Thanks to Corvus I see that Zen of Design is asking for homework papers on "what is immersion". I'm not real likely to come up with much original today, so I'll play along here.
Immersion is suspension of disbelief - not for a narrative but rather for the gameplay itself. It's the slip differential between between simply playing a game and being involved in a game. We often make it sound as if immersion is really just the stuff of first person shooters ... but I disagree. I think I felt very much part of the game when I first played Asteroids as well. Shooters have a natural advantage in that the entire genre is geared to appeasing a person's egoistic desire to be the focus, but they aren't the sole arbiter. Anyone who has emotized their X-Com squaddies should probably understand.
This distinction, however, is one of the ways that I think most people get confused when they defend Half-Life 2 as having a good narrative. Gordon Freeman doesn't talk, they say, because Valve is "showing and not telling". Wrong, Gordon Freeman doesn't talk because Valve wants you to think that you are Freeman and therefore try their best not to provide any details to dissuade that belief. It is in fact neither showing nor telling but completely avoiding the point. While this does wonders for immersion, it's really not the best for narrative as suddenly the world's most heroic rocket scientist is a mute for no reason. Duke Nukem 3D might not have been a better game, but Duke was certainly a better character than Gordon ever will be.
Monday, June 13, 2005
Immersion
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Duke Nukem a better character than Gordon Freeman? If you consider the Apogee shareware version of Duke Nukem, then I'll agree. But straight up Duke3D vs. Half-Life, no no no no.
Duke's Bruce Campbell-isms come off as neither original nor interesting.
OTOH, Freeman speaks no words, but the world of Half-Life informs us of the character. When you see "Die Freeman!" scrawled across concrete walls, or when Freeman is dubbed Anticitizen One. You also learn about the character of Freeman through the others' dialog.
At the beginning of Half-Life 2, when the Civil Protection soldier drops a can and tells you to pick it up, the response it immediately evokes in one's mind is, "No!" Thus, Freeman is MORE real then Duke. We are more sympathetic for Freeman because of this. He is the "regular guy" like us.
We don't really learn anything about Freeman's character other than someone is glad to see him, or they are surprised he made it or whatnot.
Freeman doesn't have a character of his own. I mean, what does having a can dropping tell you about Freeman? Is he sarcastic? Is he remorseful? Is he confused? How can being dubbed something while he isn't even around be telling to his character? That's all idol worship, it's not even really that much about him. He's not a regular guy ... Valve's angle is that he is you.
Duke might not be original, but he's a misoygnistic B-movie action stud, and you can tell that from the way he talks. Same with the Master Chief in Halo. You get the feel of a gritty supersoldier hellbent on doing his job. Gordon's only noticeable trait is that he is incredibly laconic. Gordon is only talked to. Gordon is only talked of.
Now perhaps I'll agree that he is more real or more sympathetic - but again, that's more immersion than narrative. This doesn't make Gordon a more detailed character in the terms of a story, but it does keep you from detaching yourself while controlling him.
Okay, I see what you're saying. Duke3D is more defined as a character, per se. Freeman is less defined and we don't get to know Gordon Freeman as a person.
However, let me posit that Freeman IS developed as a character. As you go through Half-Life 2, Freeman is more and more important to the blossoming resistance movement. Freeman goes from surviving through Ravenholm, to leading troops against Civil Protection in City 17.
Duke 3D: you have little to no character development. The character of Duke is more defined, yes, but nothing develops for Duke. He ends the game being the same person he was when the game started.
So, in one sense, Freeman has more that makes him a character, in that he develops and grows to fill the roles that the author (Valve) places before him.
Although, maybe my desire to levitate HL2 above Duke3D is showing through here. By a strict definition, I think you are right.
I will agree, though, that character development isn't really a norm of games, and shooters in particular. Duke will always be Duke, the Master Chief isn't likely to hang up his helmet anytime soon, etc.
First thought goes to Marathon's Cyborg but that really seems a tad more discovery than development ... but again, semantics.
Would be interesting to compare this to the RPG genre. For instance, characters you create yourself versus established ones.
Fyi: our recent research paper discusses this topic:
http://www.gamesconference.org/digra2005/viewabstract.php?id=267
Cheers, - Frans
Post a Comment