For the few of you who argue that this is not perfectly immersive, the only response to you that I have is that this is attempting to be MORE immersive, and will be for many people (I prefer first person gameplay for immersion). There are obvious problems about how this is not fully immersive, this is true, but the idea is to make progressive steps TOWARDS full immersion. Someday, who knows, maybe theyll learn how to incorporate peripheral vision into tvs (VR helments, amirite?). But the idea I think is to progress, and the obvious logical direction for games to be alternate life simulations is to take it to first person, even if the technical ability is not there yet to make it work perfectly.
Dopemine Cleric said:
Your a dumbass. Fallout is not an educational software program. It is a work of digital art. Art is from the perspective of the creator, and your suppose to enjoy the creators perspective of the work in question, not pick and choose like a fucking moron from something like if hypothetically Mona Lisa was remade by Bethesda and given cock-sucking lips and a huge rack, and made holding a chainsaw. THE POINT IS THE ORIGINAL INTENTION OF THE ARTWORK, NOT YOUR OPINION ON WHAT IT SHOULD BE! SO SHUT THE HELL UP AND GO MAKE YOUR OWN DAMN GAME ASSHAT!
You failed art history, didnt you?
Art nazis are fucking idiotic and completely miss the point of art.
Art is subjective, creators usually have an intent, but that does not rigidly confine the view of the viewers. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, fool.
zioburosky13 said:
Which in terms turn player into people who rarely use their imagination to visualize the game, while depends more on visual and reflexing skill.
I'm seeing the sign of devolution everywhere this day...
There is no such thing as de-evolution.
Crel said:
Ever play any muds? Have you ever read a book? Well thats what text based adventures do for the player. Every character is cast right, every camera angle is perfect, every sound, sight EVERYTHING is perfect when you are given the ability to imagine it. Its customized to you, but when visuals and sounds are incorporated, abominations like the Ogre/Mutant are born
. Story>ubergrafix!
Most of the MUDs I've played had terrible stories, I find your claim dubious. Especially since they were largely similar to MMORPGs and had other chracters constantly crushing the 'immersion' with idiot-speak.
Oeolycus said:
In my mind, an RPG (PnP or otherwise) is usually a strategy game where one logically completes quests in order to logically unlock important skills and continue advancing a narrative.
An action game eschews story (most of the time) for reflex and hand-eye coordination. Neither genre is better or worse than the other. This mix they're talking about is absurd..
A problem of definition? Action game eschews story? What about action makes story impossible? Your statement is far more absurd than the mix could ever inherently be.
13pm said:
Normally, all human beings have so called 'peripheral' sight, that allows you to see everything that happens to the left or right. So the perception field is MUCH bigger than can be depicted even on a widescreen. Thus any 3d person view (including iso) is much more immersive (fuck this word) as it allows you to be aware of what happens around you.
No, that is not even remotely true. Thats replacing one bad logic with another. Neither is fully immersive, but many people feel that the limitations of frontal sight keeping you from seeing things behind you is more immersive than having super-peripheral vision that only goes 20 feet away. This is a person by person thing. I personally think being physically within your characters skull > floating in the sky above him. What you are saying sounds like a person watching you in a helicopter better understands your point of view than a person with goggles on.
Sorrow said:
That's moronic. So now, stats and turn-based combat are immersion-breaking just because he doesn't like them?
I never found stat screens and turn-based combat immersion-breaking when playing games like Fallout or X-Com.
You're not the hores of unimaginative masses thatr the game intends to sell to. Not everyone has a good imagination, some people just can't do it. Not to mention, many people find real-life simulation better than strategy simulation when it comes to immersion. I just played call of duty 4 the other day, and I can tell you now that the game was more "character immersive" than any 3rd person view game I have ever played. This obviously will not be true for everyone, but for many people, first person view helps the player to feel more like they ARE the character, as opposed to just controlling the character.
Wooz said:
Keep it civil, or this goes straight to the vats.
Darky, develop your answers. Flamey one-liners like that don't add much to the discussion.
If only a one line answer is needed, two lines become irrelevant, amirite? Artificially inflating responses does not make them any more or less valid. But I will definitely try to keep the flaming down to a minimum, sorry bout that.
