Curse

Naqser · Mar 22, 2006, 09:39 AM // 09:39

I've searched for something like this and I didn't find anything

Something I don't like about games is that the inventroy is invisible, take FPS games, they take Bazookas, rocket launchers, ammo... anything out of the pocket. what? I want to be able to do that.

Something I discovered the first days I played GW which was roughly 7-8 months ago was that you can dye your backpack, belt pouch and the 2 bags. What's the point of that, you only see them yourself, and some friends if they come visit you and you show the backpacks.

When you pick something up you don't see the item in your hand, you just wave your hand over the item and it disapear, I think that making the inventory storage items visible, naturaly the backpack on the back, the belt pouch on the waist, and the 2 bags hang beside each other in the belt on the opposite side of the beltpouch. Then make new item-pick-up-animations, when your backpack isn't full, you character actually picks up the item in his/her hand, opens the backpack and puts it there, when the backpack is full he/she puts it in the belt pouch and so on.

The items compared to the character is groutescly big so it would look unnatural when he/she loads felblades, longbows, staffs and other stuff into the backpack that is so small, to make it look a little more natural, make the pick-up-items a little smaller, make the outside of the packs, pouch and bags storage space too, so that smaller items are put inside and bigger items hang on the outside and medium size items could pout out from the openings.

the cape could just hang over the backpack to solve that, besides u can make it invisible, if the bags iritate you, you could hide them/make them invisible/turn them of

I don't want it to look completly natural and realistic, but it would look nice

Tric · Mar 22, 2006, 10:32 AM // 10:32

I think it's a nice idea, not really hugely important or anything. HOWEVER, and this is important, it has to be hideable just like the cape and head piece.

NinjaKai · Mar 22, 2006, 10:53 AM // 10:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tric

I think it's a nice idea, not really hugely important or anything. HOWEVER, and this is important, it has to be hideable just like the cape and head piece.

Agreed. Not everyone wants a backpack or something like that forced onto their character.

RBK · Mar 22, 2006, 12:43 PM // 12:43

Nice idea, i think it would be cool to be able to see bags. however you deffo should be able to turn them off. lets face it you weapons already glitch through the cape as it is. can you imagin running and you cape constandtly flys through your bag..... its irritating enough watching my bow slide through lol

Naqser · Mar 22, 2006, 12:56 PM // 12:56

yes I'm familiar with the cape glitch, but with this backpack addon they could fix that, so the cape just hangs over the backpack and weapons don't go through it.

RBK · Mar 22, 2006, 01:20 PM // 13:20

In that case, along with the possibility of turning it off. I don't see why this should be implemented. I must admit it does seem silly to be running around with two bags a belt pouch and a backpack and yet none of them are to be seen. Anywhere!

And don’t forget they would have to fix that irritating cape glitch. However small price to pay for a Free online game that rocks!

So in short, grate idea I would love to see this implemented!

frickett · Mar 22, 2006, 01:23 PM // 13:23

/not signed

broodijzer · Mar 22, 2006, 01:27 PM // 13:27

/signed, if I can turn it off.

Starsky-sama · Mar 22, 2006, 01:59 PM // 13:59

/signage!
I like the small belt pouches on the sides of characs. puts more into character detail. (yet, if you're talking about realism, it wouldnt fit in, since there's a huge amount of stuff we carry+w/ their big size, it wouldnt realistically look like "small bags")

/unsignage!
I dont like the backpack showing. ie would be that sorrow's furnace npc with the bp. I just dont like that look and while fighting?only in town? even if ability to turn off.

I think some players wouldnt mind wearing cape+bp, looking like there's a generator strapped to their backs.

/would be amusing to see though.
/just IMO.

fiery · Mar 22, 2006, 02:54 PM // 14:54

I head this idea was'nt inforced in the beginning cause many mobs of monsters have knives that can slit your bags and grab the drops from them.

Naqser · Mar 22, 2006, 03:10 PM // 15:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by fiery

I head this idea was'nt inforced in the beginning cause many mobs of monsters have knives that can slit your bags and grab the drops from them.

but why make it like that? if they made it like that sword and axes should brake when they hit stone elementals, melt when hitting lava titans and freeze and literaly shatter when hitting frozen titans, arrows wouldn't do any dmg to those enemies I just mentioned above. So why make a backpack destroyable since nothing else in the game is?

Dougal Kronik · Mar 22, 2006, 03:46 PM // 15:46

I like the idea - especially if you'v wasted some dye on your containers.

/signed

NinjaKai · Mar 22, 2006, 06:25 PM // 18:25

Only thing I wouldn't mind showing is the little pouch on the best. That would be cool.

N19h7m4r3 · Mar 22, 2006, 06:32 PM // 18:32

What I would like to see is your weapons attatched to your character. I.e a sword in a scabard or on your back along with your shield when your not using it.

I mean I have a long sword for my female warrior although its way to big for a scabard, so I would like it to be on her back. Same goes for a rangers bow.

This should also be toggable of course so that people who don't like it could just turn it off.

Rancour · Mar 22, 2006, 07:28 PM // 19:28

/not signed

First off, having a huge backpack on my back would make me look ridiculous. I don't really want that.

Second, if it's unrealistic to be able to "wave your hand over the item" and then pick it up, wouldn't it be pretty unrealistic to carry around 5 hammers in your backpack, which would conviniently be no bigger than 2 average lunchboxes. If they were to be of realistic size they'd be the size of a minivan and we wouldn't be able to carry them around anyway.

Granted, having the feature with an "on-off"-function could work, but I would MUCH rather have Anet work on some more interesting stuff than a visible backpack.

Frankly, I see NO point whatsoever in having a visible backpack. It doesn't look better and it certainly isn't realistic.

Vilaptca · Mar 22, 2006, 07:45 PM // 19:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rancour

/not signed

First off, having a huge backpack on my back would make me look ridiculous. I don't really want that.

Second, if it's unrealistic to be able to "wave your hand over the item" and then pick it up, wouldn't it be pretty unrealistic to carry around 5 hammers in your backpack, which would conviniently be no bigger than 2 average lunchboxes. If they were to be of realistic size they'd be the size of a minivan and we wouldn't be able to carry them around anyway.

Granted, having the feature with an "on-off"-function could work, but I would MUCH rather have Anet work on some more interesting stuff than a visible backpack.

Frankly, I see NO point whatsoever in having a visible backpack. It doesn't look better and it certainly isn't realistic.

Pretty much exactly what I was going to say.

But I'm going to emphasize that there are hundreds of better things for Anet to work on, I feel that a large part of the community would be turning their backpacks off, why implement something that so few people will actually use?

EternalTempest · Mar 22, 2006, 07:48 PM // 19:48

/signed (only if I can turn it off too)

storm of daeth · Mar 23, 2006, 03:39 AM // 03:39

/signed

i think the backpack should be on the back of course but the 2 bags and belt pouches from hang from the side i think it would all look very nice

Meneldil · Mar 23, 2006, 03:59 AM // 03:59

hey if you can see backpacks i want to see a bow latched on to my back and a sword latched on to my side

Rancour · Mar 23, 2006, 06:06 AM // 06:06

And I wouldn't mind seeing the Boeing 747 I constantly use to travel from Ascalon City to Lions Arch, but that ain't going to happen now is it?