If you are into game design at all, you need to watch Game/Show. It largely takes the formula made awesome by Idea Channel and applies it to video games and game design. Despite the hosts insistence on glasses without lenses, he does a great job of explaining what is going on.
Robert Headley Yes, it's the beauty of media. However this game is targeted far more at the gamer community and covering more surface level topics, this episode in particular being very much about "isn't this interesting?", whereas Extra Credits delves deep into "why was this designed this way?", which is infinitely more useful for game designers.
Well also through a game design lens, Jumping just opens a door to lots of different interesting puzzles. It's a clearly defined action--go up, reach top, come down--so the designer has a sense of generally what the player will be limited to in tackling a problem. Especially in games where you have absolute control over the absolute highest height a player can jump, it's just a motion that loans itself well to designing challenges. It's a way that people travel through space, so you can really clearly tell when you've succeeded, and it feels good. You get to advance to the next area. You can create challenges beyond the obvious "jump as high as you can" and into "jump past this, jump around that, jump to here and from there to here." Running just doesn't have quite as many problems associated with it, which is probably why evolutionarily we favor it. But from a game design perspective, where your goal is to create challenges, jumping has got a nearly infinite number of ways it can go wrong, which makes it interesting.
Gravity itself is an intuitive phenomena, we deal with it every day. Even if the physics are exaggerated, they're still very familiar to us - we don't need to learn anything new to understand how to use gravity. In other words: It's an additional mechanic, adding lots of complexity to the paths we can take (or the paths that can unfold dynamically), without much additional burden. One extra button: Jump, B. By holding down that button, you can also jump a little higher (also very intuitive, it's a bit like putting more force into your jump IRL). But that's the limit of your control, vertically speaking. Gravity will eventually do its gravity thing no matter how many B buttons you press. What really made Mario shine was not that jump. It was the fact that you maintained full control over your *horizontal* velocity mid-air, just as if you never left the ground. That's just as physically impossible as the high jump, I'd say even more so. But not in SMB, and mastering that wholly new level of control, completely outside of reality (while somehow still being so intuitive, it goes completely unnoticed by most) before gravity shoves you into some lava is intense. It's something truly special. Mario's air-running is the *real* meat of the franchise, but it sadly doesn't get the credit it deserves.
"If putting 20 hours a week into gaming is the bar for being a gamer, then I'm not a gamer, and I host a TV show!" I totally get that sentiment, and understand that plenty of people have real world obligations that prevent them from putting a ton of time into games. I don't know what it says about me that I have a full time job, with a serious relationship (getting married next month in fact), and put 35 hours into Smash Brothers on 3DS over the weekend. I put 40 hours into Hyrule Warriors the week before that. I feel that more criteria should go into being a "Gamer" than just hours played. There's a lot of other variables that could be accounted for.
PBS Game/Show Thanks! I hope you didn't have to shell out as much for catering and photography as I am T_T I'm also anticipating dozens of left over cupcakes thanks to my overzealous soon-to-be bride ordering 3 times as many cupcakes as guests.
I think the biggest defining factors should be not only what kind of games you play, because that does matter to an extent, but also how passionate you are about gaming culture and whether or not you identify as a "gamer". If you call yourself a gamer, what right does anyone have to question it?
I think that the prominence of jumping in video games is more because of the necessity of 2D movement. Jumping has been a prominent feature since the days of Pit Fall and Mario's origination (donkey Kong). It is of necessity that you jump in a two dimensional video game, and that necessity in turn has shaped our imagination of video games, leading to it's current usage in 3D. Mario just happens to be a popular video game that falls into that paradigm.
Prince of Persia, the OLD one, is a great example of a popular game with realistic jumping physics. The focus of the game isn't on vertical momentum, but rather on horizontal. If you fall more than 2 levels, you instantly die. You can only jump up to reach the ledge directly above you. I'd argue that games with more realistic jumping have had a sizable impact as well, considering that the PoP series is considered the spiritual successor to Assassin's Creed, which inspired most of the free-running and parkour elements that a lot of games add in now.
mario is kind of the reason we jump in games. you talked about it as the most influential game mechanic, other than moving left and right. but jumping is just moving up, and then ultimately down. if mario didnt do it, another game would have. but its still the fact that marios main mechanic is jumping AND it was insanely popular that made the jump mechanic so important.
That's the way I see it, too. In a 2D game, unless you have a top-down perspective, you need some kind of control over the vertical axis. Jumping fills that need.
I feel like as influential as Mario and his incredible jumps were to to gaming industry, mere convenience also played an as big, if not bigger role. In most games, especially early 3D games, it was much easier to code a strong jump into the game than the ability to climb over your obstacles. The game developers chose to simply add a jump ability rather than try to add a complex climbing mechanic.
Not only that, but climbing requires an environment, whereas jumping can be done whenever you want. Jumping gives players freedom, whereas climbing limits it. For example, when I first played Zelda: Ocarina of Time, I spent, like 5 minutes in Kokiri Forest mashing buttons and trying to figure out how to jump. As great as the Zelda games are, compared to Mario the levels felt more structured and one-way. If I wanted to get up a certain platform, I couldn't jump to it. I had to try and find the wall that the game would let me climb. I could only explore the way the designers wanted me to explore.
When I started getting into freestyle snowboarding a few years back, I remember thinking about how similar it was to playing video games. Some of these terrain parks have jumps bigger than a small house, and if you practice enough at the sport, you will hit them one day. Game Show is quite right at pointing out how much we all suck at jumping. But man is it awesome when you use snow and a downward slope to give you an assist! I feel fortunate to have experienced what can only be described as superlative, the exact thing we aspire to feel when we create and play games like Super Mario Bros.
Jumping the most influential video game mechanic of all time? It's certainly close, but I still have to award that distinction to Space War, which gave us shooting. If there's one thing we do more of in games than jump, it's shoot. This is all assuming that movement of an onscreen avatar generally doesn't count as a mechanic, of course.
I think jumping is also prevalent because it covers so much ground in terms of the different elements of game design and interactivity. It's often 3rd person which is more relatable/projectable. It has thrill and visceralness arising from controlling something uncontrollable--Gravity and momentum. That gravity is pretty universally understood. It provides instant feedback. It allows for interactivity in a second dimension from an angle--side view--that is an almost primal viewpoint for depiction. And, as you said, it's so embedded now, it's just straight up universal.
This video makes me think of the games Uncharted. Recently my friend and I have been playing through the series and we just can't help but comment on how ridiculously badass Drake is. He can jump like nobody's business. Stuck on some crazy ledge on the side of some ancient building, hundreds of feet in the air? Not sure where you're supposed to go next? Well, see that little groove in the face of the rock waaaaay over there, across that huge gap of empty space? Try that. Afraid you just can't possibly make it because that's just crazy talk? Try it. Chances are you'll make that insanely impossible jump, and when you do, it feels like you, not just Drake, are at the top of the world (or on the side of a building).
I'm totally in agreement with that last comment Jamin made in response to the last week. The "20+ hours" bar is 1) stupid. 2) a survey by a college that is predominantly male in the first place. That's not a good sample method, and it's a ridiculously high bar in reality. I'm most definitely in the "hardcore gamer" group, as I often spend vast amounts of time in games, in the past few weeks replaying Skyrim to do the DLC and quest mods, I've put in 30 hours a week. But this was after months and months of less than 5 a week due to work and nothing that I fancied playing. Does that mean I have my Gamer Card this week, but those months I didn't? Or are people trying to average it out, then I wouldn't get it either as my yearly average likely far below 20 hours.
I think the fact that video games are on a 2d screen is also why there is quite a lot of jumping. In order to give a more immersive environment you need some sort of depth, and some sort of aesthetic only objects. so using a 2d sidescroller mechanic makes the aesthetic pieces much easier to implement without distracting the player than a top-down one would. and in newer 3d games, jumping is how you achieve a better 3d style than a hight-less world, and without some way to jump, even if part of other actions, is practically required if you can do other such hight-based things like flying or swimming freely. Some games that can't jump don't give you truly 3d environments, but use things like stairs with speed changes to make it feel more 3d, and less like a flat isometric world; A good example being megaman battle network series. And as tech increases, better physics in term of jump mechanics would be expected nowadays. Plus, as games become more open world, it's easier and easier to clip through an object, and without jumping, have no way out. All in all, I bet that even without Mario, jumping, or at least other ways of changing that vertical axis on whim, would still be just as common, if not as iconic to gaming, as it is anyways
What makes Mario's jump a very satisfying because it is a very simple mechanic which supplies the player with immediate sensory feedback. Whenever the player presses the jump button in Super Mario Bros. they are provided with an auditory "boing," imitating the sound of a spring. In the 3D games this was replaced with Mario shouting a little "yip," but the effect is the same. When the player's input is immediately rewarded with visual and audible sensory stimulation it gives the player a greater sense of agency over the game character, and thus greater satisfaction. If you were to turn the sound off that would greatly reduce the simply rewarding feeling of the jump. The fact that jumping is a mechanic in many video games is not so much a form of wish fulfillment but a result of the graphical limitations of video games for a long period of time. If you wanted to expend as little resources as possible to designing a world in which a player could explore a 2D side-scrolling action platformer was the simplest choice. Even though jumping is not an activity humans regularly engage, in order to give the impression of greater agency over the game developers has to result to impossible physics. This would include insanely high jumps as well as the ability to turn around in mid air. This method of game design could apply to many other different series which are not platformers. I found just the act of walking and running around in the first few Resident Evil games very satisfying in the same vein as Mario's jump. Even though those characters didn't jump, the controls were responsive and the sound of the footsteps gave the player immediate feedback.
I know this probably isn't how you're supposed to do this, but I had to respond to the response to yogscast will's comment, when you said 'there isn't a term for someone who just plays games' you could say the same thing about all the examples listed, someone who eats food is 'someone who eats food' someone who watched movies is 'someone who watched movies' someone who plays games is 'someone who plays game' you don't need a term, just like you don't need one for the others, it's a casual thing they do that doesn't need labelling
Just to clarify, I am saying this for the casuals, like how foodies have a name or cinaphiles, gamers are the non casual version, the ones who have gaming as a part of their identity
DireZyre Yeah, I just think the word gamer has a mixed meaning as I mentioned in my episode. It it a noun that implies a verbed behavior but also an identity as well.
But how would you define "casual" in broader terms? For example I spend 30+ hours a week gaming, but it's mostly relegated to my 3DS. Does that make me casual? Some people might think so.
Amelia Bee It depends on what kinds of games, and whether or not you identify as a gamer. For example, I'm a "cinephile", or film enthusiast if you don't like made up words, yet there are all sorts of classic "must see" films that I haven't seen, Scarface, Rocky, and Pulp Fiction among them.
I think of the term "gamer" as someone who follows video gaming culture, news and developments. In this way a gamer would be someone who, on top of playing a large number of games, discusses, reviews, and tries to better the medium.
What I love about Mario's jump is how high it gets. A single jump in 2D Mario games and the Super Mario 3D series (the newest ones) brings him up to 5 times his height, which - when coupled with the force of gravity - allows one to change the direction he jumps in, so that he doesn't fall into lava or deadly swamp water. The 3D Mario games don't have as much height in jumps, but they compensate with local sidekicks FLUDD (hover nozzle) and Luma (star spin). The great, yet not ridiculous (such as Saints Row IV's superpower-jump), height of Mario's jumps coupled with the "realness" of 3D make Super Mario Sunshine (by way of a quick, high spinning-jump) and Super Mario 3D World my favorite Mario platformers.
Interesting video. For me, its kinda like something to just do with my fingers, if I'm not really doing anything in the game (cutscene or quest) I just jump for no reason, I just press that button :P Its like in osu! and Guitar Hero where I spam strum or my two buttons before the song even starts. Probably just me though
Without question, jumping is my favorite thing to do in video games. I'm not sure if it personally started with Mario, but it definitely played a part (and Spider-Man 2 closed the deal). Even without video games, when I had super power fantasies as a kid, the one recurring power that I wanted was the ability to jump to extreme heights and distances - as opposed to flying, the usual go-to answer. Besides the reasons listed, I believe jumping specifically has played such a prominent role in both personal and video game fantasies because of the challenge it represents. It offers a person a sense of unbridled freedom that they wouldn't likely get on a regular basis, while simultaneously providing mechanics that fit our general concept of how the world works. It invites exploration by using (conservation of) momentum to reach places not thought easily possible. It's a fantasy that's still very grounded in human understanding. To put it in another way: I've idolized Superman forever, but I've always wanted to be Spider-Man. Also, I'm glad to see I wasn't the only one who could see how long they could "jump" around a planet in Galaxy. Fun video as always! EDIT: Nerdy thought - I think it should be noted that even in his first appearances, Superman only ever actually jumped great distances. I believe this where the "...Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound," shtick originated from.
When talking about Mario's jumps, I can't help but think about how Trials has dominated my gaming experiences as of late because that game's feel is both hyper-realistic (in terms of physics to the body and bone-crunching sound) and also completely fantastical.
I think it's just because computers are really good at simulating and depicting spacial environments. Jumps are just a part of that, and exaggerated jumps are required for players to understand what is going on in the low fi worlds of video games.
I always perform the Mario jump on a daily basis. Helps me threw my daily tasks and life has been so much easier since I started doing the "Mario Leap"
The reason I jump in video games is because of the old game Armed and Dangerous, where chaining together consecutive jumps actually increased your movement speed. Now when I play videogames I inherently jump out of some delusional belief that it will improve my game play.
Mario was definitely and most likely the first to bring jumping into video games with a major semblance of platformers as we know them today, but before Super Mario Brothers, Mario was jumping and platforming it up in Donkey Kong.
The arcade game Flicky came out one year before Super Mario Bros and its jumping mechanic was already pretty awesome even though it had a fixed height.
Games that have little-to-no jumping mechanics (save for a select few) feel like you're artificially limited, somehow. Whereas games that have overly-exaggerated jumping (Unreal Tournament's double jump, and Titanfall's parkour wall-running) make you feel super powered. I'd have to agree with you; these mechanics are probably evolved from Mario's superb jump physics. But I think it goes to show that video games are an escape from reality as much as they are power fantasy fulfillment.
Hardcore gamers tend to really tick me off sometimes. Turning off items and playing on only 1 stage is ridiculous. Games are about 1 thing and 1 thing only...FUN. By demanding to limit a game or otherwise label it as broken, really sucks the fun out of it for everyone.
Hardcore Melee is fun to me! (Also there are more than 6 stages available for random in tournament play, teams are possible and it's not like the hardcore players are forcing you to play a certain style. Make friends with other casuals.)
I come across a lot of players at LAN parties and these type of people demand the game be set to their preferences. They end up essentially holding the party hostage all because they can't stand having a little variety or chaos in their play set.
I think for a lot of people they grew up playing Mario, or it was one of the first games they could really get into and be good at. Mario has also been around for a long time, so people of a wide range of ages have played at lest one of the games. I was so used to the jumping aspect of games, (mainly Mario, and other similar titles) that the first time I played a game where I couldn't jump, I got really, really mad. Some of the first video games I fell in love with were Mario, and that had a big impact on my "gaming career." Now it feels natural to me, to be jumping around without a care in the world, as I fight off bad guys, or I'm just trying to climb a mountain in Skyrim...
As someone who grew up playing a lot of platformers, but didn't own any Nintendo consoles, I had a PC and a Master System, the controls in Mario always seemed very sloppy to me. I grew up on games like Cosmo, Commander Keen and Xargon. I never actually thought about this before but whenever I play a Mario game it seems to take me at least 20 min or so to get a handle on how slippery the controls feel. I remember a few years ago I was over an old friends house and we were playing Super Mario 1 and I was falling in tiny pits and running into goombas, and I was like, man I didn't realize I sucked so much at games. Then we switched over to the Master System and I was fine. Also, that's not to say that all PC games had perfect fluid controls. I think it just had different standards. Well, that's just one guys personal experience. This was an interesting episode. I didn't realize Mario had his own version of physics. Anyway, Have a good one.
I think the ability to jump in a videogame simply instills a greater sense of freedom in the player, and that's why it feels so good to do it., since in most games we can't really use our hands or use complex leg movements to maneuver through the level. If we can't interact with our environment in any way other than walking/running around in it and using predetermined functions like buttons and switches, we feel sort of closed in, an almost claustrophobic feeling of lack of control. The jump, while completely unrealistic, gives that little extra sense of freedom that somehow breaks that restrained feel.
I think the fact that Mario can jump and we can't accounts for very little of the reason why jumping in mario is great. The fact that you can control how high he can jump and change the direction he's going mid jump gives the player control (like the game feel part of the video). That means jumping is a powerful tool and not a thing you have to do which will most likely end badly. That is great game design turning something almost useless and faulty IRL and in other games into a weapon and a fun challenge. (manShigeru Miyamoto is a genius)
I think anouther big factor of why jumping is so common in videogames is space. in errant signals video about violence in video games he suggests that violence is used so much is because it is a spacial activity, it involves a lot of movement through space. and maybe thats why jumping is used so much as well, because jumping is about motion through space.
Somehow, it's always kind of bothered me how most jump mechanics work in games. There are games like Legend of Zelda, where you can't jump (most of the time) except for the auto-jumps, which makes getting some things really inconvenient. However, it also makes the puzzles that much more fun and finding new things that much more exciting. There are also games where the jump mechanics make relative sense, such as Portal. The jumps aren't that unrealistic (or at least don't feel like they are), and landing safely from great heights is explained by the long-fall shoes that protect Chell. Although the shoes themselves don't make too much sense, it's a futuristic science game, so in that regard, they do make sense.
I'm not so sure I really buy into the idea of escapism. I can't throw fireballs around, or punch through solid brick, but I think I speak for most everyone when I say that just jumping in a Mario game is more satisfying than either of those activities. Mario's jump is designed to be an experience- and judging by the information you gave relating to the development of Super Mario 64, it was one destined to be at the core of the game. Everything about it- the sound, the height, the pull of gravity, ability to change direction, all of it- was carefully considered and tweaked before reaching it's final state. These highly refined, visceral experiences are satisfying at an intuitive level, and they can take any form in the world; no matter weather its the kick of a rifle, or the burning of rubber; the sound of a punch, or the spring in your step.
I completely agree with your last point about how participating in something for over 20 hours a week doesn't make you anymore a gamer than someone who plays more casually. Props, buddy!!
+Logan McCarthy I'd agree, it doesn't make you more of a gamer, but it makes you a different type of gamer for sure. To be a gamer, you only have to play games, it amazes me that people argue about this.
@PBS Game/Show whilst shootouts and jet flying are important as tools for opening up possibilities, jumping is way more significant due to its timing in the game. One of the first things a new player learns as they play a new game is to jump. Jumping abnormally is the first promise of what the game has to offer in terms of imaginative experience. Flying jets and massive shootouts tend to come later on. The sensation of the first superhuman jump is like opening the brick wall to Diagon Alley, it opens up a whole new world of possibilities without regular physical constraints such as the human body or the Earths physics. The game stretches out before you like a blank canvas ready for you to paint your adventure, and Mario was the first character to let us feel that sense of wonder
I do agree that jumping feels good when done vicariously is because seeing these spectacular leaps is one hell of a fantasy world we as people have built, to compensate for our own sucky jumps. Though, I think saying Mario is the reason behind all of this is a stretch. We enjoy leaps everywhere - movies, sports, and yeah, games. To say that Mario is responsible for all this would be equal as to saying Bomberman is the reason we enjoy explosions.
I think maybe it's just because in the time of 2d there weren't many options, so eventually jumping was going to happen in video games. It felt so good that we've carried it over to non-flat landscapes. I love this show.
I think side scrollers and jumping in those is just a by-product of our old technological limit. It was either over view like the old GTA or side view, which uses its second dimension as height.
I've noticed that a lot of players use jumping as a way of expressing themselves in video-games. I'm not entirely sure on why this is, maybe it is due to Mario and platformer games having such a strong root within the culture or it might just that players generally have very few options available to do so . The same can be said of ducking or spinning in in circles. Thinking about it now, once placed into shared spaces, these simple actions grow as they become what i guess is "video-game/avatar body language" (?), using a duck or a jump the same as how players could chime in Journey or dance in Destiny.
Don't know if it really matters but i find the jumping in Jak and Daxter was done very well, feeling extremely well with nice air control, extending air time with spin kicks, long jumps high jumps double jumps and divepunches. And all of these link well :)
Definitely a great episode. I agree that jumping is a huge part of gaming but I wonder if that will continue much longer. It makes sense that for the most part the "central" button has been dedicated to jumping in most 3rd person games (X for playstation and A for X-Box, etc...) because in most Nintendo games the A button (which your hand naturally rests on) was regularly a jump button. Mostly on account of most early Nintendo games being platformers. But I think we are going to see a paradigm shift soon where the "central" button is going to be a dedicated "run" button as that is a more commonly necessary function in FPS's which are more common. Even in third person games Ubisoft seems to be pushing the central run button. Also for more of my two cents, I think the entire problem with the sonic games has to do with where they put the jump button. They want to make the jump button the "central" button because that is a button we are going to press often but we kind of need both analog sticks to keep track of the little bugger and move freely. The solution has been to design levels and camera movements so you don't need to control the camera to free up the thumb for jumping. I propose that if Sonic Team would just move the jump button to one of the trigger buttons and keep both thumbs on the camera and movement they could actually make a good 3d sonic game. Or they would just mess it up, because that's kind of their thing these days.
I also think jumping is often a very simple and easy way to replace a lot of more difficult to make mechanics Both to code, to animate and more difficult to make intrinsically interesting. This becomes rather obvious in some games where you can't jump, because it leads up to situations where you can't get past knee high obstacles. Games have often needed a way to tackle such problems that don't require lots of code, lots of animation and that's actually interesting. Jumping fits the bill rather easily, and is still something intuitive and already known by the audience.
I read somewhere on the internet that in Super Mario World, when Mario jumps, there is a very, very short moment in which he is not affected by gravity. And why is that? Because this way, the jump "feels more realistic".
One of my favorite jump mechanics in video games has always been the completely absurd double jump, which, surprisingly, I don't think Mario has ever done (I mean double jump in this case as in a second jump that is performed mid-air from the first jump). It's just completely nonsensical, but for a long time it was one of the most frequent elements in older platform games, and I feel it's kind of fallen out of favor in recent years. Still, cartoonish platformers like Crash Bandicoot to gritty gorefests like God of War have all fallen on this trope of "jump off of nothing." I feel like there was some game at one point that tried to explain the character's ability to double jump being due to having some kind of rocket boots or something, but I can't remember the game. But, with all the points you mentioned in this video, the double jump, and even characters having the ability to change direction mid-jump all kind of paint the ability to jump as this kind of almost romanticized thing where we have a lot more airborne independence than we do.
How do feel about the recent romanticized versions of parkour and free-running (which are technically both the same thing) which are now being included in more and more titles these days?
I'm not finished with the video yet, but I'm sensing that it's going to make a glaring omission: game programmers do use formulas for gravity in their games, but they set the gravity to dozens of times more intense than Earth's gravity is. This is really why jumping games have their feel, not because they're jumping so high, but because beyond that, there's this implication that there's an insane amount of power behind it.
I think a gamer should be somone who will play games not just because they wer bord, its somone that aprechiates the mediam and is willing to go out of there way or at least trys to devote time to playing the games.
I don't think Mario is what led me to jump in games. TBH I was a Sega kid growing up. But in most games jumping is just plain fun and it looks silly. It's like the gaming equivalent of twiddling your thumbs.
My defnition of gamer is roughly this: A Gamer is a Person that has a huge affection to Video games. It can be playing game a lot in his live or just spending a lot of time in the subject of video Games. Like you make it in your show. I Think it's something of both. Because i also cant play 20 Hours a week of video games but my live is all about the subject video games because i am something like a game journalist. So knowledge and the time spent in videogames makes a "Gamer". But honestly, its not so important how we call us. The thing that matters is the love for videogames we have.^^
I don't like commenting on RUclips, but I thought I should say I really enjoyed watching this. Good stuff about Mario, and awesome follow-up talk from the previous episode.
Even though it seems like a good explanation for most games, this "being able to jump higher than usual" theory doesn't support games like Smite, where your character can't jump even a quarter of their own length. For a while, the developers even removed jumping from the game entirely, because it seemed useless to them, but they had to add it back quite soon after, because Smite players felt like it was a necessary part of the game. I think the theory talked about in this video supports single player games very well, but in a lot of online multiplayer games there is a different reason for all the jumping, and that is the lack of simple, easy to use gestures. In most online multiplayer games, you can't run around and wave at someone at the same time. You either have to stand still and use a certain gesture from a menu or taunt button, or you just can't gesture at all. So because jumping is such a large move that doesn't make the chance of getting shot while standing still huge, and is often related to joy, people just do that instead. It's just like rapidly hitting your teammate with a melee weapon, whenever they're standing still for ages.
I don't know if we enjoy jumping in games - but I certainly miss it when it isn't included. For instance, I remember feeling like Gears of War was very clunky and rigid because you couldn't jump. It made me feel so much more restricted in my movement. In games like Halo, I love jumping and crouch-jumping across a 3D-plane. Maybe exploration is part of it? Either way, you're right in saying it feels good.
I believe mario did have major influence in the videogame jumping, but I believe that the mechanic of jumping of videogames evolved by itself as different genre games experiment with the jumping ability
I think jumping in video games would have turned out the same whether or not Mario was invented or not. It is used a lot in action movies: jumping out of a building while it explodes, jumping out of a moving car, jumping while shooting in slow motion, ... So why wouldn't it be used in action games? It is an action like running.
Whilst Mario may have been an inspiration for the jump, I always thought that the jump mechanic in a lot of games, was used so that it doesn't feel like you're trapped in a 2D plane of existence. Take for example SMITE (the 3rd person MOBA), there is a jump mechanic that serves no purpose (except jump parties), but having it there -even if it is useless- makes the game feel more free and life like.
I would say the reason we jump so much in gaming is due to the fact that in most games it feels like a faster way of getting around. In Oblivion about 20 hours of my play time would be dedicated to jumping merely because it felt like it was transporting me around Cyrodiil faster.
I jump in video games because it gives me something to do to distract myself from how bad the game is *cough* WoW *cough* P.S. I have never had chicken and waffles, it doesn't really seem like they go together. Besides, waffles are perfect on their own.
List of games with (personally) satisfying jumps before NES Mario: Joust (1983) Jungle Hunt (best jump ever) (1983) The original POW Mario Bros (1983) Pitfall! (1982) Pitfall! 2 (1984) Donkey Kong (1981) If you want to get technical, Frogger (1981) :p If we're being historically accurate, we do owe "jumping in games" to Mario, but it's carpenter Jumpman mario which (as far as I'm aware) introduced jumping in a platform game back in 1981 (there was an older platform game, but it didn't have jumping). As for "redefining the jump, my money is on Winter Games.
I actually found that Metriod had the defining jump. As I played it, Samas had pitch perfect jumping. You knew if you made the jump the second you were in the air, I can see Metroid take ques from Super Mario Brothers, but Metriod has the 'Jump' to me.
I was expecting him to say "But hey, that's just a theory..."
...a Jamin theory. Thanks for watching.
Maybe Mario is secretly wearing Chell's Long fall boots?
People jump in games because they can't muster a jump in reality...
Love that game
#dope
That's why Journey feels so satisfying. It plays into our dreams of flying. And when we dream of flying we actually dream of jumping and floating.
If you are into game design at all, you need to watch Game/Show.
It largely takes the formula made awesome by Idea Channel and applies it to video games and game design. Despite the hosts insistence on glasses without lenses, he does a great job of explaining what is going on.
he takes the lenses out so there is no glare.
Thank you! Also: ruclips.net/video/WbV_KT1iGao/видео.htmlm32s
If you're into game design, you should be watching Extra Credits. You know, a show made by game designers specifically about game design.
You can watch more than one show.
Robert Headley Yes, it's the beauty of media. However this game is targeted far more at the gamer community and covering more surface level topics, this episode in particular being very much about "isn't this interesting?", whereas Extra Credits delves deep into "why was this designed this way?", which is infinitely more useful for game designers.
Well also through a game design lens, Jumping just opens a door to lots of different interesting puzzles. It's a clearly defined action--go up, reach top, come down--so the designer has a sense of generally what the player will be limited to in tackling a problem. Especially in games where you have absolute control over the absolute highest height a player can jump, it's just a motion that loans itself well to designing challenges. It's a way that people travel through space, so you can really clearly tell when you've succeeded, and it feels good. You get to advance to the next area. You can create challenges beyond the obvious "jump as high as you can" and into "jump past this, jump around that, jump to here and from there to here." Running just doesn't have quite as many problems associated with it, which is probably why evolutionarily we favor it. But from a game design perspective, where your goal is to create challenges, jumping has got a nearly infinite number of ways it can go wrong, which makes it interesting.
Such a great video editorial. Jump, jump! Honestly, all that Mario in my childhood may be why I'm addicted to jumping in real life, too...
Gravity itself is an intuitive phenomena, we deal with it every day. Even if the physics are exaggerated, they're still very familiar to us - we don't need to learn anything new to understand how to use gravity.
In other words: It's an additional mechanic, adding lots of complexity to the paths we can take (or the paths that can unfold dynamically), without much additional burden. One extra button: Jump, B. By holding down that button, you can also jump a little higher (also very intuitive, it's a bit like putting more force into your jump IRL).
But that's the limit of your control, vertically speaking. Gravity will eventually do its gravity thing no matter how many B buttons you press.
What really made Mario shine was not that jump. It was the fact that you maintained full control over your *horizontal* velocity mid-air, just as if you never left the ground. That's just as physically impossible as the high jump, I'd say even more so.
But not in SMB, and mastering that wholly new level of control, completely outside of reality (while somehow still being so intuitive, it goes completely unnoticed by most) before gravity shoves you into some lava is intense. It's something truly special.
Mario's air-running is the *real* meat of the franchise, but it sadly doesn't get the credit it deserves.
"If putting 20 hours a week into gaming is the bar for being a gamer, then I'm not a gamer, and I host a TV show!" I totally get that sentiment, and understand that plenty of people have real world obligations that prevent them from putting a ton of time into games. I don't know what it says about me that I have a full time job, with a serious relationship (getting married next month in fact), and put 35 hours into Smash Brothers on 3DS over the weekend. I put 40 hours into Hyrule Warriors the week before that. I feel that more criteria should go into being a "Gamer" than just hours played. There's a lot of other variables that could be accounted for.
He's right about the thing with foodies and cinephiles and the like. We need a special word....Suggestions?
Mr. Fossalopagaus II Playaphile? Gamethusiast?
Butterworthy Congrats on getting married! Got married myself last month.
PBS Game/Show Thanks! I hope you didn't have to shell out as much for catering and photography as I am T_T I'm also anticipating dozens of left over cupcakes thanks to my overzealous soon-to-be bride ordering 3 times as many cupcakes as guests.
I think the biggest defining factors should be not only what kind of games you play, because that does matter to an extent, but also how passionate you are about gaming culture and whether or not you identify as a "gamer". If you call yourself a gamer, what right does anyone have to question it?
I think that the prominence of jumping in video games is more because of the necessity of 2D movement. Jumping has been a prominent feature since the days of Pit Fall and Mario's origination (donkey Kong). It is of necessity that you jump in a two dimensional video game, and that necessity in turn has shaped our imagination of video games, leading to it's current usage in 3D. Mario just happens to be a popular video game that falls into that paradigm.
joseph hall-patton That's true, but it's more about *how* the jump was executed as well.
Prince of Persia, the OLD one, is a great example of a popular game with realistic jumping physics. The focus of the game isn't on vertical momentum, but rather on horizontal. If you fall more than 2 levels, you instantly die. You can only jump up to reach the ledge directly above you. I'd argue that games with more realistic jumping have had a sizable impact as well, considering that the PoP series is considered the spiritual successor to Assassin's Creed, which inspired most of the free-running and parkour elements that a lot of games add in now.
I remember my first experience with running and jumping left and right in Pitfall on the Atari 2600.!
mario is kind of the reason we jump in games.
you talked about it as the most influential game mechanic, other than moving left and right.
but jumping is just moving up, and then ultimately down.
if mario didnt do it, another game would have. but its still the fact that marios main mechanic is jumping AND it was insanely popular that made the jump mechanic so important.
That's the way I see it, too. In a 2D game, unless you have a top-down perspective, you need some kind of control over the vertical axis. Jumping fills that need.
I feel like as influential as Mario and his incredible jumps were to to gaming industry, mere convenience also played an as big, if not bigger role. In most games, especially early 3D games, it was much easier to code a strong jump into the game than the ability to climb over your obstacles. The game developers chose to simply add a jump ability rather than try to add a complex climbing mechanic.
Not only that, but climbing requires an environment, whereas jumping can be done whenever you want. Jumping gives players freedom, whereas climbing limits it.
For example, when I first played Zelda: Ocarina of Time, I spent, like 5 minutes in Kokiri Forest mashing buttons and trying to figure out how to jump. As great as the Zelda games are, compared to Mario the levels felt more structured and one-way. If I wanted to get up a certain platform, I couldn't jump to it. I had to try and find the wall that the game would let me climb. I could only explore the way the designers wanted me to explore.
When I started getting into freestyle snowboarding a few years back, I remember thinking about how similar it was to playing video games. Some of these terrain parks have jumps bigger than a small house, and if you practice enough at the sport, you will hit them one day. Game Show is quite right at pointing out how much we all suck at jumping. But man is it awesome when you use snow and a downward slope to give you an assist! I feel fortunate to have experienced what can only be described as superlative, the exact thing we aspire to feel when we create and play games like Super Mario Bros.
0:52
I literally went back 5 times to watch this bit. No idea Bill had a hidden fly guy inside. Buried deep, obviously.
Jumping the most influential video game mechanic of all time?
It's certainly close, but I still have to award that distinction to Space War, which gave us shooting. If there's one thing we do more of in games than jump, it's shoot.
This is all assuming that movement of an onscreen avatar generally doesn't count as a mechanic, of course.
Jumping and executing gymnastic maneuvers is extremely satisfying, particularly in 3rd person. In first-person (such as in Mirror's Edge) not as much.
I think jumping is also prevalent because it covers so much ground in terms of the different elements of game design and interactivity.
It's often 3rd person which is more relatable/projectable. It has thrill and visceralness arising from controlling something uncontrollable--Gravity and momentum. That gravity is pretty universally understood. It provides instant feedback. It allows for interactivity in a second dimension from an angle--side view--that is an almost primal viewpoint for depiction. And, as you said, it's so embedded now, it's just straight up universal.
This video makes me think of the games Uncharted. Recently my friend and I have been playing through the series and we just can't help but comment on how ridiculously badass Drake is. He can jump like nobody's business. Stuck on some crazy ledge on the side of some ancient building, hundreds of feet in the air? Not sure where you're supposed to go next? Well, see that little groove in the face of the rock waaaaay over there, across that huge gap of empty space? Try that. Afraid you just can't possibly make it because that's just crazy talk? Try it.
Chances are you'll make that insanely impossible jump, and when you do, it feels like you, not just Drake, are at the top of the world (or on the side of a building).
I'm totally in agreement with that last comment Jamin made in response to the last week. The "20+ hours" bar is 1) stupid. 2) a survey by a college that is predominantly male in the first place. That's not a good sample method, and it's a ridiculously high bar in reality. I'm most definitely in the "hardcore gamer" group, as I often spend vast amounts of time in games, in the past few weeks replaying Skyrim to do the DLC and quest mods, I've put in 30 hours a week. But this was after months and months of less than 5 a week due to work and nothing that I fancied playing. Does that mean I have my Gamer Card this week, but those months I didn't? Or are people trying to average it out, then I wouldn't get it either as my yearly average likely far below 20 hours.
I think the fact that video games are on a 2d screen is also why there is quite a lot of jumping. In order to give a more immersive environment you need some sort of depth, and some sort of aesthetic only objects. so using a 2d sidescroller mechanic makes the aesthetic pieces much easier to implement without distracting the player than a top-down one would. and in newer 3d games, jumping is how you achieve a better 3d style than a hight-less world, and without some way to jump, even if part of other actions, is practically required if you can do other such hight-based things like flying or swimming freely.
Some games that can't jump don't give you truly 3d environments, but use things like stairs with speed changes to make it feel more 3d, and less like a flat isometric world; A good example being megaman battle network series. And as tech increases, better physics in term of jump mechanics would be expected nowadays. Plus, as games become more open world, it's easier and easier to clip through an object, and without jumping, have no way out.
All in all, I bet that even without Mario, jumping, or at least other ways of changing that vertical axis on whim, would still be just as common, if not as iconic to gaming, as it is anyways
My question is, where did the myth that jumping could get us from point A to point B faster? And why do I find myself trying it in every videogame?
Cool breakdown of mario's jump physics. I wonder how the triple jump made him jump higher
It's because Mario's shoes have Flubber on them.
(wow, that was a really old reference)
Good question!
What makes Mario's jump a very satisfying because it is a very simple mechanic which supplies the player with immediate sensory feedback. Whenever the player presses the jump button in Super Mario Bros. they are provided with an auditory "boing," imitating the sound of a spring. In the 3D games this was replaced with Mario shouting a little "yip," but the effect is the same. When the player's input is immediately rewarded with visual and audible sensory stimulation it gives the player a greater sense of agency over the game character, and thus greater satisfaction. If you were to turn the sound off that would greatly reduce the simply rewarding feeling of the jump.
The fact that jumping is a mechanic in many video games is not so much a form of wish fulfillment but a result of the graphical limitations of video games for a long period of time. If you wanted to expend as little resources as possible to designing a world in which a player could explore a 2D side-scrolling action platformer was the simplest choice. Even though jumping is not an activity humans regularly engage, in order to give the impression of greater agency over the game developers has to result to impossible physics. This would include insanely high jumps as well as the ability to turn around in mid air.
This method of game design could apply to many other different series which are not platformers. I found just the act of walking and running around in the first few Resident Evil games very satisfying in the same vein as Mario's jump. Even though those characters didn't jump, the controls were responsive and the sound of the footsteps gave the player immediate feedback.
Chicken and waffles??? I'm going to have to try that.
"Mindblowing" is the perfect way to describe Super Mario 64.
I know this probably isn't how you're supposed to do this, but I had to respond to the response to yogscast will's comment, when you said 'there isn't a term for someone who just plays games' you could say the same thing about all the examples listed, someone who eats food is 'someone who eats food' someone who watched movies is 'someone who watched movies' someone who plays games is 'someone who plays game' you don't need a term, just like you don't need one for the others, it's a casual thing they do that doesn't need labelling
Just to clarify, I am saying this for the casuals, like how foodies have a name or cinaphiles, gamers are the non casual version, the ones who have gaming as a part of their identity
DireZyre Yeah, I just think the word gamer has a mixed meaning as I mentioned in my episode. It it a noun that implies a verbed behavior but also an identity as well.
But how would you define "casual" in broader terms? For example I spend 30+ hours a week gaming, but it's mostly relegated to my 3DS. Does that make me casual? Some people might think so.
Amelia Bee It depends on what kinds of games, and whether or not you identify as a gamer. For example, I'm a "cinephile", or film enthusiast if you don't like made up words, yet there are all sorts of classic "must see" films that I haven't seen, Scarface, Rocky, and Pulp Fiction among them.
I think of the term "gamer" as someone who follows video gaming culture, news and developments. In this way a gamer would be someone who, on top of playing a large number of games, discusses, reviews, and tries to better the medium.
Actually I frequently jump every day at work over pipes and other obstacles.
What I love about Mario's jump is how high it gets. A single jump in 2D Mario games and the Super Mario 3D series (the newest ones) brings him up to 5 times his height, which - when coupled with the force of gravity - allows one to change the direction he jumps in, so that he doesn't fall into lava or deadly swamp water. The 3D Mario games don't have as much height in jumps, but they compensate with local sidekicks FLUDD (hover nozzle) and Luma (star spin).
The great, yet not ridiculous (such as Saints Row IV's superpower-jump), height of Mario's jumps coupled with the "realness" of 3D make Super Mario Sunshine (by way of a quick, high spinning-jump) and Super Mario 3D World my favorite Mario platformers.
This seemed more like a Game Theory episode.
Interesting video. For me, its kinda like something to just do with my fingers, if I'm not really doing anything in the game (cutscene or quest) I just jump for no reason, I just press that button :P Its like in osu! and Guitar Hero where I spam strum or my two buttons before the song even starts.
Probably just me though
Without question, jumping is my favorite thing to do in video games. I'm not sure if it personally started with Mario, but it definitely played a part (and Spider-Man 2 closed the deal). Even without video games, when I had super power fantasies as a kid, the one recurring power that I wanted was the ability to jump to extreme heights and distances - as opposed to flying, the usual go-to answer. Besides the reasons listed, I believe jumping specifically has played such a prominent role in both personal and video game fantasies because of the challenge it represents. It offers a person a sense of unbridled freedom that they wouldn't likely get on a regular basis, while simultaneously providing mechanics that fit our general concept of how the world works. It invites exploration by using (conservation of) momentum to reach places not thought easily possible. It's a fantasy that's still very grounded in human understanding.
To put it in another way: I've idolized Superman forever, but I've always wanted to be Spider-Man.
Also, I'm glad to see I wasn't the only one who could see how long they could "jump" around a planet in Galaxy. Fun video as always!
EDIT: Nerdy thought - I think it should be noted that even in his first appearances, Superman only ever actually jumped great distances. I believe this where the "...Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound," shtick originated from.
I just discovered this channel and congrats men it jumped to my top 3 favorites right the way!
When talking about Mario's jumps, I can't help but think about how Trials has dominated my gaming experiences as of late because that game's feel is both hyper-realistic (in terms of physics to the body and bone-crunching sound) and also completely fantastical.
I think it's just because computers are really good at simulating and depicting spacial environments. Jumps are just a part of that, and exaggerated jumps are required for players to understand what is going on in the low fi worlds of video games.
I always perform the Mario jump on a daily basis. Helps me threw my daily tasks and life has been so much easier since I started doing the "Mario Leap"
The reason I jump in video games is because of the old game Armed and Dangerous, where chaining together consecutive jumps actually increased your movement speed. Now when I play videogames I inherently jump out of some delusional belief that it will improve my game play.
Mario was definitely and most likely the first to bring jumping into video games with a major semblance of platformers as we know them today, but before Super Mario Brothers, Mario was jumping and platforming it up in Donkey Kong.
The arcade game Flicky came out one year before Super Mario Bros and its jumping mechanic was already pretty awesome even though it had a fixed height.
Games that have little-to-no jumping mechanics (save for a select few) feel like you're artificially limited, somehow. Whereas games that have overly-exaggerated jumping (Unreal Tournament's double jump, and Titanfall's parkour wall-running) make you feel super powered. I'd have to agree with you; these mechanics are probably evolved from Mario's superb jump physics. But I think it goes to show that video games are an escape from reality as much as they are power fantasy fulfillment.
This episode is sooo good. Ive never thought that i was playing out my fantasies by jumping in games but its true! I wish i could jump like Mario 😢
Props for the BIT.TRIP reference!
Hardcore gamers tend to really tick me off sometimes.
Turning off items and playing on only 1 stage is ridiculous.
Games are about 1 thing and 1 thing only...FUN.
By demanding to limit a game or otherwise label it as broken, really sucks the fun out of it for everyone.
Richard Duryea But what *is* fun? :)
Hardcore Melee is fun to me!
(Also there are more than 6 stages available for random in tournament play, teams are possible and it's not like the hardcore players are forcing you to play a certain style. Make friends with other casuals.)
bebobli yes it is I cant jump in to a game of counter strike with out ever one in there dog voting on dust II is annoying
I come across a lot of players at LAN parties and these type of people demand the game be set to their preferences. They end up essentially holding the party hostage all because they can't stand having a little variety or chaos in their play set.
I think for a lot of people they grew up playing Mario, or it was one of the first games they could really get into and be good at. Mario has also been around for a long time, so people of a wide range of ages have played at lest one of the games. I was so used to the jumping aspect of games, (mainly Mario, and other similar titles) that the first time I played a game where I couldn't jump, I got really, really mad. Some of the first video games I fell in love with were Mario, and that had a big impact on my "gaming career." Now it feels natural to me, to be jumping around without a care in the world, as I fight off bad guys, or I'm just trying to climb a mountain in Skyrim...
As someone who grew up playing a lot of platformers, but didn't own any Nintendo consoles, I had a PC and a Master System, the controls in Mario always seemed very sloppy to me.
I grew up on games like Cosmo, Commander Keen and Xargon. I never actually thought about this before but whenever I play a Mario game it seems to take me at least 20 min or so to get a handle on how slippery the controls feel.
I remember a few years ago I was over an old friends house and we were playing Super Mario 1 and I was falling in tiny pits and running into goombas, and I was like, man I didn't realize I sucked so much at games. Then we switched over to the Master System and I was fine.
Also, that's not to say that all PC games had perfect fluid controls. I think it just had different standards.
Well, that's just one guys personal experience. This was an interesting episode. I didn't realize Mario had his own version of physics. Anyway, Have a good one.
I think the ability to jump in a videogame simply instills a greater sense of freedom in the player, and that's why it feels so good to do it., since in most games we can't really use our hands or use complex leg movements to maneuver through the level. If we can't interact with our environment in any way other than walking/running around in it and using predetermined functions like buttons and switches, we feel sort of closed in, an almost claustrophobic feeling of lack of control. The jump, while completely unrealistic, gives that little extra sense of freedom that somehow breaks that restrained feel.
I think the fact that Mario can jump and we can't accounts for very little of the reason why jumping in mario is great. The fact that you can control how high he can jump and change the direction he's going mid jump gives the player control (like the game feel part of the video). That means jumping is a powerful tool and not a thing you have to do which will most likely end badly. That is great game design turning something almost useless and faulty IRL and in other games into a weapon and a fun challenge. (manShigeru Miyamoto is a genius)
It's not about the time you give to gaming, but the dedication you put into it.
I think anouther big factor of why jumping is so common in videogames is space. in errant signals video about violence in video games he suggests that violence is used so much is because it is a spacial activity, it involves a lot of movement through space. and maybe thats why jumping is used so much as well, because jumping is about motion through space.
More of this!!! i love game design talk, keep it up!
Somehow, it's always kind of bothered me how most jump mechanics work in games. There are games like Legend of Zelda, where you can't jump (most of the time) except for the auto-jumps, which makes getting some things really inconvenient. However, it also makes the puzzles that much more fun and finding new things that much more exciting.
There are also games where the jump mechanics make relative sense, such as Portal. The jumps aren't that unrealistic (or at least don't feel like they are), and landing safely from great heights is explained by the long-fall shoes that protect Chell. Although the shoes themselves don't make too much sense, it's a futuristic science game, so in that regard, they do make sense.
I'm not so sure I really buy into the idea of escapism. I can't throw fireballs around, or punch through solid brick, but I think I speak for most everyone when I say that just jumping in a Mario game is more satisfying than either of those activities.
Mario's jump is designed to be an experience- and judging by the information you gave relating to the development of Super Mario 64, it was one destined to be at the core of the game. Everything about it- the sound, the height, the pull of gravity, ability to change direction, all of it- was carefully considered and tweaked before reaching it's final state. These highly refined, visceral experiences are satisfying at an intuitive level, and they can take any form in the world; no matter weather its the kick of a rifle, or the burning of rubber; the sound of a punch, or the spring in your step.
Jumping is common in side-scrollers because there's only two dimensions so it the only way to dodge obstacles. (apart from flying)
Jumping is also a form of communication in video games.
I completely agree with your last point about how participating in something for over 20 hours a week doesn't make you anymore a gamer than someone who plays more casually. Props, buddy!!
+Logan McCarthy I'd agree, it doesn't make you more of a gamer, but it makes you a different type of gamer for sure.
To be a gamer, you only have to play games, it amazes me that people argue about this.
@PBS Game/Show whilst shootouts and jet flying are important as tools for opening up possibilities, jumping is way more significant due to its timing in the game.
One of the first things a new player learns as they play a new game is to jump. Jumping abnormally is the first promise of what the game has to offer in terms of imaginative experience. Flying jets and massive shootouts tend to come later on. The sensation of the first superhuman jump is like opening the brick wall to Diagon Alley, it opens up a whole new world of possibilities without regular physical constraints such as the human body or the Earths physics. The game stretches out before you like a blank canvas ready for you to paint your adventure, and Mario was the first character to let us feel that sense of wonder
I do agree that jumping feels good when done vicariously is because seeing these spectacular leaps is one hell of a fantasy world we as people have built, to compensate for our own sucky jumps. Though, I think saying Mario is the reason behind all of this is a stretch. We enjoy leaps everywhere - movies, sports, and yeah, games. To say that Mario is responsible for all this would be equal as to saying Bomberman is the reason we enjoy explosions.
I think maybe it's just because in the time of 2d there weren't many options, so eventually jumping was going to happen in video games. It felt so good that we've carried it over to non-flat landscapes. I love this show.
Pitfall had jumping as a common element a year before Super Mario.
I like jumping in videogames. Sometimes I dream that I jump really high. it' feels fun.
I think side scrollers and jumping in those is just a by-product of our old technological limit. It was either over view like the old GTA or side view, which uses its second dimension as height.
I've noticed that a lot of players use jumping as a way of expressing themselves in video-games. I'm not entirely sure on why this is, maybe it is due to Mario and platformer games having such a strong root within the culture or it might just that players generally have very few options available to do so . The same can be said of ducking or spinning in in circles. Thinking about it now, once placed into shared spaces, these simple actions grow as they become what i guess is "video-game/avatar body language" (?), using a duck or a jump the same as how players could chime in Journey or dance in Destiny.
*walking and met a wall*
"HEY YOUR LUCKY MARIO ISNT INVENTED!!"
Don't know if it really matters but i find the jumping in Jak and Daxter was done very well, feeling extremely well with nice air control, extending air time with spin kicks, long jumps high jumps double jumps and divepunches. And all of these link well :)
in terms of feedback, this is the best episode ive seen of this show. Seriosly keep up the good work
Definitely a great episode. I agree that jumping is a huge part of gaming but I wonder if that will continue much longer. It makes sense that for the most part the "central" button has been dedicated to jumping in most 3rd person games (X for playstation and A for X-Box, etc...) because in most Nintendo games the A button (which your hand naturally rests on) was regularly a jump button. Mostly on account of most early Nintendo games being platformers. But I think we are going to see a paradigm shift soon where the "central" button is going to be a dedicated "run" button as that is a more commonly necessary function in FPS's which are more common. Even in third person games Ubisoft seems to be pushing the central run button.
Also for more of my two cents, I think the entire problem with the sonic games has to do with where they put the jump button. They want to make the jump button the "central" button because that is a button we are going to press often but we kind of need both analog sticks to keep track of the little bugger and move freely. The solution has been to design levels and camera movements so you don't need to control the camera to free up the thumb for jumping. I propose that if Sonic Team would just move the jump button to one of the trigger buttons and keep both thumbs on the camera and movement they could actually make a good 3d sonic game.
Or they would just mess it up, because that's kind of their thing these days.
I also think jumping is often a very simple and easy way to replace a lot of more difficult to make mechanics Both to code, to animate and more difficult to make intrinsically interesting. This becomes rather obvious in some games where you can't jump, because it leads up to situations where you can't get past knee high obstacles. Games have often needed a way to tackle such problems that don't require lots of code, lots of animation and that's actually interesting. Jumping fits the bill rather easily, and is still something intuitive and already known by the audience.
The most surprising thing about this video is how so many people haven't heard of chicken and waffles before they saw it.
I like how you used Jumper for Super Meat Boy
Chicken and waffles are the right thing to do. Laughing so hard! :-D
I read somewhere on the internet that in Super Mario World, when Mario jumps, there is a very, very short moment in which he is not affected by gravity. And why is that? Because this way, the jump "feels more realistic".
One of my favorite jump mechanics in video games has always been the completely absurd double jump, which, surprisingly, I don't think Mario has ever done (I mean double jump in this case as in a second jump that is performed mid-air from the first jump).
It's just completely nonsensical, but for a long time it was one of the most frequent elements in older platform games, and I feel it's kind of fallen out of favor in recent years. Still, cartoonish platformers like Crash Bandicoot to gritty gorefests like God of War have all fallen on this trope of "jump off of nothing." I feel like there was some game at one point that tried to explain the character's ability to double jump being due to having some kind of rocket boots or something, but I can't remember the game.
But, with all the points you mentioned in this video, the double jump, and even characters having the ability to change direction mid-jump all kind of paint the ability to jump as this kind of almost romanticized thing where we have a lot more airborne independence than we do.
How do feel about the recent romanticized versions of parkour and free-running (which are technically both the same thing) which are now being included in more and more titles these days?
I'm not finished with the video yet, but I'm sensing that it's going to make a glaring omission: game programmers do use formulas for gravity in their games, but they set the gravity to dozens of times more intense than Earth's gravity is. This is really why jumping games have their feel, not because they're jumping so high, but because beyond that, there's this implication that there's an insane amount of power behind it.
Loved the Vsause references!
love the new set , really feels like a new era for PBSGame/Show , specially since the whole Jamin from the future incident thing,
I really like VVVVVV; there is no jumping, just inverting gravity.
I believe the jumping motiff really came from sidescrolling Atari 2600 games like Pitfall. Of course, there was always Donkey Kong...
Dude, you totally blew an excellent opportunity to use Van Halen's Jump in this one...
I think a gamer should be somone who will play games not just because they wer bord, its somone that aprechiates the mediam and is willing to go out of there way or at least trys to devote time to playing the games.
I don't think Mario is what led me to jump in games. TBH I was a Sega kid growing up. But in most games jumping is just plain fun and it looks silly. It's like the gaming equivalent of twiddling your thumbs.
that character isn't from super meat boy! it's from a game called jumper, it was my childhood.
My defnition of gamer is roughly this: A Gamer is a Person that has a huge affection to Video games. It can be playing game a lot in his live or just spending a lot of time in the subject of video Games. Like you make it in your show. I Think it's something of both. Because i also cant play 20 Hours a week of video games but my live is all about the subject video games because i am something like a game journalist. So knowledge and the time spent in videogames makes a "Gamer". But honestly, its not so important how we call us. The thing that matters is the love for videogames we have.^^
The big reason jumping is so common in video games is because jumping adds a whole new axis of movement.
I don't like commenting on RUclips, but I thought I should say I really enjoyed watching this. Good stuff about Mario, and awesome follow-up talk from the previous episode.
I remember when I first played a 3D Legend of Zelda game, one of the first things I asked was "how do you even jump in this game???"
I came to the same conclusion about seven years ago when thinking about why I like playing Rayman so much.
Get on Samus Aran's level with infinite jumping! YEAH!
Even though it seems like a good explanation for most games, this "being able to jump higher than usual" theory doesn't support games like Smite, where your character can't jump even a quarter of their own length. For a while, the developers even removed jumping from the game entirely, because it seemed useless to them, but they had to add it back quite soon after, because Smite players felt like it was a necessary part of the game.
I think the theory talked about in this video supports single player games very well, but in a lot of online multiplayer games there is a different reason for all the jumping, and that is the lack of simple, easy to use gestures. In most online multiplayer games, you can't run around and wave at someone at the same time. You either have to stand still and use a certain gesture from a menu or taunt button, or you just can't gesture at all. So because jumping is such a large move that doesn't make the chance of getting shot while standing still huge, and is often related to joy, people just do that instead. It's just like rapidly hitting your teammate with a melee weapon, whenever they're standing still for ages.
I don't know if we enjoy jumping in games - but I certainly miss it when it isn't included. For instance, I remember feeling like Gears of War was very clunky and rigid because you couldn't jump. It made me feel so much more restricted in my movement. In games like Halo, I love jumping and crouch-jumping across a 3D-plane. Maybe exploration is part of it? Either way, you're right in saying it feels good.
For those interested in this, look up the "extra credits" video on kinaesthetics
here we gooooo! caught me off guard, laughed so hard
I believe mario did have major influence in the videogame jumping, but I believe that the mechanic of jumping of videogames evolved by itself as different genre games experiment with the jumping ability
I think jumping in video games would have turned out the same whether or not Mario was invented or not.
It is used a lot in action movies: jumping out of a building while it explodes, jumping out of a moving car, jumping while shooting in slow motion, ... So why wouldn't it be used in action games? It is an action like running.
Whilst Mario may have been an inspiration for the jump, I always thought that the jump mechanic in a lot of games, was used so that it doesn't feel like you're trapped in a 2D plane of existence. Take for example SMITE (the 3rd person MOBA), there is a jump mechanic that serves no purpose (except jump parties), but having it there -even if it is useless- makes the game feel more free and life like.
That was a pretty brutal laying down of the truth at the end there, and I agree with it entirely.
I would not say it is Mario that make us jump so much in games, I would rather say it is the sensation of jumping that drives us to it.
JohannesLazorFREETIME [head explodes]
I would say the reason we jump so much in gaming is due to the fact that in most games it feels like a faster way of getting around. In Oblivion about 20 hours of my play time would be dedicated to jumping merely because it felt like it was transporting me around Cyrodiil faster.
I jump in video games because it gives me something to do to distract myself from how bad the game is *cough* WoW *cough*
P.S. I have never had chicken and waffles, it doesn't really seem like they go together. Besides, waffles are perfect on their own.
herogamer555 Incorrect! Waffles need chicken as nature intended.
List of games with (personally) satisfying jumps before NES Mario:
Joust (1983)
Jungle Hunt (best jump ever) (1983)
The original POW Mario Bros (1983)
Pitfall! (1982)
Pitfall! 2 (1984)
Donkey Kong (1981)
If you want to get technical, Frogger (1981) :p
If we're being historically accurate, we do owe "jumping in games" to Mario, but it's carpenter Jumpman mario which (as far as I'm aware) introduced jumping in a platform game back in 1981 (there was an older platform game, but it didn't have jumping). As for "redefining the jump, my money is on Winter Games.
I actually found that Metriod had the defining jump. As I played it, Samas had pitch perfect jumping. You knew if you made the jump the second you were in the air, I can see Metroid take ques from Super Mario Brothers, but Metriod has the 'Jump' to me.