Immersion vs. Realism
I was just thinking about this. It seems that a lot of people equate realism in video games with immersion. This comes from talking to my brother who is hung up on games like The Godfather and Gears of War on XBOX 360.
I’m not really in to those kinds of games, and am quite a loyal customer of Nintendo products to the exclusion of all other systems. My brother spoke to me enthusiastically about Gears of War, trying to convince me of its greatness by virtue of its realism. I’ve never played the game, but it’s not something I can see myself getting into. It may be as close to “real” as games have come so far, but that’s still quite a ways off from reality. At risk of making a Bill Gates-ish statement (one that was falsely attributed to him anyway), I do not foresee any technology that will completely and totally blur the lines between reality and fantasy. There is no matrix in our future.
But an experience doesn’t have to be realistic to be immersive. Take the Nintendo Wii. I covet the Nintendo Wii–and I’m not the only one, because the damn thing is sold out everywhere–because it’s got a slew of games that don’t even pretend to look realistic, but are arguably more immersive than the Gears of War.
I think this is because the games leave a little room for projection. Even though you create an avatar that resembles you, it isn’t a high-resolution photograph. You have to make that leap, and put yourself onto that avatar and into that space. Having to get off your ass and move your body to play the game certainly helps.
I guess that the more realistic something pretends to be, the more disappointment with the experience is possible and likely. If something looks real, and you can’t interact with it the way you would interact with something real, then it’s immediately clear that it’s NOT real. In my opinion this ruins the experience.
If you’re in a game environment that doesn’t pretend to be realistic, you don’t bring in your real-world expectations.
Related Posts:
Post a comment