StaceyPowers

I began my second playthrough of BioShock Infinite last night, and it ended up making me think a lot about immersiveness in video games. I was both looking forward to it and dreading it for around a year now. It’s rare for the second time through with something to have the same magic as the first time, since there are fewer surprises. So I was surprised to find that the game has much the same effect on me so far this time. I have the same sense I did before of being transported from my mundane life, and really being in this other place and time, immersed in this different atmosphere. The sense of place there remains unique. Having played BioShock 1 and 2 now, I have to say those are also very atmospheric games—but not quite on the same level for me. And now I think I can list factors which play into why BioShock Infinite seems to have this uniquely immersive pull on me: It’s in first person. Third-person is too detached and limiting, which is why this game beats TLOU for immersion to me—even though TLOU is very immersive. You have time to stop and look around, and are in fact encouraged to do so. BioShocks 1 and 2 spawn too many continuous enemies to do this conveniently. The soundtracking is often minimal, with the ambient sounds of the city in the foreground. This is more like “real life” than continuous soundtracking. There are often things going on in your environment, many of them unique events. These are timed with your movements so that they seem spontaneous, both drawing you forward and encouraging you to stop and pause and pay attention. In short, the game is paced for you to explore and savour. This is entirely subjective, but I find Booker very easy to relate to. We have a lot of the same reactions to what we see, so it is easy to be immersed both in the world and in his mind. From your experiences gaming, what factors do you think help make a game immersive to the point where you truly feel like you’ve left the room and travelled to the game world? @DylanC @killamch89 @kingpotato @The Blackangel @Alyxx @Aerielle del Rosario @Executor Akamia @skyfire

In this thread on whether we care or not what reviews say, @killamch89 mentioned, "The very best reviewers tend to minimize their bias or at the very least, try to be open-minded about stuff they don't necessarily like." I thought this was a great point, as someone who does typically tend to ignore reviewers, and perhaps overlooks useful reviews. It got me wondering, in order to make a game review as helpful as possible, what are some of the most important ingredients? I think what @killamch89 wrote is a great start, but I would love to hear more input. @DylanC @Alyxx @kingpotato @skyfire @Executor Akamia @Aerielle del Rosario

@kingpotato and I were talking about followers in Fallout: New Vegas, and he mentioned that he has a preference for going it alone in games in general. So I thought I’d ask everyone here: Do you prefer to travel with or without followers, and why? I originally thought when I first started playing open world games that I’d find followers annoying, but I now usually trail as many around with me as I can. I suppose I just like the “being in a party” vibe, and I also like that sometimes they make interesting comments, have quests (i.e. New Vegas), and so on. Plus, they are fun to dress up in nice armour (i.e. the Daedric armour in Skyrim). Mind you, I hate when they get stuck in Skyrim—what a pain. But in NV, this seems to happen less often, and they also tend to be more helpful in combat (especially Boone). @kingpotato @DylanC

For those who are old enough to remember the DOS era on PC, what were your favorite DOS games? A couple I remember fondly are Return to Zork and Heaven and Earth. @DylanC @killamch89 @kingpotato @The Blackangel @Alyxx @Aerielle del Rosario @Executor Akamia @skyfire

For those out there who own games on discs (and/or cartridges), how do you store your games in order to protect them? I have most of mine stored in a DVD binder. I don’t like that I am sliding them in and out to get at them, but it just isn’t convenient to have them all stacked up in their individual game boxes. @DylanC @killamch89 @kingpotato @Alyxx @The Blackangel @Executor Akamia @Aerielle del Rosario @skyfire

My impression of the situation is: 1-Most gamers do want more diversity in video games, and are happy to see it. 2-An extremely vocal minority is displeased with this diversity, and wants to sound like they are a much larger percentage of the gamer base than they actually are. So they stir up controversy about "SJWs" "oppressing" them. For reference, I am a very liberal person who does feel deeply appreciative when I feel more "represented" in gaming. But I also have no difficulty playing "stereotypical white straight male" character in a game. I just connect to the heart and soul of a given character, regardless of race, sex, sexuality, gender, etc., and I expect that most gamers out there like to do the same.

It's still so bizarre to me that console manufacturers don't want to recognize that 1-developers build games like these to entertain us forever, and 2-we are entertained, and want to keep playing them with backwards compatibility.

Makes sense. There are some hassles with followers, especially in Skyrim.

Exactly. Because they can.

Lol, good point. Thanks for bringing a different (and humorous) angle to this discussion. I can't think of any time in my childhood where exposure to violent content made me want to go out and shoot things. But I also don't recall having any difficulty telling the difference between the game world and the physical world. I expect that the problem would be when a child still has not developed this distinction, and then plays a violent video game. So long as the child is developmentally able to tell fantasy from reality and is receiving reasonable moral guidance, I don't think exposure to violent content would be problematic.

Really? I've always found the AI in NV to be much better than it is in Skyrim or Fallout 3. It's very rare for the NV followers to get in my way during a fight or unnecessarily get themselves killed, especially since you can modify their combat settings. And they all have stories/quests that are pretty awesome.

This is me as well. I prefer to minimize live interaction in my life, but I'd also rather know that I'm likely to get the problem resolved in one sitting. No phone though. Ugh.

Oh man, I hear you on that. I tried full destruction mage twice, and still found myself with my trusty axe pretty fast =D It's just more satisfying.

Ugh, I would find that very irritating probably. I don't mind the repair system in Fallout at all though, but that is because you don't need to go running around buying repair hammers like in Oblivion. You just cannibalize other equipment which you're stumbling across anyway. I've also noticed in NV that my gun seems to get more and more powerful the more I repair it. I'm not sure if that is intentional or a bug, but it's pretty sweet.

I almost wouldn't blame them if I thought they were trying to change the culture in a favourable way by presenting gaming attributes as if they are already accepted by employers as positives. But I get annoyed when media represents a problem as "solved" when it isn't, because it tells people the world is better than it is. I mean, some kid in college reading that could make the mistake of putting his gaming experience on the wrong job application. That sure won't help him get hired. So I guess maybe I think it could have been a well-intentioned piece, but not necessarily the way to achieve cultural change?