- Apr 22, 2011
As a professional programmer, I would define a glitch as some object or function not performing as expected. Or some combination of objects and functions not performing as expected. For example, being able to walk though a wall that is supposed to be solid is a glitch. Nothing like this occurs in the 1-e skip. All objects are performing exactly as expected, all functions are performing normally. Had they made that area a big box instead of just having a wall then the skip would not be possible. However, the developer did not explicitly intend for the 1-e skip to exist. This is not a glitch or a bug. The most you could make an argument for is that it is a design flaw.SilverStuddedSquirre said:Dr Oswald.
Oh I see your point. I would argue that by not engaging the Scroller of the Level, the Game is Glitching. Is it not? Maybe we should briefly discuss a "glitch" ? I can better see the conflicting nature of our conclusions from your last post.
RJ, On the subject of Mario Games having always included seeming "out of boundary" play?
But is it really a design flaw? In this specific instance the question is actually if the player should only be allowed to take routes that the developer explicitly intended. RJ 17 argues that only explicitly intended routes should be allowed.
But what about other, similar cases? There are places in the game that allow for similar skips - not skipping an auto scroller, but skipping large portions of a level - if you just make a very precise jump called a perfect flutter. Should these also be disallowed? What about extremely expert egg shots that eliminate the need to transform Yoshi on certain levels? These things were not explicitly intended. The developers probably thought they were impossible. But by expert skill these things are possible.