Immersion vs. Interaction: conflicting gamer tastes

[GlingGling]

swyggi said:

I believe that these are the two concepts that separate the 360 and PS3 from the Wii and contribute to the overall conflict between the two types of gaming.

I agree with this fully. I recently wrote an essay about this so I've though about it a little.

It's clear that Nintendo chose Interaction for this generation and Sony and MS chose Immersion. Anybody can pick up and play the Wii while interacting with what is happening in the game. However, interaction takes away from immersion, or the ability to subconsciously become a part of a game world without having to think about what you are doing like pressing a button.

I play sports often in real life. In the game of basketball there is a high level of interaction. There is an equal level of immersion. The fact that I'm interacting at a high level doesn't interfer with my immersion. I understand your arguement. In real life sports if I'm not adept at the required interaction things can get frustrating and those distractions take me out of the game. As I get better and play the sport more often things get more immersive, more than any video game I've played where I just sit in front of a screen. I think this translates to video games that require a high level of physical interaction.

Traditional gamers are more fond of games that take them away from reality and put them into another world. The Wii makes it difficult to be immersed due to the controls themselves and the constant awareness of reacting to the gameplay by moving. When you're moving your heart will beat faster than if you didn't do anything obviously giving you awareness of the situation.

Traditional gamers are fond of what is traditional, because it's comfortable and surrounded by pleasant memories. I agree with what you said, "The Wii makes it difficult...". More physically demanding controls will take longer to sink in. But it will happen, with a little extra time people will become immersed easily. As people get comfortable with this new control scheme it will eventually become traditional.

One of the other major differences between Immersion and Interaction is play time. When a player is immersed in a game, the play time will be much higher due to the player being "lost" in the game.

My longest tennis session lasted over six hours. My longest basketball session lasted over five hours. My longest ultimate frisbee session lasted over four hours. The Wii doesn't require anywhere near the physical interaction as these sports. Gaming for four, five, or six hours can be considered a serious session.

This is not to say that you can't be immersed while interacting with a game. But if the interaction wasn't there, you'd more likely be more immersed into the game itself. Conflicting joy can happen in interaction, sometimes a gamer won't care for the controls and just care about the game, other times the gamer likes a combination of both. It differs for people.

See above, I talk about "conflicting joy" and being immersed while interacting.

Interaction provides a sense of uniqueness to a game. To do something on the outside of a game and effect the inside of a game usually induces a good feeling of joy and accomplishment. The one problem with this is that if the game that is being played with these controls is not up to snuff in terms of the actual game itself according to the gamers tastes, the controls become almost useless to give off a radiant joy of accomplishment. This is where the line is drawn from someone who prefers the Wii and someone who prefers either the PS3 or 360.

I whole heartedly agree with the first two sentences. What you say next applies to all games. If a game sucks the controls will never give you a sense of accomplishment. Maybe on the Wii it matters more if a game sucks because more effort is required to interact with the game. This is assuming it even uses the motion sensing in a big way. Many Wii games really aren't too physically demanding.

 

thoughts?

I enjoyed your thread. It didn't suck. It was fun to respond to.