Debate this! - Immersion in games

For a second, think about your favourite game. What is it about this game that is so appealing? Chances are the game spoke to you on levels you had never experienced before, or the storyline dragged you in and you really felt for the characters. You might even have found the soundtrack and graphics so hauntingly captivating that you were really dragged into the game's world.

Immersion speaks to us all in different ways. Half-Life 2 is engaging because you see everything through Gordon Freeman's eyes. Partly because he never speaks, players subconsciously use his character as a blank canvas on which to paint their own image of the man himself.

Other titles, such as the recently released Prince of Persia and the superb Wii title No More Heroes, might draw gamers in with their whimsical, abstract art style and strong lead characters.

So what is it about games that draws us into the world created by developers? This week, the Square-Go editorial team got together to discuss what immersion in games means to us, and as always, left the comment box open for you to chip in with your own two cents....

Dave: This week we're going to be discussing what makes games immersive. What is it that makes them get under your skin?

Joel: Music is probably the all timer.

Kieran: A good, interesting and consistent universe always draws you in, music included.

Phil R: I hate retarded AI in games.

Dave: So good AI makes the game world more believable?

Phil R: Hell yeah, F.E.A.R. had great enemy AI.

Dave: F.E.A.R is interesting Phil, especially how the enemy troops use ad hoc cover, such as tipping over filing cabinets. Many players hate being sprung upon by ruthless enemies in games, but there's something so addictive about the whole 'fear factor' element.

Joel: The troops could flank you. That's about as good AI gets in first-person shooters to be honest.

Craig: Yeah, the combat in F.E.A.R. was so much better than the scary bits which, for me, just pulled you out of the game.

Graeme: F.E.A.R. was spectacular, you can overhear two troops discussing how they are going to flank you if you get close enough.

Craig: A strong story is important. You can have fun in a game without one, but you can't be immersed. Without that, the game world becomes something cohesive that doesn't require a stretch of the imagination. Also, good AI is a must for any game really.

Graeme: Bad AI just reinforces that it's a game.

Joel: Something like Oblivion is a good example of poor AI ruining a game. There weren't enough voice sets for characters, you ask people generic questions then wander off to do some side missions, while the world fails to get across that these people are living their lives.

Dave: Do you mean that the whole thing felt a bit robotic? Good AI is a must, none of this 'walking in circles' crap. Joel, it's funny you should mention Oblivion, because I found the characters fell flat and aside from the slow exploration, I just got bored really quickly.

Si: Having sunk nearly 70 hours into Oblivion, I can safely ask: "characters?"

Joel: Yeah, Sean Bean sounded a bit bored didn't he?

Phil R: I also hate level design which results in crack SAS commandos being unable to climb stairs because there's a chain in the way. Why would any developer design a level like that?

Tony: The beauty of games over film is the player's involvement in the story. You control what happens, even if it follows a linear script. But equally, things can go wrong if your skills aren't up to scratch. In a believable story, it feels like the characters are relying on your character to succeed.

Kieran: I think some games can have a tacked on story that feels irrelevent, like Unreal Tournament III.

Dave: How do you guys feel about the popular idea that Half-Life 2 is made more immersive by the fact that Gordon Freeman never speaks? I mentioned this in the preamble to this debate on purpose because it's an opinion I hear a lot. Just wanted to get your view as well.

Joel: Dunno...Is that like Vinnie Jones type acting, where he doesn't say much because he really shouldn't be acting in the first place?

Tony: Well, in Grand Theft Auto III, the protagonist never speaks either, but I didn't find the storyline immersive.

Graeme: I'd buy that, Tony. Character voices in first-person shooters rarely make you feel like you're playing a game, but you can still get into them either way.

Si: Someone never speaking doesn't make for immersion.

Dave: Fair points, although I think people feel that the diffeence is that though we never see Gordon Freeman, everything is from his perspective. There are no cut scenes to break away from that.

Craig: It was immersive, I agree. But only because he didn't say stupid things that you would never say personally in real life.

Dave: What? Like saying, "don't mind if I do?', every time you picked up a gun that a dead Locust just dropped? Oh Marcus Fenix stop, you're slaying me with that dry cool wit!

Kieran: I think Half-Life 2 was more immersive because the story was good, not because Freeman never spoke.

Joel: True, when it was revealed he had a wee goatee and glasses, it was almost like the NES Metroid 'Samus is a woman' fiasco.

Dave: *laughs* Yeah, it was Samus all over again. Except, instead of liberating girls in games, it liberated the IT guy at your office.

Craig: I enjoy playing as people in games, but I agree that sometimes you can only reach the heights of immersion when you are playing as yourself.

Dave: Does character creation help with that?

Craig: Sometimes. Although every character I've tried to make in Mass Effect ends up looking Asian for some reason.

Graeme: I've been immersed in Alpha Centauri, and I'm not even a character in that.

Tony: OK, so what's the difference in immersion between Half-Life 2 and Tetris then? Similar or different?

Graeme: Totally different.

Kieran: Tetris is addictive, not immersive. Though a game can be immersive when you end up losing a significant period of time to it.

Dave: Yeah, immersion in Tetris is different; it's based on simplicity and how addictive it can be. It's not the same thing.

Si: Agreed. Tetris isn't immersive.
 
Tony: Sure it is. You see people becoming engrossed and fixated on the idea of beating their own score.

Phil R: I would define immersion something along the lines of, 'it makes you feel part of the world you are interacting with'.

Dave: Good definition.

Craig: Immersion suggests you're being sucked into a game, as if you are a key part of that world. I don't think Tetris conveys that.

Dave: I think folklore and history helps to flesh out the game world and makes it more believable.

Si: Immersion is getting into the game, rather than just playing it.

Craig: Definitely. It makes the world more convincing. Take old role-playing games like Baldur's Gate or Planetscape. Your character was barely visable, but you were certainly immersed because of the strength of the world itself.

Dave: Like when you pick up the audio diaries in Bioshock. Some of them were genuinely chilling.

Joel: Yeah not bad, but Doom 3 did that way before.

Graeme: And System Shock 2 before that.

Dave: I withdraw my statement...

Joel: The people who find first-person shooters immersive end up taking a gun to their local mall.

Dave: You better hope Jack Thompson never reads that, Joel....

..............

What do you think? Deposit your opinions below...