Younes123 said:
This is satire btw, just get swimming animation already no one **** cares about immersion
So you agree it's a good idea? You clearly value immersion, because you think this real world activity should be made possible in the game! Incidentally, nobody had even mentioned the word, though of course it is
always a factor in games. Whether strongly related to reality or not (this will depend upon the type of game), we expect certain things to happen- the way weapons should be used and what effect they should have are a huge issue in M&B, for instance.
If something feels out of place in a game, is jarringly wrong, then that is something that ruins immersion- players
do care about it which is why they talk about it. The ideas and gameplay choices we want are influenced by reality and whether we think they will suit the game well (in a game such as M&B, heavily based on the real world concept of swords, shields, spears etc. realism and immersion are very closely connected). Few players would enjoy the game if instead of swords we swung giant ice-creams at one another, but you say that nobody cares about immersion...I described why I think it would be better with swimming, the way it would improve gameplay. Again, gameplay and realism/immersion are closely related here, because one would not expect heavily armed troops to be able to carry everything they had with them across the water.
However, regardless of immersion, there is another clear factor here; pure game balance. If troops were to be able to circumvent bridges and simply swim across moats, rivers and lakes, then being able to take all their top gear with them would seem unfair. It would be too easy to totally bypass what should be a significant obstacle (again, immersion; our brains tell us what a river is, why a bridge is important- if the expected characteristics of these things are ignored by the game, then the game feel less logical, less fair, more pointless- immersion and therefore
FUN is ruined).