Inventory size is by far the biggest issue i have with the game right now.

[Cpt. Jeff Gaybeard]

I'll avoid spoilers no worries.

Basically, you are limited to only 6 items on you at any time. There is no way to upgrade the size and since you pretty much always have at least one weapon, some spare ammo and a tool (Like the electric baton or flashlight), that leaves you ONLY 2-3 slots for picking up key items and or other types of spare ammo, depending if you carry healing items with you or not.

That's way too low, and leads to constant backtracking just to dump the 2-3 items you found back into the storage box (Because you can't dump items right there) and too many situations where you find a key item that you can't pick up, so you have to haul a,s.s all the way back again.

Bumping the inventory size to at least 8 slots would already be a huge help, or maybe even a maximum of 9-10 (But that probably would be too much).

edit: As some people suggested, this could also be fixed if tools (Like flashlight, eye camera and such) and weapons go in a seperate slot when equiped.

[Silamon]

Actually the tight inventory is one of the things I enjoy about the games this was inspired by. It encourages you to think about the items you pick up or take with you.

Hearing this makes me want to play the game even more.

[Karl Toffel]

That's the point. It's classic survival horror that serves the gameplay this game is going for. Increasing the amount of slots would remove the risk/reward factor as you would always be able to carry a gun with you. Playing without bullets, knowing you only got 10 in magazine, makes it more tense. Do you bring a healing item or an important item you might need? It creates decision making, which is good design.

You are supposed to memorize the map, where enemies are, clear out important routes that you frequently go through and not waste ammo on other enemies. It also brings more tension in case you bring items and not healing stuff or weapons.

[Cpt. Jeff Gaybeard]

Originally posted by Karl Toffel:

That's the point. It's classic survival horror that serves the gameplay this game is going for. Increasing the amount of slots would remove the risk/reward factor as you would always be able to carry a gun with you. Playing without bullets, knowing you only got 10 in magazine, makes it more tense. Do you bring a healing item or an important item you might need? It creates decision making, which is good design.

You are supposed to memorize the map, where enemies are, clear out important routes that you frequently go through and not waste ammo on other enemies. It also brings more tension in case you bring items and not healing stuff or weapons.

Yes and no.

The game already is fantastic with the survival horror aspect in terms of enemies, ambiance and visuals. The limited inventory, if overdone, can detract from that experience because the player is stuck constantly dealing with a full inventory. It's a not occurence made by carelessness most of the time; it just happens all the time, even when i take only the bare minimum.

Problem is there is quite a large variety of different items (such as healing items, there is four different ones) along with various ammo types, so it become nothing more than an hassle when it's time to collect because i'm just constantly tracking back instead of focusing on the puzzles and clues.

There is a fine balance to be made for inventory size. Too much and yeah, it remove a lot of the challenge since you can just bring about a little of everything. But too little, and it's simply a annoyance that doesn't contribute positively to the game.

Best way to do it: make it player choice. Easy difficulty will have plenty of inventory space (9-10). Normal will impose a few restrictions (7-8) and hard will make it challenging (6).

[Myr Superion]

It's definitely compact. I'm reaching the end of game and my storage box has so much extra ammo in it because I only carry a single gun with me.

[Ronin Gamer]

Originally posted by Myr Superion:

It's definitely compact. I'm reaching the end of game and my storage box has so much extra ammo in it because I only carry a single gun with me.

Hmm. I'm still closer to the start than I am farther in. I always remember in survival horror game I would tend to swap my weapons based both on the enemies I'm dealing with as well as the ammo supply I have for each. Rarely would I stick to one weapon and eat all it's ammo instead of swapping. Almost wish that was an option here but yeah, it's not going to be. Gotta be a lot more choosy with my weapon selection once I find my next one, probably not too far off now.

[Myr Superion]

Originally posted by Ronin Gamer:

-snip-

The game is pretty generous with attack windows and health items, and since I know enemies get back up I just run and take the occasional glancing blow. I think my hard difficulty run will tell a much different tale than my current experience, lol.

[Bankai9212]

If key items didn't take up slots I wouldn't mind it, as it stands you usually carry one healing, support, weapon and ammo. Leaving the player with just 2 free slots.

[dreminh]

i dont like this at all and i feel it is a pain in the ass more than challenging , keep you go back for the box all the time , its should be like key item/gun/stun bar should not take slot when equipped or drop item instead of destroy it , it such a pain and a waste of time not to mention enemy does come back alive

[goka9696]

While I don't mind it that much, I do think that it's over the top considering that even in RE1 6 slots were reserved for Chris, who was for the most part the "difficult" option (though he did have some advantages and imo is much better at higher difficulties than Jill is unless you are godlike at dodging and can beat entire RE1 without taking damage once). Perhaps devs can patch it later as a difficulty option since you already can change the amount of damage enemies do in the options, so it's not like devs were aiming to make some ultra hardcore real gamers only experience.

[Floppa PRIME]

I agree 6 was a questionable choice. I mean RE1 has Chris (6) vs Jill (8) and we all chose Jill because it smooths out the game so much at least for your first blind playthrough. You still have to manage your space but 8 makes for way less (boring) trips to the box.

[NeonBaron]

Agreed we are obviously going to want to collect everything all this does is force us to constantly go back to save rooms to store stuff and for crying out loud if we equip a weapon or tool can it not take up inventory space at the same time please

[vengefulretreat]

Originally posted by Karl Toffel:

That's the point. It's classic survival horror that serves the gameplay this game is going for. Increasing the amount of slots would remove the risk/reward factor as you would always be able to carry a gun with you. Playing without bullets, knowing you only got 10 in magazine, makes it more tense. Do you bring a healing item or an important item you might need? It creates decision making, which is good design.

You are supposed to memorize the map, where enemies are, clear out important routes that you frequently go through and not waste ammo on other enemies. It also brings more tension in case you bring items and not healing stuff or weapons.

Nah I get what they're saying. The thing about classic survival horror inventory management maximizing efficiency and having as few trips to the box as possible. If you're playing this game well, and stay stocked on resources you take a pretty ridiculous amount of trips to the box to drop off excess ammo and healing, because the game artificially restricts how much you can carry of each item (the amount per stack isn't the issue, the issue is only being able to carry a single stack of any ammo type at time. it just punishes players for playing well and being efficient/resourceful). Plus the additional modules take up spaces, which never feels strategic when the flashlight at multiple points throughout the game is mandatory. There is strict inventory management which can be incredible, and then there is arbitrarily throttling the player through artificial restrictions. I love strenuous inventory management, and this game is wonderful, but there are some objective issues here for sure. Few to speak of, but it doesn't take long to notice them. Making the flashlight and camera passive tools and allowing players to carry as many stacks of each item type as they wanted would've been all they needed to do. As it stands now, that camera is useless if you have a pen and paper or a cell phone, and the flashlight being mandatory for several sections offers no strategy or meaningful choice.

[Silamon]

Originally posted by vengefulretreat:

Originally posted by Karl Toffel:

That's the point. It's classic survival horror that serves the gameplay this game is going for. Increasing the amount of slots would remove the risk/reward factor as you would always be able to carry a gun with you. Playing without bullets, knowing you only got 10 in magazine, makes it more tense. Do you bring a healing item or an important item you might need? It creates decision making, which is good design.

You are supposed to memorize the map, where enemies are, clear out important routes that you frequently go through and not waste ammo on other enemies. It also brings more tension in case you bring items and not healing stuff or weapons.

Nah I get what they're saying. The thing about classic survival horror inventory management maximizing efficiency and having as few trips to the box as possible. If you're playing this game well, and stay stocked on resources you take a pretty ridiculous amount of trips to the box to drop off excess ammo and healing, because the game artificially restricts how much you can carry of each item (the amount per stack isn't the issue, the issue is only being able to carry a single stack of any ammo type at time. it just punishes players for playing well and being efficient/resourceful). Plus the additional modules take up spaces, which never feels strategic when the flashlight at multiple points throughout the game is mandatory. There is strict inventory management which can be incredible, and then there is arbitrarily throttling the player through artificial restrictions. I love strenuous inventory management, and this game is wonderful, but there are some objective issues here for sure. Few to speak of, but it doesn't take long to notice them. Making the flashlight and camera passive tools and allowing players to carry as many stacks of each item type as they wanted would've been all they needed to do. As it stands now, that camera is useless if you have a pen and paper or a cell phone, and the flashlight being mandatory for several sections offers no strategy or meaningful choice.

I wouldn't consider picking up every item you see to be playing well. You take what you need and leave what you don't. Often times in the older RE games you go buy those items multiple times while doing the story so you have no incentive to pick them up immediately.

I assume it should be similar here, though I don't actually have the game myself yet.

[vengefulretreat]

Originally posted by Silamon:

Originally posted by vengefulretreat:

Nah I get what they're saying. The thing about classic survival horror inventory management maximizing efficiency and having as few trips to the box as possible. If you're playing this game well, and stay stocked on resources you take a pretty ridiculous amount of trips to the box to drop off excess ammo and healing, because the game artificially restricts how much you can carry of each item (the amount per stack isn't the issue, the issue is only being able to carry a single stack of any ammo type at time. it just punishes players for playing well and being efficient/resourceful). Plus the additional modules take up spaces, which never feels strategic when the flashlight at multiple points throughout the game is mandatory. There is strict inventory management which can be incredible, and then there is arbitrarily throttling the player through artificial restrictions. I love strenuous inventory management, and this game is wonderful, but there are some objective issues here for sure. Few to speak of, but it doesn't take long to notice them. Making the flashlight and camera passive tools and allowing players to carry as many stacks of each item type as they wanted would've been all they needed to do. As it stands now, that camera is useless if you have a pen and paper or a cell phone, and the flashlight being mandatory for several sections offers no strategy or meaningful choice.

I wouldn't consider picking up every item you see to be playing well. You take what you need and leave what you don't. Often times in the older RE games you go buy those items multiple times while doing the story so you have no incentive to pick them up immediately.

I assume it should be similar here, though I don't actually have the game myself yet.

The backtracking doesn't work the same way in Signalis. MANY resource pickups are in optional rooms that are off of the main hub areas. The levels aren't labyrinthine like Spencer Mansion or RPD, so when you go into a room and don't have enough space for all the items in there, due to the enormous amount of puzzle items, weapons, and strict stack sizes, it is just not realistic that you will "come by them" again. Especially considering how many points of no return this game has with a couple of those having almost no warning for the player. A more grid based level design coupled with a strong focus on linear narrative that undercuts the levels themselves just doesn't encourage the same kind of backtracking as many other classic survival horror titles. It won't be a significant issue for everyone, it really wasn't for me, but I noticed it and I can definitely see it rubbing people the wrong way. It's important that we remain critical of things like this so that developers can make the best games they possibly can. If we just say "great game, 10/10" then no one can learn anything.

[Silamon]

Originally posted by vengefulretreat:

Originally posted by Silamon:

I wouldn't consider picking up every item you see to be playing well. You take what you need and leave what you don't. Often times in the older RE games you go buy those items multiple times while doing the story so you have no incentive to pick them up immediately.

I assume it should be similar here, though I don't actually have the game myself yet.

The backtracking doesn't work the same way in Signalis. MANY resource pickups are in optional rooms that are off of the main hub areas. The levels aren't labyrinthine like Spencer Mansion or RPD, so when you go into a room and don't have enough space for all the items in there, due to the enormous amount of puzzle items, weapons, and strict stack sizes, it is just not realistic that you will "come by them" again. Especially considering how many points of no return this game has with a couple of those having almost no warning for the player. A more grid based level design coupled with a strong focus on linear narrative that undercuts the levels themselves just doesn't encourage the same kind of backtracking as many other classic survival horror titles. It won't be a significant issue for everyone, it really wasn't for me, but I noticed it and I can definitely see it rubbing people the wrong way. It's important that we remain critical of things like this so that developers can make the best games they possibly can. If we just say "great game, 10/10" then no one can learn anything.

Fair enough, I can't comment on that specifically so I take your word for it.

Hoping to get it myself some time next month