The OP is a fail. Most truly immersive games are shot in 3rd person, simply because it is quite hard to empathise with a character who goes unseen. Also, because FPS games usually lack in immersivenes...though they are improving.
There's no immersion in 3rd person games
- Thread starter DalekJaas
- Start date
I'm with you on this. I quite enjoy Gears and Gears 2 but I can't help feeling that if it was a FPS it would be so much better. I can't actually feel attached to the characters in third person. I want everything in first person.DalekJaas said:
One of the greatest things for me in Left 4 Dead is the few breathes you have in first person when a smoker grabs you. I love that sensation. I just wish they'd stuck all the way with it. So when a hunter is ripping your nipples off you're actually staring at him.
Best RPGs? Morrowind and Deus Ex.
Best action games? Half Life 2 and half a dozen other FPSs.
The only one I'll concede is Resi 4 because part of that was aided by the feeling of helplessness. I would still love to play it in first person where you have to stand still to fire.
The only non-FPS view point I want is vaguely isometric (Diablo) or full on 2d (Sonic).
I don't really like first person view in general. It doesn't feel immersive to me, and it certainly doesn't make me feel like the character. If anything, it actively destroys my ability to feel like the character. I always feel like a camera floating six feet off the ground.
And for the record, "immersive" doesn't mean that you feel like you are the character. It means that the game draws you into its world. Some examples of the effects of immersive gaming are: Games that you can't put down because you have to see what happens next, games that genuinely quicken your pulse or make you cry, and games that give you "bleed through" where you start seeing peices of the game in the real world.
FPS's almost never give me these sorts of feelings. In fact, the bulk of FPS games I put down halfway through and never pick up again because I couldn't take one more level of the same point and click shooting (unrelated note: Do FPS's feel like graphics heavy mouse tutorials to anyone else?).
- J
And for the record, "immersive" doesn't mean that you feel like you are the character. It means that the game draws you into its world. Some examples of the effects of immersive gaming are: Games that you can't put down because you have to see what happens next, games that genuinely quicken your pulse or make you cry, and games that give you "bleed through" where you start seeing peices of the game in the real world.
FPS's almost never give me these sorts of feelings. In fact, the bulk of FPS games I put down halfway through and never pick up again because I couldn't take one more level of the same point and click shooting (unrelated note: Do FPS's feel like graphics heavy mouse tutorials to anyone else?).
- J
As a kid, I got immersed when playing Zaxxon [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaxxon]. So perhaps the OP can't get absorbed into a game unless it's a first-person perspective, but that's not the case for everyone. (Or, going by the responses here, even the majority.)
-- Steve
-- Steve
For me, atmosphere's what makes a game immersive. Story helps too, but for me it takes a back seat to it. Games like Mirror's Edge and Bioshock were immersive to me because of the ambience and the genuine feel to them (I could barely play Bioshock, it freaked me out way too much). I don't find that the perspective matters, as long as the camera is either behind the character or "in" him/her (ie first person). I fail to get immersed into fixed or scrolling camera games like Metal Gear Solid 3.
You just don't have a good imagination...
Or TV glasses.
Any FP game, plus TV glasses=immersion.
But really, what you're experiencing is a matter of scale. Because the game cannot properly focus and blur, a properly porportioned object, lets say a chair, appears to be smaller than it really is.
For me, a lot of FPSs aren't very immersive. The big exception is those levels in the Halo series in which there is an absolutely huge environment. The Library, Halo, the Silent Cartographer... And that's what makes it feel like a true Halo game.
Or TV glasses.
Any FP game, plus TV glasses=immersion.
But really, what you're experiencing is a matter of scale. Because the game cannot properly focus and blur, a properly porportioned object, lets say a chair, appears to be smaller than it really is.
For me, a lot of FPSs aren't very immersive. The big exception is those levels in the Halo series in which there is an absolutely huge environment. The Library, Halo, the Silent Cartographer... And that's what makes it feel like a true Halo game.
If immersion was decided purely from the perspective I'd say it is the other way around. FPP never really feels as if you see the game through your character's eyes, the only new game that has come close to that is Mirror's Edge. Most other (not saying everything) tend to feel like you're playing a very stale floating camera. But that's just my opinion ^^
It depends on the type of immersion you desire from a game, and its rare that camera angle can change the feeling of a game without changing core mechanics.
For example Max Payne happened to grab me mostly due to Max's constant monologues and simply the tone of his voice wrapped you in a surreal world... Something the movie didn't do whatsoever.
Compare that to Warcraft 3 or other RTS games which economic management and troop assignment lead to the biggest hooks the game has.
When it comes to saying certain games lack immersion it shouldn't be due to perspective, its generally due to a dull storyline, terrible game play, or bad production value.
For example Max Payne happened to grab me mostly due to Max's constant monologues and simply the tone of his voice wrapped you in a surreal world... Something the movie didn't do whatsoever.
Compare that to Warcraft 3 or other RTS games which economic management and troop assignment lead to the biggest hooks the game has.
When it comes to saying certain games lack immersion it shouldn't be due to perspective, its generally due to a dull storyline, terrible game play, or bad production value.
Far Cry 2 would have been the ultimate in immersive experiences, due to its multitude of transitionary animations, if it wasn't for four things:
- Having a (Y) icon appear to remind you that you should press this button on the gamepad to open a door, etc.
- Having a (B) icon appear to remind you to take your Malaria medicine - gee, I never would have guessed...
- Having to repeatedly toggle the map in and out of view, every ten seconds...
- Not being able to relax and take in the gorgeous scenery as you are wary of the near silent approach of armored jeeps. Why so quiet?
It is a thing close to a tragedy that these 4 things (ok, and the enemies having X-ray vision and the ability to 'snipe' you with a shotgun) ruin what ought to have been the Game of the Year. Clearly Ubisoft were aiming for an immersive experience, which is why they allow you to remove the targeting reticle from your vision and only briefly display your health and ammo stats when you reload. Also, why is it that when you get injured that you have to press (B) to do some quick First Aid there and then. So you've got a bullet in your leg and you need to show some pliers being stuck in the wound and waggled about a bit before the bullet is pulled out? Immersive, right?
Wrong. "I" need to be able to limp away behind cover, perhaps slowly bleeding-out until I attend to the injury, fighting back should "I" choose.
A lot of subtle things about the gameplay are somewhat unfair. It would be nice to be able to not only crouch, but go prone. The enemies can. It should be a 'level playing field'. Quite often a wounded enemy is lying amongst tall grass firing a pistol at you as you try to figure out where your assailant is. This 'not quite dead' mechanic should apply to you as well. Rather than fall to the floor and cut to a 'Buddy rescue' helping back to your feet it would have been better to have more of a gap here. Can you attend to your own injuries? Do you play dead until they leave? Should a Buddy rescue be something you optionally invoke, calling out for them? Should the Buddy appear and help fight the enemy when you are seriously hurt (to stop things inevitably getting worse and maybe leading them away from your location)? Then should you 'call' the Buddy you would then have to judge if they were close enough to hear you, or the enemies were closer and by calling for help you were sealing your fate?
- Having a (Y) icon appear to remind you that you should press this button on the gamepad to open a door, etc.
- Having a (B) icon appear to remind you to take your Malaria medicine - gee, I never would have guessed...
- Having to repeatedly toggle the map in and out of view, every ten seconds...
- Not being able to relax and take in the gorgeous scenery as you are wary of the near silent approach of armored jeeps. Why so quiet?
It is a thing close to a tragedy that these 4 things (ok, and the enemies having X-ray vision and the ability to 'snipe' you with a shotgun) ruin what ought to have been the Game of the Year. Clearly Ubisoft were aiming for an immersive experience, which is why they allow you to remove the targeting reticle from your vision and only briefly display your health and ammo stats when you reload. Also, why is it that when you get injured that you have to press (B) to do some quick First Aid there and then. So you've got a bullet in your leg and you need to show some pliers being stuck in the wound and waggled about a bit before the bullet is pulled out? Immersive, right?
Wrong. "I" need to be able to limp away behind cover, perhaps slowly bleeding-out until I attend to the injury, fighting back should "I" choose.
A lot of subtle things about the gameplay are somewhat unfair. It would be nice to be able to not only crouch, but go prone. The enemies can. It should be a 'level playing field'. Quite often a wounded enemy is lying amongst tall grass firing a pistol at you as you try to figure out where your assailant is. This 'not quite dead' mechanic should apply to you as well. Rather than fall to the floor and cut to a 'Buddy rescue' helping back to your feet it would have been better to have more of a gap here. Can you attend to your own injuries? Do you play dead until they leave? Should a Buddy rescue be something you optionally invoke, calling out for them? Should the Buddy appear and help fight the enemy when you are seriously hurt (to stop things inevitably getting worse and maybe leading them away from your location)? Then should you 'call' the Buddy you would then have to judge if they were close enough to hear you, or the enemies were closer and by calling for help you were sealing your fate?
that's odd. I felt very immersed watching Leon avoid being zombie chow in Resident Evil 4.
P.S. - have you even played Shadow of the Colossus or ICO? do that and then come talk to me. those games have the least menu intrusion, lots of atmosphere, and very lifelike character animations.
P.S. - have you even played Shadow of the Colossus or ICO? do that and then come talk to me. those games have the least menu intrusion, lots of atmosphere, and very lifelike character animations.