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

[Arcon]

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

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.

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.

[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. 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.

[FrankReynolds]

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

Right, so when you say:

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.

[Jile]

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.

[Zinato]

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.

[Arcon]

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.

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.

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.

[Sarick]

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.

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.

[Sarick]

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.

[Arcon]

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?

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).

[Zinato]

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.