• 106 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Edited by ElixirBronze (430 posts) -

I was looking for a concept page for the thing that happens in games when you swim/run too far on the map, so the game prevents you to go further normally by killing you instantly.

Some examples are:

Giant shark in Crysis.

Leeches in Half Life 2.

Dying from too much sun burn in Serious Sam.

Etc.

I can actually think of many more but I hope you get the idea. If there's not a page for this I think there should be.

Maybe there is one? If so what's it called? If there isn't, what SHOULD it be called?

#2 Posted by BeachThunder (11994 posts) -

I think this is what you're looking for.

#3 Edited by ElixirBronze (430 posts) -

@BeachThunder: Not really? I mean that is just barriers in it's most simple form right? I was hoping for a page that is specific to actions that prevent you from going further, and the ability to list those next to their respective game.

#4 Posted by Soap (3596 posts) -

I think this is worthy of being it's own concept, it's a bit more fancy than your average invisible wall style barrier.

And also...

The big fish that eats you in Jak and Daxter if you swim to far out.

#5 Posted by RazielCuts (2961 posts) -

Also in Borderlands 2, mounted turrets that shoot you and say 'warning, restricted area'.

#6 Posted by The_Nubster (2176 posts) -

Look at the only forum post there. It's from two-and-a-half years ago, and it mentions the Crysis sharks, as well as the turrets from Snowbound in Halo 3. Yes, it's a barrier. The page even says that barriers manifest in many ways, "physical or otherwise," emphasis added. It doesn't need a new concept, but the concept page of Barrier does need to be expanded to include these elements.

#7 Posted by DeF (4904 posts) -

@The_Nubster said:

Look at the only forum post there. It's from two-and-a-half years ago, and it mentions the Crysis sharks, as well as the turrets from Snowbound in Halo 3. Yes, it's a barrier. The page even says that barriers manifest in many ways, "physical or otherwise," emphasis added. It doesn't need a new concept, but the concept page of Barrier does need to be expanded to include these elements.

I disagree. The "something kills you" kind is something worthy of its own concept. It's not a barrier you run against, it straight up takes you and kills you, sometimes even with unique animations, etc. The page describes things that block you off from progressing while the proposed concept describes things that kill you if you venture too far off the path.

Question is now, does "deadly dark water" count as being one thing or the other?

#8 Posted by ElixirBronze (430 posts) -
#9 Posted by _Mattallica (200 posts) -

Death Barrier? Lethal Barrier? Out of Bounds?

#10 Posted by simkas (361 posts) -

@david1890: "Barriers of death" would work pretty well if you want something that would be easy to find.

#11 Posted by mlarrabee (2971 posts) -

Active Barriers?

Invisible or visible walls being passive, naturally.

#12 Edited by Akyho (1658 posts) -

@The_Nubster said:

Look at the only forum post there. It's from two-and-a-half years ago, and it mentions the Crysis sharks, as well as the turrets from Snowbound in Halo 3. Yes, it's a barrier. The page even says that barriers manifest in many ways, "physical or otherwise," emphasis added. It doesn't need a new concept, but the concept page of Barrier does need to be expanded to include these elements.

I agree.

Just because it dosnt fit what you think it should be, dosnt make it wrong.

There is many terminologies used in all fields of work that seem like oxymorons or inaccurate.

They are the terms used, they have been used for a long time. They are facts.

What you can do is spruce the page up and include such "TERMS" instead of destroying the whole page and starting again.

What happens in another years time, another guy comes by and puts forward the argument "Border Patrol? That dosnt explain what it is! I keep searching dead boundries! Lets change it. to something I can follow...fuck everyone else."

Flesh out that page if it matters to you.

#13 Edited by ElixirBronze (430 posts) -

@Akyho: You aren't getting my point. I feel the barriers page has it's place as well, but there should be a distinction between "a barrier" and something designed to act as a barrier but in a more creative way, like there's a distinction between Customizable Characters, Character Creation and External Character Creation; just because one could potentially fit within the other doesn't mean it's not it's own thing and has it's own place.

I think "Active Barrier" is a very good suggestion.

#14 Posted by MikeGosot (3227 posts) -
@david1890 said:

@Akyho: You aren't getting my point. I feel the barriers page has it's place as well, but there should be a distinction between "a barrier" and something designed to act as a barrier but in a more creative way, like there's a distinction between Customizable Characters, Character Creation and External Character Creation; just because one could potentially fit within the other doesn't mean it's not it's own thing and has it's own place.

I think "Active Barrier" is a very good suggestion.

Your examples aren't very good. External Character Creation should be combined with Customizable Characters and Character Creation should be deleted. Also, pay attention to the part in bold. It fits the description in the barrier page. It's a more creative barrier, so it goes into the Barrier page.
#15 Edited by Akyho (1658 posts) -

@david1890 said:

@Akyho: You aren't getting my point. I feel the barriers page has it's place as well, but there should be a distinction between "a barrier" and something designed to act as a barrier but in a more creative way, like there's a distinction between Customizable Characters, Character Creation and External Character Creation; just because one could potentially fit within the other doesn't mean it's not it's own thing and has it's own place.

I think "Active Barrier" is a very good suggestion.

I understand your point. I disagree with your point.

And as @MikeGosot said:

Your examples aren't very good. External Character Creation should be combined with Customizable Characters and Character Creation should be deleted. Also, pay attention to the part in bold. It fits the description in the barrier page. It's a more creative barrier, so it goes into the Barrier page.

If we do this with Barriers you end up with the redundant pages you found.

It will be a loop of this happening every so often making redundant pages when they can easily and more logically be housed within the one concept.

#16 Posted by Zaccheus (1795 posts) -

There is no reason for a new page. It's just a more elegant barrier.

#17 Edited by ElixirBronze (430 posts) -

But if I'm interested in seeing which games has boring barriers and which ones has good, creative ones, should I be forced to choose a different site than Giant Bomb? Isn't things like that and Ketchup what Giant Bomb is all about? You can't really add a "sub-concept" for certain games inside a "concept" page right?

#18 Posted by The_Nubster (2176 posts) -

@DeF said:

@The_Nubster said:

Look at the only forum post there. It's from two-and-a-half years ago, and it mentions the Crysis sharks, as well as the turrets from Snowbound in Halo 3. Yes, it's a barrier. The page even says that barriers manifest in many ways, "physical or otherwise," emphasis added. It doesn't need a new concept, but the concept page of Barrier does need to be expanded to include these elements.

I disagree. The "something kills you" kind is something worthy of its own concept. It's not a barrier you run against, it straight up takes you and kills you, sometimes even with unique animations, etc. The page describes things that block you off from progressing while the proposed concept describes things that kill you if you venture too far off the path.

Question is now, does "deadly dark water" count as being one thing or the other?

bar·ri·er/ˈbarēər/

Noun:
  1. A fence or other obstacle that prevents movement or access.
  2. A circumstance or obstacle that prevents communication or that keeps people or things apart: "a language barrier".

So let's look at definition number one, since that's more pertinent to the topic at hand.

It starts of with saying a fence, but then says "other obstacle." What's an obstacle?

ob·sta·cle/ˈäbstəkəl/

Noun:
A thing that blocks one's way or prevents or hinders progress.

So now we know that a barrier can be some form of obstacle (which, by definition, "blocks one's way"). Barrier and obstacle both include, in their definitions, the restrictiveness of each. Neither of the definitions state that the obstacle or barrier has to be an inanimate object. Barrier describes it as an obstacle, which, when deferred to, simply calls it a thing. A thing can be a number of objects, because it's a vague term; a thing is undefined, so nearly everything can fall under the term. So, a barrier is simply an obstacle, which can be a number of things, that block your progress or restrict your movement, whether that thing is an invisible wall or a vagina-mouthed monster that eats you when you wander too far away from the playable area.

Deadly dark water is an obstacle that prevents movement, so it's a barrier.

Barrier is perfectly acceptable. Like I said before, it just needs to be fleshed out to include more information on what a barrier can possibly be. Some barriers kill, and some don't. Some are alive, and some aren't. Some are in the way of your objective, and some stop you from running off into that wide-open plain which, god dammit, looks totally open.

#19 Edited by Akyho (1658 posts) -

@david1890 said:

But if I'm interested in seeing which games has boring barriers and which ones has good, creative ones, should I be forced to choose a different site than Giant Bomb? Isn't things like that and Ketchup what Giant Bomb is all about? You can't really add a "sub-concept" for certain games inside a "concept" page right?

When I type in Catsup into GB, I get Ketchup. Because it is the same on the foundations except just slightly different.

Exactly like Passive Barriers and Active Barriers, Death Barriers and Non-Lethal Barriers, Visible Barriers and Invisible Barriers.

If you are going to make a page for Active Barriers then you need to start making pages for ALL the other different kind of barriers I just mentioned.

Except you shouldn't, as they are all on the fundamental a Barrier and shall be housed within the concept page of Barrier while you can outline the different kinds of Barriers game developers use.

#20 Posted by ElixirBronze (430 posts) -

Okay... so I guess screw Giant Bomb? I'll just go to tvtropes.org with my issues regarding concepts in video games?

Is that the way it should be?

#21 Posted by The_Nubster (2176 posts) -

@david1890 said:

Okay... so I guess screw Giant Bomb? I'll just go to tvtropes.org with my issues regarding concepts in video games?

Is that the way it should be?

Only if you take your angst with you.

#22 Edited by Akyho (1658 posts) -

@david1890 said:

Okay... so I guess screw Giant Bomb? I'll just go to tvtropes.org with my issues regarding concepts in video games?

Is that the way it should be?

Geeze dude. When was this a "My way or the highway." situation.

Besides you will be eaten alive if you go to TV tropes. You think we are being anally retentive. Even if you are right those folks will just go on forever. That site is THE site for Anal retention.

All right I am out, apparently this was never a discussion and you just wanted to get your own way. We have Mods to sort out pages when people do that.

This turned personal apparently.

#23 Edited by SomeDeliCook (2341 posts) -

@BeachThunder said:

I think this is what you're looking for.

If that was the case every game in the existence of games would be on that list.

This is more of a deadly barriers type thing.

Run out of the map on some Serious Sam 3 maps and a giant tremor will eat you. Stay in the ocean too long in Scarface and a shark will eat you. Run out too far in Dead Island and.... text will say you are leaving the playing world (talk about immersion breaking)

I'd actually be genuinely interested in reading all the kinds of deadly barriers without wading through all the ones that are just invisible walls.

#24 Posted by The_Nubster (2176 posts) -

@SomeDeliCook said:

@BeachThunder said:

I think this is what you're looking for.

If that was the case every game in the existence of games would be on that list.

This is more of a deadly barriers type thing.

Run out of the map on some Serious Sam 3 maps and a giant tremor will eat you. Stay in the ocean too long in Scarface and a shark will eat you. Run out too far in Dead Island and.... text will say you are leaving the playing world (talk about immersion breaking)

Deadly barriers. So you mean like, things that will kill you, and are barriers? A sub-section of barriers? That should go on the barriers page, since they're barriers? I like the way you think! Also, read the thread that's on that page. People have come to a consensus that things that prevent you from entering certain areas by killing you count as barriers. Mostly because that's what they are.

#25 Posted by DeF (4904 posts) -

@The_Nubster: an enemy is also an obstacle that hinders your progress. it's not a barrier, though. active kill "barriers" are different enough, at least to me, and only occur in certain cases that they could/should be singled out as a unique wiki entry.

#26 Posted by SomeDeliCook (2341 posts) -

@The_Nubster said:

@SomeDeliCook said:

@BeachThunder said:

I think this is what you're looking for.

If that was the case every game in the existence of games would be on that list.

This is more of a deadly barriers type thing.

Run out of the map on some Serious Sam 3 maps and a giant tremor will eat you. Stay in the ocean too long in Scarface and a shark will eat you. Run out too far in Dead Island and.... text will say you are leaving the playing world (talk about immersion breaking)

Deadly barriers. So you mean like, things that will kill you, and are barriers? A sub-section of barriers? That should go on the barriers page, since they're barriers? I like the way you think! Also, read the thread that's on that page. People have come to a consensus that things that prevent you from entering certain areas by killing you count as barriers. Mostly because that's what they are.

Wow way to be a smartass.

I think there should be a list of these types of scripted barriers because they are unique and not just the standard invisible wall or conveniently parked truck you for some reason can't just climb over. Every game has invisible walls; only a few games will have a scripted shark come out and rip you up.

#27 Posted by BraveToaster (12589 posts) -

@david1890 said:

Okay... so I guess screw Giant Bomb? I'll just go to tvtropes.org with my issues regarding concepts in video games?

Is that the way it should be?

Well, if you're going to get that upset over people disagreeing with you (and providing substantive reasons why), then maybe you should go to tvtropes.org.

#28 Edited by Akyho (1658 posts) -

@SomeDeliCook said:


I think there should be a list of these types of scripted barriers because they are unique and not just the standard invisible wall or conveniently parked truck you for some reason can't just climb over. Every game has invisible walls; only a few games will have a scripted shark come out and rip you up.

That is why it is a subset, however as the database stands it is not very good at being finicky with small sub sets. Wait for the site redesign and such a feature will be implemented.

Dave is working on this and everyone at GB knows its a pain. Right now the GB staff get messages of people asking "Why is there not a Day-Z page?" and they have to answer. "Because its a mod, its under Arma 2. Wait for the site redesign and mods like Day-Z will be represented as its own page instead of a footer on a larger page."

This discussion is talking about a subset of Barrier. No one has argued against that. What people are fighting for its the REPRESENTATION of it. Be is known as Active Barriers or lost within the Barrier.

This is not a fault of definition it is a fault of the website. When Dave and Alex finish the redesign it will be better. And your beloved Subsets will be represented fairly and easier to edit.

Just wait.

#29 Posted by SomeDeliCook (2341 posts) -

@Akyho said:

@SomeDeliCook said:


I think there should be a list of these types of scripted barriers because they are unique and not just the standard invisible wall or conveniently parked truck you for some reason can't just climb over. Every game has invisible walls; only a few games will have a scripted shark come out and rip you up.

That is why it is a subset, however as the database stands it is not very good at being finicky with small sub sets. Wait for the site redesign and such a feature will be implemented.

Dave is working on this and everyone at GB knows its a pain. Right now the GB staff get messages of people asking "Why is there not a Day-Z page?" and they have to answer. "Because its a mod, its under Arma 2. Wait for the site redesign and mods like Day-z will be represented as its how page instead of a footer on a larger page."

This discussion is talking about a subset of Barrier. No one has argued against that. What people are fighting for its the REPRESENTATION of it. Be is known as Active Barriers or lost within the Barrier.

This is not a fault of definition it is a fault of the website. When Dave and Alex finish the redesign it will be better. And your beloved Subsets will be represented fairly and easier to edit.

Just wait.

But Day Z is now a standalone product. =P

#30 Edited by Akyho (1658 posts) -

@SomeDeliCook said:


But Day Z is now a standalone product. =P

That is a different product. Day-Z the mod and Day-Z the unreleased Standalone game will be noticeably different. Both version will have to be documented separately. Day-Z the mod is limited by Arma 2 in both engine, objects gameplay and patches for Arma 2.

While the standalone product will not be shackled to Arma 3 despite being based on the same engine. Aswell as the many thousand things they have and will learn from Day-Z mod ontop of what they have learned from Arma2 in the improvement of Arma3.

Day-Z the mod will be a subset of Arma2, while Standalone will be a different game on its on page.

You cannot report on Day-Z the mod on the Day-Z Standalone page.

#31 Posted by Hailinel (24974 posts) -
@david1890

Okay... so I guess screw Giant Bomb? I'll just go to tvtropes.org with my issues regarding concepts in video games?

Is that the way it should be?

This isn't TV Tropes. It's a mistake to think GB's wiki operates under similar ideas.
#32 Edited by ElixirBronze (430 posts) -

@BraveToaster said:

@david1890 said:

Okay... so I guess screw Giant Bomb? I'll just go to tvtropes.org with my issues regarding concepts in video games?

Is that the way it should be?

Well, if you're going to get that upset over people disagreeing with you (and providing substantive reasons why), then maybe you should go to tvtropes.org.

@Akyho said:

@david1890 said:

Okay... so I guess screw Giant Bomb? I'll just go to tvtropes.org with my issues regarding concepts in video games?

Is that the way it should be?

Geeze dude. When was this a "My way or the highway." situation.

Besides you will be eaten alive if you go to TV tropes. You think we are being anally retentive. Even if you are right those folks will just go on forever. That site is THE site for Anal retention.

All right I am out, apparently this was never a discussion and you just wanted to get your own way. We have Mods to sort out pages when people do that.

This turned personal apparently.

Crap I just realized how I completely phrased that the wrong way. What I was trying to say was "If I want to read about a certain concept in a certain video game, should I have to go to tvtropes instead of Giant Bomb"? Sorry to anyone who got it wrong, my bad COMPLETELY.

I'm not trying to insult anyone personally. And no I'm not upset. I was giving you an argument as to why there shuold be a page for this stuff, and the argument is the fact that I'm interested in reading about it. If you want to take that as "my way" then that's okay, but I have to assume I'm not alone in being interested?

I'm not trying to condescend or act like a dick, all I'm saying is right now there is a better web page out there to read about "flesh barriers" or w/e you want to call them. When I think, personally, that Giant Bomb is the page that really should excel in these areas.

#33 Posted by The_Nubster (2176 posts) -

@david1890: Then I apologize for being a prick to you!

The general consensus seems to be that these insta-kill events count as barriers, so you're welcome (heck, encouraged!) to flesh out the Barrier page to include these monsters/objects that kill you if you try to go past them.

#34 Posted by Hailinel (24974 posts) -
@david1890 TV Tropes isn't "better," just hyperspecific. On Giant Bomb, concepts are kept combined and organized in sensible ways. There isn't a need for twenty different concepts that all cover variations of the same thing.
#35 Edited by B0nd07 (1699 posts) -

The concept brought up here is a specific type of zone (or barrier) found in video games, and, like Invisible Wall, is worthy enough to have its own page. It isn't your typical locked door, wrecked car in alley, filing cabinet in hallway, or wall; those things just block you, this concept straight up kills you if you venture too far off the map. If its creation is being blocked because we have a catch-all Barrier page, then that page needs to be expanded significantly (it only has that cover-everything deck/blurb) and pages like Invisible Wall merged with it, which I think is pretty stupid.

@Hailinel said:

@david1890 TV Tropes isn't "better," just hyperspecific. On Giant Bomb, concepts are kept combined and organized in sensible ways. There isn't a need for twenty different concepts that all cover variations of the same thing.

While I agree that TV Tropes is hyper-specific, Giant Bomb doesn't need to be hyper-general. In this case, the concept is unique enough and used in enough games that a dedicated page should be made. More generic types of barriers (the standard pile of debris, unclimbable filing cabinet, or straight up wall) should be kept to the Barrier page.

#36 Posted by ElixirBronze (430 posts) -

@B0nd07: Agreed, and for this one specifically, I'd think it'd be interesting to have a table layout with descriptions of every games' version of this barrier. I'd start adding the ones I've encountered myself (obviously won't be jacking the things on tvtropes, they could be a bunch of liers for all I care), but I don't have a good name for the page yet, also I don't have enough wiki points to edit without moderation control so if someone else would start out that would be good I guess?

#37 Posted by B0nd07 (1699 posts) -

@david1890: I'd create it, but I also haven't been able to think of a good name for it. Perhaps something like Deadly Borders?

#38 Posted by ElixirBronze (430 posts) -

@B0nd07: That's good, I also liked "Active Barriers" as it seemed easy to find, but maybe that bears less significance to what the page actually is about. Anyway, both works in my mind.

#39 Posted by SomeDeliCook (2341 posts) -

@Akyho said:

@SomeDeliCook said:


But Day Z is now a standalone product. =P

That is a different product. Day-Z the mod and Day-Z the unreleased Standalone game will be noticeably different. Both version will have to be documented separately. Day-Z the mod is limited by Arma 2 in both engine, objects gameplay and patches for Arma 2.

While the standalone product will not be shackled to Arma 3 despite being based on the same engine. Aswell as the many thousand things they have and will learn from Day-Z mod ontop of what they have learned from Arma2 in the improvement of Arma3.

Day-Z the mod will be a subset of Arma2, while Standalone will be a different game on its on page.

You cannot report on Day-Z the mod on the Day-Z Standalone page.

I was just messing with you =)

#40 Edited by Akyho (1658 posts) -

@SomeDeliCook said:

I was just messing with you =)

And I messed with you with facts! I win! or do I lose?

@ElixirBronze That ok thanks for the clear up on your tone. No problem

However the main fact is. This new variation of Barrier DOES NOT NEED a new page. It should contained within barrier concept page. Call it what ever you like. However it isn't a separated concept, It is a subset.

A new page is not needed. if you make the Active barrier page, then you MUST create the passive barrier page, the visible barrier page, the invisible barrier page, the story based barrier, the inconvenient barrier, the lethal barrier, and the non lethal barrier.

Because they are all just as not worthy as Active barrier. But instead they are all housed within Barrier.

Whatever you call active barrier, border patrol, death field. It dosnt matter because people are still going to look for the same thing with different words. Your obsession about about a new page and naming this concept a new name is unsound.

#41 Posted by VarkhanMB (159 posts) -

Which is why I will request PM's of people's suggestions for a "Active Barrier" list! And then it can be related to the barrier page!

#42 Edited by MordeaniisChaos (5730 posts) -

For future reference, you shouldn't say "this" but try and think up a way to put the concept into a real short term. Might just be tough to fit for this one though, and I'm not giving you shit for it. It'll just give you a better results/responses.

@ElixirBronze said:

But if I'm interested in seeing which games has boring barriers and which ones has good, creative ones, should I be forced to choose a different site than Giant Bomb? Isn't things like that and Ketchup what Giant Bomb is all about? You can't really add a "sub-concept" for certain games inside a "concept" page right?

That sort of thing should be handled as a part of the main page, basically under a header of some kind. Concept page is barriers, then you have sections dedicated to various barriers on that page. For example, we have one Humvee (Still pissed it's called the "Humvee" page) instead of one page for every variation, even though there are everything from observational variations to ambulance variations to TOW Launcher variations. That kind of information is broken out on the page though, because HMMWV is the "concept" or over-arching 'thing' and all of the variations are very particular twists on the base 'thing'.

#43 Edited by 49th (2765 posts) -

I think it should have it's own page considering invisible walls is also separate. It's a fun variation of barriers and is different enough that it should be a separate thing. I would want to read about it way more than reading the regular barrier page.

Enemy Barriers. Out-of-Bounds Kill Barrier. Insta-Kill Barrier.

Interactive Loading Screen is a separate page to Loading Screen, just a variation on Loading Screens yet it is different enough to warrant a new page.

These are just like Interactive Barriers.

Online
#44 Edited by ElixirBronze (430 posts) -

@Akyho said:

@SomeDeliCook said:

I was just messing with you =)

And I messed with you with facts! I win! or do I lose?

@ElixirBronze That ok thanks for the clear up on your tone. No problem

However the main fact is. This new variation of Barrier DOES NOT NEED a new page. It should contained within barrier concept page. Call it what ever you like. However it isn't a separated concept, It is a subset.

A new page is not needed. if you make the Active barrier page, then you MUST create the passive barrier page, the visible barrier page, the invisible barrier page, the story based barrier, the inconvenient barrier, the lethal barrier, and the non lethal barrier.

Because they are all just as not worthy as Active barrier. But instead they are all housed within Barrier.

Whatever you call active barrier, border patrol, death field. It dosnt matter because people are still going to look for the same thing with different words. Your obsession about about a new page and naming this concept a new name is unsound.

Well those pages you named sort of do exist already. "Passive", "visible" and "non lethal" all falls into just "barrier" imo. they are all just descriptions of what a standard barrier is, contextual or not. Lethal barrier is basically what I'm proposing here. Invisible wall page does exist. And "Inconventient barrier"? What do you really mean to say with that? Is there such a thing as a convenient barrier? Or do you mean things like a broken car blocking the way, in which case I think it belongs in the normal barrier page. To simplify:

Barrier:

Fences, solid wall, broken car etc. etc. (if any page is needless and redundant I think i'ts this one, all games contains barriers).

Invisible Wall:

Exactly what it sounds like.

Lethal Barrier:

Shark or turret killing you if you go too far.

Maybe change the name of "Barrier" to "Contextual Barrier" (and only include things like a broken car etc.) is a good idea? To list all games that contains walls and fences is unrealistic.

I don't feel like there needs to be anything else. Nothing else is really different enough or occuring often enough to warrant a page.

There is a page for unclimbable hills as well. That maybe a bit redundant too, since it's basically just a contextual invisible wall.

#47 Posted by The_Nubster (2176 posts) -

@GenocidalKitten said:

@DeF said:

@The_Nubster: an enemy is also an obstacle that hinders your progress. it's not a barrier, though. active kill "barriers" are different enough, at least to me, and only occur in certain cases that they could/should be singled out as a unique wiki entry.

Very good point.

The difference between an enemy and a kill barrier is that one is supposed to be crossed, killed, dealt with, etc. and one is not. An enemy in an arena is different than the turrets that kill you if you leave that arena. One is there to present conflict and challenge the player's skills, and the other is to ensure you don't leave an area. A barrier is supposed to prevent you, no matter what you do, from advancing and it can be in any form whether it be a wall of rocks, or an invisible creature that punches you to death if you go too far. That's different than a mook trying to kill you.

#48 Posted by DeF (4904 posts) -

@The_Nubster said:

@GenocidalKitten said:

@DeF said:

@The_Nubster: an enemy is also an obstacle that hinders your progress. it's not a barrier, though. active kill "barriers" are different enough, at least to me, and only occur in certain cases that they could/should be singled out as a unique wiki entry.

Very good point.

The difference between an enemy and a kill barrier is that one is supposed to be crossed, killed, dealt with, etc. and one is not. An enemy in an arena is different than the turrets that kill you if you leave that arena. One is there to present conflict and challenge the player's skills, and the other is to ensure you don't leave an area. A barrier is supposed to prevent you, no matter what you do, from advancing and it can be in any form whether it be a wall of rocks, or an invisible creature that punches you to death if you go too far. That's different than a mook trying to kill you.

Still, I'd like to keep arguing for kill barriers to be their own thing due to their unique variations (turrets, sharks, dying from sunburn) which attributes them with something special, out of the ordinary (ordinary being an invisible wall, a random big object). Isn't that exactly what the wiki is for? Identifying interesting, concepts, ideas, mechanics that are being used in games? An active kill barrier would be something like that from where I'm standing. We have tons of concepts for similar things that have been singled out because the way they're different is meaningful in some way. I find something that active kills you if you stray from the main path meaningful in that way.

#49 Posted by The_Nubster (2176 posts) -

@DeF said:

@The_Nubster said:

@GenocidalKitten said:

@DeF said:

@The_Nubster: an enemy is also an obstacle that hinders your progress. it's not a barrier, though. active kill "barriers" are different enough, at least to me, and only occur in certain cases that they could/should be singled out as a unique wiki entry.

Very good point.

The difference between an enemy and a kill barrier is that one is supposed to be crossed, killed, dealt with, etc. and one is not. An enemy in an arena is different than the turrets that kill you if you leave that arena. One is there to present conflict and challenge the player's skills, and the other is to ensure you don't leave an area. A barrier is supposed to prevent you, no matter what you do, from advancing and it can be in any form whether it be a wall of rocks, or an invisible creature that punches you to death if you go too far. That's different than a mook trying to kill you.

Still, I'd like to keep arguing for kill barriers to be their own thing due to their unique variations (turrets, sharks, dying from sunburn) which attributes them with something special, out of the ordinary (ordinary being an invisible wall, a random big object). Isn't that exactly what the wiki is for? Identifying interesting, concepts, ideas, mechanics that are being used in games? An active kill barrier would be something like that from where I'm standing. We have tons of concepts for similar things that have been singled out because the way they're different is meaningful in some way. I find something that active kills you if you stray from the main path meaningful in that way.

And the concept is a barrier. The page needs to be fleshed out to include that. It doesn't need an entire concept of its own, because it's covered and, as I've pointed out numerous times, the page was left as is two-and-a-half years ago, talking about this very idea. Kill barriers and inanimate barriers serve the same function: to prevent players from leaving or entering an area. Without cheats or exploits, it can't be passed, killed, or otherwise dealt with. It's an impassable obstacle. The page just needs to be extended, or even re-named. I'm not against that, but it doesn't need its own concept. The "otherwise" that's included on that page needs to be explained.

#50 Edited by ElixirBronze (430 posts) -

@The_Nubster: So in your opinion because two things share the same purpose they are inherently the same concept?

Then why is there a buttload of different wiki concepts for thousands of different weapons? They should all just be "Weapons" right? All they're for is killing stuff.