To me immersion is enjoying the plot, caring about the characters, and wanting to know what happens next. If you get angry because on of your favorite characters died, then the game has immersed you. On the other hand if you don't care, or don't really even remember who that person was, it failed to immerse you. Generally the games I enjoy the most have to have a deep story, because after a while the gameplay gets boring. After going through 500 battles, I tend to stop enjoying the actual fighting parts of the game. Tales of Symphonia is one of my favorite games of all time, and it had a great combat system. But after a while I started to get bored with the combat because every battle was pretty much the same. The story on the other hand kept me sitting there on the couch all day long.
What's the big deal with "immersion"?
- Thread starter Onyx Oblivion
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I miss the healthbar, but i dont mind the HUD, nice and out of the way for me to glance at when i need to. Cutscenes on the otherhand i think youve been too general.Onyx Oblivion said:I just don't get it.
I always hear stuff about "immersion" on the forums here.
Like being "immersed in the storyline and world".
Why does it matter so much?
There are a surprising number of people out there who dislike achievements/trophies because they "ruin the immersion".
Then there are game design choices...
Games are using HUDs less and less, and those that keep them have the annoying "Fade Away" HUDs that make you draw your weapon every time you want to check your health, ammo, or anything else. And even then, the HUD is tiny, cramped in the corner of the screen, only showing one weapon at a time. I remember the HUD from Doom. You could see all of your ammo, for all of your weapons, equipped or not.
Then there is the fad of getting rid of cutscenes. And placing everything in-game. What's wrong with cutscenes? Giving the player freedom of movement during important events means that they could miss important information. It lets the developers show us what they want to show, and not have to jump through hoops to get us to focus our attention on important objects with things like of glowing audiologs...And with many games these days being designed around surround sound, you can't hear people you aren't directly facing, unless you have surround sound. For example, if there are two characters standing a decent distance away from each other, talking back and forth, I have to keep switching my reticule back and forth between them as they exchange dialog, a cutscene would remove this annoyance. These cutscenes don't have to be Metal Gear Solid levels of ridiculous length and frequency, either.
And finally:
THE REMOVAL OF SUBTITLES
Halo 3 says it has them, but I never saw them as I gunned through hordes of brutes. Even when I switched them on! Not a big deal, as it had cutscenes.
Assassin's Creed 1 was REALLY big on this. I had to do the "turn to face" thing I described above to an annoying degree, as Lucy and Vidic talked to each other from across the freaking room and I'd miss snippets of dialogue frequently. With no subtitles, I had no clue what I missed in this plot heavy game.
In closing:
Why is it bad to be reminded that a game is just a game?
Also, there is a nice little rant in the box. Please click on it and read it.
Spellcheck doesn't think that "spellcheck", "cutscenes", or "immersive" are words.
Edit:
Onyx Oblivion said:
Cutscenes where story is explained are fine, as long as they dont go ON AND ON AND ON AND ON (im looking at you tales of synphonia, 80 hours of game, 50 hours of cutscenes 30 hours of gameplay.)
Cutscenes where my character does awesome shiz are not ok. I want to do that. Why do i have to watch? Immersion is all about atmoshere. Imagine bioshock one if it went ITS A GAME ITS A GAME ITS ONLY A GAME! Every so often. It would ruin it. Part of gaming in very immersive game is a little bit of make believe. "If i was in this situation id be scared" and you are scared. Thats immersion. Achievements and cutscenes wrestle control or attention from the player, almost like going "NO NO NO YOU ARE NOT THE CHARACTER SIT DOWN AND WATCH!" Immersion is good for living in the characters shoes, feeling what he feels, the excitement of a chase, the fear of the dark, the joy of an epic victory.
It was Jurrasic Park: Trespasser:Onyx Oblivion said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurassic_Park:_Trespasser
OT: I like having a hud liek the one in Doom, it seems more game like, I disliked the hud in Farcry2, I like ones where I can clearly see everythign whenever I want to.
Immersion is one of those things that cannot be measured and are entirely subjective when it comes to evaluating whether or not it succeeded.
Immersion, is simply how much of a bias you have.
Immersion, is simply how much of a bias you have.
/threadWoodsey said:
although i'll add, it depends on the type of genre you go for..
No one buys and rpg JUST for the graphics, or if you do you're missing the point. Why wasn't there a hard rock soundtrack for The Dark Knight? Immersion. Why isn't there Comic book "POW, SMAAASSSH, BOOOOOM" when you hit someone in Heavy Rain? Immersion. Why do people have no problem playing through Mass Effect 2 three times back to back? Because the sense of immersion into the world makes time FLY.
When i play an rpg, i roleplay, when i play MW2 SP, im doing the shooting, im not just controlling some guy. Immersion is the be all end all in many genres. Let me put it this way.
A game CAN be fun, and not be immersive, but an immersive game is ALWAYS fun.
in my humble bumble.
It lets us feel in touch with the game world. This doesn't matter in some things. I don't care if some things are immersive or not, but other games are better for a strong atmosphere and a sense of immersion.
Immersion is good if the game world is worth losing yourself in. Bioshock spring to mind as a place it was really cool to get lost in. On the flip side, I'm playing Dragon Age right now, and while it's not really immersive, I'm simply enjoying the game as a game.
Time and a place for everything.
Immersion is good if the game world is worth losing yourself in. Bioshock spring to mind as a place it was really cool to get lost in. On the flip side, I'm playing Dragon Age right now, and while it's not really immersive, I'm simply enjoying the game as a game.
Time and a place for everything.
Simple. The closer you feel to a game, or a character, the more likely you are to keep on playing, and playing, and playing, and playing, and playing, etc.
This.tlozoot said:
I can deal with reckless, deconstructionist, fourth wall-breaking madness. In fact, I love it.
But more often than not, I don't want to play a game; I want to experience something, and every bug, cliche, and just all out poor design only serves to undermine that experience.
"It might just be me, because I prefer gameplay over story. I love a nice, deep battle system in my RPGs, rather than an immersive story. I can guarantee you that I didn't play Star Ocean 4 for 60 hours for it's damn plot."
there you go, you were immersed. If you weren't you would be really bored. That is why immersion is important.
there you go, you were immersed. If you weren't you would be really bored. That is why immersion is important.
On a completely basic level it's almost like a high. It's a meditative state because it's one of the few states outside of sleep where you can completely lose contact with the regular world.
It's an exciting feeling, and it makes you want to progress in the game. It's just a mark of quality when you aren't so aware that it's a game. It's the same with movies, or with theater or whatever. If the actors are delivering bad lines, you will quickly be made painfully aware that you are watching people acting out pre-written lines.
On the note of HUDs, likewise, imagine you are watching a play set in the 17th century, and suddenly in the middle of a dramatic and intense scene, a new character is introduced, and a guy in jeans and a polo shirt walks casually onto stage and introduces the name of the character as well as where he fits into the universe, making you miss more than one line from the actors, and then he just sticks around in the middle of the action and looks casually out into the audience until the next time he is needed.
It's an exciting feeling, and it makes you want to progress in the game. It's just a mark of quality when you aren't so aware that it's a game. It's the same with movies, or with theater or whatever. If the actors are delivering bad lines, you will quickly be made painfully aware that you are watching people acting out pre-written lines.
On the note of HUDs, likewise, imagine you are watching a play set in the 17th century, and suddenly in the middle of a dramatic and intense scene, a new character is introduced, and a guy in jeans and a polo shirt walks casually onto stage and introduces the name of the character as well as where he fits into the universe, making you miss more than one line from the actors, and then he just sticks around in the middle of the action and looks casually out into the audience until the next time he is needed.
Because I want to feel like a bad ass and do the things I can't do and feel like I'm part of something and not just some fat kid in a dark room with a bag of chips playing with my thumbs.
I agree that HUD's don't have an impact on immersion, in my opinion. I got heavily immersed with the Half Life storyline. Subtitles don't interfere too much, but if I have the choice to turn them off, I will. Cutscenes are ok, as long as they explain what I have to do, or explain a part of the story, and don't last overly long. But games like Half Life 2, where there are no cutscenes, being in control of the character the entire time, jsut increases the level of immersion.
Did the jerky animation and odd lip synching of fallout 3 detract from the experience for you?
If you answered "no" then I'm afraid we have irreconcilable differences about games, and I'd tilt my head and look at you funny if we ever met in real life.
Sure, there are plenty of games that aren't too immersive, but loads of fun (mostly multiplayer), but I absolutely love getting sucked into a world, to empathise with the characters, and to have an experience. Anyone who in any way enjoys films without explosions or nudity should get this.
If you answered "no" then I'm afraid we have irreconcilable differences about games, and I'd tilt my head and look at you funny if we ever met in real life.
Sure, there are plenty of games that aren't too immersive, but loads of fun (mostly multiplayer), but I absolutely love getting sucked into a world, to empathise with the characters, and to have an experience. Anyone who in any way enjoys films without explosions or nudity should get this.
Because it's better than In Silico! [/increadably lame pendulum pun]
Seriously, the games industry is notorious for playing follow-my-leader, and since successful games used the tactics (Half Life, usually), people try to use them to cash in. Although not bthering with subtitles is penny-pinching, frankly.
Seriously, the games industry is notorious for playing follow-my-leader, and since successful games used the tactics (Half Life, usually), people try to use them to cash in. Although not bthering with subtitles is penny-pinching, frankly.
Immersion for me is when the interface between the game and the player is transparent. I actually think that the more modern "realistic" games are worse at this. a HUD was a more elegant solution to the problem of displaying information about the character and the world, e.g. metroid prime's visor system. It's much harder to know how many shots you can take when the information is displayed more subtly, and it's also harder to tell when something is an instant kill, &c., &c.
I think the uncanny valley in the graphical area is more of a barrier for immersion than gameplay elements that serve a purpose. To me it's more likely to pull me out than in if I can't get information quickly and effectively.
I think the uncanny valley in the graphical area is more of a barrier for immersion than gameplay elements that serve a purpose. To me it's more likely to pull me out than in if I can't get information quickly and effectively.