IrishSkullpanda said:
Spunkgargleweewee.
The Escapist is now rife with it. Can't we just go back to calling them FPS games, or military shooters?
No, we won't. It's too funny to watch people rage over a word so ridiculous.
King Billi said:
Dryk said:
"Immersion" mostly used by people who have nothing else to offer other than I like/dislike this game because of some arbitrary and usually irrelevant factor that adds or breaks their supposed immersion. I'll take the term "dumbed down" over "immersion" any day.
If it's ruining their suspension of disbelief it's not irrelevant.
Of course it's not irrelevant to the person making that complaint, the original point being made was just how meaningless the whole argument becomes when the exact same feature can be used as proof for two completely opposite points of view.
It hardly makes it meaningless; the things that pull someone out of their state of immersion is going to differ from person to person. The flashing red screen may indeed be very distracting for one person while for another they won't even notice it but still receive the intended message it is meant to convey.
Let's look at a more extreme example that actually happened though. You may or may not remember how some months back a person (or group of persons I don't remember very clearly) convinced James Cameron to replace the sky used in
Titanic with one that was astronomically accurate; the reason given was that the stock, inaccurate sky used in the film bugged the ever living crap out of them. Did you notice the sky was wrong in Titanic, because I sure as hell didn't. However this seemingly insignificant detail was enough to pull those people out of the movie and go "Wait a minute, that sky isn't right!". Until that point they had bought into the entire world Cameron had built on screen, and depending on how anal they were about it (which by the sounds of it they were very anal about it) their immersion in the film was broken every time the frame included a prominent view of the sky.
Going back to our hypothetical situation of a flashing red screen to denote damage we can roughly apply the same situation. You and I may not give two shits if the screen flashes red so long as whatever is causing it dies; we'll never once dwell on it during the game. Someone else, however, may like the first person perspective (the most logical scenario that such a mechanic would be use) that has no hud cluttering up the screen; they effectively buy into the game's universe. Their perception of the world becomes the game on screen, that is until the screen flashes red the first time they get damaged and they're suddenly jarred back to reality. This is of course going to happen dozens or hundreds of times more during the game, and if it bothers them enough to complain about it then chances are their immersion in the experience is broken every time.
The same way that good books, movies, plays, and tv shows draw you into them so completely that you lose track of the world around you; so do good games do the same. Since you can't please everyone all the time, inevitably there will be something in them that pulls someone unwillingly back to reality. Therefore it is inevitable that two people will have opposite opinions on whatever pulled one of them out of the experience; it is a quite valid argument point. In fact it can be used a spring board into further discussion, "Well why is it that the screen flashing red broke your immersion?". The dissenting party can then explain why it bothered them, and the supporting party can counter with why they feel it shouldn't have. Both then are able to walk away more enlightened to a view point different from their own.