Better graphics = worse immersion?

Damn, Ocelot looks so smooth.

I would fuck the ever loving shit out of realistic Ocelot.

Not really worse immersion for me, but bad animations and things like clipping really stand out worse to me in better graphics.

They really do, and coupled with good graphics it only stands out worse.

I'm pretty sure that's normal. Here's his face on the 3DS by the way, which gave the Boss a babby face and turned EVA's hair a weirder hue of yellow.

Real life has the best graphics available, do you feel less immersed because of it?

Wouldn't be playing vidya otherwise

it all makes sense now

I don't think there is a certain way to tell that, you would need to experience a game for the first time again

I kind of experience the same thing. My guess is less realistic graphics force you to use your imagination more, which gets you more drawn in or something. Also, everything past the PS2 era feels fake to me. Like it's too polished or something.

Real life is real life- you can't do better than real life because there is nothing higher to model your graphics after.
The thing is, if you emulate real life, then you have to emulate it the right way.
These new graphics don't do this.

Now, with the lowish poly models that the original MGS3 had, there were enough details left out that the models sort of become a metaphor for the real thing.
It's a case of "this isn't what the character would exactly look like in real life, but we have given enough details for you to imagine them in a realistic way."

But the new graphics leave no room for imagination, and instead try to make you believe thar the representation of real life that you're looking as IS real life. What that means is that your mind is less invested in the game, and thus means you're less immersed.

It's what we grew up with, what we're used to. If all rpgs were made on the same graphic level than fo1 but with much more content, I'd be more than pleased

That, and

I think that's because art direction is something that seems to have been lost in favor of everything looking realistic and using the same realistic lighting. When something imitates life to closely it can become boring… and now every game strives to do that while remaining "practical" to appease people who know nothing about art styles or art directions.

You're more easily immersed in a well crafted but unique world than one that mimics ours a little too closely… well, most of the time anyways.

It's all about the a e s t h e t i c s

...

Not by today's standards

Well, I have to say that Quake 3 still looks fucking great.

Iv been having this for quite a few years now, FPS was my favorite genre in the 90's 00's i slowly when off them, i just could not get immersed into the games and now just cannot play a modern FPS.

I look at the games i play now and they are all not very spectacular in the graphics department, immersion has always been a big thing for me and it dose seem the better looking the game the harder it is for me.

But then on the other hand Flight Combat/Flight sim have to be top level graphics for me to get immersed, iv played flight sims all my life and its getting harder and harder to get immersed in the older ones i used to love.

A good artstyle is timeless.

Most designers worth a shit stick to 'form for function', meaning you trim all the unecessary shit and focus on the essentials. Something like TF2 pre hats is a good example of this.
NuDOOM is a good counter example. Instead of having a few key elements that lead your eye, every model is cluttered with shit and just looks busy.

Funnily enough i got a prescription for glasses a few years back, never wear them because the world seems comfier place without them

also you can't fuck something up if you don't try to do it in the first place. i'ld argue that well done detailing can help immersion, but poorly done it's far worse than just leaving it out.

I've always noticed how cartoonish games always feel more immersive to me. I'm not really sure why though.

I've been needing glasses for six years now and never went to get my eyes checked.
But that's just because I hate the idea of wearing glasses.

3rd pic, I can't stop seeing it as a big head with little arms and legs

...

glasses are fucking expensive but nothing beats putting them on for the first time, something everyone should try.

Its like your hole world is SD and you never notice, then you put them on and everything around you jumps at you.

after a few days i hated it tho, everything was too sharp too crisp. felt like it made my eyes sore, they world just looks more appealing to me without them

nice

I thought the eye thing along with the awkward motion capture in MGS3 was pretty charming in a cheesy kind of way.

I never noticed anything wrong with the eyes, maybe because I was focused on the unsynched lips.

I liked that too.
Shit like that adds to the experience.

The more detail something has the more your brain needs to process. Thus games that aren't as photo-realistic are easier to immerse yourself in because your brain isn't trying to process everything it's seeing and can focus on the events transpiring within the game.

It grew on me too. I wouldn't say it's inherently a good thing, but it doesn't feel out of place.

That's a Baron of Hell, not a Cyberdemon.

If you're going to Criticize Doom at least do it right.

Not gonna lie user, I'd fuck his boypussy

It fits the silly nature of the game too well.

Upon searching this image…

Did Darkgem really draw promotional art for a Blizzard game? I mean this looks almost precisely like Darkgem's artstyle.

That's not really a problem of better graphics itself as much as developers assuming higher quality graphics can replace a coherent art style.

...

I'd explore his hearth if you know what I mean

...

...

its too late, user, its already happening, I can feel the autism in my veins

well he's obviously not pounding a lizard man's butthole at the moment.

goodbye thread, you were nice while you lasted but now you are dead.

your hair looks fucking stupid

consoles win again

Obligatory.

rest in pieces

It's never about the graphics, or dev time, it's about distributing money. And if you have nepotistic BLM Billionaires running the show, you know how the budjet is going to balance… pic related.

It's just you, op. I love better graphics.

Opposite for me.
I love putting them on and just basking in the detail of everything. Looking at trees, plants, even just the most seemingly boring shit, like bricks or something. The tiny details in eveything in life are beautiful to me. sounds cheesy, I know

...

HELLO MY BABY, HELLO MY HONEY

...

amazing
include me in the inevitable reddit screencap

...

...

...

...

:^)

...

...

...

Can you give examples of games that do it well and games that do it terribly?

DELETE THIS

Silent hill 1 does it well, anything after silent hill 4(except pt) does it badly

...

That's really bad for your eyes.

Never change, user.

I was actually thinking of Silent Hill when I posted that. In addition to what I said before, I think back then they just had to try harder with their more limited resources, and really get creative to make their games visually appealing.

...

Less room for imagination to take over.

What? Th…

We're already disconnected from reality. That's why we're here. We will no longer be able to escape into our own false realities because they will blend with reality, the thing that we flee from.

Well this is just silly.

...

...

Thats only applies for horror games

/thread

...

We need to stop before this gets out of hand.

Dont stop the inevitable

You don't know the meme hell, user

...

...

oh fug

...

...

...

Consider your thread DERAILED!

The crisp lines on flatscreen TVs makes playing MGS3 worse because the eyes don't even look vaguely round anymore they're clearly hexagons now.

Modern games are right on the uncanny valley
Also modern games are actually farther form reality than ever because developers are retarded and can't into mimicking real life, so they spend all that complexity in making an unrealistic game that just looks weird and unbelievable, normally coupled with unconsistent art styles and a piss filter

...

...

hue

The current lack of immersion in games stems from how static and lifeless their detailed looking worlds end up being.

No games have ever immersed me as much as the original Deus Ex and System Shock 2. If these games had contemporary graphics I don't think they would be any less immersive. It's the complete lack of ambience, attention to detail and engaging game mechanics that is missing in today's games.

this is exactly why. the abstract and under-detailed worlds use your imagination. the photo-realistic ones aren't actually photo realistic so they break immersion. also the increase in visual clutter, good or bad, messes with your ability to read the scene on that little PC monitor.

Human mind>graphics
SUck it computers ,,|,,

...

I feel Witcher 3 does a good job of immersion, at least until Roach's or Geralt's animations freak out a little.

I don't know user, I was fully immersed in RealMyst and that game doesn't have people or much going on. It's just so fucking comfy for some reason.

It's not that funny. Seriously, how is this funny?

But what other games out now have the same kind of scenario as Myst? You don't need people to have ambience.

you don't know the meaning of the words you use

You got it, but there's more than that. Having to use your imagination builds immersion, but more important than that, it means that to some extent, part of the experience that you're having was generated by you. Because of this, you're going to imagine the thing that's coolest to you. As in, specifically you.

This is part of why movies based on books never meet up to those who read the originals works. Books aren't a visual medium, and can only paint so much of a picture as they can with their words. No matter how hard the author tries, A good portion of it is going to be left to the reader's imagination, unless you're Uillillia-tier, which is too much information to give to a reader and also keep an enjoyable narrative pacing. And this isn't even taking into account things like character voices.

When a Hollywood movie comes out based around a book, not only is it based on the vision of someone other than the audience, the director, it's also the product of the work of hundreds or thousands of people. There are a thousand fucking cooks in the kitchen, and it ultimately doesn't look like anyone's vision. But even if there weren't so many people involved, and it was all just one guy who magically managed to perfectly convey his version of it, it still wouldn't matter, because nobody in the audience is going to have the same vision. Therefore, everyone's expectations are broken, and it then takes a fucking masterpiece, better than what they ever could have imagined, to mend that betrayal, and the simple fact is that most things are not a masterpiece. Therefore, invariably you hear "the book was better than the movie." It was real in my mind.

With video games, you often get huge teams of people all struggling to see one guy's vision, and imperfectly create it, so we get that effect already. But then, the more "realistic" games get, the less room there is for interpretation, so your mind can't fill in the blanks with what it wants. Better art assets become less personalized to you, because it isn't your brain doing the work. People look more attractive with a blurry camera at mid range than they do at close range in HD.

Research source: ________My ass.______________

I don't understand the graphics obsession. The best games of all time don't have any realistic graphics but it seems as if all AAA retards can think of these days is about to add more polygons instead of making the game fun.

Ive been playing the wow expansion and the areas are so low poly but it doesnt matter because the artists are so good.

It's subjective.

Depends on a lot of factors, but usually more realistic = easier to get immersed. Usually.

Good post, couldn't have said it better.

I like how a good game will utilize its limitations to its advantage. I'm playing New Vegas for the first time and I'm just amazed at how well-weaved everything is.

It's because they sacrifice other things for better graphics, less interactive enviroments, less attention to detail even

Obligatory.

Dreamcast/PS2/GC/XB era was the perfect spot for me graphics wise. In your example Revolver Ocelot looks much better in MGS3 to me, more distinct, and unique. Everything nowadays has a fuckton of obnoxious useless filters and effects, also everyone is going for a realistic style which just makes the visuals really boring.

It's just scary to see something and not know what the fuck it is/what you are looking at. Think of the times you've found a fucked up looking bug you've never seen before, you have no idea what it is capable of, there is mystery, uncertainty, potential danger and thus fear.

So true it hurts

I think it's because as games looked more shit, they had to think outside the box for what kinda visual style they wanted to go for, forcing them to go down routes that where not "realistic"

That and big company have this stupid idea that REALISUM IS DUH BEST so all big AAA games are starting take a lot of the same graphical techniques from eachother to get the most realistic effect possible.

only nostalgia google shitlords think like this

Grow a sense of humor, you witless prick. Back to Tumblr with you, fuck.

I don't find it funny either.

The more vague something is, the more your imagination does work to fill the blanks.

This is pretty basic visual/character design knowledge.

A probably more easier way to illustrate the concept would be a minimap. When you have a minimap, you don't have to pay attention to the world, in fact it might be disadvantageous to do so, because the minimap is so much easier to navigate with. In the words of Thief vs AAA, you can just sleepwalk through the game. Same with quest notifications and markers, it doesn't matter if you don't listen or give a fuck about anything that's going on around you, because the quest marker will point you into the right direction anyway and the quest journal will have a summary about the things that you were previously doing.

More like uncanny valley not-realistic-enough "style" is what causes that. You need actual artstyle for game to be enjoyable and immersive, otherwise it just feels like real life and mostly causes a feeling that you're not really escaping the reality and are just doing some chore-like shit.

...

...

Interesting stuff, I think most people here reached a consensus that vaguery lets the imagination fill in the blanks, resulting in an arguably more immersive experience. But would the same argument apply to pixel art that looks like pic related?

That is just shit that doesnt have effort put in to

Too much pixels you underaged friend

shit for homos and redditors

No because it' painful to look at. Although the graphics of PS1 era games were technically shit, the artstyle was really well done and very well thought out which made up for it. What you posted is just lazy garbage.

THIS is pixel art

Pixel spites with noodle limbs are a plague that refuses to die out. If you ever see a /agdg/fag making a game that looks like that, please slap him right in the face for me.

No, modern hipsters got the idea completely wrong.
The concept behind making pixel graphics is to use limited resources for a result as realistic as possible. Instead, they use the endless resources we have nowadays to make this shit
Had this been published on the ff6/chrono trigger era, what do you think that would've happened?

...

...

...

It probably wouldn't even have run on the old hardware. Too many games with this 'style' don't limit their palette and even use gradient lighting.

Except when the director adds their style to it. Kubrick's film adaptations of books are all very good films, but generally poor adaptations in the 1:1 detail sense. Most interpretations of Shakespeare's plays change scripts, add props, or even remove scenes, because it's an interpretation, not a recreation of the original.
Then again, most hollywood films based off books are made to be replacements of the book, which will never work

Come on it's all hypothetical. The point is, this looks somewhat real while modern pixel art looks like garbage

kids these days are stupid, why watch a movie about a book when there are good resumes of very few pages that you can pirate

The more like reality the graphics look, the more they have to do in order to keep the illusion functioning. In a less realistic style, your suspension of disbelief is higher, whereas something that looks almost real but not falls into the uncanny valley.

Its something called "suspension of disbelief." The cartoony artstyle puts you in the mindset that things wont be realistic and will more than likely be silly and impossible. So when things start to leave the realm of realism, you arent pulled out of the experience, whereas something that is trying to be "realistic" leaves the realm of realism, it can be immersion breaking. Its why cartoon violence doesnt translate well into live action.

...

As graphics are made more and more 'realistic,' the necessity of substituting in your own imagination goes away.
Imagination is the driving force of immersion.

The fuck is going on here?

seconded

(You)
It's all me

If we're agreed that less detail lets the imagination fill in the blanks, then doesn't this argument also apply to frames per second? Does this mean that lower FPS is more immersive like moviefags have always claimed?

this is the fucking nth time

...

Very nice

shit gets

...

...

this thread is beautiful

i hate newfags and their misuse of the word get
and the fact that they don't sage while dubsposting

...

Try contacts. Glasses have that problem because they magnify a bit. The only problem with contacts is putting them on and taking them off but you figure it out pretty fucking quick.

Any game is immersive when it's fun enough to make you forget the rest. Or when you're autistic.

That's what you get for reading books, faggot

...

You can train your eyes, for a couple of minutes at a regular basis just go to the nearest window and oscillate between looking at something near and something far. It won't make your eyesight perfect but it will help slow down if not stop your vision from deteriorating.

Games lost their imagination and are generally just the same rehashed garbage, AAA games being perfect examples of this.

Are there any good absolutely and flawlessly faithful adaptions of anything?

checked

...

...

most PS1 games and n64 games do this ,even without trying.

...

...

>A game I made

dont do royalty free kids

What are you, a faggot?

What are you, a muslim?

Oh…
But, is it largely used?

I REMEMBER THE user MAKING THIS GAME

WHERE CAN I GET LINKS FOR SHIT

No, your shitty low-poly game isn't "immersive".

No idea, this is the first time I've heard it outside my own game.

I feel uneasy because of this. Fuck off Lo-Ping.

is that real? looks pretty slick

Uh…

whats your game?

...

First of all, TESIV Oblivion has the ugliest graphics in video game history. I'd rather look at Arena's graphics than that shit.

Also, that Ocelot face remodel sucks. It hardly even looks like the same person.

I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you saying that 3rd person games are inherently less immersive than 1st person games?

Aw mates, thats kind of yo-

Fucking attention whores

The lighting bugs me. It's a jungle, there's shade everywhere and nu-Ocelot looks like he's standing in the middle of a desert with that sunlight.