Didn't I state doing it for those things I get? Of course it's immersive to have trouble when you're about to do something like that because it goes against instincts.

I meant things like drinking beer or getting out of chairs. It's not immersive to just get up an inch and then sit down unless you loose your balance, but the animation doesn't show that. It's not immersive to reach for a door and the fail part is to just not grip it rather than your hand slipping. It's not immersive to have to have QTEs for things that muscle memory makes automatic in typical situations.

So don't try to counter my argument with the parts I'm not arguing. That won't make the game immersive. It just shows you didn't read all I wrote.

I know you can't do every single thing like in a tabletop game. Duh.

But even taking the term in the context of just the choices the developers put in, which is what I meant so you took my statement literally, any part where there is no choice at all still makes it a lie.

It wasn't uncomfortable to those things (no playing twister with your fingers), in fact it was very very easy. It would have sufficed to simply press X for Yes, or O for No, just as you could press X for Open Door, and O for don't.

Have you played the game?

Furthermore, it would have been very awkward as there would have been the requirement of a HUD, or at least some Splinter Cell like menu. Taking a menial example, lets say drinking orange juice. I feel that it would have been boring to simply press "Drink Orange Juice", and the next time I drink orange juice in the depressing scene, I wouldn't really connect with the past scene.

That wasn't what I meant. I meant that the thing you spoiler taged would make sense to be a pass fail thing because it would go against his instincts to do that, and thus he would have to force himself. I didn't mean anything about the gameplay there being bad because I was stating it WORKED there.

I didn't even have to play the game to get the context of what you meant, but you actually read what I wrote and didn't get the context at all.

And how is flicking up on the analog stick to or three times different than pressing a button, when nothing in the story is changed? It's a mundane action that doesn't affect the story. And how you feel doesn't matter, because I've been stating those things turn me off from the game. So that's another thing showing you haven't been reading what I wrote.

You can like the game, but I'm entitled to not like these aspects, so if you want to convince me otherwise, stop trying to convince me to like those aspects.

I don't know why you're so big on the instinct thing. At that point in the scene, you have already decided to go for it, you could have walked out of the door before deciding to get all the stuff and sitting down. In fact, I think there even was your desire for a simple Yes or No confirmation before you got in to the motion part.

My point is that you've already made your decision, pass/fail had nothing to do with it, and will had nothing to do with it since you've already made up your mind before hand, not at the momment. The only reason why they made you do those things, technically unnecessary, was to actually give the choice more depth (YOU actually did the ACTION, not just decide what your character will do).

I don't get your context, because you're totally emphasizing the wrong things. The whole point of the motion control was to magnify the immersion, and to make you feel that you ARE the character.

If you will like me to drop the immersion argument, I will argue that it makes the screen less clutered, allows easier selection and distinctions between objects that are close to each other, and allows you to carry out actions at your own speed (slowly opening a shoe box for example).

Honestly though, you're really making a large deal out of nothing. Would you really have simply liked "Press X to open Door"? I don't see how that would have changed much in your eyes, without the immersion aspect.

Please don't tell me this was a spoiler.

Meh, it was a spoiler that was featured in all the trailers.

Oh thats fine then, I don't count things in trailers as spoilers.

I guess the best thing to do is avoid all heavy rain threads till I play it.

"I don't know why you're so big on the instinct thing."

As in I was stating that it would make sense to have a pass or fail thing about that thing you mentioned, since...



**SPOILER ALERT**

Ethan cutting off his fingertip would go against survival instincts. It doesn't matter if he made the choice already. Instincts don't work that way. Hence making that a QTE makes sense. It's a matter of one emotion versus another. It's primal, thus fitting with the theme of the story.

I can't believe I have to explain this to you when you like the game. It's a basic storytelling convention. Someone has to do something against instincts, whether facing a fear or making a suicide charge in battle, any characters will have to psyche themselves up. So Ethan making the choice will still go against his instincts.

So that is a logical choice in the game.

**END SPOILER**

"If you will like me to drop the immersion argument, I will argue that it makes the screen less clutered"

No, I'd like you to drop this "immersion and HUD are connected" notion. They aren't, and I'm not even suggesting putting one in this game.

"Would you really have simply liked "Press X to open Door"?"

Why not? You wouldn't even need a prompt, since many games without HUDs don't need them anyway. It's a simple and familiar mechanic, thus would logically be immersive since we don't need to think about it. Or even just making an automatic open like in games since since the first console RPGs. Making it a pass/fail thing when it's not a realistic thing should break the immersion logically.

What about my orange juice example? Or what about suspensful scenes (like opening the shoebox).

Obvious spoiler here:

That scene would have been MUCH less emotional, if it were just pure buttons.