Do you consider game mechanics appliable in a debate?

What..?

No, because DBZ characters would get stomped.

No.

Hahahaha. Oh man.

I guess then that most video game characters are bullet proof, die if they fall from any substantial height, and heal if they eat food.

Bump.

nah

It depends, but more often than not, no

Most of the cased, no. Maybe yes in a few cases depending on what you consider the boundary of game mechanics.

I suppose it is technically subjective unless contradicted by cutscenes or lore, but for me there has to be a happy medium. Taking everything that happens during gameplay at face value is flawed, but completely discounting everything that happens in game is absurd. For example, I've seen one user claim that the BFG 9000 isn't as powerful as shown, which to me is a ridiculous argument, considering that it's only shown during gameplay, and it's clearly intended to be as powerful as we see. You may as well say it doesn't exist, or that special abilities and items seen in game are inapplicable (which I've seen people claim). Again there has to be a medium. Saying Mario dies from touching a Goomba is flawed, but saying he can't jump high because he does it in game is even more ridiculous. Skill could be considered ambiguous, as some players are more skilled than others; however, it is at least implied that they are skilled enough to win on their first try. I suppose I'm rambling at this point, but what I'm getting at is that discounting everything that occurs or is shown during gameplay makes no sense. Considering it's a video game character, I feel completely negating their main source of media is downright stupid. I know most people here do find a balance, but those few who simply choose to ignore everything that happens during gameplay never cease to get under my skin.

Rant over.

Depend on the game.

depends

This is the main reason why I don't debate with or for now for game characters

Depends on the game

Only if they're objective and there's nothing that contradicts them.

@geistalt: My rant in short form. Thank you.

@snakeeyes4597: Glad to help.

In general, I prefer to avoid using them. Especially if there are other sources.

No.

But if they were, Arkham Bats would be a street-level god.

Gameplay feats can only be as great as the lowest weakest gameplay feat shown

What I mean is if one character can tank lots of bullets in gameplay but is incapacitated but one bullet later

no. game mechanics are there to level out the characters and to make the fights even. for example in mk scorpion can only teleport and punch in the game. in the comic he can teleport and do whatever he wants. scorpion can also teleport other people into the netherrealm or wherever. scorpion can't do that in the game. also, if game mechanics were allowed characters could just place their hands over their face, kneel and become invincible.

Basically if it can be done by a character then yes. Like if dante does 30 hit combo(example) it shows he can. On the other hand if dante is shown in cutscenes that is he is fast but the gameplay mechanics show him slow then it is not to be applied.

Another example connor fights brutually than ezio and altair. The gameplay mechanics shows his moves very different and much stylized than that of ezio and altair. But if it proved in story wise that both ezio and altair are more efficient then the gameplay thing shouldn't be taken in consideration. Because if a remaster happens then both of them will be shown miles better than connor. In other words, if storywise ezio and altair are good but gameplay wise if they are poor then that means resources of developers were poor that is why they couldn't make their combat better.

@samconery: Well said.

I would say no because it's not that much fair.

@stormphoenix: How is it not fair?

No

@snakeeyes4597: I say it's not fair because there are some video game characters with outstanding feats purely because of the Game allowing them to have. Ex. Kratos...I LOVE God of War one of my favorite franchise however most of what he does is pure game mechanics. So if you allow characters with game mechanic feats they are unstoppable. (I think)

Depends on the game,

In Assassin's Creed for example,killing every guard counts if it leads to 100% synchronisation then you've replicated exactly what the character had done in their history.

However in like COD,you can shoot many people in the head and they can still survive depening on how many bullets you use.

Ultimately,it depends on whether those mechanics have an actual impact on the canon storyline.In most cases it does not

This.

It depends on the situation really. If the game lines up with a different book or comic then I think it'll be ok. Some games like GoW have to be limited to cutscenes and tapping parts because that's what's meant to happen

Depends.

Gameplay mechanics that are direct reflections of the lore/story should be accepted. Gameplay mechanics that are there for balance/enjoyment should be thrown out.

As most people said... it depends on the game and character.

@Linha-Fone: Love ya.

I don't normally believe you can accurately use feats from within a game as long as they are things the player is actually doing, because the player is meant to pull through these things even if it looks completely implausible or impossible.

Like is Solid Snake a master infiltrator? Certainly when we see him sneak around in vents and so on to bypass heavily armed chokepoints and enemies... but not based on him crawling around under a cardboard box while thicko sentries continues to completely ignore the box moving around, or when he decides to tranq dart most of them and no one notices half the compound staff is lying on the floor.

@stormphoenix: Considering the amount of comic book characters with crazy amounts of insane feats, I'd say it balances out.

Hell to the no.

I'm actually going to play a game right now. I'll say a game mechanic, and I want to see whether people think it would be applicable in a debate (just comment yay or nay). Here goes:

1. Mario's jumping ability

2. Jason Voorhees' teleportation (MKX)

3. Bowser's shockwave attack (SM64)

4. Mario's power-ups

5. Bowser's Fury (M&L:BiS)

6. Mario shattering brick with his fist

7. Mario's badges (Paper Mario series)

8. BFG 9000's destructive capability

9. Mario surviving underwater indefinitely

10. Mario surviving being crushed by a Thwomp

11. Mega Man's ability to switch between power ups at will

12. Chell being intelligent enough to solve all of the puzzles in Portal and Portal 2

Yes because if it's something they do in the story or game it should count. Comic characters have more than enough feats. Video game characters need game mechanics feats otherwise they are kinda useless

No. Unless you want guys like Master Chief to be 20+ toners because of faulty logic

If they are legitimately part of a character's abilities in the story and not something used to exaggerate a character's powers to hell (i.e. Sora being faster than light) then yes.

Only cut-scenes.

Usually yes, but it depends on circumstance. Also depends on how exactly you define "game mechanics"

@anthp2000: So you basically think none of Mario/Samus/Mega Man/etc's power-ups and weapons exist? Most of them are never seen in cutscenes.

@cfrehse: Exactly. I can't understand this mentality of "game mechanics makes characters too OP." Read a Superman comic, watch an episode of Dragon Ball Super, then tell me they're "too OP".

@snakeeyes4597: Oh, no. It depends.
When it's a character that only appears in a games and has no comic or show then of course they can apply.

@i_am_lightning Depends on the mechanics. Alex Mercer being able to carry and throw a tank across multiple blocks, is applicable. Within the game's database, it's said that he is strong enough to do so. And he kills Hunters that "rip tanks apart".

But CoD characters having healing-factors, can't be used in a debate. Because that's a game mechanic that contradicts the game's story.

@anthp2000: Oh, sorry, I thought you meant all game characters. The way I see it, gameplay can be used as long as it doesn't directly contradict anything known about the character.

@snakeeyes4597: True, but also depends on what character you put them against. I thought you were doing Video Game character vs Video Game character

@stormphoenix: Well, if both characters have gameplay abilities shouldn't that balance out as well?