@andfx8: There is a difference between making something impressive and acting like you were just shown it was possible. Someone with an avatar of Rick should known the difference. It is impressive. Not as impressive as when someone built a similar device in 1830, so let's not all pretend he's pushing the boundaries of what we understand is possible.
Of course it's powerful enough to produce calculators. GEARS are powerful enough to produce calculators. Any device that can be created mechanically can be reproduce in a game if you give it a simple physics simulation, because that's how mechanics works.
@Trifler: Well, personal tastes are just that: personal. I might talk confidently and state things very plainly, but I was in no means trying to invalidate your personal experience.
That said, I think there is a flaw with your example. Bioshock and System Shock were two very different games. Do you think you would have enjoyed it as much had they included an inventory system, if not, there is likely a deeper systemic reason in the design for your discontent. Therefore, I find your comparison, likely unintentionally but nonetheless, misleading.
Item limits and weight limits... I don't support them. It's never challenging, it's always time consuming. I don't have time for a game that doesn't respect mine.
A really great RPG from last year that completely does away with inventory management is Pillars of Eternity. Each character has limited inventory space, which mean they can only have so many items in combat. However, outside of combat, you've free access to the stash, which you can store unlimited items in.
The designers, in trying to capture tabletop rpgs, realised that in tabletop games, you can say "we come back to the dungeon with a packmule and clean the place out", but in videogames, this is a chore. You have to do it manually and it's not any fun, but there isn't any reason you shouldn't be able to do it. That's why it's not any more realistic to limit players. Realistic isn't even the correct word.
Encumbrance is just a bad design concept. There are plenty of "realistic" concepts that have no place in most videogames. You don't have to balance your nutritional intake in fallout, which is much more important to your survival. Having to do so would also represent a strategic challenge, but that sort of thing is abstracted. Because it's not fitting with the narrative. It doesn't fit with this heroic character they're trying to sell you on if you have to make sure you get enough fibre in your diet. Neither does it really fit with weight management. However, one is a common convention of the genre and the other isn't.
@omotih: I disagree. The name would hint at a function dealing with simplifying information. This aside, the way Jess talks seems more determined by a style guide. If you, in your day to day, talked like that, the first day they'd laugh, the second they'd ask you to stop and finally they'd think you're mental. That's not how people talk to one another. That's a style used by people who talk AT other people. Which is precisely what Jess is doing, obviously. No shame in that.
I find it grating, in Jess' case. You don't have to agree with me. However, I can't give someone else's opinion. I only have my own. The best thing I can do for anyone and anything is to speak honestly about the flaws that I see as holding them back. This ruffles some feathers, but that's just the price of honesty.
@omotih: He's thoughtful, talented and in pursuit of his passion. You know when he sits down and says something that it's sincere. He's a smart person who cares about and is good at his job. He is relatable in that as well, because he's not playing it safe with his work. I can admire these qualities in a person.
Verenti's comments