So about jump.

[Jacien]

In one point of the letter of the producer everyone hops on and starts jumping on top of a tent ...

Am I the only one who has an issue with this stuff?

I really hope they'll put an invisible wall of sorts on release.

I'm okay with jumping as long as they keep it realistic. To hop on top of a tent in one leap? For the tent to look like freaking plastic and hold there as if it was steady ground?

Hate it.

Do you hate Mario games because it's physically impossible for a short, fat plumber to jump 10 feet high?

[NinjaPanda]

Oh, right... this is where people begin to selectively pick and choose when realism is okay/necessary and when it isn't.

If it suits them, it's appropriate. If it doesn't suit them, "No freaking way! Not in my game!"

Jumping was requested/demanded in part because it's more realistic for people to be able to jump. In that case "realism" is not only acceptable, it's downright necessary.

Mention that it's ridiculous to believe that several full-grown people could feasibly jump on a cloth tent without the thing collapsing, and suddenly, "What? Realism? In a fantasy game?"

Personally, I never cared if you could jump or not. Now that you can jump, jumping on a tent isn't a game breaking deal. The argument of too many people on a tent isn't realistic is... just... stupid.

Hey guys! Light isn't moving at the correct speed. It's not realistic enough.

[Arcell]

Yes, I would.

You know.. that whole "realism" thing that people selectively agree with when it suits them...

I'm not going to discuss realism. I'm strictly talking about believability which is an entirely different issue. That would be, things you could believably do in the game world. Either way, something is occurring that is beyond believability.

Either some invisible force is keeping me from jumping on that tent or some invisible force is holding it up. Both scenarios are equally unbelievable to me so I'd prefer the one that doesn't limit where I can jump.

[Preypacer]

Do you hate Mario games because it's physically impossible for a short, fat plumber to jump 10 feet high?

Super Mario Bros. isn't trying to simulate a believable, living environment. Super Mario Bros. is a platforming game designed entirely around the idea of jumping on top of floating bricks. The jumping aspect is kinda core to what the game is about.

Got any other ridiculous comparisons?

[Jacien]

Super Mario Bros. isn't trying to simulate a believable, living environment. Super Mario Bros. is a platforming game designed entirely around the idea of jumping on top of floating bricks. The jumping aspect is kinda core to what the game is about.

Got any other ridiculous comparisons?

I bolded where the silliness comes from. You're playing a Final Fantasy game. There are countless tropes that break the concepts of a "believable, living environment."

And overall, the most important thing: It's a video game.

[Kallera]

Yes, I would.

You know.. that whole "realism" thing that people around here selectively agree with when it suits them, but completely reject when it doesn't...?

Jumping on tents is as real as invisible walls, or not jumping off a cliff.

Invisible walls are by far more annoying, they are the antithesis of fun. There's far more fun jumping on tents.

[Arcell]

I bolded where the silliness comes from. You're playing a Final Fantasy game. There are countless tropes that break the concepts of a "believable, living environment."

And overall, the most important thing: It's a video game.

Well, it kind of depends on what you're defining as believable. I'd say anything that is considered possible in the game world would be believable, not that which is believable in our world. If you're going by the definition of our world I'd say that's more realism.

An example would be, casting magics is believable because the game world treats it as something you can do. It is a generally accepted thing that can happen in the game world.

Invisible, unnamed forces restricting access to/holding up tents is somewhat unbelievable because there is really no explanation of it in the game. It's a thing that sometimes happens, sometimes doesn't.

[NinjaPanda]

Well, it kind of depends on what you're defining as believable. I'd say anything that is considered possible in the game world would be believable, not that which is believable in our world. If you're going by the definition of our world I'd say that's more realism.

An example would be, casting magics is believable because the game world treats it as something you can do. It is a generally accepted thing that can happen in the game world.

Invisible, unnamed forces restricting access to/holding up tents is somewhat unbelievable because there is really no explanation of it in the game. It's a thing that sometimes happens, sometimes doesn't.

Maybe someone cast a spell on the tent. MAGIC! David Blaine'd

[Kallera]

Maybe someone cast a spell on the tent. MAGIC! David Blaine'd

I blame the lala in your sig.

[Preypacer]

I'm not going to discuss realism. I'm strictly talking about believability which is an entirely different issue. That would be, things you could believably do in the game world. Either way, something is occurring that is beyond believability.

Either some invisible force is keeping me from jumping on that tent or some invisible force is holding it up. Both scenarios are equally unbelievable to me so I'd prefer the one that doesn't limit where I can jump.

Yes, that much was clear from the moment you decided to argue it.

First of all, believability and realism fall within the same category... they both share roots in credulity. They go hand-in-hand. If something is "believable", it's because it would be "realistic" for it to happen. If something is "unrealistic", people won't "believe" it. People don't really believe a magician is making an elephant disappear, because it's not very realistic for that to happen. See where I'm going with this? Point is, whatever semantic nonsense you're attempting to pull here... it's not working.

But again.. as I said before, "realism" and "believability" for that matter, are selectively supported around here. So I fully expect the spin, self-contradicting logic, and selective reasoning to continue.

Boy are some of you folks gonna be pissed the first time you try jumping off a moderately high cliff and find you can't because Yoshi-P has decided it wouldn't be possible (which he has stated) to jump beyond a certain height or from certain locations.

I can't wait to see the selective arguments for "realism" popping up over that. I'm going to remind them that it's not "believable" that people would jump from a height that would likely injure them in a realistic situation. And, of course, in that case, "realism" will - again - be shunned as people say "well, it's a fantasy game, it doesn't have to be realistic! Just don't have us take damage!"

Some people around here are so predictably selective in their reasoning, it's like reading a script.