What determines the immersion of a RPG?

[Darth Canoli]

• Mechanics and lore being in line and making sense in the context

• First person perspective

• Music fitting the ambiance.

• More realistic or gothic artstyle.

• High lethality(except in few ocasions where low lethality makes sense)

• Reactivity

• Immersion is easier in first person but it's not required.
• Everything has to be in line with the context, i agree
  
• Dialog and language is what breaks immersion the most, particularly 20th/ 21st century slang and figures of speech in a medieval setting.
• Sound effects done right, like in Arx Fatalis: no SFX loops, when you hear a growl, it means something is coming for you!
• I somewhat agree with lethality, it doesn't need to be high, somewhat lethal is good enough on this day and age...

 

[d1r]

I think it simply comes down to believability.

How can a fantasy or sci-fi RPG be "believable", you ask? Well, just in the same way a fantasy or sci-fi novel can suspend your disbelief: through clever and creative writing; through plausibility and just enough relation to the real world; through detail and forethought and scope of design.

Tolkein's Middle-Earth is a "believable" world because of all the incredible detail and thought he put into it over the years. Reading his novels, obviously unless you dislike Tolkein, you almost feel like you've been transported there.

Rarely can the same thing be said about an RPG, but it happens. Most of the true classics are "immersive" mainly because of the same reasons.

Best example for non-believability: Fallout 3

A game which tries so hard to build up a world, but fails so spectacularly with just its writing alone:

You leave the Vault, you explore Springvale, and suddenly find Silver's house, and you, as someone who has no idea about the Wasteland, talk to her, and the only options the game gives you is to deny that you're working for Moirya, or that she should give you the caps. If Fallout 3 had been a Obsidian game, you could have asked Silver all things about the Wasteland, and she could have acted as a good entrypoint into the new world. She could have informed you about the Raiders, about the Talon, about Megaton, and what there is all to find in the world. But instead, the game just forces you into a quest without even giving you the option to just leave her alone for now.

 

[Cryomancer]

Best example for non-believability: Fallout 3

I would put Diablo 3 as the most nonsensical game which I ever played.

First, while in Diablo 1 you become better at casting fireballs by reading magical tomes and having enough MAG to be able to learn from the tome, in D3 you become better at casting a spell by ... Finding a bigger and sharper axe!!!! And your weapon disappears during the casting animation. And you can use siphon blood spell in creatures with no blood like skeletons. The game is all about managing cooldowns and farming bigger numbers in stat stickie items that represent nothing and flashy AoE explosions.

Dragon Age Origins breaks my immersion in a lot of times, but still breaks due the high amount of cooldowns and the fact that you can use blood magic in front of templars and nobody cares.

VtMB did right with supernatural abilities. Using domination in front of kine is ok, but transforming into a giant bat, transforming enemies into blood grenades with blood boil and so on are masquerade break. VtMB also simulated how police works in Commiefornia, Brazil and other places. Criminals start firing on you and nobody cares. When you pick your firearm and fight back, then is a criminal offense. Getting illegal firearms is easy but you just can't get legal firearms.

 

[laclongquan]

Best example for non-believability: Fallout 3

A game which tries so hard to build up a world, but fails so spectacularly with just its writing alone:

You leave the Vault, you explore Springvale, and suddenly find Silver's house, and you, as someone who has no idea about the Wasteland, talk to her, and the only options the game gives you is to deny that you're working for Moirya, or that she should give you the caps. If Fallout 3 had been a Obsidian game, you could have asked Silver all things about the Wasteland, and she could have acted as a good entrypoint into the new world. She could have informed you about the Raiders, about the Talon, about Megaton, and what there is all to find in the world. But instead, the game just forces you into a quest without even giving you the option to just leave her alone for now.

The problem with Fallout 3 is that it being a heavy tactical combat game try to incorporate heavy element of RPG. Plus Bethesda's QA department is like a leaky bucket, traditionally.

Case in point: Silver's case. There's two way to simply deal with it. One is locking the door until you get the quest from Moriarty. Another is set up a few conditional in their coding for a case of generic dialog (Silver and you dont know each other and SIlver is wary of stranger). The latter case has trouble of extra voiced dialog. The former is simpler if QA is good.

As for F3 writing quality in general, yeah, I have my own thread criticizing it, wont reiterate here.

 

[BruceVC]

I can't just write a definition, however, IMO there are a couple of things which increases the immersion.

• Mechanics and lore being in line and making sense in the context
• First person perspective
• Music fitting the ambiance.
• More realistic or gothic artstyle.
• High lethality(except in few ocasions where low lethality makes sense)
• Reactivity

The first is very important. Game mechanics and lore needs to be in line in order to make the game immersive. First person perspective enhances the immersion but you still can have a very immersive game in third person. Gothic is an example. So far, the most immersion which I had in a RPG so far was with :

• Mount & Blade : Warband - Amazingly immersive. Charging into enemies with a heavily armored horse and a spear is amazing. Conquering a city and defending it with Rhodok Sharpshooters, doing quests for noble and growing from a small mercenary band into a powerful noble or even a king is so amazing.
• VtMB : Extremely immersive. The dark urban fantasy set in early 2000s commiefornia is vastly different than what we generally see in RPGs. The music, sound design, dialog, quest design, everything is amazing in this game.
• Gothic 1/2/3 and Returning. I know that a lot of people consider G3 bad (IMO is just not as great as G1), but all Gothic games are very immersive.
• Fallout New Vegas : The unique game problem is the relative low lethality. But I love FNV so much and the immersion of the game is amazing.

Shotguns are extremely versatile weapons. Can be used for long range bird hunting with birdshot, with buckshot, can kill a human at about 50m and hit someone at hundreds of meters with slugs. Can be used to throw fire with dragon's breath ammo. In a futuristic game, I expect to be able to use "EMP shells" and shit like that.

You ask a question that may seem hackneyed but its relevant because for me the whole question of immersion is a huge part of why RPG are my favorite genre of any game and always will be

And I love RPG because I use to DM in AD&D so I always appreciate how your imagination is part of the overall fun and experience. So I always play all games the same way, I imagine it was me in the game or rather I become the main character but I always make choices based on what I think is the right choice for the greater good of the game world, for example in Far Cry 4 I had to choose between using the drug trade to finance the new world or destroy the drugs because they are so destructive to people. Anyway I considered certain realities about the rebels and what they were trying to achieve, drugs can be used to finance certain government programs but since the drugs were heroine and they create such problems in communities I decided this country wasnt in a position to mange the drug trade so I decided to destroy all drugs

So what matters to me about immersion is similar to your list

• the overall narrative and making choices that really are about understanding what the consequences mean
• Companions and interacting with them and feeling they matter in their contribution
• Romance and companion side quests make things believable
• Lore and realistic design of cities must make sense
• Games must have NPC that react to you like you said in Gothic and Elex
• I like it when quests have different ways you can solve them
• And then realistic AI in animals and creatures so that they have their own ways of acting.....like sometimes attacking NPC

 

[BruceVC]

Ultima IV was one of the most immersive RPGs for me and I think it doesn't fit any of the criteria. IMO the game being immersive is not about what to do but rather about what not to do. I will get immersed in pretty much any game there is and will stay immersed unless my immersion is broken by some stupid crap.
Here's a list of things that will break my immersion immediately:
-Leveled loot - this instantly pulls be out of any game
-Leveled enemies - completely broke immersion in Witcher 3. Geralt is able to take down a griphon in prologue, yet I need to avoid some stronger drowners in later acts? Bullshit.
-Story not taking itself seriously - the game may have humor but I won't get immersed if the main story itself is a farce
-Dumb modern day political bullshit - this doesn't require explanation
-Shit writing in general - if I see garbage writing I won't think of it in as "something character X said" bur rather as something written by a retard. My immersion in WoTR was constantly broken simply because of sheer amount of bad writing in the game

I may be misunderstanding you but levelled enemies for me are where they all seem to have the same level as you so combat becomes boring and their is no risk or reward but games like ELEX are perfect where some enemies will destroy you on lower levels but you learn how important a tactical retreat is

But I dont remember Witcher 3 being levelled because Im sure all enemies had a certain level but the gryphon was unusual because it was very tough but you evade to avoid certain death

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

I may be misunderstanding you but levelled enemies for me are where they all seem to have the same level as you so combat becomes boring and their is no risk or reward but games like ELEX are perfect where some enemies will destroy you on lower levels but you learn how important a tactical retreat is

But I dont remember Witcher 3 being levelled because Im sure all enemies had a certain level but the gryphon was unusual because it was very tough but you evade to avoid certain death

I've meant enemies with levels, not in-game indicators for foes that are too strong to beat. For example in normal RPG you fight goblins which will always have the same or similar levels of strength. You might later encounter Goblin Kings with slightly differently colored sprite which are stronger, but are also a different monster. Then you start killing ghouls, dragons etc. as you advance through the game. However some games like Witcher 3, Divinity Dragon Knight Saga etc. will just have monsters with levels. So you begin the game and you meet 5 lvl drowners which you can kill and in other places 15 lvl drowners which are unbeatable at this point of the game. Which makes no sense since at that point Geralt is a veteran uber-Witcher and there should be no drowner which is too tough for him to beat. It's lazy, it feels boring and it breaks the internal consistency of the game.

 

[Arthandas]

I think it simply comes down to believability.

This! And avoidance of obvious gamification elements like fetch quests, characters telling you their life stories after meeting you for the first time etc

In truth every single element of the game adds or subtracts from immersion - music, art direction, believable characters and plot, UI, voice acting...

 

[octavius]

So...immersion=suspension of disbelief?

 

[Humbaba]

Nothing,it is game and you are aware of it. Especially rpgs,they are impossible to immerse in to.

We are not worthy of this high test Bugar BVLL wisdom.

I think it simply comes down to believability.

How can a fantasy or sci-fi RPG be "believable", you ask? Well, just in the same way a fantasy or sci-fi novel can suspend your disbelief: through clever and creative writing; through plausibility and just enough relation to the real world; through detail and forethought and scope of design.

Tolkein's Middle-Earth is a "believable" world because of all the incredible detail and thought he put into it over the years. Reading his novels, obviously unless you dislike Tolkein, you almost feel like you've been transported there.

Rarely can the same thing be said about an RPG, but it happens. Most of the true classics are "immersive" mainly because of the same reasons.

Internal consistency is key. A good example would be Game of Thrones post season 3, when things start sucking and people start noticing glaring plotholes. Fanboys and actors responded with "Hurrdurr this is a world with dragons, and THIS is what you don't believe??? Heh I'm very smart." Like, why is Sam still so fucking fat after years of being in the Nights Watch? How come the Mountain can get fucking skewered through the chest and still have the strength to squash Oberyn's head into goo? Are the people in this universe somehow different? In short, while a lack of realism can excuse plotholes, a lack of internal consistency cannot, which makes the latter more important to a believable and thus immersive setting.

So...immersion=suspension of disbelief?

That's more a consequence of immersion.

 

[Rincewind]

Are the people in this universe somehow different?

YES!

 

[Humbaba]

Are the people in this universe somehow different?

YES!

>refuses to elaborate

 

[BruceVC]

I may be misunderstanding you but levelled enemies for me are where they all seem to have the same level as you so combat becomes boring and their is no risk or reward but games like ELEX are perfect where some enemies will destroy you on lower levels but you learn how important a tactical retreat is

But I dont remember Witcher 3 being levelled because Im sure all enemies had a certain level but the gryphon was unusual because it was very tough but you evade to avoid certain death

I've meant enemies with levels, not in-game indicators for foes that are too strong to beat. For example in normal RPG you fight goblins which will always have the same or similar levels of strength. You might later encounter Goblin Kings with slightly differently colored sprite which are stronger, but are also a different monster. Then you start killing ghouls, dragons etc. as you advance through the game. However some games like Witcher 3, Divinity Dragon Knight Saga etc. will just have monsters with levels. So you begin the game and you meet 5 lvl drowners which you can kill and in other places 15 lvl drowners which are unbeatable at this point of the game. Which makes no sense since at that point Geralt is a veteran uber-Witcher and there should be no drowner which is too tough for him to beat. It's lazy, it feels boring and it breaks the internal consistency of the game.

Yes I see your point, I ended up spending 300 hours on W3 and it is probably in my top 3 favorite RPG and I tend to not remember those kind of things but you right , its inconsistent
But I remember playing W1 and it was a great game. It was my first CDPR game and I didnt know much about the books. But I became a fan of the Witcher universe and I was pleased that the origin of this type of fantasy wasnt from the normal countries but was Polish and I like to see diversity in how RPG are created. In W1 they had some interesting unusual components that I enjoyed but werent very popular like the Card system but I enjoyed the idea....how could I ever forget the hot vampiress interlude :D

But for W2 they improved on every part of W1 and that game was huge with massive developments around wars and kings and you got learn about the interesting lore and politics of the Witcher world

I still must read the books sometime....but in English because my Polish is not strong

 

[InSight]

Immersion when applied to Video Games can simply/ultimately mean any period when one is ignorant of the surrounding be they be the time passage or one's thought. When one's utmost focus is on/in the game.

Do to the prevalence of health bars, menu, numbers , mini maps... ect , the periods of immersion would often be brief for they remind of the outer world, the world outside the game's world. That is why hiding them such in game as GTA 4, Vanquish, Control or any game that can be played without the User Interface data/info(such as on screen campus), would lead to a greater experience for they increase the frequencies and lengths of immersions.

If in Action games the immersion would form&flow from the heat of battle or stress of anticipation
Or
in fighting games from the flow and timing of combos
Or
in Tactics and Strategy from the planning and calculation of future moves,
Then in
Role-Playing Game they should form from the settings and characters. The settings as the game world, a fiction that could portray blue tree's and standing talking rats. When one add these two together a event or story is tethered.

Both aspects of world view and facial* interaction would be most suited for the first person perspective or at least 3rd point of view for they allow farther, closer and wider view for changes to be noticeable. Close enough to see the daggers in the smile.

*Face to Face, Most Top view CRPG fulfill the latter to a minor degree with character portraits.

 

[laclongquan]

Leveled enemies are an aspect of tactical combat game. Especially an open world tactical combat game. You just cant do without it, or the combat become boring

Take Fallout 1 for example. The Raider camp where we go to rescue Tandi. If we go at it right at the beginning after leaving Shady Sands without going anywhere, it's pretty tough. But if we return to it after do a full round of the hub, Necropolis, Water shed etc... it's piss easy.
+++ OTOH, if its group of hostile is always set to spawn 3-5 level higher than Vault Dweller, it's still a challenge in middle game

OTOH, people keep complaining about Morrowind's bastard wearing best armors in game at high level. Well fucking duh. You are talking about Bethesda who notoriously keep having trouble with OP loots (and will never officially rebalance, because it's in their games' design philosophy). I notice those buggers never say anything about Icewind Dale 2 where spawns at VH diff or HoF mode can do wonder with their leveled list.

Why is that? I will tell you why is that: because they are storyfaqs, not tactical gamers. They CAN NOT play tactical combat at anything higher than hard diff.

I reiterate: Leveled enemies are an aspect of tactical combat game. If your rpg has open world and heavy combat, Leveled enemies will be present or it fuck up your game power progression.

 

[Marat]

It's quite simple: to be immersive the game has to intrigue you: you need to want to see what will happen next. That's all.

 

[Harthwain]

Mechanics and lore being in line and making sense in the context

Agreed. This applies to the narrative too. Having mechanics to support the narrative can do a lot for the immersion.

 

[BruceVC]

It's quite simple: to be immersive the game has to intrigue you: you need to want to see what will happen next. That's all.

I agree that fundamentally immersion requires that but the reality of RPG is the overall journey is always part of your experience. If I think of most RPG games I have played I often consider my characters path and then I ruminate on what could be ....it may sound unusual but its normal for how I think about my game.

And yes it requires an RPG that is captivating and worthwhile but believing in the purpose of the primary narrative also is about real immersion ?

 

[Faarbaute]

One aspect I find trumps most other aspects of immersion for me personally, is whether the game makes you care about its outcomes, or not. Not in the sense of beeing drawn into the drama of the story or how well it holds up to scrutiny, that can be nice aswell, but about the gameplay.

Do you care about a missed roll, do you care if the quest you're on succeeds or not? If a scripted mugging event takes place and a theif steals 5 GP from you, do you even care about getting those 5 GP back or are you just going through the motions?

Do you care about gaining or losing reputation with a faction? Earning experience?

When you care about the next move, because you care about its outcome, even if you're playing chess, you'll be immersed in the game.

How the developer sets about this is up to them, but they have to make the player care about the gameplay, and its outcome.

 

[undecaf]

It’s ability to suck you in with its mechanics and content.

To me that would be nice amounts of abstraction through PnP-related mechanics in a believable enough world.

I’ve found the first two Fallouts and the original Wasteland to be more immersive than the modern high fidelity in your face games for which developers nowadays think ”oldschool” mechanics are incompatible.

 

[Shadenuat]

I always thought word was invented by journalists to praise games that can't be pre praised for their gameplay.

 

[Valdetiosi]

I would say envoriment is big part of immersion, not just from being accurate to setting, but how beliavable and comfy it can be. I guess one would call it atmospheric than immersive, but I think atmosphere is important part of doing immersion.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and Kingdom Come Deliverance has nailed it for me.

 

[Cryomancer]

I always thought word was invented by journalists to praise games that can't be pre praised for their gameplay.

No, game journos don't care about immersion. Otherwise, they would't be pleasing shit like Diablo 3 and Dragon Age : Inquisition.

 

[Inhabitants of Khorinis]

>See a thread about immersion
>Reads the thread
>why are these motherfuckers talking about flow?

 

[gurugeorge]

I can't just write a definition, however, IMO there are a couple of things which increases the immersion.

• Mechanics and lore being in line and making sense in the context
• First person perspective
• Music fitting the ambiance.
• More realistic or gothic artstyle.
• High lethality(except in few ocasions where low lethality makes sense)
• Reactivity

Mechanics definitely. Things not being logical (or logical in terms of the virtual world as set up) are really jarring.

FPP no, not necessarily. This is a hobby horse of mine. FPP is "more immersive" only in a specifically dungeon-crawling context, where it mimics the tunnel vision you get from fear. In most other contexts, TPP is more immersive because it mimics the sense of oneself that one normally has of a 3-d entity situated in a 3-d world, which you get from subtle environmental sensory cues, from the eyes' constant saccading, etc., and from the brain's own modelling of its body situated in the world. The only downside of TPP is being able to look around corners, but that can be solved by adroit use of fog of war. Being able to switch between the two is best (e.g. in the Bethesda games, you can be in FPP when you're inching through a deep, gloomy dungeon, and go to TPP to feel the liberation of the clean air as you come outside).

Music, absolutely. I'd say music is about 1/5th contribution to immersion, and good, fitting music really helps to "glue" you to a game. You could extend that to sound design generally. For example poorly cloned footsteps can ruin immersion, whereas properly varied footsteps help.

Art style definitely - though here there's a lot of leeway, it depends on the genre, sometimes a more cartooney or less realistic art style can be fine. But if you're going for a proper feeling of apprehension and doom, realistic and/or gothic (and or alien in some sense) is the way to go.

High lethality. Definitely. You should be on the same level as the mobs, none of this bullet sponge nonsense (except where appropriate ofc, with monstrous bosses, etc.).

Reactivity. Definitely, the more the world responds to whatever random probing of it you decide to do, the more immersive it is.

As always, I'd be careful to distinguish several things. There's "immersion" in the sense of the feeling of "being there" in another world, in the virtual world as depicted (the acute version of it is called "presence" by analysts, it only happens rarely but you'll know it when it happens) - part of one's brain forgets that one is a geek sitting in a Herman Miller, and one feels transported to this other place. Related to that is "immersion" in the sense of roleplay, in the sense of being or acting your character in that virtual world (this has a lot to do with C&C); I suppose that's straightforwardly called "roleplaying." Then there's "immersion" in the gameplay itself, which I think is more properly called "engagement," the feeling of being in a trance state, where your mind is thoroughly absorbed by the gameplay - by making your build, by going over your options in combat, or by developing good twitch skills and "throwing shapes" as you're playing, so to speak. In general, being absorbed in finding the optimum, most elegant path to success or victory.