I should hope not because that'd be idiotic.

 

[Claw]

Deus Ex had the best inventory i've ever seen, i guess.

Ultima VII had the best inventory I have ever seen.

No guessing, it's pure awesome, and it's full of unused potential. It's based on the character itself, and it's expandable. It puts the interface in the background and really lets me put my stuff in bags, and I don't think I've ever had such a large yet well organized inventory in any game. The backpack isn't just some concept to explain how I carry my stuff, it's an actual item, which I find great.
I think it's a shame that the concept isn't explored further. A modern 3D RPG could use the character model itself instead of a paperdoll as focus of the inventory. You could have active slots for quick access; put a sword on your belt or strap to your back so you can draw it quickly. That would work for potions, too.
The inventories in most RPGs can only be described as primitive. Bloody stone age.

Lots of people complained that the inventory doesn't pause in Gothic. You know what? The character should actually take the backpack off his back and put it on the ground in front of himself when I access it. That's the kind of inventory I'd like to see.

 

[Atrokkus]

How realistic it is to carry a flamethrower, a plasma rifle, a plasma sword, explosives and medkits in a trenchcoat again?

WEll, that's present in every RPg...
Yeah, devs have to deal with that somehow.
But hey, it's not that hard, isn't it?
I mean, either make big weapons really big - square-wise, or have some other limit.
Again, just change square-count of items more logically, and the problem will be solved.