The overuse of jumping mechanics

Avatar image for bhtav
bhtav

157

Forum Posts

16694

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By bhtav

Platformers, a generally more fanciful or abstract genre, I understand. Jumping mobilizes a character in service to puzzle solving. My issue is with the overuse of, and over-reliance upon jumping mechanics, when the player is a basic human, or something equivalent. Practically every shooter and WRPG has a jumping mechanic that's entirely unrealistic. When was the last time you jumped over something to avoid it? When was the last time you saw a fight, a battle, a war that involved people bounding around like sentient pogo sticks? I'm not a big fan of online gaming, but when I see a top player in a clip, or a twitch stream, it's hilarious. Watching soldiers jumping about to avoid gunfire, leaping over small objects, etc...

I was baffled when the (excellent) Witcher 3 gave an alternate move mechanic. They stated that they hadn't done so initially, because it broke movement realism. But the jumping about is already patently unrealistic. Jumping over and over to get up a mountain, jumping and swimming fully armored. I know that not all games have a jump mechanic (although they have a similarly silly dive-roll, also not something people ever do in actual combat on a regular basis).

I understand that realism is rarely job one of a video game. But it's an odd conceit as we move forward; making sure that guns recoil realistically, that tires skid across water in a natural way, etc... I'd like to see at least the occasional game, (not a sports game, but a shooter or WRPG) that has a realistic combat and movement system.

Avatar image for mike
mike

18011

Forum Posts

23067

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 6

#2  Edited By mike

Realistic jumping doesn't sound fun. I'd rather a game just have no jumping at all if it was aiming for realism, like ArmA III. In that game you can crawl over and up onto low objects, but that's about it.

Avatar image for deactivated-60dda8699e35a
deactivated-60dda8699e35a

1807

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I don't know if a game with realistic movement would be entirely fun to play though. I imagine it would be much slower paced, and much more annoying and difficult to control at the same time. You mention The Witcher 3 and how the original controls tried their best to be realistic, and despite the lapses in realism it had, people hated how awkward it was to control. Can you imagine how much worse the game would have been if they restricted the movement even further than it already was? I loved the game, but holy crap the clunky controls were quite a hurdle for me to get through at first.

I guess the game would have to be built from the ground up with a realistic movement set in mind, and maybe it could be possible.

Avatar image for dixavd
Dixavd

3013

Forum Posts

245

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

I'd prefer a ridiculously unrealistic and borderline unusable (due to feel) jumping mechanic than none at all. I tend to get unreasonably angry when I have to walk all the way around an edge or around a railing or something when I feel I should be able to just jump over it. For instance, there are some Final Fantasy games where I cannot play them for long stretches of time due in part to how in the world I cannot jump (despite adoring everything else about them) whereas part of my enjoyment of Kingdom Hearts stems from being able to jump around even though they feel floaty, imprecise and cumbersome (in the original especially). I can look past the controls and the look if it allows me to do what I want to do (which is get to where I want to be without having to really think about it).

Avatar image for zeik
Zeik

5434

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

There are games out there that have attempted realistic movement and combat, but they're all incredibly niche games with very specific audiences. That's not what most people want from games.

I find it kinda weird that you singled out Witcher 3 though, as the jumping in that game really didn't do much. It did pretty much nothing in combat, it was only a way for you to quickly get past small objects in your way while exploring instead of having to go around. While realistically you wouldn't leap over objects to get past them, it's also unrealistic and more frustrating for a small obstacle to stop you from moving forward.

Avatar image for theht
TheHT

15998

Forum Posts

1562

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 9

Jumping in video games is fun. I don't think it's overused at all.

Avatar image for bhtav
bhtav

157

Forum Posts

16694

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Point missed. When I mentioned Witcher, I said that PCR mentioned that their reasoning for not using the updated movement set in the first place was that it made it less realistic. As though the movement was realistic in the first place (jumping all over the place).

My point isn't an absolute indictment on jumping at all, I'm not saying we should ban it (Titanfall is pretty fun...) just that the pogo stick mechanic is often the PRIMARY way to stay alive in games that are in most other ways, at least making an attempt to emulate Earth. Walking, running, shooting, check. Now just give everyone anti-gravity boots and we're set! I mean, even most running mechanics have a limit (you have to take a break). But you can jump over fences and parkour (also a ridiculous mechanic that's overused).

It's not that jumping is inherently fun. If it were, we'd jump all the time. The game design is built specifically for jumping to be a primary movement mechanic, which, for humans, it's not. It's just really odd that in worlds that make sense in most other ways, we have this bizarre conceit as the standard, not as an occasional thing. Level and enemy design is what makes the jumping necessary. You can have methodical, paced action or completely frantic action that take place within the physics of Earth without the spring shoes.

Avatar image for peezmachine
PeezMachine

700

Forum Posts

42

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 2

Take a 2D sidescrolling action game and remove jumping. You now have a 1D sidescrolling action game. Yuck. That extra dimension was SUPER important -- it allowed you to have more varied enemy designs (like Goomba vs. Spiny) and provided the payer with an extra tool to solve puzzles and defeat enemies. I've had a hard time going back to Borderlands 2 after playing The Pre-Sequel because I really liked (and used) the jump-and-stomp mechanics introduced in the latter. The flow of battles in The Pre-Sequel is much improved, in my opinion, because being able to actually use that third dimension offers a ton of new ways to move between cover or close the gap on entrenched enemies.

Realism should never get veto power over the rest of your game. If ultra-realism is a core tenet of your game's design, then sure, scale back the jumping a bit. But if you're making an interactive action movie like Uncharted, then let the jumps flow strong and plentiful. In most cases, excessive jumping is not going to cause that much dissonance with the the rest of the game's world, so it's fine to keep it around as a game-mechanical interpretation of of the physical world.

Avatar image for zeik
Zeik

5434

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By Zeik

@bhtav: I think you missed my point too. You are not actually "jumping all over the place" in The Witcher 3. (If you are doing that then that's on the player, not the game.) The vast majority of movement is simply walking or running (or riding) from one place to another. Jumping is simply something you can do, not something you are expected to do constantly. Much like how humans can jump, but only when necessary. It provides no real advantage anywhere except to clear small gaps and obstacles. The game may not be a 100% realistic simulation of real life, but having the ability to jump is in fact more realistic than not being able to.

Avatar image for bhtav
bhtav

157

Forum Posts

16694

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@zeik said:

@bhtav: I think you missed my point too. You are not actually "jumping all over the place" in The Witcher 3. (If you are doing that then that's on the player, not the game.) The vast majority of movement is simply walking or running (or riding) from one place to another. Jumping is simply something you can do, not something you are expected to do constantly. Much like how humans can jump, but only when necessary. It provides no real advantage anywhere except to clear small gaps and obstacles. The game may not be a 100% realistic simulation of real life, but having the ability to jump is in fact more realistic than not being able to.

I actually spend a fair amount of time jumping in the Witcher, and other jumpable games. The game is filled with little streams, rocks, short fences around gardens, hay bales, etc... it's more efficient to jump over all of it. It's also more efficient to parkour over larger fences and obstacles in certain cities, even though you look like a lunatic while doing it.

Take a 2D sidescrolling action game and remove jumping. You now have a 1D sidescrolling action game. Yuck. That extra dimension was SUPER important -- it allowed you to have more varied enemy designs (like Goomba vs. Spiny) and provided the payer with an extra tool to solve puzzles and defeat enemies. I've had a hard time going back to Borderlands 2 after playing The Pre-Sequel because I really liked (and used) the jump-and-stomp mechanics introduced in the latter. The flow of battles in The Pre-Sequel is much improved, in my opinion, because being able to actually use that third dimension offers a ton of new ways to move between cover or close the gap on entrenched enemies.

Realism should never get veto power over the rest of your game. If ultra-realism is a core tenet of your game's design, then sure, scale back the jumping a bit. But if you're making an interactive action movie like Uncharted, then let the jumps flow strong and plentiful. In most cases, excessive jumping is not going to cause that much dissonance with the the rest of the game's world, so it's fine to keep it around as a game-mechanical interpretation of of the physical world.

Right, I have no problem (like I said in my OP) with abstract platformers (though even then, jumpless platformers can be fun.... VVVVVVV). Sometimes perspective changes that too - top-down games usually don't get a jump (Link can't jump in TLoZ, nor does the game suffer for it). In completely insane games like Borderlands, Saints Row, or anything with a grapple-flying mechanic, it also doesn't matter. I'm talking about games that have a fairly serious tone, or a very realistic setting (like a WWII shooter) that will go to lengths to preserve realism in some regards, but completely ignore others, like the way things move. It's just something I've noticed; in a large number of streams, clips, and during gameplay, it's a bouncy world out there in video game land. Everyone is jumping on, over, around. It seems necessary because of level design, but it's really not.

I don't mind that this is the minority opinion, but it's something I've seen and heard come up on occasion, and it seems like we're hitting a threshold where movement is just getting absolutely silly. Maybe VR will improve this, because massive constant jumps in your goggles while you aren't moving might induce sickness. I'm not saying hyper-realism is necessary in all respects, but I'd like to see the dial turn a bit more toward realistic movement. The more realistic the mundane components are of a game, the more immersive it can feel, and the more fantastical elements pop a lot more when everything isn't constantly insane. I liked the movement a lot in dead space, alien isolation, and the like. Sure it's fun to "flow" over and around all obstacles like spiderman, but at some point, it seems really off tone-wise. Both types of games can exist, it's an over-reliance on the mechanic; I'm not advocating on its removal altogether.

Avatar image for stayflip
stayflip

30

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11  Edited By stayflip

In 3D worlds, having some vertical mobility is important. Now games can have more naturalistic animations for this, stepping over, climbing on etc. but I'd guess this wasn't feeesable until last generation, and by that time it had become ingrained.

But to say that other aspects of movement are realistic (in most games) isn't true either, most game characters are pretty much superhuman in their speed agility etc. and that probably comes down to "feel" and "fun".

Avatar image for rigas
Rigas

950

Forum Posts

179

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Jumping Simulator 2016 featuring full VR support

Avatar image for justin258
Justin258

16684

Forum Posts

26

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 8

It seems like your basic point is "I wish games didn't stop in a middle ground between realism and gamey-ness, especially in regards to jumping". I'm not a hundred percent sure of that, though, your sentences are somewhat labyrinthine and you don't seem to be able to state your point clearly.

But in any case, I don't think The Witcher 3 is a great example of jumping being egregious and/or superfluous. Geralt of Rivia is a white-haired mutant with cat-like eyes and a gravelly voice that makes Marcus Fenix sound like an anime girl. He spends his days fighting monsters that few others even have the ability to kill for money. He's clearly faster and stronger than anyone who isn't also a witcher. Being able to jump shouldn't be unrealistic for him. It isn't like you're leaping over buildings or anything, you've just got a little leap that's good for climbing walls, crossing small gaps, and making the umpteenth run from one part of Novigrad to another a little more interesting. Oh, and let's not forget, you can't actually do any jumping during battle - you can only do a roll that makes Marcus Fenix's roll look like an amateur's, and a sidestep.

OK, anyway, as far as jumping in general goes - we are getting more games where it doesn't really fit or doesn't really serve any real purpose. It's never really bothered me, though. In fact, it sometimes bothers me more when there isn't a jump button, even though the game doesn't need it.

In any case, this discussion is really part of an overall question - "How realistic can games get before they stop being fun?" The answer to that question is different for everybody, but I imagine that a truly realistic game wouldn't impress anybody. Even your most realistic games have to make concessions for the sake of gameplay somewhere. Personally, I've never been someone who buys into the concept of "realism = immersion". "Immersion", for me, is being so absorbed in a game, any game, that you don't really give any thought to anything else around you. That requires a combination of excellent design on the developer's part and the player's willingness to stay calm and just keep enjoying the game.

Other than The Witcher 3, what games do you specifically have in mind?

Avatar image for paulmako
paulmako

1963

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

It's there because it works.

What games did you have in mind specifically when you say shooters and WRPGs?

I think part of it is that vertical traversal is fun and on a fundamental level opens up the space in the game. This can be climbing over a low wall in Skyrim, or climbing up a stack of of boxes in Counter Strike. Jumping works for both.

It probably looks strange because the one 'basic jump' animation needs to cover lots of different kinds of vertical traversal. It's not really an issue in single player first person games because you don't see yourself jump.

I guess it would be cool if the jumping was context sensitive each time but then you might not need a dedicated jump button. MGSV has this with the 'climb' button.

For the most part though I would rather have a one size fits all jump button than get stuck on a tiny ledge in Alien Isolation.

I imagine we will get more realistic niche combat simulators if that's what you're looking for, but they will be simulators.

Avatar image for imsh_pl
imsh_pl

4208

Forum Posts

51

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

It's even worse when there a visibly scaleable barrier like a knee-high fence or a ledge that the developer forbids you to cross.

Avatar image for csl316
csl316

17001

Forum Posts

765

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

I never had a problem with unrealistic jumping til I played the first Tomb Raider. "Why is she jumping so high??"

Then I realized it's cool because I can't do it and never worried about it again.

Avatar image for boozak
BoOzak

2858

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

People are just trying to find new ways to innovate gameplay wise and for action games traversal is the easiest thing right now. (AI has been the same for the past decade but noone seems to care) If your arguement is why gameplay mechanics dont meet the tone or style of the game that's a whole gameplay versus immersion thing every developer has to balance. Some do it better than others. Personally I really hate encumbrance (because it's stupid. both in terms of gameplay and immersion) and I really wish RPGs would adopt D&Ds Bag of Holding. (or some other equivalent)

Anyway, I actually love what Titanfall and Advanced Warfare have done for shooters and hope to see it continue. But I would much rather see more imaginative weapons and AI but I understand those things are harder to balance. I can wait though.

Avatar image for bhtav
bhtav

157

Forum Posts

16694

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

In 3D worlds, having some vertical mobility is important. Now games can have more naturalistic animations for this, stepping over, climbing on etc. but I'd guess this wasn't feeesable until last generation, and by that time it had become ingrained.

But to say that other aspects of movement are realistic (in most games) isn't true either, most game characters are pretty much superhuman in their speed agility etc. and that probably comes down to "feel" and "fun".

We live in a 3D world right now. Getting around vertically isn't challenging, because we build structures based on our somewhat more planar movement abilities. Normal structures aren't built to traverse by jumping, usually. In games, this is not always the case.

@rigas said:

Jumping Simulator 2016 featuring full VR support

I'm in.

It seems like your basic point is "I wish games didn't stop in a middle ground between realism and gamey-ness, especially in regards to jumping". I'm not a hundred percent sure of that, though, your sentences are somewhat labyrinthine and you don't seem to be able to state your point clearly.

But in any case, I don't think The Witcher 3 is a great example of jumping being egregious and/or superfluous. Geralt of Rivia is a white-haired mutant with cat-like eyes and a gravelly voice that makes Marcus Fenix sound like an anime girl. He spends his days fighting monsters that few others even have the ability to kill for money. He's clearly faster and stronger than anyone who isn't also a witcher. Being able to jump shouldn't be unrealistic for him. It isn't like you're leaping over buildings or anything, you've just got a little leap that's good for climbing walls, crossing small gaps, and making the umpteenth run from one part of Novigrad to another a little more interesting. Oh, and let's not forget, you can't actually do any jumping during battle - you can only do a roll that makes Marcus Fenix's roll look like an amateur's, and a sidestep.

OK, anyway, as far as jumping in general goes - we are getting more games where it doesn't really fit or doesn't really serve any real purpose. It's never really bothered me, though. In fact, it sometimes bothers me more when there isn't a jump button, even though the game doesn't need it.

In any case, this discussion is really part of an overall question - "How realistic can games get before they stop being fun?" The answer to that question is different for everybody, but I imagine that a truly realistic game wouldn't impress anybody. Even your most realistic games have to make concessions for the sake of gameplay somewhere. Personally, I've never been someone who buys into the concept of "realism = immersion". "Immersion", for me, is being so absorbed in a game, any game, that you don't really give any thought to anything else around you. That requires a combination of excellent design on the developer's part and the player's willingness to stay calm and just keep enjoying the game.

Other than The Witcher 3, what games do you specifically have in mind?

1) Meh, the point is fairly clear. Jumping as a general mode of transportation, in my opinion, is over-used. People responded by reading it as "Jumping should be completely real at all times in all situations", which I neither said nor implied.

2) Geralt of Rivia moves exactly like a human when he's not fighting. When he is fighting, he moves like he gets paid by the dive roll. Unless, of course, it's a cut-scene, where he moves the way you'd expect him to. It's not a great example - granted - but after 100 hours of Witcher, I feel like I've spent at least 20% of the traversal hopping about over stuff.

3) This is the point. It might not bother you - it doesn't really bother me as much as it sounds, I'm just pointing it out. "we are getting more games where it doesn't really fit or doesn't really serve any real purpose..." is the crux of my OP.

Someone made a point about better context-sensitive animations. That might be the real solution, for now. Rather than hopping like a lunatic everywhere, a couple more arm-assisted vaults over rails, proper climbs, dodges around small rocks, etc... would definitely make a serious world seem less bizarre. We don't need to play as spiderman in every game, but it really seems like that's where we're headed.

Is it a problem with traversal in general? Are games so open and huge, that trivializing the trek itself is necessary? Is jumping the only way, or the best way to accomplish that? I feel like the parkour crutch comes from the same place. Suddenly everyone is a parkour expert, including the enemies following you (any AC game ever).

Avatar image for mike
mike

18011

Forum Posts

23067

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 6

#19  Edited By mike

I mentioned ArmA III but you didn't say anything about it...are you just not interested in that game? It fits what you are talking about almost exactly. However, the fact that there is no jumping and there are multiple types of stances and movement for just being on foot alone is one of the most divisive things about that game. As it turns out, a lot of people claim they want realism, but when they get a game that has those features they just complain and want it to be more like Call of Duty or Battlefield. Of course, ArmA is also PC only, so that may be a problem if you're a console gamer.

Avatar image for ripelivejam
ripelivejam

13572

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

This reminds me when me and my friends first tried ocarina of time and one was lamenting that there wasn't a jump button.

Diving would make more sense from a realism perspective. I guess more games could do an assassin's creed/shadow of the colossus mechanic with climbing. Hold down button to climb/clamber in a pressed direction, percent chance of success woukd decrease on sharper inclines. Your grip would wear out and you'd have to let go for a second. I do agree the leaping about is a bit silly but it seems to need a lot more effort to add something more realistic.

While on the subject of witcher 3 i did love how the dodging controlled.

Avatar image for joey_ravn
JoeyRavn

5290

Forum Posts

792

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

#21  Edited By JoeyRavn

@imsh_pl said:

It's even worse when there a visibly scaleable barrier like a knee-high fence or a ledge that the developer forbids you to cross.

The issue there is caused by the knee-high fence or ledge, not by the jumping mechanic. Because removing the ability to jump doesn't magically make the obstacle presented by the fence make sense. If anything, it makes even less sense to have a character who can't jump at all when there's no reason (beside the game's mechanics) that explains why they wouldn't be able.

Unless the character is an elephant, of course.

Avatar image for pezen
Pezen

2585

Forum Posts

14

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

A jump button, however superfluous, gives one very important benefit to you as a player though; it detaches you from the ground. Whenever I play games that specifically don't have one, I feel magnetically connected to the ground. My character feels like a tank more than a human being. Naturally, not all humans train in the techniques of parkour, but if I try I can do a little jump.

Avatar image for nilazz
Nilazz

842

Forum Posts

19

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

@pezen: That is putting it pretty good. Even if the jump doesn't serve a great function in a game it makes you feel more mobile.

Avatar image for ajamafalous
ajamafalous

13992

Forum Posts

905

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

Avatar image for bhtav
bhtav

157

Forum Posts

16694

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Mike said:

I mentioned ArmA III but you didn't say anything about it...are you just not interested in that game? It fits what you are talking about almost exactly. However, the fact that there is no jumping and there are multiple types of stances and movement for just being on foot alone is one of the most divisive things about that game. As it turns out, a lot of people claim they want realism, but when they get a game that has those features they just complain and want it to be more like Call of Duty or Battlefield. Of course, ArmA is also PC only, so that may be a problem if you're a console gamer.

Sorry - yeah, it's a good example, but I'm a console gamer, so I can't really comment on that specific one. I was also trying to avoid a conversation specific to any particular game; rather jumping in general.

@joeyravn said:
@imsh_pl said:

It's even worse when there a visibly scaleable barrier like a knee-high fence or a ledge that the developer forbids you to cross.

The issue there is caused by the knee-high fence or ledge, not by the jumping mechanic. Because removing the ability to jump doesn't magically make the obstacle presented by the fence make sense. If anything, it makes even less sense to have a character who can't jump at all when there's no reason (beside the game's mechanics) that explains why they wouldn't be able.

Unless the character is an elephant, of course.

Yeah, artificial barriers are another weird in-game conceit. I'd rather there not be a lot of knee high fences, which basically don't exist in the real world. Ambling up or around small obstacles is better than leaping full force over a little rock or fence.

@pezen said:

A jump button, however superfluous, gives one very important benefit to you as a player though; it detaches you from the ground. Whenever I play games that specifically don't have one, I feel magnetically connected to the ground. My character feels like a tank more than a human being. Naturally, not all humans train in the techniques of parkour, but if I try I can do a little jump.

I'm not advocating the removal of jumping. I'm advocating game design which doesn't make jumping such a constant mechanism for basic movement. This comes up in action RPGs and shooters in different ways. In action games, it's mainly a traversal conceit. Like the aforementioned invisible wall is a "small world" conceit. In shooters, it's doubly ridiculous, because you can't jump and shoot simultaneously, and jumping to dodge someone machine gunning at you is a way to die very, very quickly. Yet many shooters (especially online shooters) require you to CONSTANTLY pogo stick around to stay alive. It can be fun tactically, but this has to do with level and overall game design with jumping in mind, not that jumping is inherently fun.

Obviously, I'm not the first person to point this out. A little google-fu turned up a bunch of forums like this:

http://community.us.playstation.com/t5/PlayStation-General/CoD-AW-Too-Much-Jumping/td-p/45263805

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654624810993020/

etc.. A lot of them focus on CoD, which is like watching a bunch of frogs shoot eachother.

Avatar image for justin258
Justin258

16684

Forum Posts

26

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 8

#26  Edited By Justin258

@bhtav:

Geralt is superhuman when it comes to physical ability - why shouldn't he have a reasonable jumping ability? "He moves like a normal human outside of combat" doesn't cut it, Bruce Lee (before he died) and Chuck Norris (before he got old) moved like normal humans in normal situations but neither would have had any problems suddenly doing things that are impossible for the rest of us when they needed or wanted to. How is it bizarre, in any way, for a character like Geralt to be able to jump?

Geralt also has the ability to vault over things and climb up things, both of which I've done plenty of times - run up to a fence and hold B/O/space bar at the right time and you'll see him vault over it. Why are you jumping all over the place in The Witcher 3? I've been playing that game lately and I just don't have any idea why you would be jumping if it isn't necessary when running or galloping on Roach is faster (if Roach feels inclined to behave that day).

Is it a problem with traversal in general? Are games so open and huge, that trivializing the trek itself is necessary? Is jumping the only way, or the best way to accomplish that? I feel like the parkour crutch comes from the same place. Suddenly everyone is a parkour expert, including the enemies following you (any AC game ever).

People like robust traversal systems and mechanics and being able to jump at any time just feels good. It feels like more of the world is opened up to you because you can jump, and you know (or, at least, you hope) you're never going to be stopped dead in your tracks by a one foot high obstruction that any schmuck with working legs could get across.

@Mike said:

I mentioned ArmA III but you didn't say anything about it...are you just not interested in that game? It fits what you are talking about almost exactly. However, the fact that there is no jumping and there are multiple types of stances and movement for just being on foot alone is one of the most divisive things about that game. As it turns out, a lot of people claim they want realism, but when they get a game that has those features they just complain and want it to be more like Call of Duty or Battlefield. Of course, ArmA is also PC only, so that may be a problem if you're a console gamer.

I'm going to highlight Mike's comment here so that maybe you'll see it again. ArmA is pretty much what you're looking for. I'm also going to ask, again, for more specific examples than The Witcher 3.

EDIT: I posted this after you posted your post above my post and didn't see that post. Post.

Um, anyway, the jumping in Call of Duty doesn't seem so ridiculous because those games are pretty ridiculous anyway. They're hardly even realistic on a surface level, much less when you get down to depth of the rest of the mechanics. It's a little weirder that people in Battlefield would be doing it, though - when I played Battlefield 3, I remembered the jumping slowing me down. I also played that game with other PC players where jumping made you an even easier target than on the console. He won't be able to move left or right or go prone, just aim up, get him in the head, and watch his corpse crumple to the ground.

I kinda suspected you'd bring up Counter Strike for some reason.

Avatar image for pezen
Pezen

2585

Forum Posts

14

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@bhtav: I never intended to imply you were arguing for it's removal. It was simply an observation of the use of jumping as a means to tell the player something that doesn't necessarily have any real mechanical benefit. Also, maybe I've missed something, but your points on CoD and Battlefield seems really strange to someone who's played a lot of those. Sure, there are people that jump around like frogs, but those are rarely your best players. The best players I've known usually go prone faster than I can aim and then I'm dead because I'm aiming at nothing. And I have never, ever, felt as though I was required to jump around to stay alive in those games. In fact, doing so usually had the opposite effect for me.

Advanced Warfare being the exception so far, considering it built it's entire movement around the boosts and double jumps.

At some point, aren't you arguing people's behavior more than the actual game design?

Avatar image for bhtav
bhtav

157

Forum Posts

16694

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@bhtav:

Geralt is superhuman when it comes to physical ability - why shouldn't he have a reasonable jumping ability? "He moves like a normal human outside of combat" doesn't cut it, Bruce Lee (before he died) and Chuck Norris (before he got old) moved like normal humans in normal situations but neither would have had any problems suddenly doing things that are impossible for the rest of us when they needed or wanted to. How is it bizarre, in any way, for a character like Geralt to be able to jump?

Geralt also has the ability to vault over things and climb up things, both of which I've done plenty of times - run up to a fence and hold B/O/space bar at the right time and you'll see him vault over it. Why are you jumping all over the place in The Witcher 3? I've been playing that game lately and I just don't have any idea why you would be jumping if it isn't necessary when running or galloping on Roach is faster (if Roach feels inclined to behave that day).

Is it a problem with traversal in general? Are games so open and huge, that trivializing the trek itself is necessary? Is jumping the only way, or the best way to accomplish that? I feel like the parkour crutch comes from the same place. Suddenly everyone is a parkour expert, including the enemies following you (any AC game ever).

People like robust traversal systems and mechanics and being able to jump at any time just feels good. It feels like more of the world is opened up to you because you can jump, and you know (or, at least, you hope) you're never going to be stopped dead in your tracks by a one foot high obstruction that any schmuck with working legs could get across.

@Mike said:

I mentioned ArmA III but you didn't say anything about it...are you just not interested in that game? It fits what you are talking about almost exactly. However, the fact that there is no jumping and there are multiple types of stances and movement for just being on foot alone is one of the most divisive things about that game. As it turns out, a lot of people claim they want realism, but when they get a game that has those features they just complain and want it to be more like Call of Duty or Battlefield. Of course, ArmA is also PC only, so that may be a problem if you're a console gamer.

I'm going to highlight Mike's comment here so that maybe you'll see it again. ArmA is pretty much what you're looking for. I'm also going to ask, again, for more specific examples than The Witcher 3.

EDIT: I posted this after you posted your post above my post and didn't see that post. Post.

Um, anyway, the jumping in Call of Duty doesn't seem so ridiculous because those games are pretty ridiculous anyway. They're hardly even realistic on a surface level, much less when you get down to depth of the rest of the mechanics. It's a little weirder that people in Battlefield would be doing it, though - when I played Battlefield 3, I remembered the jumping slowing me down. I also played that game with other PC players where jumping made you an even easier target than on the console. He won't be able to move left or right or go prone, just aim up, get him in the head, and watch his corpse crumple to the ground.

I kinda suspected you'd bring up Counter Strike for some reason.

"why shouldn't he have a reasonable jumping ability?" ... Again... oh forget it... I'm not sure I understand the Bruce Lee analogy. Are you saying that, say, Michael Jordan (an accomplished jumper) would go around jumping up mountains and across streams rather than use a more mundane mechanism? Geralt has a very, very silly jump, and he takes these really silly looking bounds no matter the obstacle. It looks silly.

"People like robust traversal systems and mechanics and being able to jump at any time just feels good. It feels like more of the world is opened up to you because you can jump, and you know (or, at least, you hope) you're never going to be stopped dead in your tracks by a one foot high obstruction that any schmuck with working legs could get across."

Meh. Just feels good. I mean, fine, then let's just have everyone fly, and screw it. A good many games are already basically giving you flight, making traversal completely trivial, rather than building interesting worlds that are a pleasure to move around the way that people actually move. If the world is a lot more open due to jumping, it's because the world was designed for jumping. That's not the only way.

As for Call of Duty, there are a large number of forums of CoD players (I'm not one of them) lamenting exactly this. I can't comment whether or not it's effective, but I sure see a lot of jumping in videos.

@pezen said:

@bhtav: I never intended to imply you were arguing for it's removal. It was simply an observation of the use of jumping as a means to tell the player something that doesn't necessarily have any real mechanical benefit. Also, maybe I've missed something, but your points on CoD and Battlefield seems really strange to someone who's played a lot of those. Sure, there are people that jump around like frogs, but those are rarely your best players. The best players I've known usually go prone faster than I can aim and then I'm dead because I'm aiming at nothing. And I have never, ever, felt as though I was required to jump around to stay alive in those games. In fact, doing so usually had the opposite effect for me.

Advanced Warfare being the exception so far, considering it built it's entire movement around the boosts and double jumps.

At some point, aren't you arguing people's behavior more than the actual game design?

Well, no - I'm arguing that the game design lends itself to jumping about, or nobody would do it. Games are all getting to the point where everything has to be this constant flow of one thing into the next, whether it's movement (parkour, pogo jumping everywhere), combat (the omnipresent batman / mordor combat), or what have you - it can be fun to just combo everything, but man, it's starting to make everything look like super mario brothers.

Again, I'm not saying everything needs to be 1:1, but so much is spent on physics that make things feel visceral and weighty, while jumping is just magic for some reason.