You maniac.

“Gamers want life-like shooters”
How can you make a claim like that? Fans of life-like shooters want life-like shooters. And they get them. And there are no ridiculous jumps in them.

its funny, almost all of my friends complained for at least the first hour or so when i showed them gears of war… “wheres the jump button?” “you can jump” “this is so fucking stupid, why cant this guy jump?”

i think it would be interesting to know what percentage of games have a dedicated jump button…

I can make that claim as a generalization and because life-like is a somewhat loose term. Gamers want better graphics, better physics, better AI and in this sense, “better” means closer to our reality.

“Gamers want life-like shooters [...] the jump still has its place in gaming, just not in life-simulating first-person shooters”

errm… I think we can go the Army office(or whatever it’s called) and ask them if soldier ever jump.

“Closer to reality” means “close but not exactly the same as reality”. Part of what makes a game(any type of game) fun is its *well controlled* deviation from reality. When a game blindly attempt to replicate reality, it reminds me of everything I hate about things in real life. To me, a good FPS is not about “how much the game makes me feel that I’m controlling a human being in real life”, it’s on the other hand about “how much the games makes me forget the complication of real life and have lots of fun at the same time”.

No, “close to reality” means “close but not exactly the same as reality”; “closer to reality” is an adverbial phrase meaning the progress towards reality. I agree, a “well controlled” game helps makes a good game. In fact, every game I play (and hopefully you too) deviates from my reality. I’ve never shot a gun at someone, I’ve never driven a tank, etc. I’m not advocating for a life-simulation that requires a game obey every law of real life. I’m arguing that jumping breaks immersion in life-like FPSs. In Halo, though I feel the jumping is silly, doesn’t break the immersion. In the Metroid Prime games, jumping not only didn’t break immersion, but it was necessary for exploration. The fact that I was so far removed from my reality—and in space—let me accept the height at which Samus could jump. In a game like Medal of Honour, a game that attempts to simulate historical wars, doesn’t require hopping. Soldiers didn’t hop&shoot then and they don’t today.

Attempting to replicate reality and “blindly” attempting to replicate reality are two different things. Of course I’m not advocating the blind replication of reality; I’d hope and assume game developers would think before they code.

If a game replicates something you hate in real life—like gravity, maybe—then that’s your issue, not the game’s.

“Soldiers didn’t hop&shoot then and they don’t today”

I’m sure they don’t because it would look funny. BUT they are human, and they most definitely CAN. So If I WANT to, why does the game not allow me to?

I’ll say it again…

To me, a good FPS is not about “how much the game makes me feel that I’m controlling a human being in real life”, it’s on the other hand about “how much the games makes me forget the complication of real life and have lots of fun at the same time”.

I hate adding to this abortion of a comment thread, but

“I can make that claim as a generalization”

Yeah, you can, but it doesn’t make it logically sound. “All gamers want Mountain Dew!” No, some gamers want Mountain Dew. The gamers that like Mountain Dew. And then you say,

“Gamers want better graphics, better physics, better AI and in this sense, “better” means closer to our reality.”

But “better” doesn’t mean “closer to our reality.” It only means “closer to our reality” to the gamers who appreciate realistic games. And games that appeal to that market already understand the issues with jump, and come up with creative solutions. Admittedly, shit games like Medal of Honour use an out-dated thought process when it comes to dealing with obstacles in the environment, and that kind of game rides the line between realistic and arcade, but you have to recognize that what attracts the arcade crowd to those titles is, partly, the ability to jump as a method of dodging. The jumping doesn’t remove those gamers from immersive experiences. It’s what they want. And also perhaps the WWII environment, which is a change of pace from space arena shooters, which like you say, take their liberties and explore the arcade style fully. Given that everyone’s got their own fucking corner to sit in, what’s the problem?

“Gamers want life-like shooters.”

No. Not all gamers do.