• 55 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by BBAlpert (1470 posts) -


#2 Posted by ShockD (2401 posts) -

I appreciate realism so damage it is. Actually more and more games today punish you with damage (and even death) when falling from too high in water. Too bad GTA is not one of them...

#3 Posted by AlexW00d (6275 posts) -

It depends on the game to be perfectly honest.

Online
#4 Posted by MooseyMcMan (11003 posts) -

Depends on the game. If it's something not realistic, then no damage, but if the game is trying to be realistic, then damage it up.

Moderator
#5 Posted by Ares42 (2663 posts) -

Realism in gaming is overrated.

#6 Posted by Jack268 (3387 posts) -

I prefer A because I will always presume that's how it is so if it isn't I'll just get mad if I die from it.

#7 Edited by BBAlpert (1470 posts) -

*edit: I wrote this post as a description/explanation for the question, but I took too long to write it, so it's down here.

When you land in water from a moderate height, you should be fine. But one thing I've learned from Mythbusters is that you can still get smashed up pretty badly if you hit water with enough velocity.

So I guess my question is whether you think games with otherwise "realistic" physics engines should reflect this, or if safely landing in water should remain an accepted mechanic. I just wonder about this every time I encounter a high jump into water for the first time in a game (such as diving from a cliff in Far Cry or a tower in Assassin's Creed).

#8 Posted by Yummylee (21629 posts) -

@MooseyMcMan said:

Depends on the game. If it's something not realistic, then no damage, but if the game is trying to be realistic, then damage it up.

And scene.

#9 Posted by LiquidPrince (15946 posts) -

Would you still die from water if you hit in diving or reverse diving position? Like what height are we talking about?

#10 Posted by Animasta (14691 posts) -

@Yummylee said:

@MooseyMcMan said:

Depends on the game. If it's something not realistic, then no damage, but if the game is trying to be realistic, then damage it up.

And scene.

word.

#11 Posted by Rafaelfc (1347 posts) -

I hate fall damage in general... so, since the standard is to take damage from falls, keep water safe please.

One of my favorite thing in open world games is to go as high as the world will alow me and fall in the water, it is stupid dumb fun... please don't take it away PLEASE!

#12 Posted by jacksmedulla (279 posts) -

There should be no fall damage in any game ever.

#13 Posted by BBAlpert (1470 posts) -

@LiquidPrince said:

Would you still die from water if you hit in diving or reverse diving position? Like what height are we talking about?

The Mythbusters were testing something from Burn Notice, where a guy jumps out of a second or third story window into a pool, landing on his back (a sort of back flop, instead of a belly flop). They tested this with an artificial surgery practice substitute, and it shattered its pelvis and royally fucked up its spine. You can survive falls from greater heights depending on how you hit the water (such as if you are in a diving or foot first position), but at some point that'll still fuck you up pretty bad.

#14 Posted by UlquioKani (1057 posts) -

As said above, Depends on the game

#15 Posted by YI_Orange (1148 posts) -

@jacksmedulla said:

There should be no fall damage in any game ever.

This. I hate fall damage. I understand why it exists, but other than the once in a while funny situation, it's more of a nuisance.

#16 Posted by CatsAkimbo (625 posts) -

@Rafaelfc said:

I hate fall damage in general... so, since the standard is to take damage from falls, keep water safe please.

One of my favorite thing in open world games is to go as high as the world will alow me and fall in the water, it is stupid dumb fun... please don't take it away PLEASE!

Fall damage is probably the least fun "realistic" thing a game can do. I remember the first time I played Guild Wars 2 and got up to a scenic point at the top of a roof. My natural instinct, standing ~40 feet in the air, was to jump off, but in Guild Wars 2, that kills you.

It boggles my mind that they would make that choice, and it was the first moment where the happy, idealistic sheen of the game quickly wore off. If Arenanet truly put player's fun first, why in god's name would they kill you just for jumping off a tall roof? Backtracking down a jumping puzzle isn't fun, dying isn't fun, fall damage isn't fun.

I understand the "need" for fall damage to prevent players from accessing certain areas, but when you can easily access the bottom of something you climbed up to, let me take a damn shortcut back down.

#17 Posted by Zella (748 posts) -

Depends on the game but I prefer no damage. One of my favourite achievements is jumping off the top of the Eiffel Tower and surviving in The Saboteur by falling in like a 8 foot deep pool of water.

#18 Posted by EquitasInvictus (2029 posts) -

Yeah, being able to survive impossible dives into water is something that should never go away.

I can understand the need for it in games stressing realism, though, so I'm cool with those kinds of games doing that at least.

#19 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4351 posts) -

@AlexW00d said:

It depends on the game to be perfectly honest.

#20 Posted by Rekt_Hed (848 posts) -

The day I start caring about this is the day I stop playing video games

#21 Posted by Giantstalker (1648 posts) -

Realism. Always be realism.

#22 Posted by Hunter5024 (5672 posts) -

I don't really care for games that try to be realistic. In fact fall damage shouldn't be a thing, they should just make the player bounce.

#23 Posted by JoeyRavn (4973 posts) -

It depends on the game, but if "realism" means "falling from the tiniest height will deplete at least 25% of your life bar" as in Far Cry 3, fuck realism.

#24 Posted by Zelyre (1193 posts) -

Can I take a bullet and keep on going as if nothing happened?

Yes?

Then I should be able to survive falling into some water and keep on going, too.

#25 Posted by PeasantAbuse (5138 posts) -
#26 Posted by _Zombie_ (1462 posts) -

I couldn't care less about realism. And it's fun beyond belief to dive out of a plane hundreds of miles above the water.. and land safely in the ocean.

#27 Posted by HH (609 posts) -

also, if you reload a half empty clip, you lose the damn bullets. you people have had it far too easy for far too long dammit.

#28 Posted by StarvingGamer (8233 posts) -

@CatsAkimbo said:

If Arenanet truly put player's fun first...

Statements like this make me think you haven't actually played GW2.

#29 Posted by CatsAkimbo (625 posts) -

@StarvingGamer said:

@CatsAkimbo said:

If Arenanet truly put player's fun first...

Statements like this make me think you haven't actually played GW2.

I like most of the stuff they do around the game, and I think it's great they're pushing forward new mmo conventions like level scaling and such, but geez, I just don't have fun actually playing the game. Dying from the fall off the roof of the building in the Norn starting area just made that come into clear focus.

#30 Posted by Beforet (2921 posts) -

Depends on the game (though I vote no damage period for most cases)

#31 Posted by MikkaQ (10288 posts) -

No, realism in games is stupid.

#32 Posted by StarvingGamer (8233 posts) -

@CatsAkimbo: GW2 is one step forward, two steps back. They've managed to iterate on a few less-used systems from other MMO's, but the game's content is so out of balance that it's more frustrating than fun. I just hope someone else takes some of those refinements and puts them into a game that's actually good.

#33 Posted by Subjugation (4720 posts) -

That just sounds like it would suck the fun out of the game. I thought the whole point of playing a game was to escape reality?

#34 Posted by MariachiMacabre (7096 posts) -
@AlexW00d

It depends on the game to be perfectly honest.

@AlexW00d

It depends on the game to be perfectly honest.

Yep. A survival game, absolutely. Game like Saints Row? Nah. I'd love to see a game like Far Cry with a realistic map/compass element and hyper-realistic damage. Broken bones, infections, etc. and rocks/coral under water would fuck you up.
Online
#35 Posted by RandomInternetUser (6789 posts) -

It's never not fun to jump off a really high spot and land in water perfectly fine. ESPECIALLY IN FAR CRY 3. That automated dive animation you go into upon jumping towards deep water is THE BEST THING EVER. However, in some games, it makes sense to take water-fall damage. So, like those other dudes said, it depends on the game.

#36 Edited by kerse (2113 posts) -

Nah its more fun with unrealistic physics, I'm actually tired of games trying to be as realistic as possible, well most of them anyways. It works well for some.

Also if this became a thing, then a single bullet needs to kill you in every game, because being able to take 100s of shots and live is way worse realistically than not taking damage hitting the water.

#37 Posted by AlexW00d (6275 posts) -

@kerse said:

Nah its more fun with unrealistic physics, I'm actually tired of games trying to be as realistic as possible, well most of them anyways. It works well for some.

But like, no games try to be even a little realistic. Other than simulations, but they're generally labelled as such so it's the user's fault if they expect anything else.

Online
#38 Posted by eccentrix (1553 posts) -

Only if they hit the bottom.

#39 Posted by kunoh (57 posts) -

In most games I would hope that fall damage into water is NOT realistic - because its a video game. I want to fall down into pool of water the size of a bath tub and live.

#40 Posted by ExplodeMode (852 posts) -

It depends on the tone of the game.

#41 Edited by HerbieBug (4212 posts) -

I can't recall a game having fall damage where I thought it really added to the realistic immersion. In all cases fall damage is an annoyance at best. Except for maybe games that have flight and parachute mechanics, clearly you need fall damage in those.

But in general, if fall damage as a video game concept went away I would be perfectly fine with that. In current gen games, the only time consequence of a fall matters is when you've jumped outside the designated level design, which equals instant death so the game can spawn you back into the geometry. Regenerating health makes fall damage meaningless unless you are already taking damage from other sources during your trip to the ground. You jump knowing you'll survive, you watch the screen turn a bit red, your character does its taking damage animation, health regenerates and... what? What is the point of that sequence of events? It surely isn't realism. Also, games rarely (never?) clearly indicate to the player whether a jump from a particular height will cause damage. You just have to guess it based on past experience.

Toss it. Needless mechanic in most circumstances, added more from tradition than actual necessity. Or:

@Hunter5024 said:

I don't really care for games that try to be realistic. In fact fall damage shouldn't be a thing, they should just make the player bounce.

I support this bouncing proposal.

#42 Posted by believer258 (11901 posts) -

You know what feels great? Jumping off of a really high cliff in Borderlands 2 and landing perfectly safely.

I do not think that all fall damage should go away, but I do think it's kind of overused in spots. Like, sometimes in Far Cry 3, you can fall just a bit and lose a good bit of health. Why? Or in Skyrim, where the fall damage is better but not by much.

As for the topic at hand? Well, it depends on the game.

Online
#43 Posted by BBAlpert (1470 posts) -

There is one specific situation where fall damage can be a good thing, although it doesn't make up for the times when fall damage sucks.

Falling off of a ledge at the top of a long climbing/platforming sequence, I think it's generally less frustrating to have your character die and just respawn near where you fell from, rather than survive the fall all the way down and need to climb back up again. Granted, if there isn't a checkpoint at the top there, then surviving the fall is better.

#44 Posted by VoshiNova (1687 posts) -

Love it!

Half Life 3 - Introducing realistic water damage!

#45 Posted by eccentrix (1553 posts) -

@HerbieBug said:

I can't recall a game having fall damage where I thought it really added to the realistic immersion.

It wasn't fall damage, but I was playing the original Far Cry recently and it struck me as surprisingly realistic when I jumped into the ocean from a cliff and fell through to a certain point. I went deeper than I thought I was going to and it felt realistic for it.

#46 Posted by notdavid (839 posts) -

Fuck fall damage in general.

#47 Posted by Zomgfruitbunnies (784 posts) -

Make it a toggle.

I like fall damage, but I don't like being killed by fall damage.

#48 Posted by face15 (1300 posts) -

It depends on the type of game, but generally I'd prefer the Hollywood physics.

#49 Posted by MordeaniisChaos (5730 posts) -

You have to hit water pretty hard to take much damage from it. If you want to go for realism, damage should be more than simple "pain."

Plus, most characters don't belly flop into water. You can dive into water from pretty crazy heights. And the few games that let you really push the limits of a dive are ridiculous enough that it doesn't matter if they ignore realism. If Ezio can survive a couple hundred feet of gravity assisted falling into a freakin hay cart, I think we can get away with occasionally falling from really high heights into water.

It certainly depends. That said, it's silly that FarCry 3 will take away half of your health if you jump down half 4 feet of stairs, but can dive off of a huge cliff into water and be A-OK.

#50 Posted by MentalDisruption (1635 posts) -

Depends on what game it is. Some work well with fall damage and other don't. However, if a game is going to damage me for hitting the ground, then yes it should also damage me for hitting water. One of the very minor things that bugs me about most games.