- 13,902
- 5,395
I kinda have a problem with how game mechanics are treated by the wiki. I understand that game mechanics are not very reliable in a lot of instances for power scaling, especially since a lot of games end up contradicting them, but I feel like they are overgeneralized and they should be used depending on the case by case scenario.
There are many games which simply have no real plot or lore, and all we have is gameplay. In a situation like that, there is nothing that can actually contradict the gameplay for it to be flawed in the first place.
Game mechanics should really be taken similarly to statements, where if it is contradictory, vague, untrustworthy, or insufficient in any way it wouldn't be considered, but if not, it would be accepted as valid evidence. if A can damage B who is insert tier here level, but it didn't "happen in the plot", it shouldn't just be disregarded, since it's not contradictory unless proven to be.
There are many games which simply have no real plot or lore, and all we have is gameplay. In a situation like that, there is nothing that can actually contradict the gameplay for it to be flawed in the first place.
Game mechanics should really be taken similarly to statements, where if it is contradictory, vague, untrustworthy, or insufficient in any way it wouldn't be considered, but if not, it would be accepted as valid evidence. if A can damage B who is insert tier here level, but it didn't "happen in the plot", it shouldn't just be disregarded, since it's not contradictory unless proven to be.