Originally Posted by
Abriael
Unfortunately for this absolutely silly statement, the fact that an argument isn't valid for you doesn't make it less valid.
Plenty valid, compelling and intelligent arguments have been made against jumping. You not liking them has no bearing at all on their validity.
See, fact is that your book is completely inconsequential. The dev's book is what matters, and quite evidently, given the drop in priority of the implementation of jumping, the very clear possibility that it will never be implemented, and the fact that they're instead tweaking environmental collision detection (as many that are against jumping suggested) as a much more convenient feature, it's people for jumping 0, people against jump 1.
Sorry to burst a bubble. Oh wait... I'm not really THAT sorry, mind you.