Immersion: absolutely useless.

[Alex_P]

Consider this a response to every post that talks about "immersion" and how to achieve it and why it's good and all that jazz.
 

"Immersion" is quite the terminological bugbear. It's pretty much always defined in terms of "feeling like you're there" or whatever (see above). But half the time it's brought up it's really just a stand-in for any kind of interest or engagement. (People use the word in other ways, too. It's even worse than "roleplaying" in that respect.)

"Immersion" in the narrower, forget-it's-a-game sense is 99% bullshit.

I know I've never had an experience involving any medium -- movies, video games, flight-simulator-style amusement park rides, pen-and-paper roleplaying -- that I didn't recognize as mediated. Have you? Have you ever actually believed your were jumping on turtles or fighting zombies or hugging your Companion Cube, even for one second?

The awareness that you're engaging in something that's constructed -- "We're doing this but not really" -- is essential to any kind of play. That "... but not really" part is what creates the meaning in a game. Even, like, puppies scampering around with each other are aware it's not real. Without it, you're not playing at all. You're just doing something else (e.g. fighting). True "immersion" is the death of play and meaning.
 

The other flavor of "immersion" is really just anything that's interesting. How many special words for "I like this" do you really need?
 

Most discussions use the two interchangeably, which means that most discussions are little more than an unconscious rhetorical bait-and-switch.

This terminological haze leads to all kinds of statements that seem perfectly reasonable when you just say "immersion" a lot, but are really just nonsense and non sequitur. Take out the obfuscating window-dressing and you end up with silly ideas like:

"You want to keep your audience interested, so let's chase this phantom of really-there-ness all day in the hopes of achieving that."

"I was really interested at this point, so clearly it must've been really real to me rather than just, y'know, a cool story that I found interesting."

"The holodeck is 3-D and tactile while the PS2 is not, so the crappy boring live-action games Star Trek characters play are actually somehow more fun than any TV-and-controller game with real structure."

"I totally felt like I was a real person when I did this thing that only a hyper-stylized fictional character would ever do."

"Getting shot in the face is more fun when you really feel like it's happening to you."
 

Immersion: not a useful concept, not a good idea, and, most importantly, not the holy grail of game design.
 

-- Alex

 

[Anton P. Nym]

Anyone who has ever tried to use "body English" on the controller, or jumped when surprised in the game, or been surprised to see how much time has gone by while playing has experienced immersion. Immersion doesn't mean delusion, or losing track of what's real and what isn't; it means that attention has been focused on the game to the point that "suspension of disbelief" occurs the same way it does when you're reading a good novel or watching a good movie.

It can be overblown, but as a concept immersion is a valuable one for game design.

-- Steve

 

[OurGloriousLeader]

Of course you never seriously believe that you're in the game, or that the film is real etc. But that's not the point. This belief is at a sub-conscious level, and is forced there when the film, book or game is good enough. Immersion, or the willing suspension of disbelief, simply refers to that point when you forget where you are, how long you've been doing it and that you've burned your soup. It's an extremely worthwhile goal in gaming, just as it has been in plays and storytelling for the past 3 millennia.

 

[Lazy Lemon]

No game can acheive true immersion (i.e. making you actually believe that you are not playing a game), but some get closer than others. These games usually tend to be the good ones.

 

[Alex_P]

Anton,

How's that functionally different from just being interested in something?

What do you mean by "suspension of disbelief"? Are you referring to something other than just the basic buy-in required by any fictional work ("I'll accept your premise if you promise to entertain me")?

-- Alex

 

[SteinFaust]

Nym has the right idea. games can't lead to delusion. They shouldn't either, because that just gives the anti-gaming lobbyists more ammunition than all the Hot Coffee in Rockstar.

 

[Anton P. Nym]

Anton,

How's that functionally different from just being interested in something?

What do you mean by "suspension of disbelief"? Are you referring to something other than just the basic buy-in required by any fictional work ("I'll accept your premise if you promise to entertain me")?

-- Alex

I can be interested in something without ever losing track of time or investing it with emotional involvement. The difference between "interest" and "immersion" is the difference in watching a sport as an observer and watching a sport as a fan. The former experiences very little emotional impact, while the latter is often moved to cheer (or weep) by the experience.

And you're correct in your second paragraph; "suspension of disbelief" is the viewer/reader/player giving the movie/story/game permission to access his or her emotions. It's the ability to get people to set aside the idea that the experience is artificial and, in a way, experience the events portrayed instead of just watching passively.

-- Steve

 

[Johnn Johnston]

Immersion in the sense that I use it, at least, is not so much 'forgetting it isn't real' but more of a 'the awareness that it is a game isn't in the front of your mind'.

It doesn't have to make you think it is real, it just has to make you forget that it isn't.

 

[fix-the-spade]

You have just answered why real sports will never be truly outdone by videogames.

I have to argue with you point about immersion being the death of play. When I ride my bike, that's true immersion, huffing down rocky ground at 25mph the mind becomes focused entirely. Any thought, action or emotion not related to riding a bike totally becomes irrelevant.
That's complete immersion and it's an absolute blast, probably more fun than anything else that's legal (well, there is that one thing, but it's not so great by yourself).
Most skiers motorcyclists, climbers and the like would probably say the same.

The problem (as you said) is that it can't be applied to games, they're all based on suspension of disbelief. Rather than the focus that comes from a "Christ I'm gonna die" type of experience.

 

[Gooble]

I'd say immersion is where you actually give a shit about the story and characters.

 

[SteinFaust]

lol the worst immersion I ever get is anytime I bail out of something in mid flight, and my stomach clamps itself shut.
you want to generate some energy into a room? take Niko up in an Anhilator over Manh-uh I mean Algonquin, and get as high as you can over the farthest dock. drop straight down, and then pull up, most likely forming a "u" pattern in the air. at the middle of the way up, bail out of the chopper. this will send Niko FLYING over manhat--argh screw it! See how far/long he flies, and if you did it right, you will land him in the water on the other side of the island. when I did this, the entire room was on their feet, excited to watch, and taking bets on how far/if he dies/where he lands. it was crazy, just crazy.

 

[Copter400]

lol the worst immersion I ever get is anytime I bail out of something in mid flight, and my stomach clamps itself shut.
you want to generate some energy into a room? take Niko up in an Anhilator over Manh-uh I mean Algonquin, and get as high as you can over the farthest dock. drop straight down, and then pull up, most likely forming a "u" pattern in the air. at the middle of the way up, bail out of the chopper. this will send Niko FLYING over manhat--argh screw it! See how far/long he flies, and if you did it right, you will land him in the water on the other side of the island. when I did this, the entire room was on their feet, excited to watch, and taking bets on how far/if he dies/where he lands. it was crazy, just crazy.

...The fuck?

 

[ReverseEngineered]

I agree with what others have said: immersion should/can be defined in the same sense as it's used in movies: the suspension of disbelief. This is the fine line where you are consciously aware that it's fake, and yet you gain an emotional attachment to the material, whereupon it can summon great emotions in you. The example of being a fan watching a sporting event is a great demonstration of this effect. It's also what causes people to jump or cry in movies.

And I see no reason why games can't do this. "Steering" with your controller is already a common reaction, as is ducking or wincing when something flies towards the screen. While I've seen few games which managed to move me to tears (mainly because of terrible writing), there are many which have caused me to hold my breath and tense as I fly around a corner or am within an inch of my life before killing the enemy.

I think the assertion that actually doing the thing is complete immersion is flawed. The idea behind suspension of disbelief is that you know that it's fake -- it's what allows you to watch a zombie movie and get scared without actually running out of the theatre for your bloody life. If you are actually doing the thing, then you don't have suspension of disbelief, you have full awareness of it being real, and all of the fear and apprehension and limitations that come with it. Playing an FPS is fun because you can kill and be killed without anybody actually dying. Would you really want to play a game like Doom if hellspawn were really coming after you and failure to kill them would mean being eaten alive? I doubt it. That's the same reason why there's a definite difference between an immersive virtual world and the real world.

 

[end_boss]

No, there will never be a game that immerses you to the point where you forget it's a game, and I don't think that anybody has ever claimed that. Immersion is when you get to absorbed you begin to block out the things around you in real life as you play it, or whose experience lingers with you well after you've turned it off.

 

[DannyboyO1]

I usually think of it as "The Gamer's Trance". Where I'll sit down to play a game until I become hungry enough to cook and eat something. Then the sun comes up, and I'll look around for the glare. It's a meditative state achievable through focus.

The better games are worth focussing on. They draw you in, you spend time with them, and you play until something distracts you. It could be your bladding finally getting your attention, your alarm clock, or just pure frustration as you failed the same level for the 20th consecutive time.

Better gameplay just means avoiding elements that distract people from "The Zone" (another way of putting it). Internal distractions, like constantly needing to pause the game to go reconfigure your inventory every other enemy to match vulnerabilities. Or wondering why you can't just hop through the bashed-in picture window while you pick the locked door next to it.

Sadly, building good gameplay requires cohesive design and a lot of sanding at the rough spots. You can't boil it down to bullet points, and while I'd say that good management (something rare and precious in the world) may not guarantee a good game... bad management (which is as common as war, prejudice, and ignorance) will kill any possibility of competance in the long-run.

 

[Kikosemmek]

I think you took immersion to an extreme. One could say that real life is the ultimate immersive experience, where the immersion is so thick that it makes the sensations real. Absolute immersion means that it's not a game that we're playing, and I agree, but I do not recall that absolute immersion was said to be required anywhere.

What's required is enough to make you act and react in a game's virtual environment in a manner which becomes second-nature to you.

You claimed that the word 'role-playing' is used as a synonym to immersion. I disagree with that use as I believe that the two mean different, albeit closely related things.

In order to role-play correctly, one must be immersed in the character being role-played, especially if this character is incongruous with one's own personality. So in an RPG, for example, should your character be presented with a challenge, and you're aware that you are role-playing, an immersive game would elicit a more natural, intuitive response out of you that makes sense as something that the character you're role-playing would do. To be less immersed in your game and your character would cause you to do something that makes sense to you, the player, and not you, the gaming character, which could remind you that you're at a computer desk, and have you replay the part and choose according to your character's preference or alignment, or have you skip the part out of frustration and continue on with the game, dissatistfied. You cannot tell me that, in this case, proper immersion is not required. Of course it is.

Why would players be intimidated by playing the Ravenholm level from Half-Life 2 at night if immersion did not exist? The game's output is just a bunch of digitized images and sounds being produced harmlessly by a machine, right? No one thinks of that, though, when they're attentively watching out for zombies that might be crawling around and behind them, leaping onto them, intent on shredding them to bits. Why? Because they're not themselves during those moments, they're Gordon Freeman, and Gordon Freeman wants to not-die. That is immersion.

Just in case someone makes a stupid argument, yes, I am aware that they are not physically Gordon Freeman. What matters is that during the game, this fact is overlooked if it is immersive. What's real is determined only by the medium with which we perceive. If immersed in a game, the player perceives through the game, making their experience of its gameplay much richer, as all our realities are, in all moments, our perception.

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

Clearly the TC has never played Wii Sports or Guitar Hero.

 

[BallPtPenTheif]

this seems like a semantic issue and you seem fixated on the literal meaning of the word. in truth it's a relative concept based on what the game is and how that immersion better serves the actual gameplay.

try thinking of the inverse idea; game elements that remind you that it's a contrived game are bad. yes, by their very nature games are contrived.. but anything that exposes the illusion is bad.

 

[Mr. Fister]

Nym has the right idea. games can't lead to delusion. They shouldn't either, because that just gives the anti-gaming lobbyists more ammunition than all the Hot Coffee in Rockstar.

Why would anti-gaming lobbyists want to bash a beverage that Rockstar employees drink? [/humor]

I'd say immersion is where you actually give a shit about the story and characters.

Bingo. I've played games where I couldn't care less about the characters ("Oh look, that person just died. I wonder what's for lunch?"). But then I play games like Twilight Princess, where I won't spoil what happens, but I will say that there were moments where I was literally dreaming about what would happen to the characters. I must say, it was quite awesome.