I suddenly realized the two categories of players that exist out there. If someone can link me to a person who's talked about this before, that would be awesome.
The theory is this: you play either for immersion or for escapism. They're polar ends of a spectrum, so you can be somewhere in between. The ends are defined as:
IMMERSION - to play with an active interest in simulation; positive. They like thematically complex games that focus on servicing suspension of disbelief, games which are usually pretty fluid mechanically (escapist players would call them simple, not fluid). Halo players.
ESCAPISM - to play with an active interest in forgetting; negative. They like mechanically complex games that focus on servicing intellectual stimulation, which are usually pretty simple thematically (immersive players would call them repetitive, not simple). Quake players.
I say forgetting, because games like Quake do nothing to get you to feel the stress and drive for heroism that the protagonist experiences, which a game like Halo does. They instead just give you a fun game to play. Games are easier to interpret, and more relaxing than sitting there actually feeling like the world is resting on your shoulders, which you sense when you have marines dying around you in Halo and such. Someone who just wants to forget about shit doesn't want to experience the latter.
Let the bickering commence.
Jacob Thompson
Immersion
Aaron Lopez
Fun
Connor Edwards
I used to be more immersion based but now i think i definitely lean towards escapism.
Lucas James
Fun is closer to escapism
Wyatt Hernandez
your scale makes no sense.
immersion speaks of the ability of the player to get involved in the game world and respond to the situations, tasks and conditions within it in a more natural and personal way, challenging him in a character aspect as well as through his physical skills as a player and intellect.
escapism means the game is oriented towards provoking a sense of detachment from the real world on the player, it's a game that is pleasurable and rewarding to play and that the player can easily sink a large amount of time in continuously. These games have specific themes, visuals and mechanics that offer a fairly tilted balance between excitement, stress and rewards.
i would swap the names for "Abstraction" and "Immersion" instead.
Gavin Martinez
Theyre not mutually exclusive things
Samuel Carter
Entertainment
Leo Lopez
Those two things aren't mutually exclusive. By being immersed in something you escape from reality.
Benjamin Diaz
>Halo >immersion As a halofag, wat?
Cameron Young
Especially on the fact that you actually have to PLAY Halo.
Connor Russell
I'm defining them by the intent of the player. If you play for immersion then your main objective isn't to forget your own world, but to explore a new one. By necessity when you're immersed you do forget your own world, but that wasn't the appeal for you, it was a consequence. Meanwhile, if you play for escapism then the appeal is in relieving yourself of your own world, and that person just wants to play a game, because games are more relaxing than simulations.
Halo was ALL about immersion. This is why there's such a divide between Halo fans and Quake fans.
Lincoln Butler
To ad to your post. Immersion happens in every well made game. Its the result of projecting your senses into the game while you control the players avatar as a proxy to interact with that microworld. Its also reffered to as being in the zone.
Adrian Martinez
Youre using the words wrong
Asher Garcia
You've picked terrible labels. Immersive experiences are the most driven by escapism as people usually mean it. Mechanically intensive games are also usually about reaching a state of flow which is totally immersive just not in the world's story.
Aren't you really trying to get at a mechanics vs roleplaying comparison?
Even then the two aren't necessarily in conflict, since good mechanics help good roleplaying/world immersion. And good ties into the world subjectively improve mechanics (eg Souls games' world tie-ins for co-op and resurrection mechanics)
Kayden Long
>Halo was ALL about immersion The setting or the gameplay? Cause Halo's gameplay is engrossing, but it's also some real power fantasy crap. Pretty fucking far from immersive.
OP, you're just making shit up to suit your personal definitions of a word, and your examples are retarded.
Prey [CURRENT YEAR] is an immersive game. Hell, Dragon Age Inquisition is an immersive game, but there are elements of escapism to both of them. Forcing this dichotomy of two non-mutually exclusive words is like banging your head against a trampoline, things rattle and noises are heard, but nothing is accomplished other than making yourself look like a high-school drop out.
Isaiah Lee
this
this post doesn't help. You're not making an active distinction between your two definitions, besides game mechanics which have nothing to do with immersion or escapism. I can be immersed or 'escape' with any kind of mechanics, complex or simple, shitty or not.
'Escapism' is a term used to define anything that allows people to get away from reality. That could be books, movies, drugs, whatever. Most people who truly desire escapism play games like Animal Crossing and shit like that, where they can enter a world where everything is nice and they have a big house and tons of friends etc.
Immersion is just a by product of games that focus on certain aspects, like environment, story telling, sounds, atmosphere, whatever. I can't be immersed in Overwatch because there's a bunch of crazy goofy fucks running around doing stupid shit. I can be immersed in Subnautica because that's what it focuses on.
Neither Quake nor Halo is immersing. Both can be escapist, however.
Owen Mitchell
Maybe. The desire to explore a place and the desire to escape from a place are perceptively different, and is what leads to different taste in games, is what I'm trying to articulate.
William Powell
you can have both
Michael Hall
>Neither Quake nor Halo is immersing It's not the games that you attribute this to but the players. Quake fans and Halo fans like entirely different things. They both have their own language to refer to one another and to each other's game. Neither are in the wrong, they just have a different mindset.
Quake fans think Halo is casual Halo fans think Quake is repetitive
Both are valid only when you understand the different language and interests between the two groups of players and neither are if you don't understand either.
