FPS=immersion?

joxer

The Smoker
Original Sin Donor
Original Sin 2 Donor
Joined
April 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
As usual. When I can't stand something, it appears everywhere only to annoy me with mundanity and irrelevance.

Extremely irritated, seeing it in comments of this article:
https://wccftech.com/cyberpunk-2077-e3-2019-screenshots/
k whatever, walking and hacking simulator, FPS nonsense, I can't get immersed in an RPG if I can't actually see my character, what's the point of all that customization if all I see are my hands
Same as skins in FPSes...why the hell would I buy a skin if all I see are its hands?
>Wants to see character
>Wants immersion
Don't you see how those two statements are counter to each other?
You're an idiot alongside the rest of your generation who think FPS = immersion.
When you go to a movie or read a book, do you feel unimersed because you don't see your characters in first person? What about an MMO, out of which all are third person? What about the witcher 3? What about Elder Scrolls?
Immersion means the world pulls you in, it doesn't mean you're stuck in one perspective.

Please, just please, shoot your thoughts on this matter so we can put the travestic use of the word ad acta already.

Kardashians' "literally" we'll leave for another thread.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
Immersion into...character, world, etc? It's more than one thing.
With camera: depends. If I can see legs, body animation/movement, camera doesn't feel like it's in "player's chest"..First Person. Mirror's Edge is probably best example of this.
For rpgs? If you want to see Yourself as this character-> First character.
This is ( usually) better for more player driven/skill involved.
Grognards though blobber bout against it.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
3,898
Location
Croatia
I think this one is pretty clear and can probbaly also be proven via some scientific methods if anyone wanted to do that (if it didn’t already happen).

Ofc a bad fps immersion can be worse than a good third person immersion in a game.

But considering equal quality, the FPS immersion will be better, simply by looking at how our brain works.

There are basically 2 examples: Motion Sickness / Gaming Sickness. I know a couple of people who feel sick if the game is too closely mimicking reality. As long as the game is somewhat abstract they have no problems with it. 3rd person games are usually fine. As soon as they go first person (also cockpit-view in driving games) it becomes difficult. The brain immerses itself into the game and the environment and anything which doesn’t feel perfectly right will actually make them feel sick. Headbobbing for example.

The second example is actually very similar and is VR: Games on third person perspective are easier to do. As soon as you go first person again, you have the same issue as with the motion sickness / gaming sickness people infront of the screen. Any movement which is a bit disconnected from reality makes you feel sick. For example it will be fine if in VR you turn your head to the right, and the game simulates exactly the same movement by doing so. As soon as you use a controller to do that, your brain misses the connection of your vision and your head movement and you will feel sick. As third person is much more disconnected and less immersive it will not happen there as quickly.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,691
Immersion means the world pulls you in, it doesn't mean you're stuck in one perspective.
Depends on context, actually.

Immersion can mean just like this person said. If a world is "well realized" so you find yourself easily suspending disbelief, you are "immersed" in that world. The medium, never mind the perspective, doesn't really matter in this case. You can great immersion from a book or some person telling a story by a camp fire. You mess it up by breaking the spell. For instance, if Cyberpunk had its menu options set up to look like words carved into stone, it would break immersion a lot more than a menu with neon-on-black because it clashes less.

The other is the one Kordanor is describing - the feeling that you are IN the world. You aren't going to get that with a book. Not even a little. But video games can sure do it. Whenever I need to look up in a first person game, I actually crane my neck up a bit. Toss in 3D vision and the effect increases a bit. Toss in VR and it increases a lot. This time the spell can be broken by screwy graphics or sounds coming from random speakers instead of the correct ones.

I guess they are somewhat similar. The first kind of immersion is one of imagination while the second is one of senses. (So yes, that means @Kordanor; is more sensible.)
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
8,238
Location
Kansas City
If someone has to see himself you can do that in the inventory screen, usually.

What would be the point of always seeing that you are wearing e.g some type of helmet or whatever? It's neither realistic or very immersive, but obviously you need to have a screen where you can easily see what you're wearing in the game.

Third person games are great for melee combat and platforming or very tactical games where you are larger group, there it makes a lot sense. Other than that it's pretty useless, especially for immersion since it's not how we see things in real life.

In Cyberpunk we will interact with a lot of objects, like screens and consoles. It would be terrible to have this switching going on from third to first all the time, not immersive.
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2011
Messages
3,263
Location
The land of rape and honey
I don't buy the "first-person is more like real life so that equals more immersion" theory. Video games aren't real life, so that argument is redundant at least to me.

If a game is immersive, it's that way because it was created in such a fashion that it successfully absorbs the player into the game world. I've experienced that with games of every perspective, and I've never felt like a game was more immersive simply due to the camera view.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,138
Location
Florida, US
For me first person is (slightly) more immersive simply because the camera is closer to the world and you see much more detail (if there). Of course, it's just a small part contributing to it.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Messages
1,502
Immersion is overrated imo.

The only time I've felt even remotely immersed is when playing VR and even then it wasn't lost on me that I was holding controllers and wearing a silly helmet.

As such I don't really care about immersion. What I do care about however, is gameplay. For my tastes I would have preferred a Skyrim camera system. Zoom to 1st person for ranged, zoom out to third person for melee and exploration.

I may be mistaken but wasn't it Joxer that said he didn't know what immersion was and people were trying to explain it to him?:thinking:
 
I can't imagine any serious gamer actually thinking immersion is overrated or claiming he's never felt it.

You've never been deeply absorbed into a game? I find that a little hard to believe. Perhaps you simply have a different term for that. Either that or you've been playing the wrong games.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,138
Location
Florida, US
The thread reads something different from being simply engaged.
Games are supposed to be engaging.

Immersion seems to refer to something that happened with the introduction of 3D graphics.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
I don't buy the "first-person is more like real life so that equals more immersion" theory. Video games aren't real life, so that argument is redundant at least to me.

Neither are books or movies, you can still be immersed in it when it hits the right notes.

It's probably very personal. I guess i personally find it easier when it's something which transfers more easily into something very relatable. First person is always more up close and personal and it's at least a bit similar to how i usually relate to things.

But immersion can be widely different things too, i'm extremely immersed in Rimworld even though the graphics is poor, it's third person, you play as a group (usually) and not as a person. It's not so much me being there but me being immersed in the interesting gameplay mechanics and how to solve things. "Immersed" needs to explained before we use it, i guess. Saying "it's immersive!" could just as well translate to "it's great!" so in a way its kind of useless.

I personally try to use it for things that tries to describe that i'm "in that world as a person".
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 18, 2011
Messages
3,263
Location
The land of rape and honey
But I think that's pretty much what ChienAboyeur mentioned and to which, for once, I kinda agree.

There is immersion and there is engagement. And there can be a very thin line between that.

I can be very engaged in playing Tetris. But that's probably not what we'd call immersion.

But I think if you are extremely immersed, most of the time you are also very engaged.
The time when the immersion is great but the engagement is not, is bad VR experiences.

However, there is also games like Tetris Effect. Which is like tetris, to which I mentioned there is only engagement but no immersion, but in VR, which sucks you right in and brings you into the "zone", which is often described as extremely immersive.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,691
Neither are books or movies, you can still be immersed in it when it hits the right notes.

Absolutely. If I'm not immersed, I'm not reading/watching it for very long. :)

It's probably very personal. I guess i personally find it easier when it's something which transfers more easily into something very relatable. First person is always more up close and personal and it's at least a bit similar to how i usually relate to things.

But immersion can be widely different things too, i'm extremely immersed in Rimworld even though the graphics is poor, it's third person, you play as a group (usually) and not as a person. It's not so much me being there but me being immersed in the interesting gameplay mechanics and how to solve things. "Immersed" needs to explained before we use it, i guess. Saying "it's immersive!" could just as well translate to "it's great!" so in a way its kind of useless.

I personally try to use it for things that tries to describe that i'm "in that world as a person".

I didn't think there was that much confusion about it to be honest. To be immersed means you're drawn into the game world. The definition of immersion is "deep mental involvement". The angle at which you're viewing the game world or whether you're in control of a single character vs a party or group are irrelevant outside of personal preference.

Not saying it can't mean other things to some people. That's just a general description that I think most people can relate to.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,138
Location
Florida, US
But I think that's pretty much what ChienAboyeur mentioned and to which, for once, I kinda agree.

There is immersion and there is engagement. And there can be a very thin line between that.

Immersion is a specific case of engagement.


But I think if you are extremely immersed, most of the time you are also very engaged.
.

Nope. The current trend is to favour immersion as it can be stepped in and out easily and fast. Tetris's kind of engagement does not let much room on the side to do something else and streamers require additional space to do their job, interacting with their viewers.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
Immersion is to me to feel like I'm part of that world I'm playing [in].

The woods of Zanzarah made a deep impression of that in me.
Plus I was so much younger, then.

Shooters are about shooting, so no immersion for me. Excuse me, but I've developed quite a prejudice over shooter games over the years …
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,910
Location
Old Europe
Immersion is to me to feel like I'm part of that world I'm playing [in].

The woods of Zanzarah made a deep impression of that in me.
Plus I was so much younger, then.

Shooters are about shooting, so no immersion for me. Excuse me, but I've developed quite a prejudice over shooter games over the years …

You should give the Metro Games a try. :)
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,691
I would say that FPS, and therefore VR, do assist with what I think of as immersion. I think in practice today, many other aspects of a game override perspective in terms of determining the "immersiveness". But I think that, with all other factors being equal, and let's say excellent, the perspective (and a refined VR experience) would likely be decisive.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
12,085
You should give the Metro Games a try. :)

Or even better, STALKER Shadow of Chernobyl which is far more immersive, on so many levels. It's one of few shooters i call an RPG because it's really what it feels like..
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2011
Messages
3,263
Location
The land of rape and honey
Or even better, STALKER Shadow of Chernobyl which is far more immersive, on so many levels. It's one of few shooters i call an RPG because it's really what it feels like..

Liked it on release, tried to get back to it a few years ago with prypjat and I don't think it aged that well. ^^
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,691
Back
Top Bottom