Imagine nerfed containers for storage due to object size. How would it make storing objects more interesting and immursive? Will it even work or be realistic?

[Kyle Rick]

This came to my mind after seeing all the recent sneak peeks of shelves and such for storing objects. While it is mostly cosmetic because containers can store so much more per block but what if they did not exist or very nerfed, so you can only store most objects by actually putting them away? I myself don't store objects on the floor too much but it is a nice visual way to tell how much I have in ingots or such, and tools as well early game.

Now keep in mind that the inventory you are carrying is a separate thing entirely to solve for this idea I have but we can ignore that for now, and only focus on actual containers or placing of objects in the world.

While containers exist in real life, they won't magically be able to fit a ton of things like in Vintage Story. However there is a mod that does that: https://mods.vintagestory.at/immersivechests

The mod shows items actually be stored inside, including those long tools that now stick out of the chest, with things like blocks grow in size the larger the stack. However keep in mind the mod is purely for visualization only with no mechanic changes. Of course it does not look perfect though I not tried it myself yet and it does not solve the main problem is that you get a interface of items instead of actually placing or picking up items. It does show that it kinda works like in real life, but now wonder if it can go further by making object size matter more for storage, and more importantly, no interface that you open up to see all the objects to manage.

So my idea on what be a interesting world/mod to try would be...

• Having to make every object actually visible in storage, not in a interface. Meaning having to look at a object to pick it up even in a container.
• Containers nerfed due to the size of most objects taking up a large amount of space.
• Because of object size, with bigger objects taking up more space in containers and such, it would make you think more on if you should keep those bulky items or not.
• Having to make real dedicated storage rooms that isn't a ton of chests, especially if it's for bulky items that can't fit well in containers.

Now of course there is problems with this setting, though knowing Vintage Story is a game of it being slow paced and like to make some stuff complicated I think it could be cool.

Potential problems with these changes:

• Blocks if not scaled down would mean the only real way to store them is to place it somewhere to mine later, and that seems a bit excessive, so blocks being shrunk down when not placed could be fine to solve this problem. (Considering when mining blocks it drops as much smaller versions of itself, and the mod above shows how it can be done.)
• Having to dig out items to reach objects that is at the bottom of containers, though that is realistic at times.
• Besides blocks some items might have to be rescaled to make storing them more realistic or balanced.
• Having to handle inventory or mobile containers that ignore this realistic item storage mechanic outright via a interface, though that will be a separate problem to solve, or impossible to program or balance. Might need its own mechanics where bulky items take multiple item slots like you see in some backpack management games.

I think it could be neat if this would be a actual mod or setting, slowing the game down even more as objects take up actual space. Curious what other people think of this, and what ideas or solutions people have for these mechanics. Thanks.

[LadyWYT]

42 minutes ago, Kyle Rick said:

I think it could be neat if this would be a actual mod or setting, slowing the game down even more as objects take up actual space. Curious what other people think of this, and what ideas or solutions people have for these mechanics. Thanks.

I think it would be interesting as a specific mod challenge, but otherwise be pure torture when it comes to base game mechanics. Many stack sizes are already nerfed compared to the other block game, and limiting useful storage for the player even more is most likely going to result in players throwing items away and getting very frustrated overall, especially for items that are gathered in bulk. Stones, ore, cattails, beeswax, rusty gears, wood, etc. Temporal gears are a decent example, as they don't stack at all and thus while valuable, are difficult to store and end up being a hassle. 

 

51 minutes ago, Kyle Rick said:

• Having to make every object actually visible in storage, not in a interface. Meaning having to look at a object to pick it up even in a container.
• Containers nerfed due to the size of most objects taking up a large amount of space.
• Because of object size, with bigger objects taking up more space in containers and such, it would make you think more on if you should keep those bulky items or not.
• Having to make real dedicated storage rooms that isn't a ton of chests, especially if it's for bulky items that can't fit well in containers.

Now of course there is problems with this setting, though knowing Vintage Story is a game of it being slow paced and like to make some stuff complicated I think it could be cool.

Potential problems with these changes:

• Blocks if not scaled down would mean the only real way to store them is to place it somewhere to mine later, and that seems a bit excessive, so blocks being shrunk down when not placed could be fine to solve this problem. (Considering when mining blocks it drops as much smaller versions of itself, and the mod above shows how it can be done.)
• Having to dig out items to reach objects that is at the bottom of containers, though that is realistic at times.
• Besides blocks some items might have to be rescaled to make storing them more realistic or balanced.
• Having to handle inventory or mobile containers that ignore this realistic item storage mechanic outright via a interface, though that will be a separate problem to solve, or impossible to program or balance. Might need its own mechanics where bulky items take multiple item slots like you see in some backpack management games.

While these sorts of changes might make the game more realistic, I don't think most players want to spend most of their time in the game managing storage. Storage space is already at a premium early in the game, which is part of what makes unlocking chests and crates so very satisfying--now the player can actually have somewhere to put all the stuff they collect! One of Vintage Story's draws is its realism, but the game itself doesn't need to be an exact replica of real life. 

[Kyle Rick]

1 hour ago, LadyWYT said:

I think it would be interesting as a specific mod challenge, but otherwise be pure torture when it comes to base game mechanics. Many stack sizes are already nerfed compared to the other block game, and limiting useful storage for the player even more is most likely going to result in players throwing items away and getting very frustrated overall, especially for items that are gathered in bulk. Stones, ore, cattails, beeswax, rusty gears, wood, etc. Temporal gears are a decent example, as they don't stack at all and thus while valuable, are difficult to store and end up being a hassle. 

 

While these sorts of changes might make the game more realistic, I don't think most players want to spend most of their time in the game managing storage. Storage space is already at a premium early in the game, which is part of what makes unlocking chests and crates so very satisfying--now the player can actually have somewhere to put all the stuff they collect! One of Vintage Story's draws is its realism, but the game itself doesn't need to be an exact replica of real life. 

While I do agree it's quite extreme I found it quite interesting as a idea to try out one day but unsure. Even with how slow progression is in Vintage Story compared to the other block game it still feels too fast to progress so I don't get that satisfaction when getting most unlocks. (Still never made cheese.) Maybe because of there only being 2 story missions, and by the time of new years I would already be quite cozy with what I have. Been thinking of trying out a bunch of mods that make the game harder and slow it down and this is one idea I had in mind. I did try a seaworld playthrough once with some difficulty mods where I had to island hop a bunch till I found a decent sized island to settle for a few months making progression quite slow, combined that with limited chests on the ship it made it cool figuring out what to bring for my trips and progression enjoyable. Just wish there was more tiers of ships.

Maybe I just like handling inventory while also being a hoarder hah. Love seeing items pile up.

Edited January 15 by Kyle Rick

[Allen]

I like the idea in concept.

A lot of items can be stored in-world, but for most things you don't really do that since a chest can store so much more. A reason to have more 'real world' storage would be cool.

However, yeah I do agree that it'll be very easy for things like that to get tedious real fast.

Maybe if instead of nerfing chests (or at least nerfing them too much) we could buff specific/world storage options to make them more viable against chests?

[wutamidoing]

I'll pass on this being the baseline in the game. I already despise the base inventory system given how low stack sizes are for lots of items. I couldn't care less if this was a settings option tho. 

[LadyWYT]

22 hours ago, Kyle Rick said:

While I do agree it's quite extreme I found it quite interesting as a idea to try out one day but unsure. Even with how slow progression is in Vintage Story compared to the other block game it still feels too fast to progress so I don't get that satisfaction when getting most unlocks. (Still never made cheese.) Maybe because of there only being 2 story missions, and by the time of new years I would already be quite cozy with what I have. Been thinking of trying out a bunch of mods that make the game harder and slow it down and this is one idea I had in mind.

Hence why I said it'd be a good mod.  That way the extra challenge is there, but it's optional since it's not baked into the base game itself. I could be wrong, but I don't think inventory changes are something that could just have a toggle in the settings.

 

18 hours ago, Allen said:

Maybe if instead of nerfing chests (or at least nerfing them too much) we could buff specific/world storage options to make them more viable against chests?

I think this is a better solution. I don't think that world storage options would even need buffs; a special stockpile that can only store large things like logs or stones would be more attractive to a player by default, since it could hold a lot of raw material in an aesthetically pleasing fashion rather than just shoving it all into yet another crate. 

With the new shelf storage that's been teased, I'm thinking there's also going to be a lot more storage space becoming available in players' chests. 

 

[Kyle Rick]

On 1/15/2026 at 9:58 AM, LadyWYT said:

Temporal gears are a decent example, as they don't stack at all and thus while valuable, are difficult to store and end up being a hassle. 

Unironically I think Temportal gears could fit more in one block if stacked properly on the ground instead of being in a chest due to being unable to stack them in the interface normally. x3

Also yeah that video is what gave me inspiration to do a challenge like this. Being able to see all your items at once does sound neat but gameplay wise I could see it being annoying storing mass amounts of items, but one day love to give it a shot if I could mod some storage like feature in the game.

[MKMoose]

On 1/15/2026 at 4:03 PM, Kyle Rick said:

So my idea on what be a interesting world/mod to try would be...

• Having to make every object actually visible in storage, not in a interface. Meaning having to look at a object to pick it up even in a container.
• Containers nerfed due to the size of most objects taking up a large amount of space.
• Because of object size, with bigger objects taking up more space in containers and such, it would make you think more on if you should keep those bulky items or not.
• Having to make real dedicated storage rooms that isn't a ton of chests, especially if it's for bulky items that can't fit well in containers.

I do think the game could benefit from an approach to capacity that is less tied to stacks and more to size, weight or whatnot. While the current approach is simple and functional, it's also kind of silly that two different items effectively take up twice as much space as a full stack of identicals items. Or instead of reworking capacity, something like the other block game's bundles could be a neat addition. The new displayable system is also a massive step in the right direction.

That said, making every object visible in storage containers would likely be a massive pain to implement and it will only get worse the more different storage options are added to the game. The reduced capacity coming with it would be a pain to deal with as well, because realistically it would make even dedicated storage (chests, crates and so on) actually really quite bad at storing things. Visualizing the contents of containers and perhaps limiting the capacity of some of them may be a good idea, but taking it to the extreme is not.

Broadly, I would say that immersive storage options should be made more practical and varied. Improve ground storage for bulk items to be more practical (why only 12 ore nuggets, why only 10 grass or cattails, why only 6 thatch?), add dedicated liquid storage methods (casks, barrels, tubs etc.), potentially reduce the overreliance on chests and crates by adding some different containers more suited for different things, like actual barrels that can be picked up, sacks for produce or flour or dirt or other stuff, free-standing shelves, racks for stacking long and thin items, open containers for grains or grass and the like, more gameified wardrobe sections as a way to store a larger quantity of unused clothing.

 

On 1/15/2026 at 4:58 PM, LadyWYT said:

Temporal gears are a decent example, as they don't stack at all and thus while valuable, are difficult to store and end up being a hassle. 

And one of the most stupid things, arguably, is that you can actually get stacks of two temporal gears. Dropped from the first boss. I would love to be able to hang the gears on rope from the ceiling, or something like that. Would make sense since they provide light and lore-wise it would be quite reasonable to keep them easily accessible.

Edited January 16 by MKMoose

[Zane Mordien]

I don’t think mass and weight restrictions really fit in with a fantasy block game, but it can be done easily the way Wurm does it. Fun fact, the creator of Minecraft split from the team that developed Wurm. If you want painfully slow progression you should try it out. 

You limit what goes into the inventory by the mass and or weight of each item. They would need to introduce carts or some other bulk transportation vehicle to allow you to move things around early game, since it won’t fit in your inventory anymore. They would need to create a system for you to plan blocks where you want them built and then you could build the block in place from the ingredients in your inventory.

[LadyWYT]

2 hours ago, Zane Mordien said:

I don’t think mass and weight restrictions really fit in with a fantasy block game, but it can be done easily the way Wurm does it.

Valheim has the weight system. Which...kind of works, but is also one reason of many I don't like to play Valheim very much. 

 

3 hours ago, MKMoose said:

I do think the game could benefit from an approach to capacity that is less tied to stacks and more to size, weight or whatnot. While the current approach is simple and functional, it's also kind of silly that two different items effectively take up twice as much space as a full stack of identicals items. Or instead of reworking capacity, something like the other block game's bundles could be a neat addition. The new displayable system is also a massive step in the right direction.

I'm of a similar mindset as Zane here, in that I don't think mass and weight restrictions really fit well with semi-fantastical block games. The main reason I don't think it's a good idea is that such mechanics can easily bog the player down in busywork and stop them from enjoying other gameplay loops, since inventory is involved with practically everything. The games I've seen where mass/weight mechanics work well as a challenge without dragging down the overall gameplay, are games that utilize weight/mass as one of the few primary challenges the player has to contend with regularly.

While Vintage Story is a survival game, it's also got a significant focus on building, as evidenced by the chiseling system and wide variety of aesthetic blocks that have been added. One quick way to kill enthusiasm for building is requiring the player to make many, many trips just to restock their supplies while building, let alone how many trips it's going to take to collect the raw materials for those supplies. Stack limits are a much better way to handle things here, especially since there are already other survival challenges the player needs to deal with on top of already limited inventory space. 

[MKMoose]

8 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

I'm of a similar mindset as Zane here, in that I don't think mass and weight restrictions really fit well with semi-fantastical block games. The main reason I don't think it's a good idea is that such mechanics can easily bog the player down in busywork and stop them from enjoying other gameplay loops, since inventory is involved with practically everything. The games I've seen where mass/weight mechanics work well as a challenge without dragging down the overall gameplay, are games that utilize weight/mass as one of the few primary challenges the player has to contend with regularly.

While Vintage Story is a survival game, it's also got a significant focus on building, as evidenced by the chiseling system and wide variety of aesthetic blocks that have been added. One quick way to kill enthusiasm for building is requiring the player to make many, many trips just to restock their supplies while building, let alone how many trips it's going to take to collect the raw materials for those supplies. Stack limits are a much better way to handle things here, especially since there are already other survival challenges the player needs to deal with on top of already limited inventory space. 

How does adjusting capacity to be less focused on arbitrary slots and stack sizes imply a reduction to the amount of things the player can carry? Sure, any changes would probably reduce the capacity for some items, but they could very well also increase the capacity for other things. Also, if any significant reduction to capacity of this sort were introduced, I would expect to see bulk transport methods like frame packs or carts to come alongside them as a way to offset that capacity reduction.

The main goal that I have in mind when suggesting something more akin to a weight or size system is to dictate capacity more by the total amount of items, and less by the number of unique items. As an example, I currently have three chests for random looted clothing, one of which has more than a dozen butterfly pins and more than a dozen items of jewellry, while all my building materials fit in just one chest simply by the virtue of stacking. The problem is not that the building materials take too little space (though I wouldn't mind small changes to it). The problem is that the clothes take a comparatively absurd amount of space because they don't stack.

Edited January 17 by MKMoose

[LadyWYT]

7 hours ago, MKMoose said:

How does adjusting capacity to be less focused on arbitrary slots and stack sizes imply a reduction to the amount of things the player can carry? Sure, any changes would probably reduce the capacity for some items, but they could very well also increase the capacity for other things. Also, if any significant reduction to capacity of this sort were introduced, I would expect to see bulk transport methods like frame packs or carts to come alongside them as a way to offset that capacity reduction.

I mean, if a weight system is implemented in the name of more realism...realistically the player is only going to be carrying four ashlar stone bricks at a time, if that. Even if the rules are bent somewhat, I would still expect it to be a very tedious reduction in the amount of blocks like dirt, stone, and wood the player can carry in their inventory at a time. Yes, the player could use carts to move around large quantities of those materials, but that doesn't alleviate the issues such a change is going to present for building.

The current stack size limits might not be the most realistic, but they make it a lot less of a pain to build stuff. I really don't want to be having to run up and down ladders a million different times just because the game only allows me to carry a few stone blocks at a time. A stack size reduction is fine, since the current stack size is 64, so even if the stack size were drastically cut(like to 16) I can still carry enough stacks of blocks to build with for a while before I need to restock.

7 hours ago, MKMoose said:

The problem is that the clothes take a comparatively absurd amount of space because they don't stack.

Right, and I do agree that's an issue. I just don't think weight limits are a good solution here given the problems such a system introduces. I think in this case, something akin to Minecraft's bundle would probably be better. Lump clothing with clothing, jewelry with jewelry, to get a generic "collection" item that fits in one inventory slot and can hold X number of items. The player can activate this collection by holding it and right-clicking to add/retrieve items at will. Items must be removed from the collection before being displayed, used, or otherwise altered.

 

7 hours ago, MKMoose said:

The main goal that I have in mind when suggesting something more akin to a weight or size system is to dictate capacity more by the total amount of items, and less by the number of unique items. As an example, I currently have three chests for random looted clothing, one of which has more than a dozen butterfly pins and more than a dozen items of jewellry, while all my building materials fit in just one chest simply by the virtue of stacking.

This would also be a prime opportunity to add wardrobes and jewelry boxes specifically for storing these kinds of items. Perhaps they have more storage slots than chests, but can only hold clothing or jewelry, so the furniture is a great way to decorate and store those specific things, but can't be abused for storage in general.