Immersion: absolutely useless.

[The Thief]

A game can't make a player immersed, but a player can make a game immersive.

 

[Saskwach]

Just out of curiosity Alex P, are you into GNS theory?

Familiar with it, yes. "Into" it, no. The basic idea -- some play goals are mutually contradictory -- is worthwhile; the rest of the stuff built around that (like the actual categories) kinda sucks. You'll note that GNS is an outdated model, having been replaced by "The Big Model" (which, unfortunately, still includes G, N, and S).

And, yes, I'm well aware that Edwards has said some negative things about "immersion"... I disagree with his take on that, though.

This rant is motivated more by Salen & Zimmerman (though I'm sure they'd disagree with me and I would disagree with them) than Edwards et al. The bits more specific to pen-and-paper gaming are more related to the semi-famous RPGnet "my character" rant than anything from the Forge.

-- Alex

Ah. I'd noticed a couple of your ideas and key words were superficially similar and wondered if they were closer than that; GNS theory strikes me as draws all the wrong conclusions from a very small common sense idea (some people like stories, some like the game, some like the world-building) by trying to categorise and segregate play styles.

 

[Pastey Old Greg]

Rock Band infuriates me
If people want to experience playing in a band then learn the bass or guitar or something and do some good.
of course if you're too lazy....
I can understand playing, say an FPS what with the risk of death and all that or games that enable an experience that was near impossible to achieve but sports games and music games etc. are just stupid, go and do it in real life you'll get far more enjoyment out of it.

Really wish this argument would die. I've been playing bass since fifth grade and guitar since sixth grade. I've been in several bands, and am working to get a couple groups off the ground right now. I play Rock Band because I don't want to start a cover band, and I have about a 1 in 1000000 chance of playing in a stadium. It's also a hell of a lot of fun to play against some friends or play together for a high score.

 

[Alex_P]

Rock Band infuriates me
If people want to experience playing in a band then learn the bass or guitar or something and do some good.
of course if you're too lazy....
I can understand playing, say an FPS what with the risk of death and all that or games that enable an experience that was near impossible to achieve but sports games and music games etc. are just stupid, go and do it in real life you'll get far more enjoyment out of it.

Your ideas are built on a very shaky foundation (that's the whole point of this thread).

Let's follow your logic to the next logical step...

Paintball is a lot more visceral than playing Halo or Team Fortress in front of a big glowy screen will ever be. You get to feel real exertion and hold a an actual paint-spewing gun and you get dirty and there's even a (very, very mild) bit of pain. You'll certainly get in better shape playing paintball than you will just sitting around with a video game, and you might even learn just a bit of real marksmanship, too -- sounds like it would definitely do you more "good" than yet another shooter. A paintball outing no harder to organize than a sports or music activity, either.

So, why aren't you playing real paintball instead of video-game shooters right now, huh?

-- Alex

 

[Alex_P]

Here's an aside about "theories of roleplaying":

Ah. I'd noticed a couple of your ideas and key words were superficially similar and wondered if they were closer than that; GNS theory strikes me as draws all the wrong conclusions from a very small common sense idea (some people like stories, some like the game, some like the world-building) by trying to categorise and segregate play styles.

Unfortunately, it's not even that, in my opinion. You've got:
- Gamism is achievement- and competition- focused play; I think this works as a category, more or less.
- Narrativism is a very particular, very narrow set of techniques that the author(s) happen to particularly like. It's not Narrativist if the story doesn't have theme. It's not Narrativist unless we all create theme together. It's not Narrativist unless I specifically get to author X and you author Y. Sometimes it's not Narrativist unless the theme is, specifically, a moral question.
- Simulationism is anything that doesn't measure up to the bar of Narrativism: world-building, character-acting for its own sake, any form of fannish appreciation without a higher overall purpose, stories that don't make a particular kind of statement in a particular kind of way -- a useless hodgepodge category that isn't actually a category, in other words.

The older GDS classifications are pretty much the opposite. GDS Simulationism is a very narrow set of techniques that focus on reinforcing the pretense that the game world is somehow more than what you experience in play, complete with its own version of "immersion" different from the ones I mentioned in my first post, too. I see it as trying really hard to make the game's story seem emergent and natural when it really would be easier to just admit it's partly constructed and move along to the goddamn fun. GDS Dramatism then serves the role of the pointless kitchen-sink category, acting as the place you dump naive roleplaying and soapy character drama and anything else that is neither "game-like" nor part of the one really narrow category that the authors like a lot.

So, basically, both theories are kinda crap for anything other than explaining their own very narrow playstyle, in my opinion.

-- Alex

 

[curlycrouton]

Rock Band infuriates me
If people want to experience playing in a band then learn the bass or guitar or something and do some good.
of course if you're too lazy....
I can understand playing, say an FPS what with the risk of death and all that or games that enable an experience that was near impossible to achieve but sports games and music games etc. are just stupid, go and do it in real life you'll get far more enjoyment out of it.

Your ideas are built on a very shaky foundation (that's the whole point of this thread).



Let's follow your logic to the next logical step...

Paintball is a lot more visceral than playing Halo or Team Fortress in front of a big glowy screen will ever be. You get to feel real exertion and hold a an actual paint-spewing gun and you get dirty and there's even a (very, very mild) bit of pain. You'll certainly get in better shape playing paintball than you will just sitting around with a video game, and you might even learn just a bit of real marksmanship, too -- sounds like it would definitely do you more "good" than yet another shooter. A paintball outing no harder to organize than a sports or music activity, either.

So, why aren't you playing real paintball instead of video-game shooters right now, huh?



-- Alex

ok number 1 i do paintball
number 2, Halo OR Team Fortress 2 will NEVER be achieved in real life, the story, visuals environment, atmosphere etc.


playing in a band can be.

 

[snuffler]

Immersed - Deeply occupied; engrossed; entangled.
Immersion - The condition of being immersed.

What's all this BS about actually being there? Immersion is the condition of being immersed. Immersed means being deeply occupied; engrossed; or entangled. Immersion in a game just means you're deeply occupied; engrossed; or entangled with the game. Nothing more. It doesn't mean you feel like you're actually there. It means the game is currently absorbing the majority of your attention.

Have you been playing a game and someone told you something and you said "mmmhmm" without actually hearing them? You've experienced immersion in a videogame.