Banknotes were first used on earth that we know of at 700 AD.
Daggerfall had banks and banknotes.
There is nothing unrealistic about it.

I think the perfect solution would be money having weight, and be divided in gold, silver and copper coinage.
Each weighing 0.1 encumberance.
Banks. And banknotes that are like the old style promissory notes of yore, able to hold any denomination.
Anything but Oblivion style please, where gold was really just a stat.

And as pointed out before, a completely unnecessary time consuming thing to get money weightless again. Earth =/= Nirn. i never said it is unrealistic, I said it is too realistic. Lets all go to the toilet and poop between dragon fights. Hurray to realism.

I find running around with oodles of phantom gold coins in my pocket that I cant drop a bit annoying. Its just a stat.
I really did prefer Daggerfall style, though its weakness was that gold was too heavy. Wich is where lower denominations would come in.
It really is not that much of a hassle to go to a bank once a week, bank all extra gold, and take up a 50k note.
Thats how I did it in Daggerfall and my slowly rising bank saldo felt quite rewarding.

This has nothing to do with pooping.
Please dont overexaggerate into the ridiculous.

I'm just saying you shouldn't add something just for the sake of realism. Which has pretty much 100% to do with this. :wink_smile:

I suppose if you wanted to make large investments you may have to carry a cart from one place to another, perhaps a horse and a carriage if you want to trade and shop at a distant town. This could prove to be either fun or just plan tedious. I'd rather have it than not.

Sigh...
So realism has become a no no to to you, hey?
I wish you would articulate why Realism in itself is a bad thing and why in this case it's even worse.
It's the very least you could do after such a puzzling statement.

There is a realism/convenience-for-the-sake-of-fun balance that needs to be struck. Giving gold weight and so having to make needless trips to banks and the like falls a little too much on the 'realism' side for most, especially since we're all so used to being able to carry infinite currency now because of Morrowind, Oblivion, FO3 and F:NV not to mention many non-gamesas games.

ie. too much realism.

noooooooooooooooooooooo....please let us run, jump, swim, levitate, fall off cliffs with our pockets lined with all the gold we can carry !

Agreed (with a few nunaces i shan't bother to elaborate on)



Here we go again. I'm a bit tired of reading someone's opinion disguised as the alledged voice of the majority. Have you conducted a poll? No, you have not.

Notes are a reasonable way around the problem, though it's not really a problem as much as it is a tactical choice. You are choosing to carry that much gold. Stash it somewhere. Carry notes.
Choose.
And deal with it.

if money had weight, it depends on how much.......what would happen if u ran across a wicked sword or armor, and if it is random like in OB, u go to the bank to get ur money out and when u get back to the shop the item is gone....or for that matter could you even carry enough to purchase the item in question. This is possible but at the same time if its in the game it needs to be worked so somethin like this could never happen.......

And what, may I ask, is the difference between weightless notes (infinitely stackable currency) and weightless gold (infinitely stackable currency)?

Specifically in terms of inventory capacity BGS RPGs tend to ask for quite a lot of suspension of disbelief. I'm curious as to how you can believe that your character can carry around an insane amount of baggage without any kind of pack, but can't carry as much gold as they please?

As for "have you conducted a poll?", no I have not. But the OP has, and the majority do not want weighted gold.
Deal with it.

I'm smiling right now - and without even looking at what the actual results were. i would never draw any absolute conclusions or make claims as to what the majority thinks based on them, even if those results were favorable. They are an indication at best and drawn out of a very small sample. I'm sure you know Oblivion has sold almost 2 million copies. I'd say one's opinion does not grow any more valid either because the majority endorses it or rejects it. Hopefully, you'll never hear me resorting to such rationale.

But you are right. For me, the notion things should have weight and occupy space must not be limited to gold. Inventory space should be volume and weight limited, im my opinion. So you are very much right.

I voted no, but I still would love banks...

If you are going to retreat to such a moral high ground then I would suggest in the future that you don't drag polls into things in the first place.


Well here we have our fundamental disagreement: I think that Oblivion's encumbrance system was balanced quite well. I think we just stripped this argument down to its core, and since we disagree so essentially there's really no point carrying on. We shall agree to disagree and I shall hope that you play on PC for the mods so that your gameplay experience can be what you want.

Good day sir.

I would respectfully point out to you it was the OP (was it you?) that implied his opinion was representative of the majority. My point is this: do not do that unless you have some meaningful hard data to back your claim, no matter what that claim might be. I would still offer the same rebutal to a poster defending a hardcoe mode - which I myself support - that claimed to represent the majority. Hope that clears this point.

Indeed. This is a crossroad of uncomformable differences. It boils down to a matter of personal preference.
Optional toggable hardcoe mode seems to be the right solution then.

I bid you a good day too Sir!

I was referring to this:

Forgive me if I read that wrong, but that strongly confers undue importance upon polls and it was, at least within our discussion, the first time polls were brought up: by you. That is why I got annoyed by your subsequent dismissal of them as evidence to a tendency within the community (which I actually believe them to be. It's called a sample).

ANYWAY.

Not that i'm an expert in statistical sciences, far from it. But i'd bet a propper expert could dismiss these results as invalid in 0.1 seconds. The number of cumulative statistical pitfalls is just enormous here, wouldn't you agree? So i'd say there's no ground for democratic claims nor a need for them. Just state your personal opinion. It will do.

I hope that clarifies my position.

ANYWAY. :biggrin:

I said, you shouldn't add something just for the sake of realism. I did not say you shouldn't add anything realistic. Completely different things.

I don't think you should make it weigh you down. However I do agree that there should be banks where you have the ability to invest your money and truly add some substance to "Mercantile"

Also, buying and transporting massive amounts of trade goods would be cool as a side quest for the "Merchant's Guild".

Realism is a good thing on its own right - and i shan't go back to discussing its role in a fantasy game.
Realism is a good thing, yet needs to be speckled with exceptions to such rule, exceptions of which some rather tasteless examples have been provided recently.

So i am challenging your laconic statement ?you shouldn't add something just for the sake of realism?.If by that you mean it needs to be tempered with other considerations, i agree. What we'd probably disagree on is the extent and with what it needs to be tempered with.

...yes?

:facepalm: You should not add something to a game just because the thing is realistic. Same thing as I said before, but perhaps easier to understand.

I have no idea what your point of view is, just that you probably misunderstood what I said and disagreed with it. Which probably means in a twisted way that we agree. Agreed?

Realism should be the rule, to which there are some mundane exceptions. That's my take.

He's saying it's totally subjective. the opinion of something being superfluously realistic will vary from person to person. I think that making gold have weight is a realistic dynamic that should be implemented, but many people disagree (mutually respectively). There is no clear defined line which separates what would be too real in a game, and what should not. Most people will agree things like going to the bathroom is too much, but this is all subjective

"I can't define what is too real for Skyrim, but i know it when i see it" <--subjective viewpoint of everyone in this forum.

I think it would do more bad than good... so no.