There is a specific footlocker key for each footlocker. You can open one of these footlockers now probably.

That is one of the stupidest design decisions I've ever heard. But thanks for explaining, as there is no way of knowing this from the game. "You need the Footlocker Key." Check bag, and there is "Footlocker Key."

It is rather sad to see what people have become nowadays that instead of giving some though to an issue at hand, when for example you look around when your key "does not work", you instead immediately run to forum to complain and cry and call things stupid. Clearly an indication of belonging to generation of gamers that dont know anything better but blindly following a marker from A to B without giving any thought to it. It is pretty obvious when seeing that there are multiple footlockers, that one single key will not open them all just like you dont expect one apartment key opening all apartments in an apartment house. Just get off your entitlement horse and realize that it is you and not the game design that is stupid.

Have a nice day.

Speaking of crying; wow.

I'm an old gamer, but damn is that an entitled attitude. Poorly labelled item or a bug? He checked the forums and now he knows, rather than screw around guessing in-game. Every other key I found up to this point was uniquely labelled and only worked in a single lock that was also specifically labelled, and for this key they decide to screw around, and you can't even criticize that oversight for what it is because you're busy basking in this entitled attitude. Take your meds.

Originally posted by Holy13:

Speaking of crying; wow.

I'm an old gamer, but damn is that an entitled attitude. Poorly labelled item or a bug? He checked

I couldn't agree more. I read that, and WOW. Artasia made a valid point. I'm a principal software engineer, and User Interface Design is one of my key backgrounds, among others in the field.

It WAS a bad design decision to have a generic name for a key that isn't generic at all. Period.
How about Guard #1's footlocker key, Guard #2's footlocker key, etc. You are right, every other key in the game follows a logical, intuitive standard. Not this badly named key. (or keys)

Leo is an ___hole, plain and simple.

Leo is a little ♥♥♥♥♥, I stand with Artasia.

Originally posted by Daddy Finger:

Leo is a little ♥♥♥♥♥, I stand with Artasia.

Leo made a 100% valid point so I'll rephrase in case it was missed: Walk in that hardware store and look at their lockable safes with a key/combination. How many does each key/combo work with?
The OP ended with "is this a known bug?" because he ASSumed it was a bug- he didn't ask if it was purposely designed this way.

Had the same issue and found this thread, just posting to say Leo's rant is completely unhinged. I'm the opposite of what he describes, love getting lost and not having games hold my hand, and I find this stupid as well. F*** off, a******.

Originally posted by Cinderwolf:

Leo made a 100% valid point

No he did not. Games are not real life, keep your stupid hardware store analogies out of here.
Using real life logic though, in this case the character would try to open a lock and see that the key doesn't fit. THAT is what the game should convey; if it displayed a message like "The lock doesn't open; it looks like this key is for a different footlocker", there would be no problem.
Instead it says "It's locked! You need the footlocker key!", as though it were not acknowledging that you do possess an item called "footlocker key". This absolutely looks like a bug.

Originally posted by Cinderwolf:

The OP ended with "is this a known bug?" because he ASSumed it was a bug- he didn't ask if it was purposely designed this way.

Because it was stupid to design it this way. OP assumed the designer was competent and made logical decisions, which is true for the rest of the game from what I've seen so far (very charming and fun, well done), but not in this case. If you encounter something that makes no sense, like a key and a lock whose labels match yet the game acts like they don't, you're going to assume one of two things: it's a bug, or the designer consciously did something that doesn't make sense. OP went with the charitable assumption.