Don't you just run over ammo, guns and the like and maybe press one button in those games?

Actually looking at the stuff in a container, while a novel idea would be too clunky and take too long/ would be really tedious if it were used in all loot containers.
It would kill exploration based rewards for me.

No one here is criticizing you for saying we have the technology for "open world looting", and I'm at least not upset that your opinion is different, nor would I ever be. What I am upset about is how you quite blatantly implied that menu style loot is for people who aren't intelligent. Because that's just incorrect.

Yes, in Cod ammo is acquired by running over a firearm of that type or by pressing x to "Refill ammunition", so the comparison is silly to begin with.

not arguing with yo uabout your opinion or anything, simply pointing out that is has ZERO to do with immertion, and only personal preference, nor does it have anything to do with "casualness" or something stupid like that, because it is a standard RPG mechanic, that EVERY RPG in existence uses in some way shape or form.

Getting rid of it, is getting rid of part of the RPG aspect.

this is the ONLY forums i have ever seen where people have such little ability to immerse themselves in a game, people like you guys must be COMPLETELY unable to play video games, or even Tabletop games, if you have THIS much trouble immersing yourself.

Please, by all means, quote where there's a "blatant" implication inferring anything about someone's, anyone's intelligence.

Wait. Here. Let me save you the trouble. My statement was:

Naturally, I can't prove how your brain works. But I think it's safe to assume that the diction choices "Typical CoD console player" and "Someone familiar with quick, convenient, or easy" have an under tone of disdain towards those players. Especially considering the dogma associated with Call of Duty fans in many gaming circles.

Menu looting, as open world looting does not seem feasible at all. But a combination of course, like it's always been in Bethesda's open-world games.

Perhaps I'm just used to the ever-so-constant CoD-bashing that occurs nigh-ubiquitously across the internet, but I perceived:

"button-mashy" and

I'm guilty of favor bias in favor of PC, and rivalry against the "console", and make distinctions between the psychology of playing styles for different platforms (someone that prefers touch screen tablet games is going to have a differently weighted game psychology than someone that primarily plays coin operated arcade games, as there are differences between console and PC psychologies), but I'm not insulting anyone's intelligence, nor intending to do such.

Please. Don't be so sensitive. Is there NOT a difference in gaming psychology across various platforms? Is someone favor biased for Candy Crush, or Angry Birds touch-screen style games going to have a psychology suited for a full headset immersive VR realistic world game? Not by default.

It has nothing to do with someone's intelligence.

It's a favor bias and differences in psychology and approach observable across different platforms. Someone that's only ever known an Atari 2600 with a joystick and a single button wouldn't be more or less intelligent if they could play Fallout 4 on an Atari 2600, but, if Bethesda had to make the game where it would work for a system with a single joystick and just one button, I'm guessing it'd have an effect on the end result for all the platforms involved, and the 2600 player would certainly have a different gaming psychology than other platforms due the conformity demands their platform reuires of the player to make.

Menus. Bethesda has a long history of putting flamethrowers in small footlockers. However, it's kind of necessary.

How about we compromise between the two systems and keep it the way it already is.

Voted for open world looting but a combination of both is the way to go.

I enjoy the feeling of looking carefully all the shelves and tables for items. For example the room after you finish OP Anchorage you fell like a kid in a candy store while looking at all those items. It would be really anticlimatic just to find three chests.

Like the "Travel Options" thread, this is yet another "I'll spend extra 10 hours looking through every crevice of every room for that empty syringe" for "added immersion."
Quick and Easy is right. I have no problem with being able to loot Caesar's body by highlighting his detached arm if it's for the sake of convenience.

Heck, the weight thing is already gimmick. Remember Diablo 1? If you couldn't carry any more items your character would say: "I gotta pawn some of this stuff."
Come back for it later. Simple.

I can't handle how hard I'm myron, brah.

'nks. DYEL bruh?

About tree fiddy lbs

Gameplay > immersion, always.

A system leanings towards 100% open world looting is beyond stupid for a game of this caliber. Even the most hardcoe and niche simulation games don't do this, and I'll give you a hint as to why.

It's pretty dumb.

Wanting it for the sake of immersion just displays a huge lack of awareness for what makes a game good. Gameplay is generally a pretty big factor, and wanting a system of open world looting is not good gameplay. You can say it's up for debate, but you'd be wrong;no one in the industry does it, and these people make video games for a living.

There's no defending such a system because it is shunned by anyone with half a brain working in this medium. You may as well want to make a silent black and white film;

yea, you'll have a small audience of hipsters, but they aren't going to pay the bills, so why would you ever cater to that?

Why not stay true to the old method where both looting systems were viable and often encountered.

There are just moments when "immersion" goes too far like with Metro LL where the most "immersive" playstyle were the Ranger modes where they completely disabled the help interface.
So you're good at shooters? Great. But you don't know HOW TO PLAY THE F'N GAME because the controls were all over the place!! The worse part was you had to BUY these "Ranger Modes." That is unfathomably stupid.

Remember Diablo? Even the first game was so immersive despite it's Tile-Based action. It achieved this through Lighting, Sounds and music. It had shortcut points for the Catacombs, Caves and Hell levels to the Town but it still gave the player an option to use TOWNPORTALS. Sure these were optional and by the 3rd floor you're rich enough to be able to use buy town portal scrolls but I can't imagine someone would want to walk ALL 20 FLOORS back and forth just for added "immersion."

I've played both computer & console games since 1979. I've never understood this need (beyond the standard Tribalism! issue that causes humans to crusade for their religion/politics/sports team/softdrink) for the two sides to be against each other. Yes, certain types of games work better with different interface (k+m, or controller). That doesn't mean one is better than the other, or that one is deeper than the other. If someone is more fond of deep 4X games, super-tough platformers, or Candy Crush... that's not an issue of platform differences, that's an issue of player differences. (Just like the demographics on a single platform can be varied - like PC: the folks who like 4X games, the ones who like flight sims, the ones who just want to blow crap up, the MMOers, the PvPers, the dudes just playing solitaire & Bejeweled. Those differences existed in 1990, they exist now. Nothing new.)

And the bashing on CoD seems to be more a case of the "it's popular, so we'll hate it" that seems to pop up in all sorts of places - games, music, movies,... ("how dare so many people identify themselves with MY tribe now that it's Gone BIg! We were here first! We're the real gamers/sports fans/music appreciators/etc") Meh, not enough time in the day to waste energy on that silliness.

----

As to the main topic.... I still think you need a standard container interface to deal with storing loot. Trying to keep a lot of stuff (dozens/hundreds/thousands of items) in your house by just throwing it all in a pile on the floor, or even having open bins would be a spectacular pain. As anyone who's made one of those "I filled a room with all the Cheese in Skyrim!" videos could attest. Heck, just arranging a half a dozen unique weapons on the bookshelf in FO3's Megaton House was enough of a pain. Having to store three dozen guns that way?

Or sticking thirty bottles of Nuka Cola in the fridge or soda machine. Or dealing with ammo - would it drop in individual clips like you find it on tables, or would it just drop as a single "10mm ammo (4300)" unit? In the first case, shoving a hundred of those little clips into an ammo box would be "fun", in the second case picking up just a bit of it - especially when using a "realism" mode that gives it weight - would would be an issue. Etc, etc, etc.

The idea of having to root through boxes to find stuff sounds like a fun idea at first (and, actually, it is the times that we do it in Fallout 3/etc). But it's just not practical/rational to do the entire inventory system that way, in a game that encourages the carrying/gathering of massive amounts of loot.

In principle, I'm in favor of any attempt to make game mechanics more realistic and more interactive so I'm all for open world looting.

On top of making players physically go through the items inside a container (so that they can decide if it includes something of value for them), I'd also suggest removing any text-based proms describing the items. In practice, this means that If you want 10mm ammo, you better know what 10mm ammo looks like. Removing descriptive text would make the looting experience more visual, involving and even educational.

Another thing I like about open world looting is that containers will only include objects that can physically fit inside them, thus avoiding the immersion-breaking situation where you find large weapon/armor pieces stored in tiny containers.

Some people have mentioned that, as a system, open world looting would make managing large inventories a pain. I agree it would. For houses/storage rooms, one solution would be to use more compartmentalization (as opposed to one container for everything, use several, and devote each one to a certain item type only). For the player inventory, carrying only what could be realistically carried would solve the problem since there wouldn't be any large inventories to manage to begin with.

I voted yes not for the idea of having to sift through containers, but because I want them to put more stuff in the actual world, instead of containers. It would be fun to try and find where a raider his his special gun in his base, or to find a good set of armor on a table that was being worked on, instead of every decent piece of equipment being locked behind a neon green menu on a container or body.

....

...I don't want to play the same kinds of games you want to play. The vast majority of that sounds fantastically horrible (in a "lets make our gameplay as miserable an experience as is humanly possible" kind of way), particularly in a world-full-of-loot game like Bethesda makes. That seems, honestly, like fetishizing "realism" to the point of crippling gameplay.

(And, as I've stated before, my basic belief is that gameplay trumps realism. i.e, if making something more "realistic" harms the gameplay experience, you're doing it wrong.)

Disclaimer - if one is designing a simulation (at that level, it would no longer be a "game") specifically around realism & accuracy, then things like that are appropriate. The "X Plane" sim, for instance, is so close to real life that it can count as valid sim time for your pilot's license (or so I've heard).

I do that already. My favorite house mods are the ones that add more (and labeled) containers. They still end up with dozens-to-hundreds of items in them. I gather stuff in these games. Lots of stuff. (honestly, I'm a packrat in every game that allows it. Playing the first Stalker game was painful - every enemy encounter dropped three times the amount of junk you could carry, and things would respawn in the time it took to make one trip back to a shop. "Stuff" generated far faster than I could deal with it. )

Shots fired, shots fired! Need immediate evac at fallout forums!

I agree with you completely. Some of it is nice so you get to see special items in all their glory, but all of it is overkill.

That........sounds COMPLETELY, HORRIBLE and a TERRIBLE game.

That would not e an RPG, that would be a game of the stupid genre.

RPGs are NEVER, EVER about realism, EVER, there is not such thing as a Video game that tries to be realistic completely. Gameplay and REAL immersion comes WAY, WAY before "Realism" of any kind.

I would call what you want a sim, but not even the most hardcoe sim video game player would call that fun.

That's totally respectable.

This discussion reminds me of an old article I once read. It was about the potential ill-effects of adding a (gun) reloading mechanic to shooters. In the first shooters (first Doom, first Quake...) players didn't need to reload their weapons. When this mechanic was finally introduced, players couldn't agree whether they liked it or not. It made the game more realistic, sure, but it also forced players to keep track of how many bullets were left in the magazine lest they found themselves reloading in the middle of an encounter. That was, in my opinion, a realism feature that made gameplay more annoying. Yet people came to accept it because, in the end, 'it made sense'.

Shooters may be more realistic on average than RPGs. Still, the line between the two is getting progressively blurred with titles that are a mix of both genres (such as Fallout 4). I have no doubt that realism features will start to permeate intno RPGs too, and people will start accepting them because they make sense. Looting from the world (as opposed to from black-hole containers) or carrying only as much as it's reasonable may become a reality in future RPGs. Time will tell

You are a fanatic who hasn't got the slightest idea of how to discuss in a civilized manner.

You are also so fixated in your own misconceptions that you ended up believing them. RPGs are never ever about realism? Says who? RPGs are about roleplaying. Why can't I or you or anybody else roleplay in a a game that features a realistic setting and mechanics? Also, have an exmple of an RPG that intends to be realistic:https://www.kingdomcomerpg.com/ It has raised almost 2.5M dollars through donnations so far and it's coming next year.

I'll do my best to ignore you and your posts in the future. It's probably a good idea if you do the same.