Immersion - Do companies not "get" it?

[Edmond Dantes]

So today I uploaded a video (THIS IS NOT A VIDEO THREAD even tho it probably totally is) where I discussed the concept of games being "immersive" (https://youtu.be/Y1HdcT3n-7k) and how companies do it wrong.

So you won't have to see my ugly mug, my basic thought is that it seems like game designers think being "immersive" means hiding the fact that its a game, by trying to explain away the game mechanics--for example, game overs are "the prince remembered the story wrong" in Prince of Persia, or "memory desynchronization" in Assassin's Creed.

But it seems to me this is actually counter-productive. By explaining the gamey elements you're calling attention to them, and furthermore inviting scrutiny. Like with the POP Sands of Time example, the meta-explanation completely breaks down once you reach the end of the game because it makes even less logical sense than if it just said "look, its a video game, just go with it."

I always thought it would be better if they went the opposite route. Instead of hiding the game elements, why not make games take place in a world that explicitly works like a game? Sort of like the world of Scott Pilgrim. I actually find NES RPGs immersive for this very reason--they make it clear upfront that it's a game and they never break kayfabe, so its easy to get involved. RPG Maker Horror games also often benefit from this, because by making the boundaries clear it makes it easier to care when something weird happens.

But that's just my thought. What do you think? Agree? Disagree? Have your own view? Let's discuss!

[kupomogli]

Problem with video game immersion is that there is none when most games that release now give no consequence. Unless it's a sports game, there's hardly any sort of immersion in the game because if you die, you'll just start a checkpoint that's two feet away. That alone takes away any immersion the game could potentially have. If you only had a single life to go through the game, you can be sure a game like The Last of Us, Metal Gear Solid, etc, etc, etc, would have been a whole hell of a lot immersive because it means that you really do fear for your life on the game.

Games that you have characters that actually die and the game keeps going in my opinion are far more immersive than the games that try to be immersive. Games like Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Brigandine, Civilization, XCOM, etc. Even Diablo 2 or 3 in hardcore mode. You might lose a key area in your game, you might permanently lose one of your best monsters/characters that you worked so long to build up, a more powerful army just sends thousands of troops to invade your cities and while you'll desperately try to survive you already know it's over. Doesn't even have to be a loss, you might not have enough troops to attack or defend on two fronts but you do so anyways and you happen to pull out a win. Or if you do lose, you might have sacrificed one character or group to completely turn the tides in your favor, etc.

That kind of stuff immerses me in a game far more than just going through your standard fare. It doesn't mean that I can't enjoy a game that doesn't have that kind of immersion, just that the kind of immersion in other games that really try and push immersion has no effect on me.