zombietom

I understand both sides of the argument. I really do. I get that some people want encumbrance and I understand why. I also get that some people don't want encumbrance, and I understand why that is, too. My bafflement wasn't about that. I was confused by the double-standard (on either side of the argument) of saying "Don't use it, if it bothers you that much!" but in the very next breath being aghast at the same suggestion from someone else. Pro-encumbrance: "If you don't want to travel back to town five times to sell everything because your inventory is less than infinite, just don't pick up everything, if it bothers you that much!" Anti-encumbrance: "If you don't want to be able to carry five sets of plate armor because your inventory is infinite, just don't pick up everything, if it bothers you that much!" Both groups have a choice about what they do in the game. No one is forcing them to contribute to the aspects of gameplay that annoy them. I wasn't saying "ENCUMBRANCE 4 LYFE! Y'ALL HATERS CAN DIE!" nor was I saying "DOWN WITH THE TYRANNICAL ENCUMBRANCE-IMPOSING EMPIRE!" I was just seeing the same argument from both sides and not understanding how those that are shouting it are not heeding their own advice.

Typically, I prefer some system of inventory restriction. The play style of "LOOT ALL THE THINGS!" is not nearly as interesting to me as being presented with a choice about what is junk and what is treasure. On the other hand, I get why other people don't want to deal with shuffling their inventory around so they can get their luggage weight below the airline's carry-on limit. What baffles me, however, is the arguments like "if you don't like being able to carry 5 sets of plate armor, just don't pick up everything! No one is forcing you to that. Just don't impose your 'inventory encumbrance' religion on me, because I don't like being forced to go back and forth 5 times as I pick up everything!" ...What?