What defines an immersive sim?

henke on 3/1/2017 at 10:56

Quote Posted by zoog

Maybe it's stupid but "immersive sims" is what makes immersion. That is, game makers create realistic and beautiful and exciting world which causes player to believe in it. That way is often non-commercial - publishers have to work not with the cheap, replaceable and obliging hindus but with talents

This is (http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147363&p=2341637&viewfull=1#post2341637) the second time in a week you're complaining about "Hindus". What is this, zoog? Explain yourself.

Starker on 3/1/2017 at 12:16

Quote Posted by Malf

I mentioned this in the "Best games of 2016" thread, but do games necessarily need to be first person to be considered "Immersive sims"?

I would say that it's a very big part of the equation. Immersive sims aim to evoke a certain "you are there" feel that's very hard to replicate in third person view.

Judith on 3/1/2017 at 12:52

I'd say that again it's secondary. It's kind of like Flight Simulator is not a simulation game anymore, because you switched from cockpit view to external view. All the systems are still there, working, you just decided to throw your cameraman out of the window for a while.

Nameless Voice on 3/1/2017 at 13:19

There are two parts to the term, immersive and sim(ulation).

Immersive means that it feels like you are directly there in the game world - you can't really do that in third-person.
Simulation means that the game world is built from simulated systems rather than pre-defined gameplay elements. Third-person games can do that.

So we probably need a broader term to apply to both, something like "emergent sim".

Malf on 3/1/2017 at 14:17

Quote Posted by Nameless Voice

Immersive means that it feels like you are directly there in the game world - you can't really do that in third-person.

You know, I'm not convinced that's true. I still refer to actions performed by a third-person character in-game as "my" actions. And in MMOs in particular, my "toon" was "me" in the game world. "I" would attack that group of monsters, "I" explore the world. I don't experience a massive difference in immersion, being sucked in to a game world, between third and first person games. I'm still able to suspend disbelief and convince myself that it's me in the character's situation.

Don't get me wrong, there's something definitely different about first person games. But I think excluding games with virtually every other requirement from the genre purely because of POV is pointless. For example, which is a more relevant comparison? Deus Ex & MGS V or Deus Ex & Doom?

Malf on 3/1/2017 at 14:29

While we're at it however, there's one developer who used to be in the genre who opted out and haven't dabbled since: Monolith.
While I never played the first game, I felt No-one Lives Forever 2 was a fine example of an immersive sim, as was Tron 2.0.

Yet now all we get from them are the various FEAR games (and by extension, Condemned) and Shadow of Mordor. Great games in their own right, sure, but to see a developer not related to the giants of immersive sims drop out of the genre is a sad thing. They provided a unique perspective and I really miss their contribution.

Judith on 3/1/2017 at 15:54

Quote Posted by Malf

You know, I'm not convinced that's true. I still refer to actions performed by a third-person character in-game as "my" actions.

I too think that's better approach. Immersive sim means creating simulation of a believable world. How you place the camera in that world is another issue. And whether it's me playing as myself, or me playing Garrett, Snake or Hitman, or anything in-between, that doesn't matter. I still play, more or less creatively, with the game systems that constitute the simulation and dynamically react to my actions.

icemann on 3/1/2017 at 16:58

I'm with Malf as well. Games where your a god / controlling entity watching down from up above whilst you issue orders to your troops / people can be quite immersive.

The first 2 Syndicate games + Satelite Reign spring to mind. There's much more to them than just combat, with the need to research new gear, develop good strategies, think on where to spend your cash etc etc.

That said, I wouldn't call those games immersive sims. I'd call them strategy games, but they do have immersive elements.

Would Spore be an immersive sim? I've not played it so can't say.

demagogue on 3/1/2017 at 17:08

Quote Posted by Nameless Voice

So we probably need a broader term to apply to both, something like "emergent sim".

Whatever term you want to use, I think what we're really talking about is a movement or tradition or design philosophy in game development history which has some representatives games explicitly designed with that philosophy and tradition in mind. So I'm not that worried about getting the definition exactly right. It's a flexible umbrella term that can cover a lot different elements, and it works better as a label for the movement than a definition anyway. I'm more interested in just being literate about that tradition and design philosophy that it's pointing to.

Edit: The punchline being that, because "immersive sim" is the term that's been popularly attached to the design philosophy, it's ok to stick with it and treat it more like a title than a definition.

Malf on 3/1/2017 at 17:11

Quote Posted by icemann

Would Spore be an immersive sim? I've not played it so can't say.

Nah, Spore's several different genres in one game, each "phase" being a rather shallow version of another type of game.
The Cell stage is reminiscent of Flow, the Creature stage like a third person ARPG, the Civilization stage confusingly like an RTS and the final Space stage being the most unique. I didn't play much of that, getting bored quite quickly.But I can safely say it's definitely not an immersive sim.