When gameplay contradicts cutscenes

[EliminatorVenom]

So, what is the standard when the gameplay of a said game contradicts what is shown in cutscenes and scripted events?

I ask this because, checking out the profiles (particularly of the Grand Theft Auto series), it seems that feats from both are picked to highball the character as highly as possible. As in, the highest feats of both cutscenes and of gameplay are equally valid, despite contradicting each other.

Initially, this is a very simple problem to solve, which is really prioritize the cutscenes and events; because while, say, Mario may die by touching a goomba (which is consistent in 90% of Mario games), he is also treated as way superior to them in both lore and most games that go outside of the platforming genre, in which that is typical.

However, this is a far less simple issue when the gameplay feats are better than the cutscene ones. Grand Theft Auto is the greatest example of this; the kind of punishment your character can withstand in-game is far greater than what they can survive in cutscenes and events. The same applies to other Rockstar games and Call of Duty, at least, and I'm pretty sure that if I just dig around a bit, this will pop up a lot more with games with more realistic expectations.

Will we prioritize cutscenes and events over the gameplay feats, if they contradict? Or vice-versa? Or will we just accept both high ends and work as if no such contradiction existed? This might be relevant for some revisions I may do in the nearby future.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Usually cutscenes, story, and canon take priority. I'm not saying all gameplay feats should be invalid as those are mostly case by case. I think for example character being able to destroy large objects or move large objects in gameplay should still be valid for instance, but fodder characters and objects surviving powerful attacks and weapons is what's prone to outlier territory. Though it depends on what type of characters and verses.

 

[EliminatorVenom]

Usually cutscenes, story, and canon take priority. I'm not saying all gameplay feats should be invalid as those are mostly case by case. I think for example character being able to destroy large objects or move large objects in gameplay should still be valid for instance, but fodder characters and objects surviving powerful attacks and weapons is what's prone to outlier territory. Though it depends on what type of characters and verses.

See, that's where I see the most common problems.

Taking, for example, Grand Theft Auto and Call of Duty. In almost any cutscene, characters being shot at is a very, very serious threat - life-threatening, even. However, in-game, they can take several bullets quite well. Another example is how in-game, for example, being ran over by a car in GTA is really harmful, but usually not lethal unless said car was at a very high speed, but there are many examples that people being hit by a bicycle or punched by normal people is, again, treated as a quite serious thing.

 

[Antoniofer]

One ignore gameplay mechanics when they contradict cutscenes/lore or are counterintuitive, yes; in several boss fights both characters can withstand a massive amount of damage from each other, but in the cutscene they very well may one shot each other.

If a character can withstand several attacks in gameplay while innthe cutscenes is actually threatered by even one of these attacks, or if it fails to break through something that can be easily broken in gameplay, then one ignores gameplay mechanics and stick to what is shown in the cutscenes.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

GTA and CoD are both verses intended to be realistic, in which ordinary bullets oneshot everyone. So those are examples where I may consider superhuman durability feats outliers. In RPGs and fighting games, it makes sense for protagonists to trade blows with boss fights, but not in a lot of FPS games. I'd also be saying the same for some mostly heat based incineration cannon can vaporize a bunch of fodder enemies that gets tier 8 calculations yet struggles to destroy small vehicles that have no right being higher than 9-B.

 

[thetechmaster36]

We mostly accept cutscenes and lore over gameplay unless there is something to suggest we should take gameplay over cutscenes and lore. RPGs are a good example of this: the characters may be able to destroy. . .I dunno, a planet in lore, but they can't even destroy a house in gameplay. In cases like that, lore takes precedent over gameplay. Some series are an exception to this (Disgaea, for example, has a lot of its feats come from the gameplay), but in most cases, lore > gameplay.

 

[EliminatorVenom]

I appreciate all the answers. I believe that, in the future, this gives some grounds to revise a few pages on the wiki.