Inventory Increase, New Satchel, Infinite (sortable) Item box in MogHouse

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

The point is it's possible to have unlimited storage. The space limitations are client side most of the time. AH and mog mail store that data on the server side. It does take longer to load because you download it but it's there.

---

Exactly... client side limitation... as in PS2 limitations. You only have...what was it? 32 MB of RAM to use on the PS2 for EVERYTHING NEEDED IN THE GAME AT THAT PARTICULAR POINT IN TIME. Just look at the difference in assets that may be required when standing at the AH vs. being out in the field and pulling up your inventory screen during battle in something like, lets say Campaign or Besieged. There is a lot more going on behind the scenes with your client between those different points in time, and thus different levels of resources are being consumed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

The point is it's possible to have unlimited storage. The space limitations are client side most of the time. AH and mog mail store that data on the server side. It does take longer to load because you download it but it's there.

---

So, with unlimited storage you meant putting everything on the server and only pulling up pieces of it at a time, as required?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

So, with unlimited storage you meant putting everything on the server and only pulling up pieces of it at a time, as required?

---

and in a game that doesn't really take advantage of broadband either because it is designed to run on a 56k connection....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAIST

and in a game that doesn't really take advantage of broadband either because it is designed to run on a 56k connection....

---

Meh, I just read over it again, it seems he thinks inventory/storage data is currently not stored on the server at all, which is false. All item data is stored on the server (that's why the client has to load it from the server every time you zone). The issue is that the item list cannot be loaded in the active memory (like when viewing two inventories at the same time). Putting it on the server completely to extend the capacity is not gonna happen and I wouldn't want it to either, because that would bring a whole other range of problems with it, even disregarding the crippling loading times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zinato

Lack of auto-translate in a multicultural game, lack of new zones (yes they can add them but only so many we only know 1/5 of Vanadiel), lag, macro-size, graphical changes. This is but a small list, all of which is being held back by the PS2.

---

New zones are NOT an issue for the PS2. That rumour was based on the number of zones approaching 256 (a single byte), but devs have come forward a while back stating that this is not the case.

New zones (especially when part of new expansions) generally require a massive investment in resources, most of which are either cut back or working on the 75 -> 99 changes and rebalancing.

And Vana'diel isn't Minecraft... content and maps aren't auto-generated, so there will always be areas we will never see (the other 4/5th of Vana'diel).

One way to help the inventory problem would be to create another n-slot bag (where n = size of gobbiebag) that is field accessible into which ALL treasure drops fall. As with satchel or sack, you would need to move items from your treasure bag to main inventory to use, trade, sell, etc.

They could also change bazaar so that you could only bazaar items from your treasure bag, also freeing up more main inventory space.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lokithor

One way to help the inventory problem would be to create another n-slot bag (where n = size of gobbiebag) that is field accessible into which ALL treasure drops fall.

---

"Kupo! We at the MHMU have been working hard on this new creation, and we're pleased to announce the Log Lugger 800b! It lugs your logs, leaving your Gobbie Bag open and free! Kupo-po!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

Meh, I just read over it again, it seems he thinks inventory/storage data is currently not stored on the server at all, which is false. All item data is stored on the server (that's why the client has to load it from the server every time you zone). The issue is that the item list cannot be loaded in the active memory (like when viewing two inventories at the same time). Putting it on the server completely to extend the capacity is not gonna happen and I wouldn't want it to either, because that would bring a whole other range of problems with it, even disregarding the crippling loading times.

---

No, all inventory is stored on the server side. The client itself keeps track of local inventory including item info. It's still verified on the server side. Take for instance, the storage slips. They're actually a really simple system on/off bits stored on the slip. The slip itself doesn't hold the item info it just stores if the user has or doesn't have the item on it. This is also how the storage NPCs store armor sets as a single key item. They store the items as placeholders inside the slip. These aren't processed into actual items until removed from the slip. This is also why trial weapons/armors messed up the slips.

I know exactly what I'm talking about just no way to communicate it. As for it crippling load times in the field the OP "Thread: Inventory Increase, New Satchel, Infinite (sortable) Item box in MogHouse" It wouldn't work for players that have 5 armor sets that they constantly swap in the field but it'd be faster then logging off and on more then 2 times to mail yourself 16+ items.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

So, with unlimited storage you meant putting everything on the server and only pulling up pieces of it at a time, as required?

---

Exactly.. This is why the clients limits for items is moot for collectors. It wouldn't solve local inventory for people complaining about not having room with a lot of swapping sets but it would enable a large amount of storage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

Exactly.. This is why the clients limits for items is moot for collectors. It wouldn't solve local inventory for people complaining about not having room with a lot of swapping sets but it would enable a large amount of storage.

---

This is exactly what we need. Imagine if they did this and then gave you a few sort options like the AH does.

Click inventory form mog menu -> Select "sort by job" -> Swap all gear in like 30 seconds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

Just like I'd call you a noob for not using the full extent of your inventory. I'm too good in your eyes, you're too bad in mine. Works out just fine.

---

Nobody is using 80 pieces of equipment for one single job at one time. I have tons of macro swaps for rdm, blm, sch, and SMN. The most I'm ever at in inventory is 65/80, and that's still usually with extra crap I don't really need, like crystals, logs, etc.

That being said, I could use more space, but I still stand by the fact that nobody has 80 pieces of gear for swapping on one job at the same time. Maybe different sets for different events and different subjobs, but that's what mog sack/satchel is for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zinato

That's right like the 8 elemental staves, 8 obis, 8 gorgets, 7 spaces of relic currency +various upgrade items, 5 types of forgotten items, 13 mog slips, 8 types of geodes and 8 more avatarites, various seals/+2/empy, the dozens of VW drops that are so rare dropping is nothing short of foolish. (and on the VW note, if they are dropped they cant be used for tickets in the future) Otherwise you have a valid point.

---

Or you know, don't take up space with things you don't need? Seriously, you have every obi? Why? Thunder, ice, dark, and possibly light or fire are the only ones really "needed." Why do you have an earth obi? You use stone spells THAT much? When the majority of nukes cast are either thunder or blizzard, there's no reason to go get all the obis if you don't feel you have the space for them.

I haven't done gorgets yet, so I can't comment on those. You also don't seem to understand how the porter moogle works since he stores AF, upgraded AF, Relic, upgraded relic, empy, and upgraded empy.

No reason you have to hold on to 8 different types of geodes AND avatarites at the same time.

Also, do you not have a satchel as well as a sack? Boom, 240 inventory spaces from anywhere in the world at once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

Or you know, don't take up space with things you don't need? Seriously, you have every obi? Why? Thunder, ice, dark, and possibly light or fire are the only ones really "needed." Why do you have an earth obi? You use stone spells THAT much? When the majority of nukes cast are either thunder or blizzard, there's no reason to go get all the obis if you don't feel you have the space for them.

---

Not only are they planning on leveling elemental dmg (meaning thunder will do the same as stone) But, earth is used for VW proc/abyssea proc/and anytime an enemy has a weakness to earth. Stone is used rather frequently and if im going to cast it I may as well get the dmg boost since between cape/obi/ring/legs it can get ~+20% that's not even day or double weather. Even just to humor you that's still 5/8 obis needed and also I forgot the belt set to go along with gorgets that's 8 more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

I haven't done gorgets yet, so I can't comment on those. You also don't seem to understand how the porter moogle works since he stores AF, upgraded AF, Relic, upgraded relic, empy, and upgraded empy.

---

I am very well aware of how the porter moogle works as I have well over 100 pieces of gear stored with him. What I refer to is +1 seals (100 types max), +2 items (20 types max), Empyrean weapon items (18 types max) that doesn't even include Forgotten, AF+1, ABC, Dynamis Currency and the various other upgrade items. Everything and its uncle requires some new item to upgrade now and expecting to do nothing but that task until its finished is unreasonable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

No reason you have to hold on to 8 different types of geodes AND avatarites at the same time.

---

When you have 8 blm staves, 8 summoner staves, and some dozen or so Elemental weapons for various jobs yes there is. Since I don't have millions of gil to outright buy 420 Geodes for +2, 1120 Geodes for +3 and 420 Avatarites for +4. At just 1k apiece that's 1.96m, and some geodes/rites go as high as 30-50x that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

, do you not have a satchel as well as a sack? Boom, 240 inventory spaces from anywhere in the world at once.

---

Personally, I couldn't care less about world inventory since only the 80 main can be used for macros and 240 pieces on a single job is highly unlikely. A second locker/storage/safe etc. would do just fine.

Overall, they keep adding more and more R/X gear many of which are such a low drop from an event that's dieing out that dropping it is foolish. On top of that they want to add a system that requires you have the original to create a second item so that it can be sold. Abyssea also had alot of R/X items JSE weapons, Fake Relic, Serpetine and Cousins. Anything that can be better needs an item to be so. There are items for breaking caps for NPC, for learning emotes, breaking caps (if you are one who needs rarab tail) Most of the issue is due to the reliance on Trials/Synergy for anything upgradable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zinato

stuff.

---

couldn't have said it better myself.

The main problem is mog house storage. I'm fine with the amount of stuff that I can keep on me but porter moogles and mules are tedious. It's 2012. Lets get a giant mog locker and a few search options ffs. They can bill me for it if they want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

No, all inventory is stored on the server side.

---

That's exactly what I said?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

Exactly.. This is why the clients limits for items is moot for collectors. It wouldn't solve local inventory for people complaining about not having room with a lot of swapping sets but it would enable a large amount of storage.

---

Yes, that's possible and they're already doing it. That's what all the different forms of storage do (inv, sack, satchel, safe, locker, storage). And I wouldn't be surprised if they added more things like that. Unlimited won't happen though, since it's still all transferred to the client every time you zone (which is especially important for field storage, such as sack and satchel), which would lead to ridiculously large load times. If you only load inventory every time you zone and only load sack or satchel when you try to open it, that would lead to a 2~3s delay every time you open them, which would be pretty annoying.

The thing is, if you're just looking for storage for hoarders, there's already plenty of options. Armor storage, event item storage, Porter Moogle and muling are enough if you just wanna be a "collector". The problem is for actual users, people who use many jobs and need to swap quickly. and loading times do matter for those. The best thing they could do is add more locations like the safe and the locker (or possibly the sack and satchel), that would already be a great help. If you could equip gear from there, it would make it even better, although that would require more development time and testing than simply adding a new storage location.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

Nobody is using 80 pieces of equipment for one single job at one time.

---

Yes, because we can't. 78 is the max, if you have one slot for a linkshell and one for swapping items from the sack or satchel. I know plenty of people who do use 78 and who would use a lot more if they could (including me). My PLD, for example, has a set for HP, Resting, Refresh, Regen, PDT, MDT (one for Shell up, one for Shell down), Haste, Melee, Attack, DEX, Fast Cast, VIT, Enmity, Shield skill, Enhancing skill, Cure potency and several macro items (Sentinel, Rampart, Cover, Shield Bash, etc.), and that is not counting other sets that I have in storage that I only get out for situational use (elemental resist sets, for example). Now you'll say "you don't need that many items", am I right? Well, in your eyes I don't, I know there's several people who think that. Doesn't change the fact that I wanna play as well as I possibly can, which is currently restricted by the inventory limit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

Nobody is using 80 pieces of equipment for one single job at one time. I have tons of macro swaps for rdm, blm, sch, and SMN. The most I'm ever at in inventory is 65/80, and that's still usually with extra crap I don't really need, like crystals, logs, etc.

That being said, I could use more space, but I still stand by the fact that nobody has 80 pieces of gear for swapping on one job at the same time. Maybe different sets for different events and different subjobs, but that's what mog sack/satchel is for.

---

If there's any chance at all that I'll use Sanguine Blade and Magic Fruit on Blue Mage, and there always is if somebody is going to lose HP that day, then carrying everything I use puts me at roughly 79/80 depending on if I need echo drops or something. That number is after turning my resting set into "the same Refresh gear I idle in but my character wears it while sitting down" and other things I've done to save space such as using sub-optimal pieces for spells with AGI modifiers.

Similarly, I've rebuilt my resting set, enfeebling set, and Divine Magic damage set on White Mage to use more shared pieces with other sets than they would if optimized. I'm roughly 70/80 right now because I prefer not having to stick something in my Mog Sack every minute to dealing more damage with Holy II, but I could easily go up to the cap if I tried to optimize everything I regularly use.

Irregularly use in the case of the resting sets for both jobs, I suppose, but the cases I'll need it are unpredictable. I can only imagine how much I would hate my inventory if I had to deal with switching around Obis and a Twilight Cape to make my little tarubroro suck less in addition to the sacrifices I already make for inventory reasons.

Not only do some people use 80 things at a time, they could use more if the potential were there.

I said >>

Quote:

---

No, all inventory is stored on the server side.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

That's exactly what I said?

---

Actuially, I corrected you for your misunderstanding when you said this >>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

Meh, I just read over it again, it seems he thinks inventory/storage data is currently not stored on the server at all, which is false.

---

All data is stored on the server but not everything is loaded until it's requested by the client. So it's only loaded on the client side. << see the confusion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

Yes, that's possible and they're already doing it. That's what all the different forms of storage do (inv, sack, satchel, safe, locker, storage). And I wouldn't be surprised if they added more things like that. Unlimited won't happen though, since it's still all transferred to the client every time you zone (which is especially important for field storage, such as sack and satchel), which would lead to ridiculously large load times. If you only load inventory every time you zone and only load sack or satchel when you try to open it, that would lead to a 2~3s delay every time you open them, which would be pretty annoying.

---

Not the system I'm talking about, It's not transferred until you attempt to retrieve it from the mog house moogle or nomad moogle. It's stored as a placeholder in the character data on the server.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

The thing is, if you're just looking for storage for hoarders, there's already plenty of options. Armor storage, event item storage, Porter Moogle and muling are enough if you just wanna be a "collector". The problem is for actual users, people who use many jobs and need to swap quickly. and loading times do matter for those. The best thing they could do is add more locations like the safe and the locker (or possibly the sack and satchel), that would already be a great help. If you could equip gear from there, it would make it even better, although that would require more development time and testing than simply adding a new storage location.

---

All of these take more then 2-3 seconds, you have to go out of your way to a special NPC to get them. It's funny that you make statements about players who use many jobs and need to swap quickly then promote muling. Tell me how running to a mog mail, placing items in the mog mail , logging off, logging on a mule, getting items out of mule, walking to ah, mailing items, logging off mule, and then finally logging back on main to get LOL 8 items as QUICK. It took me more then 8 seconds to write the mule dance.

Extra locations sack would only create more zone lag when zoning and are limited to 80. You still can't easily create swap sets for over 80 items.

Slips use inventory space, they're limited to items the developers allow stored in them, they can only hold one of each item and they also require a trip to special NPCs to utilize them.

Key item storage you need complete sets, they're limited to the sets developers allow stored and they also require a trip to special NPCs to utilize them. Money isn't really an issue with ki storage.

The near unlimited storage I'm talking about would only look up the data if requested. On top of that it would only load the specific section requested. The auction house is split up into categories and sub sections. Think of the unlimited storage like having a personal auction house inside your mog house where everything you own can be stored in it with some exceptions. This could be the easiest manageable inventory with a storage capacity beyond what most players could logically fill.

The system I speak of >>

1. No muling needed.
2. Store all item types with the exception of trials and uniquely augmented items.
3. Would work on all platforms.
4. No storage slips or key items.
5. No extra load times while zoning since items are downloaded as a list at moogle.
6. No special NPC's you could use the nomad, rent a room or mog house moogles.

These are just few of the advantages. This system would obsolete any past mass storage system. The only system that it wouldn't work for is in field transactions. It's just not in the intere$t of the developers to create this system.

Even if this system is not possible a few things could be done by slitting up the inventory. Some items can only be stored in there own section. linkshells, Keys, consumables, Weapons, Armor. At least to keep the main inventory clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

All of these take more then 2-3 seconds, you have to go out of your way to a special NPC to get them. It's funny that you make statements about players who use many jobs and need to swap quickly then promote muling. Tell me how running to a mog mail, placing items in the mog mail , logging off, logging on a mule, getting items out of mule, walking to ah, mailing items, logging off mule, and then finally logging back on main to get LOL 8 items as QUICK. It took me more then 8 seconds to write mule dance. The extra locations would only create more zone lagging.

---

I said those were options for hoarders and collectors. People who keep their Spelunker's Hat because it's a fun item. I mentioned explicitly that those options are a problem for people who want to swap their gear quickly. See:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

[..] Armor storage, event item storage, Porter Moogle and muling are enough if you just wanna be a "collector". The problem is for actual users, people who use many jobs and need to swap quickly. and loading times do matter for those. [..]

---

[..]

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

The near unlimited storage I'm talking about would only lockup the data if requested. On top of that it would only load the sub section. The Auction house is split up into categories and sub sections. Think of the unlimited storage like having a personal auction house inside your mog house where everything you own can be stored in it with some exceptions.

---

So, how would you split it into sections? How would transferring gear from one location to another (like your inventory) work? Try to detail it for me. Would you select "head gear" "level 50~60" "job x" and it would show you the items you have that fit this category? I just don't know how you imagine this to go down. How will the data be stored on the server? A bitfield for every item in the game, which can be 0 or 1? Since you said something about "placeholder in the character data".

I can't think of any way that wouldn't have any other drawbacks attached to them. But I'm still not sure how you'd want to implement this, so I can't comment on any of it until you detail that a bit further.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

I said those were options for hoarders and collectors. People who keep their Spelunker's Hat because it's a fun item. I mentioned explicitly that those options are a problem for people who want to swap their gear quickly. See:

So, how would you split it into sections? How would transferring gear from one location to another (like your inventory) work? Try to detail it for me. Would you select "head gear" "level 50~60" "job x" and it would show you the items you have that fit this category? I just don't know how you imagine this to go down. How will the data be stored on the server? A bitfield for every item in the game, which can be 0 or 1? Since you said something about "placeholder in the character data".

---

Same way it's stored in the AH. The first placeholder says the player has the item, the second says how many. It doesn't need accessed until the player looks inside the container data. When you look at the AH list its split into categories and sub categories. Each category has items listed no matter what level. When you want an item to go to that category and it loads the list. The level range isn't important unless you sort by level.

The bitfield is how slips store items. The items have a single placeholder bit for each item. When the player retrieves one item the bit for that item is turned off in that slip. The game itself simply translates what bit equals what item. For instance, if the slip type was magically changed to anther slip the items in it would translate the bits into the other slips placeholders.

Say, for example slip 1 had all artifact armors, and slip 2 had all relic armors. If the artifact slip 1 ID was turned into slip 2 ID the bits stored in it as artifact armors would become placeholders for relic armors. The game itself just translates what bit is what item based on what slip it's stored on. Other then being it's own item and what placeholders are active all slips are basically the same.

My statement about slips meant they don't actively relate the items stored as being in your active inventory. Slips process data in them differently then a player active inventory. Technically the items don't exist on your character until they're removed from the slip. They aren't processed as owned items or loaded in memory when you zone. Only the slip itself is loaded.

To be honest this might not be the EXACT method they use but I can assure you it's not far off. It's like compressing. (no need to explain this in detail.)

Processed active inventory a problem for some while inactive storage is a problem for others. With processed inventory the client constantly scans it when you access your inventory. If you make a macro that says /equip head "Black Hat" or when you try to lot on an an item you can only hold one of this is the data that is checked. If the item is stored on a slip it's not processed and inactive so it doesn't exist in on the player to equip or restrict from owning more then one.

The system I'm talking about is for inactive mass storage that is easily accessible and quick. It wouldn't solve the local swap inventory limitations but would allow players to get items they want without muling or running out of actual storage.

As for how, Items in auction have several values such as Item ID, item type and item amount up. I think you know it's possible to do but are thinking to hard about it. It's just a tweaked personal auction house used as a storage medium with the data stored in their data folder.

Wouldn't it be nice if equipped armor did not count against your inventory limit (like in many other MMOs)? Besides, if it's on your body, it shouldn't be counted as being in your "bag", right? Although that would be problematic for swapping if the quantity of gear pieces were different and your inventory were maxed....another can of worms altogether. :\

Could have the "swapped sets of gear" go into a temporary "container" of some sort during the swap so they would be still kept track of...don't know how that would work with memory limitations and all, though...there's those 'limitations' again. $%#@*. -.-;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrankReynolds

This is exactly what we need. Imagine if they did this and then gave you a few sort options like the AH does.

Click inventory form mog menu -> Select "sort by job" -> Swap all gear in like 30 seconds.

---

There's an app for that.

I mean plugin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greatguardian

There's an app for that.

I mean plugin.

---

Yeah, sorta. Those things are all buggy.

If they simply implemented one large bag that was sort-able by job and could hold everything that was not on your person in the mog house, changing jobs would be as easy as selecting what job you wanted to gear, and then spamming the collect item key.

Those third part tools require XML and and spellcast knowledge, and they frequently break whenever a new item is added. Not to mention all the wacky rules for keeping items not related to a specific job.

This would allow any schmuck with a controller to change gear by simply emptying out everything but meds/tools from inventory, hitting sort, and spamming the button to transfer back items that have been sorted for the job they want.

It would actually even make those 3PP work better because it would make all the sorting mumbo jumbo that they do take far less time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

I think you know it's possible to do but are thinking to hard about it.

---

On the contrary, I think you're not thinking enough about it. You still haven't said anything about how you think it should be implemented, which was the only thing I wanted to know.

But basically you're asking for the same thing everyone's asking for, more storage locations. Only the way you're describing it wouldn't work, for a few reasons. It would still need to be restricted to 80 slots when it is displayed (because they'd need to be in active memory, not on your hard drive or on the server, and that is currently limited by the PS2). So if you have more than 80 items in a category you're out of luck. The only method this could be prevented with would be if it was indeed an AH-style list, which would mean dropping the associated metadata and making a fixed list, that would have to be stored locally. Also, that list would be massive, because AH data is static (it doesn't only show the items that are on auction at any moment, but a fixed list of everything that's ever been on AH), and in this case you'd either have to store seperate lists for each user or make one huge ass list with all the items from one category on it. This would mean that it would take ages picking your gear out of that list for one (especially because you'd have to search for ages for each slot then reload a massive list for another slot), and also you couldn't store any items that rely on that metadata to exist (like trial items, augmented items, items with charges and anything like that).

Furthermore, this would be nearly impossible to implement on the server. A server needs to be able to retrieve and send data immediately, but for this to work the server would still have to perform an expensive search process. The reason why we've only ever had static storage (and the reason why it will always remain this way) is that it's significantly more efficient. Fixed-size data can be stored in an array and read in one swoop through a certain memory location. Unlimited storage would have to be searched, possibly all the time in different memory locations which would take a hell of a long time to find if you look at it in the server's terms, which would have to do this for every incoming user request. They'd have to keep their server data storage permanently defragmented to ensure fast access, which would be undone as soon as someone adds a new item to that storage.

Also, it would make searching for items locally impossible, if they ever decided to add that feature (which they totally should).

You're sugarcoating the advantages and ignoring many of the disadvantages of your suggested system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

1. No muling needed.

---

Arguable, depending on what other items you have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

2. Store all item types with the exception of trials and uniquely augmented items.

---

And any other type of item that has any metadata attached to it, like charged items or BCNM triggers, quest triggers and whatnot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

3. Would work on all platforms.

---

Not the way you're imagining it. If it was indeed true storage, it would still be limited to 80 items displayed per time because of PS2 limitations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

4. No storage slips or key items.

---

Wouldn't be required for any other kind of storage either (not even for Porter Moogles, if they adjusted their data storage server side). It's just how SE chose to implement it. I'm not saying that's good (it's the reason why I never use Porter Moogles myself), but I'm guessing if they did it like this there was a reason why they couldn't save it server side. After all, it would mean having to code an entirely new way of storing character relevant data on the server. Since the beginning of the game they've only stored job levels, skill levels, items, key items and quest progression on the server, nothing else. This would mean expanding that to incorporate new ways of item storage, which would be especially tricky if it was indeed unlimited, as you want it to be (which may even be impossible to implement due to the nature of the server side of the game, as I mentioned before).

Honestly it sounds a bit like wishful thinking, unless you can tell me where I'm wrong and how you would implement it. And you seem to ignore the downsides this would bring as well (forget fast regearing with a system like that). Don't get me wrong, I'm the last person who would turn down more storage options, as I suffer from short inventory like the next guy, I just don't see this as a feasible solution. A new storage location (like a sack and satchel) would actually fulfill all the points you mentioned better than your own suggested method (point #5 being arguable, but it wouldn't have a huge impact either, and it would be even better than point #6).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

Yes, because we can't. 78 is the max, if you have one slot for a linkshell and one for swapping items from the sack or satchel. I know plenty of people who do use 78 and who would use a lot more if they could (including me). My PLD, for example, has a set for HP, Resting, Refresh, Regen, PDT, MDT (one for Shell up, one for Shell down), Haste, Melee, Attack, DEX, Fast Cast, VIT, Enmity, Shield skill, Enhancing skill, Cure potency and several macro items (Sentinel, Rampart, Cover, Shield Bash, etc.), and that is not counting other sets that I have in storage that I only get out for situational use (elemental resist sets, for example). Now you'll say "you don't need that many items", am I right? Well, in your eyes I don't, I know there's several people who think that. Doesn't change the fact that I wanna play as well as I possibly can, which is currently restricted by the inventory limit.

---

Anything except BLU I call BS on. link a picture of this inventory of 78 items that are all needed at the same time for one single event.

Quote:

---

If there's any chance at all that I'll use Sanguine Blade and Magic Fruit on Blue Mage, and there always is if somebody is going to lose HP that day, then carrying everything I use puts me at roughly 79/80 depending on if I need echo drops or something.

---

BLU I could understand, just due to the nature of either having to be a melee or nuker, or even support. Any other job? No.

Quote:

---

Not only are they planning on leveling elemental dmg (meaning thunder will do the same as stone) But, earth is used for VW proc/abyssea proc/and anytime an enemy has a weakness to earth. Stone is used rather frequently and if im going to cast it I may as well get the dmg boost since between cape/obi/ring/legs it can get ~+20% that's not even day or double weather. Even just to humor you that's still 5/8 obis needed and also I forgot the belt set to go along with gorgets that's 8 more.

---

If you want to min/max every single thing, then don't complain about inventory issues. That's a you issue, not a game issue. At the moment, there is no reason to get a stone obi. Let me rephrase before you mention some out-in-left-field example. The effort to get, plus the -1inventory, is obviously out-weighing the benefit of getting a few extra damage in sandstorms or on Earthsday. Also, mobs weak to stone still take more damage from a fully merited Blizzard the vast majority of the time. The only time I can think of, other than procs, where I would really NEED to cast stone is during the torama BC.

Also, I don't tend to try to push my damage to the max when proc'ing. You know, because my damage goes to 0 if I die. Proc with crap damage so you can proc it fast, then wait until hate is set on the tank well and nuke in max damage gear. Might not work for everyone, but works just fine for me.

You're also extremely exaggerating the situation by insinuating that it's common to have every trial weapon, at least 1 of every seal possible, at least one of every stone, at least one of every avatarite, at least one of every +2 item, all the normal gear, etc. That's not common, especially for someone who talks about not being rich.

It would be nice if you could store seals though, that's all I really want.

What is this game about, really? It's about collecting gear. Just about everything you do in this game has an end goal of getting some new, marginally useful piece of equipment. That's what keeps people playing.

By that logic, SE needs to provide more incentive to want to get more gear to keep people playing. More storage to keep all the junk. More usable storage in the field in order to encourage more min/maxing. Combined with the content that provides the new gear, that's what keeps the subscription bucks flowing.

By that logic, it is in SE's business interest to make changes in this area.

I made a suggestion a few posts back about adding another field accessible bag and having all treasure drops fall there (as well as recoding bazaar to use that bag) rather than the gobbie bag. Seems like an easy way to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

Anything except BLU I call BS on. link a picture of this inventory of 78 items that are all needed at the same time for one single event.


BLU I could understand, just due to the nature of either having to be a melee or nuker, or even support. Any other job? No.


If you want to min/max every single thing, then don't complain about inventory issues. That's a you issue, not a game issue. At the moment, there is no reason to get a stone obi. Let me rephrase before you mention some out-in-left-field example. The effort to get, plus the -1inventory, is obviously out-weighing the benefit of getting a few extra damage in sandstorms or on Earthsday. Also, mobs weak to stone still take more damage from a fully merited Blizzard the vast majority of the time. The only time I can think of, other than procs, where I would really NEED to cast stone is during the torama BC.

Also, I don't tend to try to push my damage to the max when proc'ing. You know, because my damage goes to 0 if I die. Proc with crap damage so you can proc it fast, then wait until hate is set on the tank well and nuke in max damage gear. Might not work for everyone, but works just fine for me.

You're also extremely exaggerating the situation by insinuating that it's common to have every trial weapon, at least 1 of every seal possible, at least one of every stone, at least one of every avatarite, at least one of every +2 item, all the normal gear, etc. That's not common, especially for someone who talks about not being rich.

It would be nice if you could store seals though, that's all I really want.

---

So exactly how does having better storage hurt you again? and why are you opposed? I see you arguing about peoples habits and play styles (which actually makes you look like you don't try very hard) , but I don't see any actual argument against better storage. Care to elaborate on that (on why you don't like better storage, not why you think that your better at storing things than other people)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

Anything except BLU I call BS on. link a picture of this inventory of 78 items that are all needed at the same time for one single event.

---

I gave you a list of my sets, I'm not gonna list every single item I have. Pretty sure you can figure it out yourself from there (if you wanted to, which I doubt).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

BLU I could understand, just due to the nature of either having to be a melee or nuker, or even support. Any other job? No.

---

My PLD and THF both go over the 80 limit and my BRD is close (the instruments alone make up a big part). Actually, all my jobs are in the 60~70 range, but BRD is ~75.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

If you want to min/max every single thing, then don't complain about inventory issues. That's a you issue, not a game issue.

---

I predicted you were gonna say this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

Now you'll say "you don't need that many items", am I right? Well, in your eyes I don't, I know there's several people who think that. Doesn't change the fact that I wanna play as well as I possibly can, which is currently restricted by the inventory limit.

---

Because that's the only argument you people ever have when we tell you our inventory is not enough. Either way, you're wrong because it actually is a game issue. SE designed the game to allow gear swaps at arbitrary times, they knew people have been doing it forever and they keep dishing out more situational gear that has no uses aside from situationally being macrod in. So they know full well we'll use them situationally and macro them and as a result will need a lot higher inventory than just 16 pieces, which means they are encouraging our behaviour. However, the game doesn't allow us to go above 80. So for your theory to even be considered you'd have to assume that the 80 limit was their design. That is simply not true. It used to be a lot lower and they kept increasing it for years until they hit a brick wall. Why would they have done it, according to you? Because 80 is alright, but 81 isn't? And all those years they were just trying to find the right balance?

The truth is simply that 80 is a number defined by hardware limitations. SE obviously agrees with our playstyle to min/max situational gear. The extent of our gearswapping is no issue at all. Who are you to tell me that if I need 78 items it's ok, but 79 isn't?

So yes, it's a game issue and not ours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrankReynolds

So exactly how does having better storage hurt you again? and why are you opposed? I see you arguing about peoples habits and play styles (which actually makes you look like you don't try very hard) , but I don't see any actual argument against better storage. Care to elaborate on that (on why you don't like better storage, not why you think that your better at storing things than other people)?

---

Where did I say I'm opposed to more inventory? Oh right, I didn't. I really don't care what people on this forum think of whether I'm "trying" or not, as this forum is pretty well known for being a bunch of whiners, nay-sayers, and people who just lack reading comprehension. Much like you and Arcon assuming I'm against extra inventory.

My entire point boils down to this:
No job -needs- to have 78 different pieces of equipment in their inventory at once. It is not necessary. There comes a point when you're doing 6k+ nukes that, just perhaps, you don't need to carry around that Hyorin obi when it's not ice day, not ice weather, and you don't happen to be /sch or have someone hailstorming you. You are not using that piece of gear at that moment, so it can be sacked/satcheled.

This is most likely the case with most people claiming they use 78 pieces of equipment for gear swaps. In MY opinion, and one that is not changing anytime soon, I am not going to need a stone obi for that little bit of extra damage from sandstorm while I'm proc'ing a mob with stone spells. For one, when I'm proc'ing, I want to be able to get off my proc spells WITHOUT pulling hate, this means I don't want huge numbers until the mob has been proc'd. Why have to waste manawall or douse when proc'ing instead of saving those 10 minute cooldowns for an actual emergency? Yellow is going to proc on Stone IV whether I'm naked or wearing every piece of earth-boosting equipment there is. The quicker I go through my spells and proc it, the faster we can just zerg it.

Quote:

---

Now you'll say "you don't need that many items", am I right? Well, in your eyes I don't, I know there's several people who think that. Doesn't change the fact that I wanna play as well as I possibly can, which is currently restricted by the inventory limit.

---

Go ahead and min/max to the extreme, just don't act like you're superior to those of us who min/max normally without going insane and playing pokemon with gear.

Quote:

---

Because that's the only argument you people ever have when we tell you our inventory is not enough. Either way, you're wrong because it actually is a game issue. SE designed the game to allow gear swaps at arbitrary times, they knew people have been doing it forever and they keep dishing out more situational gear that has no uses aside from situationally being macrod in. So they know full well we'll use them situationally and macro them and as a result will need a lot higher inventory than just 16 pieces, which means they are encouraging our behaviour. However, the game doesn't allow us to go above 80. So for your theory to even be considered you'd have to assume that the 80 limit was their design. That is simply not true. It used to be a lot lower and they kept increasing it for years until they hit a brick wall. Why would they have done it, according to you? Because 80 is alright, but 81 isn't? And all those years they were just trying to find the right balance?

The truth is simply that 80 is a number defined by hardware limitations. SE obviously agrees with our playstyle to min/max situational gear. The extent of our gearswapping is no issue at all. Who are you to tell me that if I need 78 items it's ok, but 79 isn't?

So yes, it's a game issue and not ours.

---

Rage more, please.

Did I ever say SE opposes gear swaps? No. My entire point that everyone seems to be overlooking is that 80 is THE LIMIT. Either adapt, or keep whining about not being able to pump out that extra 30 damage on a nuke that you just absolutely HAVE to have in your mind. The limit won't be increased due to the hardware limitations. No amount of whining is going to change it. The most that will happen is another bag is added like satchel/sack. Thus, my comment, learn to store situational gear that you may need during the event, but do not need right this minute. If you want to have your nuking/healing/DD sets from BLU all sitting in your inventory at once, go right ahead. Just don't whine that you have no room when you're bringing the issue upon yourself because you'd rather have every piece sitting in your inventory instead of actually grabbing it from the satchel when you realize you are going to need it.

For min/maxers, you all sure don't understand how to minimize unnecessary inventory burdens while maximizing your gear sets for the activity you are participating in.

Quote:

---

I gave you a list of my sets, I'm not gonna list every single item I have. Pretty sure you can figure it out yourself from there (if you wanted to, which I doubt).

---

Link me that post please, because I haven't seen it. Also, if you aren't listing every item, then you obviously don't care enough about this topic to actually give an example of why this is a problem. You're just here for the whine, which as I already stated, this forum is notorious for.

The first part of your post about how it would download the list and allow you to pick out items is technically correct. The issue you point out is the slow gathering of items. I explained it was mass storage process. It would be definitely be slower to download and get a category list of items but in all circumstances quicker then transferring from a mule. I also pointed out this wouldn't be a field inventory.

Now for the hard part.

Arcon, I've explained it enough that if you didn't figure it out yet simply you won't figure it out. I've pointed out loopholes in the limitations using a system that's outside the box. The limitations are cemented so deep that no amount of evidence or explanation could undo unless the reader figures it out. I provided the auction house example that has/can access thousands of items on any current platform. This proves there are ways around listing more then 80 items. You still made this comment: "If it was indeed true storage, it would still be limited to 80 items displayed per time because of PS2 limitations."

The truth is I played on the PS2 for years and the auction house never had an 80 item limit. There may indeed be a display limit but it has nothing to so with storage limitations. At this point pinning this on PS2 limitations is outlandish. Storage is simply a way to store items. There is no such thing as true storage. If items can be put someplace where they don't occupy the player inventory, maintain basic information and can be retrieved within reason it's still storage. The PS2 limitation is inventory related. The developers can create a system to mass store items. If people think still it's impossible because the PS2 limitations then they need to stop thinking that.

I'm just going to set things straight.

The server can list more then 80 items, The server can store more then 80 items. The limitation remains because the method of storage and this is what limits it on some platforms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

My entire point boils down to this:
No job -needs- to have 78 different pieces of equipment in their inventory at once.

---

No job needs any equipment. It's just increasing our efficiency. You're just picking an arbitrary line and saying "if you need more than this you're overdoing it". Then you bring stupid examples of a Dorin Obi because you assume we're carrying all obi and all staves with us at any time when you fail to realize that even without it we're at our maximum. We don't carry everything with us we don't need. My THF is over the limit and that's not counting all my ranged accuracy gear and my steal and mug gear, which I all still have stored, just in case I'd ever need it. With that, my THF gear approaches ~100. Same for the earth/fire resist set for my PLD, with which I'd easily be over 100.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

Go ahead and min/max to the extreme, just don't act like you're superior to those of us who min/max normally without going insane and playing pokemon with gear.

---

I'm not. I play with plenty of people who don't gearswap at all and I get on with them just fine. I don't have a problem with people like you, I have a problem with you, and it has nothing to do with your playstyle but with your groundless insistance that our opinion is worth less than yours, because that's all it is. We asked for ways to improve our inventory and you came in on your high horse and tell us we don't need it and we're mismanaging our inventory. You were the one telling us how to play. Don't make me out to be that bad guy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

Did I ever say SE opposes gear swaps? No. My entire point that everyone seems to be overlooking is that 80 is THE LIMIT.

---

Oh? Because I thought I remembered you saying it's not the game's fault. You seem to mix up your arguments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

For min/maxers, you all sure don't understand how to minimize unnecessary inventory burdens while maximizing your gear sets for the activity you are participating in.

---

Then how are we playing right now? Or do you think we're all on a strike and sitting in Port Jeuno crowding up Horst with angry shouts directed at SE that we can't play anymore? Newsflash: we do manage. But we'd manage better if the game would let us. Now you don't seem to understand for what we're asking. We're not asking SE to increase the inventory limit, because we already know that that's the physical limit. We're suggesting different ways to bypass this, different systems to work around that shortcoming. This is the part you seem to be confusing with whining. Sarick, for example, has posted his idea on a new system that would completely bypass the 80 limit imposed by the PS2. So what, are you saying we shouldn't even bother, because it is how it is and we should just be fine with it? Then what exactly are these forums for, if not for feedback and suggestions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

Quote:

---

I gave you a list of my sets, I'm not gonna list every single item I have. Pretty sure you can figure it out yourself from there (if you wanted to, which I doubt).

---

Link me that post please, because I haven't seen it. Also, if you aren't listing every item, then you obviously don't care enough about this topic to actually give an example of why this is a problem.

---

No, I don't care enough to go through all my gear in my different storage locations and on my mule just to convince any random stranger as to why he needs to get his facts straight. And it's funny you're saying you didn't see that post when you even quoted it. Here it is again, the relevant parts bolded, so you don't skip over it again

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

[..] My PLD, for example, has a set for HP, Resting, Refresh, Regen, PDT, MDT (one for Shell up, one for Shell down), Haste, Melee, Attack, DEX, Fast Cast, VIT, Enmity, Shield skill, Enhancing skill, Cure potency and several macro items (Sentinel, Rampart, Cover, Shield Bash, etc.), and that is not counting other sets that I have in storage that I only get out for situational use (elemental resist sets, for example). [..]

---

Anything except BLU I call BS on. link a picture of this inventory of 78 items that are all needed at the same time for one single event.

---

Sorry for the double-post, but I decided to split it because they're directed towards different people and address different topics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

Arcon, I've explained it enough that if you didn't figure it out yet simply you won't figure it out.

---

That's the thing, though. I'm pretty sure I did figure it out and I told you what was wrong with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

I provided the auction house example that has/can access thousands of items on any current platform. This proves there are ways around listing more then 80 items. You still made this comment: "If it was indeed true storage, it would still be limited to 80 items displayed per time because of PS2 limitations."

---

That's because the AH listing is inherently different from the inventory listing, and I told you repeatedly why. The inventory is not a static list that can just be read and interpreted and it's not just numbers that are being displayed but entire objects. Each item in an AH list is just a number (displayed as the item name) along with three markers, stack size (probably implemented as two flags as well), whether or not it's usable/equippable and whether or not it is currently equipped. This can be done entirely in a 13-bit array assuming a max of 512 items per category (even 12-bit with some clever coding). This simply does not work with items in the inventory, because they do list almost everything related to that item. WS points, for example, or max charges, charges left and recharge time, number of items, flags for usable or equipped items, etc. Now add on top of that that it's not a fixed item list and the storage size for each item increases. The inventory can't impose a limit of 512 items like AH categories to reduce storing information, because every item in the game can be in your inventory. Last I checked a compilation it was around 14k items (probably higher by now), if I remember correctly, which alone would require at least 16-bit allocated memory for each item. You cannot possibly combine all of that information in under 32 bits (I didn't do the actual math because I don't know how SE implemented it, but this would be the bare minimum). Now you do the math, 512*13 = 6656, divide that by our 32 bits per item and you're at 208 items for our inventory. Half that, to get 104 max inventory (because two storage locations can be up at any time to swap items). That's 104 items, in the same space that the auction house uses to store several hundreds of items. And notice how close it is to the current 80 item limit, and I was assuming the worst for many of those options.

And please note that I'm not saying my math is correct, I don't know how exactly SE coded it. I'm just saying it's plausible. You keep using the AH list as an indication that more than 80 items can be displayed when that's simply not always the case, because the space requirements are fundamentally different between the two. That's all I'm trying to say here.

I already said it would work for certain items (items with no metadata attached), but they're still not comparable and it's still not unlimited. So other means of storage would still be required. So if they added another storage location they would achieve the exact same result, only it would work on all items, it would be a lot faster to swap and it would be easier to implement (this is an educated guess, based on the fact that they've already done it several times). The only drawback would be that it would increase loading times after zoning, by a maximum factor of 15%, quite probably a lot less if you consider that all the key items, friend list and blacklist entries probably take up most of the time. So the entire process would still be within only a few seconds.

You said it would make any past "mass storage system" obsolete. What exactly do you mean by "mass storage"? What is the majority of your items? Because for me, it's gear I use constantly for all of my jobs. You even said yourself it's not for quick job changes, only that it was an improvement from muling (which I completely agree with). But what remains after the gear that I constantly use are some items most of which can already be stored (like event items and old artifact armor) and some old quest rewards or NM drops that I don't wanna toss. They hardly make up any kind of "mass" though (I think I have less than 30 of those items). So in the end I'd still prefer other systems for faster gearing and would barely use this, unless I had items I could store away permanently. I realize this may be different for other people, but again, not trying to bash the idea, just saying it's not quite as rosy as you made it out to be before.

The best reason for this is the increased capacity, because you could strip all those items of their metadata and just store them with much less space, possibly with less than 14 bits per item. However, I don't think SE's servers are a bottleneck for storing item data, so I'm not sure how relevant that would be. They could probably just add another /satchel-like storage and get away just as good, maybe even better, depending on the person and their playstyle.

Arcon, You're confusing a few things. First off I mentioned somewhere that this isn't inventory It's a storage system. Don't confuse inventory with storage. The mog house storage is actually a part of your inventory, it's just named storage. Secondly, I did say that there where some exceptions to what items could be stored. The obsolete wording was a comparison to the amount you can store vs other currently available storage systems. No where did I say it was the only way to store or hold items. The main inventory would still be necessary for instant access items.

As for the words near unlimited. Let me explain what I meant by near unlimited. I meant that of all the systems this one could hold more then most players could fill within reason. Also, this doesn't translate directly into never running out of space. I'm sure someone could fill it up if they tried but to do so would be abusive.

Mathematics aside the type of storage I'm talking about wouldn't need all the item data stored with it. It'd only need the item identification, and how many are owned. As for timers etc as metadata. SE avoided timers by resetting them when you got the item. The charged items where limited too fully charged only. Unique augmented items where not allowed to be stored. Finally they solved the issue with signed items by clearing them when sold. This shows data is stripped when items are placed on the auction house or stored in some fashion. The so called metadata limitation only exist if items require it. Storage slips would be such an item.

Mass storage is this. You craft 250 healing potions that can't be stacked in regular inventory. You can store all 250 of them like this even though they don't stack. This is where this system would excel. It wouldn't matter if you stored 1 or 200 of the same item it'd still consume the same amount of space. Gear or whatever you want could stack even if you can only hold one at a time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

Where did I say I'm opposed to more inventory? Oh right, I didn't.

---

Right, so when you say:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipp

I really don't care what people on this forum think of whether I'm "trying" or not, as this forum is pretty well known for being a bunch of whiners, nay-sayers, and people who just lack reading comprehension. Much like you and Arcon assuming I'm against extra inventory.

My entire point boils down to this:
No job -needs- to have 78 different pieces of equipment in their inventory at once. It is not necessary. There comes a point when you're doing 6k+ nukes that, just perhaps, you don't need to carry around that Hyorin obi when it's not ice day, not ice weather, and you don't happen to be /sch or have someone hailstorming you. You are not using that piece of gear at that moment, so it can be sacked/satcheled.

---

Your not saying that your against more inventory.

Your saying that you are way better at managing inventory than I am, but you still think they should add more inventory.

Man sorry for my poor reading comprehension. It's just that when an amazingly well thought out and eloquent post like yours comes along, it stumps my somewhat inferior mind.

Thanks for straightening us laymen out on how to manage our inventory. It's great to hear that you want better / more storage too. I guess we have nothing left to argue about huh?

EDIT: I know your not good at catching this, so I'll just spell it out for you. All of that was sarcasm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zinato

I hate to be the one to say this but due to PS2 limitations (in this case its true) anything over 80 space is impossible. At least that's the story they've given us. Linking bags may work however, for the same reason 80 is max per bag type 160 would be the max for a linked bag, since that is the maximum allowed items the PS2 can process. (this is also why 80/80 is cap)

---

You know, SE could add a huge storage expansion that imho shouldn't impact the PS2 users.

If they add the MogSack2 that we purchase for another 10k gil on the npc, and PS2 users would be told - do not buy this item or you will break your game......

Frankly I'd like to see a quest or moogle-purchase where I can double the lines of my macros..... another to get blue-magic-sets so I could switch group-sets of BLU spells..

There are lots of things SE could do but the PS2 limitation, with so few legitimate players using it (I have 1 friend in 6 years that I know, that still uses his ps2 for xi) I don't understand why SE cant either make some of the above noted suggestions or at the very least, platform-specific updates, so PS2 can be omitted on an update while the rest of us get our game's updated. Obviously this is possible, 360 has much better graphics images than the PC so there are obviously different update packages they could push to each platform.

-Just my 10 cents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jile

You know, SE could add a huge storage expansion that imho shouldn't impact the PS2 users.

If they add the MogSack2 that we purchase for another 10k gil on the npc, and PS2 users would be told - do not buy this item or you will break your game......

Frankly I'd like to see a quest or moogle-purchase where I can double the lines of my macros..... another to get blue-magic-sets so I could switch group-sets of BLU spells..

There are lots of things SE could do but the PS2 limitation, with so few legitimate players using it (I have 1 friend in 6 years that I know, that still uses his ps2 for xi) I don't understand why SE cant either make some of the above noted suggestions or at the very least, platform-specific updates, so PS2 can be omitted on an update while the rest of us get our game's updated. Obviously this is possible, 360 has much better graphics images than the PC so there are obviously different update packages they could push to each platform.

-Just my 10 cents.

---

This is exactly why so many are pushing for SE to drop PS2 support, in the interest of "balance" they won't ignore any single system. However, rumor has it SE made an agreement with Sony ever so long ago that any expansion made for FFXI must be made as a game disc for PS2. Ever notice how everything past WoTG is broken into mini expansions even though abyssea could have very easily been released all at once? Hence why until PS2 is dropped they keep dancing around players requests for expansions even though they swear up and down they can make them. I wish I could find it but sony made a statement awhile back saying that basically XI cant drop PS2 support unless sony does first. Which of course sucks for us, then again with all the lies, backpedalling and ignoring of player questions its hard to tell what is and isnt true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

Arcon, You're confusing a few things. First off I mentioned somewhere that this isn't inventory It's a storage system. Don't confuse inventory with storage.

---

I know, but the limitations I mentioned are for display purposes, because to be displayed means it needs to be stored in active memory. They could work around it, if they didn't have both menus up at any same time and made another way to move items between them. Which, for long-term storage, shouldn't be a problem, I guess. I don't know, maybe the AH memory and the inventory memory are entirely different anyway, I have no way of knowing that, but seeing how short SE claim they are for memory I believe they'd do all they can to compress it further.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

As for the words near unlimited. Let me explain what I meant by near unlimited. I meant that of all the systems this one could hold more then most players could fill within reason. Also, this doesn't translate directly into never running out of space. I'm sure someone could fill it up if they tried but to do so would be abusive.

---

The problem is, many people may be abusing it unwillingly. People just not bothered by storage limitations will keep putting stuff in there because they feel like they're not limited by inventory anymore and keep it for "situational use" or whatever. Everything that's being tossed now (like shitloads of feathers and skins and whatnot) would just be kept in case anyone needs it. Then again, that would be their personal problem. It would definitely help with storage of certain items.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zinato

This is exactly why so many are pushing for SE to drop PS2 support, in the interest of "balance" they won't ignore any single system. However, rumor has it SE made an agreement with Sony ever so long ago that any expansion made for FFXI must be made as a game disc for PS2. Ever notice how everything past WoTG is broken into mini expansions even though abyssea could have very easily been released all at once?

---

Any sources for this? Sounds like something players came up with to justify SE's release behaviour when it really seems as simple as that they're out of development time and simply weren't finished when they wanted to be (and should have been). Hence the release in smaller amounts. Abyssea had a whole slew of reasons why it was probably released in steps. I don't know, this is just my first time hearing about this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

I know, but the limitations I mentioned are for display purposes, because to be displayed means it needs to be stored in active memory. They could work around it, if they didn't have both menus up at any same time and made another way to move items between them. Which, for long-term storage, shouldn't be a problem, I guess. I don't know, maybe the AH memory and the inventory memory are entirely different anyway, I have no way of knowing that, but seeing how short SE claim they are for memory I believe they'd do all they can to compress it further.

---

It is stored differently. The items stored in the auction house are a listing. The client translates the item when you check them on demand. As for the display limits, the player inventory menus would only be open when storing items. You could only see the amount stored if you was looking at the retrieve list. When retrieving them they're pulled from a list just like the AH and player inventory isn't displayed. Take a deep look at how the AH works you'll notice the player inventory isn't shown when buying items. It's only shown when you sell an item and in this case the AH list isn't shown.

They won't compress it more because it's not in their best Intere$t to allow players this much capacity. Look at a simple text file. Let's consider If each item on the list used 8 bytes of data to store it even an old 64kb computer could manage hundreds of items in list forum. It just doesn't need that much memory data for an item. If the PS2 can list, store and retrieve items with a system then the only real limitation is if the code to make it happen can't fit in memory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

I The problem is, many people may be abusing it unwillingly. People just not bothered by storage limitations will keep putting stuff in there because they feel like they're not limited by inventory anymore and keep it for "situational use" or whatever. Everything that's being tossed now (like shitloads of feathers and skins and whatnot) would just be kept in case anyone needs it. Then again, that would be their personal problem. It would definitely help with storage of certain items.

---

Filling it up shouldn't cause a detrimental effect because the list would maintain placeholders for every item that could be stored. Items in the list could have 0 or 255 items they'd still take the same space in memory. The bytes used to store amounts would definitely have set limits. If those limits are hit either the client/server would block adding more or it would truncate extra items over the limit. This would insure that client crashing abuse wouldn't be possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zinato

This is exactly why so many are pushing for SE to drop PS2 support, in the interest of "balance" they won't ignore any single system. However, rumor has it SE made an agreement with Sony ever so long ago that any expansion made for FFXI must be made as a game disc for PS2. Ever notice how everything past WoTG is broken into mini expansions even though abyssea could have very easily been released all at once? Hence why until PS2 is dropped they keep dancing around players requests for expansions even though they swear up and down they can make them. I wish I could find it but sony made a statement awhile back saying that basically XI cant drop PS2 support unless sony does first. Which of course sucks for us, then again with all the lies, backpedalling and ignoring of player questions its hard to tell what is and isnt true.

---

They aren't dropping support, they just aren't making a reasonable effort supporting it. If you look at all the PS2 forums where players complain about crashes and black screens they haven't done much to rectify these issues. In fact they pin all these issues into It's your fault, your providers fault, your firewalls/routers fault or a defective console. If they haven't fixed it yet they're not planning on fixing it. This is the same with inventory limitations. They want to pin the problem on the PS2 limitations. Either they don't know how to fix them or they don't want to because it would cause players to cancel some mule accounts. It's as simple as that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

They won't compress it more because it's not in their best Intere$t to allow players this much capacity.

---

Why exactly not? How would it be anything but their interest?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarick

Filling it up shouldn't cause a detrimental effect because the list would maintain placeholders for every item that could be stored. Items in the list could have 0 or 255 items they'd still take the same space in memory.

---

Now you're mixing something up. One drawback of bitwise storage is that it's only an on/off switch, meaning you can't store multiples of one item (like the 250 healing potions you mentioned earlier). If you want that kind of storage then you'd really just need very little space, but in addition to the metadata restriction (no augmented/trial items, charged/signed items, etc.) you also couldn't store more than one of any given item. You'd have to choose between bitwise storage and regular storage, one for a checklist-type of storage (for rare armor, for example) and the other for stacking various amounts of items (like craft materials or trial items).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcon

Any sources for this? Sounds like something players came up with to justify SE's release behaviour when it really seems as simple as that they're out of development time and simply weren't finished when they wanted to be (and should have been). Hence the release in smaller amounts. Abyssea had a whole slew of reasons why it was probably released in steps. I don't know, this is just my first time hearing about this.

---

I was shocked when I heard it to. (followed by a soft we're screwed, only with stronger words) A friend of mine showed me the statement on some Playstation news letter addressing if Sony was going to make PS2 and therefore FFXI obsolete (as in stop supporting it) I really wish I could find it again, but i'll ask if he still remembers where he found it.