Solution to inventory that no one will like

[Ihnako]

@FrankReynolds
You can't access more than 80 items at once cause the game has to load the other 80 items from your other sack/satchel/storage/etc. seperatly and temporarily. So macroing different items from different storageareas would at least cost a huge ammount of time and server resources, traffic etc. cause of reload the whole inventory of that specific storagearea. And I speculate - as long as the game is designed and supported for the PS2 - you won't see a significant change.

But I still hope SE would change the slips to become keyitems.

[FrankReynolds]

@FrankReynolds
You can't access more than 80 items at once cause the game has to load the other 80 items from your other sack/satchel/storage/etc. seperatly and temporarily. So macroing different items from different storageareas would at least cost a huge ammount of time and server resources, traffic etc. cause of reload the whole inventory of that specific storagearea. And I speculate - as long as the game is designed and supported for the PS2 - you won't see a significant change.

But I still hope SE would change the slips to become keyitems.

Yeah, unfortunately they can't change slips to KIs because of how they are programmed. Best thing they could do with those slips, is make the moogle in our moghouses handle them instead of the porters. I just figured that since we were asking for storage options, I would shoot for the stars.

[Corwin]

@FrankReynolds
You can't access more than 80 items at once cause the game has to load the other 80 items from your other sack/satchel/storage/etc. seperatly and temporarily. So macroing different items from different storageareas would at least cost a huge ammount of time and server resources, traffic etc. cause of reload the whole inventory of that specific storagearea. And I speculate - as long as the game is designed and supported for the PS2 - you won't see a significant change.

But I still hope SE would change the slips to become keyitems.

You have proof of this?

[Arcon]

You have proof of this?

He doesn't, because it's wrong. A system like that could be implemented and it would work just as fast and efficient as now, however, it wouldn't be easy to implement and there'd be some things they'd need to consider (the benefits and pitfalls of it was discussed in this thread).