Hi All,

Interested to hear peoples thoughts on whether in a fallout style RPG you think grid or list style inventory works best or if both have their place.

To start things off, here are my thoughts.

Grid based.
Pros. Familiar, easier to find items visually?, can implement different sized items for some inv management games.
Cons. Micro management of inventory can detract from the game for some.

List based.
Pros. Removes the need for management. Can manage different sized items with 'size' and capacity variables rather than playing Tetris.
Cons, harder to quickly glimse items.

I am familiar with grid and my brain went there girst, but am strongly considering list type for my game.

Fire away :)

How about combining the pros and cutting the cons. Each item take up the same space ?one grid) and have different actual size (with a number display the size), then count up all item space to determine if surplus the restriction. So you can easily glimpse, and don't need manage inv.

Hi :) this was more a general discussion of pros and cons from differing points of view :) but seeing as you raised it, that's an option I was considering. The other was a list (easily viewable images+text) with each item having volume and weight.

Grids give a feeling of a backpack. If the RPG is about people traveling a lot, with no home point where a large amount of items are kept, then a grid inventory would be better.

Lists both with and without a image give the feeling of order and purpose. If your RPG is about a envoy from some kind of order then this would be a better choice.

In the Avernum series in the right hand corner you could equip your characters and use items from lists with quick use icons. It gave the feeling that the things you had where meant to be used, the items where means to a goal.

This perfectly matched the game, especially Avernum 3 where you lead a party to explore the surface world. The whole game your backed by the Avernite government and could ask for payment and other resources based on your performance. The list of items felt like a connection to the power you had as a government official, so it didn't matter that one adventurer had 14 Iron bars in his inventory; he is a government official and clearly has access to transportation.

Skyrim is a good example of how the inventory doesn't match the game, many players mock the way a single adventure can carry so much cheese. The inventory system was clearly selected for convenience and to show off the graphics of the game.

The inventory feels like it exists in it's own world, with it's own rules.

I was about to let this thread die since I've just found many discussions on the subject. However your just mentioned something none of them have.

Most threads I've read say the inventory should for the game style, which of course is true. You are the first to suggest it should suit the players purpose.

I know I said this would be an open discussion, but figured this would be a good time to use my own concept as an example.
In my game, the player and his/her party of 3/4 are acting largely unsupported (think fallout but not post-apocalyptic) which people tend to equate with large list inventories. However it is a resource limited game so large inventories (skyrim style) would not fit. The players purpose is covert, so carrying a diablo bag full of large pieces of phat loot wouldnt suit either. Thus I'm leaning towards graphical list, but limited by realistic item sizes. E.g a bag holds 25litres, so the player can carry lots of small, 0.5l bottles, or a few bigger flasks. Weight plays a part too but that's based on character strength.

Question A: Why limit how much the player can carry? Why not allow him to carry an infinite amount?

Some games have valid gameplay-related reasons for limiting the amount you can carry. Does yours have a gameplay reason to do X, or are you doing X and looking for a gameplay excuse to justify it?

Question B: Why does the player pick up junk that isn't useful for him? Sure he can sell it, but why not auto-convert it to money, or better yet, why not just have enemies drop money directly instead of x30 bolts.

Question C: Why does the player even have money? Sure you can use money to buy upgrades, but what about giving upgrades through other means? Players grind for experience which levels them up and makes them more powerful. Players also grind for money to buy equipment to make them more powerful. So one gameplay mechanic (combat) gives you to upgrades in two different ways that actually just do the same end result (make you more powerful, combat-wise). Why not make different gameplay mechanics improve your character? If the player gains experience through combat, maybe he should only gain better equipment through exploration (or some other method of progression, like quests, or trade sequences).

Note: I enjoy some of these mechanics, but as a designer you should think about why your game should use one mechanic over another. What problem are you trying to solve, or purpose you are trying to add, by using mechanic X?

I think I first came across the grid system for inventory management in the original Deus Ex. I'm so glad they bought it back for Human Revolution.

I realise that a lot has already been said, but my feeling with mechanics such as this (and anything similar really), is that if you are going to limit something, really limit it. It's pointless if the player has a weight limit but it's so high as to be irrelevant (e.g. the already-mentioned Skyrim). Likewise, even if it starts small, if they can upgrade it to the point of irrelevance, players will! And then probably complain that this is possible...

Grid based.
Pros. Familiar, easier to find items visually?, can implement different sized items for some inv management games.
Cons. Micro management of inventory can detract from the game for some.

List based.
Pros. Removes the need for management. Can manage different sized items with 'size' and capacity variables rather than playing Tetris.
Cons, harder to quickly glimse items.

I fixed that list for you. The utility of both systems is 100% similar. You can have auto-sort and such things in both systems. The usability of both is 100% game-specific. Design your gameplay first before you worry about the visual representation. Once you 100% know your gameplay, design your GUI and test, test, test, test, test, test, test, test, [...], test, test, test.

I don't know what GUI will work best for your game, and neither do you, nor anyone else here. But once you have decided on your gameplay and did 100+ user tests, you will have a pretty good idea.

I fixed that list for you. The utility of both systems is 100% similar. You can have auto-sort and such things in both systems. The usability of both is 100% game-specific. Design your gameplay first before you worry about the visual representation. Once you 100% know your gameplay, design your GUI and test, test, test, test, test, test, test, test, [...], test, test, test.

I don't know what GUI will work best for your game, and neither do you, nor anyone else here. But once you have decided on your gameplay and did 100+ user tests, you will have a pretty good idea.

The visual representation is pretty important though, so they're definitely not 100% similar. The visual representation changes their utility. A list is going to focus primarily on text describing the items, or with an image would require much more scrolling to see a long list of items. With a grid, the primary view is a picture of the item, only displaying more information after you've moused over the item. Also, you're probably not going to have scrolling in your grid, so you can see everything at once unless you get into pouches and treasure chests for hording.

Also, the grid inventory tetris sort of thing would never be represented in a list, but I think games have realized that's not too fun and get away from it, like diablo 3 only having 2 sizes of items, small & large.

The visual representation is pretty important though, so they're definitely not 100% similar. The visual representation changes their utility.

“Utility refers to the ability of the product to perform a task or tasks. The more tasks the product is designed to perform, the more utility it has.” Source: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ff728829%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

Both interfaces can potentially perform the exact same tasks: Show items and their parameters (including required inventory space), equip items, use items, etc. So potential utility is indeed 100% similar.

A list is going to focus primarily on text describing the items, or with an image would require much more scrolling to see a long list of items. With a grid, the primary view is a picture of the item, only displaying more information after you've moused over the item. Also, you're probably not going to have scrolling in your grid, so you can see everything at once unless you get into pouches and treasure chests for hording.

Also, the grid inventory tetris sort of thing would never be represented in a list, but I think games have realized that's not too fun and get away from it, like diablo 3 only having 2 sizes of items, small & large.

All these points are about usability, not utility; and none of these points are rules set in stone. I can make a list with images, in which you need to select an item to view its properties (in fact, Final Fantasy XI has such a UI). I can make a grid that shows all of an item's stats without the need to mouse over it, but no image of the item itself at all. I can make a seemingly infinitely extending grid that can require lots of scrolling (e.g., Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance and Champions of Norrath games for PS2). Any task that can be achieved through “grid inventory tetris” could similarly be achieved through a list.

Usability of grid and list inventory interfaces are not similar, but utility is. At least according to the definition of utility that I use.