Quote from: Koltar;327937No.

Its much simpler than that.

 People sometimes have FUN when they get really immersed in an RPG universe.

No "heaven of ideals" implied or needed.


- Ed C.

That's not true. I have a blast playing my friend's Exalted game, but there's no immersion for me because I know that no matter what I do, everything is going to conform to his imagination and notion, rather than to any kind of living, random, or reactive interplay. I find the game neat and interesting, but it isn't what it could be if I thought the game pieces were reacting directly with one another instead of being filtered through his short story.

I think an inconsistent universe can act as a barrier to immersion, simply as it makes it you constantly come out of character to worry if the laws of physics are different to what you might expect.

Quote from: jadrax;327940I think an inconsistent universe can act as a barrier to immersion, simply as it makes it you constantly come out of character to worry if the laws of physics are different to what you might expect.

Yes, it certainly can. It makes you feel less competent or able b/c your ability to predict what will happen can't function properly.

Quote from: Cranewings;327939That's not true. I have a blast playing my friend's Exalted game, but there's no immersion for me because I know that no matter what I do, everything is going to conform to his imagination and notion, rather than to any kind of living, random, or reactive interplay. I find the game neat and interesting, but it isn't what it could be if I thought the game pieces were reacting directly with one another instead of being filtered through his short story.

There's already a term for that - its called Railroading.

Sounds like an example of it to me.


- Ed C.

Quote from: Koltar;327944There's already a term for that - its called Railroading.

Sounds like an example of it to me.


- Ed C.

The problem is that rail roading can be sneaky. There are a lot of rail roading tools that are hard to detect but can be used to great effect:

The problem only has a single obvious solution
The players' characters have very limited information to go on
The risk of ignoring something far outweighs the benefits of going after something else
A helpful NPC that has all the information and gives directions without any meaningful alternatives
The GM can change the location of NPCs, traps, and treasure based on where the party goes. If the party has two towns to go to, it doesn't matter what they pick because they will meet the same person...

And the GM can do most of that without ever telling someone in the game that they can't do something. If he does it right, everyone will play along and anyone that doesn't will look like an asshole.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;327942Yes, it certainly can. It makes you feel less competent or able b/c your ability to predict what will happen can't function properly.

I'm stooping to my standard vidgame analogies here, but this was why I quit D&D Online.

The rules had been so mutilated from their tabletop form, that I was constantly interrupted from my enjoyment time and time again by the realization that something I expected to work a certain way from tabletop, didn't actually work that way at all in DDO or was even completely worthless, and sometimes this even resulted in characters being unexpectedly worthless because of this contrast.

In many ways this is also a similar experience to joining a new group, who have all manner of unwritten house rules that you find yourself running into like landmines in the midst of planning actions.

Quote from: Koltar;327937People sometimes have FUN when they get really immersed in an RPG universe.

And how do they get to this stage, Ed ?

Regards,
David R

Immersion is such a subjective experience that it's piss-poor for any objective reasoning. Emulation is way better. Characters should fit the game and their mechanics should reflect that. The more the mechanics allow characters to seamlessly integrate into the proceedings of the game world, the more relevant and therefore the more substantial the characters are.

Quote from: DeadUematsu;328045Emulation is way better. Characters should fit the game and their mechanics should reflect that. The more the mechanics allow characters to seamlessly integrate into the proceedings of the game world, the more relevant and therefore the more substantial the characters are.

I dunno, this seems pretty subjective to me. Anyway I don't see how emulation makes a character more substantial.

Regards,
David R

Except mechanics objectively exist as a set of numbers, values, and procedures divorced from your fancy. We can't have an objective conversation regarding a subjective state of feeling (Immersion) but we can objectively discuss if the mechanics model the virtual reality that the game is shooting for.

Also, emulation makes characters develop substance by establishing the various parameters by which important decision-making can be made against.

OK, so I just read the Wiki article on flow, and I'm unconvinced that it is equivalent to IC immersive gaming.  Some of the "components of flow" (from the Wiki page) are present, namely 2, 3, and 4.  However, the rest don't seem to apply.

The link for folks who don't want to scroll up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_%28psychology%29

Quote from: DeadUematsu;328094We can't have an objective conversation regarding a subjective state of feeling (Immersion)...

Sure but why does it have to be an objective conversation ? Describing experiences and perhaps finding commonality works too, IMO.

Quote....but we can objectively discuss if the mechanics model the virtual reality that the game is shooting for.

I've always had a problem with this.

QuoteAlso, emulation makes characters develop substance by establishing the various parameters by which important decision-making can be made against.

I dunno' about substance esp considering how most people have defined it on this thread. I do think emulation relates to stereotypes or archetypes, though, which facilitates an immersive  experience for some.

Regards,
David R

Yes, because arguing facts is better and the argument of experience should carry weight only in number with re-creatable circumstances to back it up and yes, emulation does relate to the roles supported by the game.

Who said anything about arguing, DU. I said talking about our experiences. Anyway, I doubt we would be "arguing facts" in a discussion about emulation.

Regards,
David R

Oh, forget it. If that's how you are going to operate, I'm just wasting my time.