• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PCGamer: designers of Deus Ex, Bioshock 2 & Dishonored talk about Immersive Sims

Eolz

Member
They did a talk at GDC with those great designers:
- Warren Spector (Otherside Entertainment)
- Harvey Smith and Ricardo Bare (Arkane Studios)
- Tom Francis (Suspicious Developments), developer of Gunpoint and Heat Signature
- Steve Gaynor (Fullbright), lead designer of Minerva Den

GVD8Qozxcvm4pshmUh6tmS-650-80.png

Audio version here or directly on the article (with more quotes).
Some selected quotes below.

About why Immersive sims are important for gaming, and what they hope it bring to the medium.
Warren Spector: I have a firmly-held belief that to honor a medium, and for it to grow, you have to do what it does that no other media can do. When I look at what games can do that other media can't, I instantly go right to the immersive sim. That sort of real-time you are there, nothing stands between you and belief that you're in an alternate world, that is something that I guess LARPing gets a little close to, and D&D gets pretty darn close to, but we're the first mainstream medium that can actually do that. And the immersive sim is the perfect way to do it.
(...)
Steve: The interesting thing about this discussion is that there are a couple of us here, me and Tom, who really came to an understanding of immersive sims as fans first, and then got to actually do work in that space.
(...)
Harvey: I think that you guys have touched upon some of my favorite things about this sub-genre. It's that sense of presence, exploring a place that doesn't just feel like a series of puzzles someone's erected for you, but rather a coherent place that you can actually explore in the real sense of the word. And part of that is the pacing. Immersive sims often go very fast, and very loud, but generally only if you trigger the right sequence of actions. Otherwise they can be very slow-paced.
(...)
Tom: A lot of my friends who haven't clicked with these games feel obliged to play that way. Because they know they can, and it's morally better, and the game rewards it in some ways. They feel they can't play any other way. And I know some people don't enjoy playing that way, but just feel compelled to, because they feel like that's how you play these games, and if they screw up they feel like they've got to reload. Maybe there's a challenge there that we haven't solved yet in terms of persuading people to play in their own way and explore new playstyles.
(...)
Warren: Warren: It's funny, people ask me all the time: 'Do people go out and play extreme playstyles?' Most of the people I hear from play a kind of balanced style. They sneak when it feels right, they fight when it feels right. So I think most people play down the middle and we're talking about the outliers. But the thing that surprised me a lot, that's relevant here: when we were working on Deus Ex I thought players were going to just pick a playstyle and stick with it. 'I like fighting, so I'm going to fight my way through the game.'

Instead, very early on, I remember watching normal humans playing the game, I mean, well, gamers, but I remember watching them play, and they'd get to right on Liberty Island, an early choice point. We tried to reveal the choice points especially early on. They'd get to a choice point and two things would happen. First, they'd put the mouse down and push the keyboard away like 'Oh my god, I have to make a real choice!?' Because games had trained people not to make choices effectively. It's just, okay, kill everything that moves, or I get seen by nothing. And we were trying to do something different.

I would see that, and then the one that frustrated the hell out of me at first, I would watch people save their game at an obvious choice point, and then try something. And then go back to their save and try something different. And go back to their save and try something different. In one sense that's one of the strengths of the game, that they could try all those things. But then they would pick the one that they liked the best. That was not at all what I thought they were going to do, and it really bugged me for awhile. But then I realized, like you guys were saying, once it's their game, it's their game. As long as they're finding fun, who am I to say how they're playing the game? That's another one of the defining characteristics of an immersive sim. You don't judge the player. You don't tell the player how to play your game. It's their game.
farc2.jpg

Anecdotes from playing or designing immersive sims:
Harvey: (...) But those improvisational moments, as Ricardo says it's hard to train the players to play games like this, but once they do, especially if they'll play a second time… If you go play System Shock or Far Cry 2 or Prey or Dishonored a second time, the intimidation of learning the systems and knowing the game space is gone, and you get back to that joy Steve Gaynor was talking about where you're playing at this point. You're improvising and experimenting and it's beautiful.
(...)
Steve: Something that's interesting about immersive sims is that oftentimes, like you're talking about, players will find exploits that are a legitimate combination of systemic interactions that the designers weren't expecting. I feel like the classic example is using wall mines to climb walls in Deus Ex.

Tom: It's funny how once you're immersed in these games, learning the rules and then using those rules becomes entirely what your brain is occupied with and you don't really care if it's realistic or makes sense. When you asked for anecdotes from playing immersive sims, the one that sprang to mind is one in Deus Ex where I had started to hack into a terminal that could open Gunther's cell on Liberty Island. As I hacked it I was looking through the camera that shows the view of the room I was in, I could see myself hacking the terminal, and a guard ran in. And guards aren't allowed to shoot you when you're using computers in Deus Ex.

[Warren puts his head in his hands and shakes it, moaning softly]

Tom: So I could see he's pointing his gun to my head, but can't fire, because I'm busy! I had to figure out, I was playing on Realistic where you just die in one shot from those guys at close range. I can't leave the terminal now because I'll die instantly, so I had to figure out a way, with just the tools I have now, to try to block this guy from shooting me. The turret couldn't shoot him. But I figured out if I open Gunther's door it'll nudge him a little bit around the corner so he no longer has line of site, so I can leave the computer and attack him.

Warren: I'm so proud.

Tom: And there was never a thought in my head that this was any way unrealistic or strange. I just thought, this is amazing!
(...)
Warren: The Deus Ex story that kills me, though. A year after we shipped, I was out in San Francisco at the Eidos offices, and our publisher-side QA lead, a guy named Charles Angel, was playing the game, demoing it for some executives. Now why Eidos executives needed a demo of a game that had shipped a year earlier that had won like 35 game of the year awards I will never understand. But they did. I'll probably never work again for having said that, but anyway.

I was watching him on Liberty Island, and there was a spot where a guard was standing on one side of a doorway, there were two or three guards on patrol on the other side of the doorway, and there were laser triggers covering the doorway. And so what he did was, he secretly was sneaking around, moving explosive barrels around and stuff. I was watching him, and I kind of knew what he was setting up. He crept back and got out the pistol, which was the weakest weapon in the game, and with one shot he took out the guard that was guarding the door, took out the laser triggers, and because he had waited for the right exact moment, took out the two guards on the other side of the door. With one shot. And I fell on the floor again. Because I'm completely certain that no human on the face of the earth had tried that before. No one on the team... Harvey, if you knew that was going to work, I'll buy you lunch next time I see you.
14c.jpg

Challenges of designing immersive sims:
Steve: That is a really interesting question for the guys here who have worked on the big titles. I've worked on, basically, sequels to immersive sims. I worked on Bioshock 2 and Infinite, but I didn't work on the original Bioshock, and obviously that's kind of a continuation of System Shock 2. So I'm interested to know, when you are building a game that is based on this bedrock of multiple strata of systems, do you try to block in as much of the different player abilities and AI systems as you can as early as possible, or is it an ongoing glazing of 'what if we added this, what if we added this' over a long period of time.

Ricardo: There's a lot we could say there. Some of it is what you're saying, Steve. I think we try to get a 60 percent version of as much as possible in, as quickly as possible. Because part of the fun, of course, is not just the thing existing in isolation, but when it interacts with all the other systems. People have likened it, a little bit, to making a stew. Individual elements aren't that great, together they're okay, but they kind of have to live together in the pot for awhile so that you can begin identifying, like 'this one mechanic doesn't contribute very much. This other one, though, we should double down on.'

By the end, maybe we make 25 percent more than necessary, mechanics, that end up getting stripped out, and we focus on the ones that end up being really successful in the whole mix altogether.
(...)
Warren: Design documents are always right. [laughs] There was one point on Deus Ex where the documentation was 500 pages, but we're not going to talk about that. It was ridiculous. The final version was 270 pages that nobody read. Anyway, the interesting thing about making this kind of game is that you guys are all right, until those systems are online you don't even know what you have. Alpha is the point on a game like this where the game is complete and finishable and playable and sucks.

To make this all work—the money guys love this, while you're working on it the first two years or whatever it is, the game is not there, it's not there, it's not there, and everybody's going 'oh my god,' biting their fingernails down to the nub, because they're giving you all this money and they can't see the game yet. You have to go and say 'relax, it'll be okay, everything will come together.' And then you hope they'll give you enough time in alpha, at least this is my take on it, they give you enough time in alpha to make it right.
(...)
Harvey: (...) And I can tell you from experience, sometimes they don't give you the money to finish it, to get that final three months or whatever. But in almost all the best cases of these types of games, the ones we've worked on here and the ones that friends have worked on, Deus Ex, Dishonored, Bioshock, you hear these stories about how things almost came together at the end but then we got three more months or six more months and then we just started hitting it with the magic in place.

By contrast, you have developers who say 'on day one, you need a loop, and if that loop is fun, you just iterate it and your game will be fun. If your game is not fun on day one, your day will never be fun.'

Warren: I FIGHT THAT EVERY DAY!

(...)
Ricardo: What you're citing is one of the reasons I actually love being finished with the main game and getting the chance to work on DLC. You have that baseline there that you can build on top of, and it's so easy to add things.
(...)
Warren: You do need to be thinking about player improvisation early, though. We did build those proto-missions [on Deus Ex]. That's what I called them, I can't remember if anybody else did. We built that White House mission where everything was sort of hacked together, which didn't show how the game was going to play but showed the potential of it.

I can't really talk much about System Shock 3, but I will say that we're just beginning to prototype a bunch of stuff, and if you think about giving players the ability to improv early, you can start to see the fruits of that early.

We built one thing out—I should not be talking about this—where there are a couple ways to get past a problem. But I found one that no one knew was going to work. Instead of taking five, six minutes to play through this space, I did it in 10. Ten seconds. It was pretty magical when I figured out something that no one on the team knew was going to work, even early. And we've got another system that I'm not going to talk about that we've started prototyping. And already we're starting to see people use it, family and friends testers, they're starting to do things with it that we had no idea would work. When you start seeing that, even early on, that's the magic of these games. It's what makes them different.

If everybody on the development team knows what every player is going to do, my advice to them is just go make a movie.
1458036819-1291-card.jpg

Where they want to go next:
Warren: Non-combat AI is an area where games in general really have some work to do. In the more linear cinematic games that we're not talking about today, I think there are some pretty amazing things going on. But in terms of characters who can react to you, whether they hate you or love you or are neutral towards you, we still have a lot of work to do on that front. I would say non-combat AI is one, and accessibility is another.
(...)
Ricardo: (Mark of the Ninja is) a 2D game, or sidescroller, but just the way that you play that game, it's clearly founded on similar principles. Just the open-ended nature of the game mechanics. They're super fun. Like Steve was saying, the Gone Home and Tacoma-like games, they're more stripped down than the giant triple-A action immersive sim. But they're an interesting offshoot. I look forward to seeing more things like that. Offshoots that come from that lineage.

Didn't see anything about it, close this thread with different methods if old.
 
Interesting interview with the devs. Really enjoyed reading their process and the stuff they learned.

With Prey coming on May 5, I do hope it is a success. It would be a shame for Immersive Sims to fade into obscurity again
 

Azar

Member
If you enjoy the summaries in the OP, I hope you read more at the link to help justify the hours and hours it took me to transcribe 10,000 words and format it into something readable. It really does make a difference!

Hope everyone enjoys. I wish I'd had another hour to get these guys sharing more stories and insight.
 

jtb

Banned
Why are these games called immersive sims? When did this happen?

Also, OG Deus Ex is such a brilliantly designed game.

(Also, Deus Ex is an RPG.)
 
yeah I dunno when this moniker happened but apparently I really fucking like immersive sims. Deus Ex is my GOAT, the reboot franchise was pretty satisfying for me overall as well. Dishonored was cool but could use more work.

I think Prey shows promise.
 

Bydobob

Member
If you enjoy the summaries in the OP, I hope you read more at the link to help justify the hours and hours it took me to transcribe 10,000 words and format it into something readable. It really does make a difference!

Hope everyone enjoys. I wish I'd had another hour to get these guys sharing more stories and insight.

Fascinating article, thank you. Interesting discussion about players not playing the way the devs intended, or going back to their saves to try something new. I was guilty of that recently with Resi 7, restarting to conserve ammo and ending up with a stash of unused stuff by the end. I think players could do with trusting the designers a bit more.
 
Why are these games called immersive sims? When did this happen?

Also, OG Deus Ex is such a brilliantly designed game.

(Also, Deus Ex is an RPG.)

1994 when System Shock came out.

e: Actually, I think the term was coined to describe Deux Ex and was retroactively applied to LGS games and their derivatives.
 

Window

Member
Tom: A lot of my friends who haven't clicked with these games feel obliged to play that way. Because they know they can, and it's morally better, and the game rewards it in some ways. They feel they can't play any other way. And I know some people don't enjoy playing that way, but just feel compelled to, because they feel like that's how you play these games, and if they screw up they feel like they've got to reload. Maybe there's a challenge there that we haven't solved yet in terms of persuading people to play in their own way and explore new playstyles.
I find myself to be in the frame of mind as well and it would be great if they can find a way to incentivize players not feel compelled to adopt this playstyle, maybe even actively discourage it in certain games. Additionally, I feel the need to look in every nook and cranny of a level in these games so the times when I do happen to fast track my way to the goal or destination I often turn back and go exploring (which can be tedious sometimes). Maybe implementing time critical events could help?
 

HK-47

Oh, bitch bitch bitch.
I find myself to be in the frame of mind as well and it would be great if they can find a way to incentivize players not feel compelled to adopt this playstyle, maybe even actively discourage it in certain games. Additionally, I feel the need to look in every nook and cranny of a level in these games so the times when I do happen to fast track my way to the goal or destination I often turn back and go exploring (which can be tedious sometimes). Maybe implementing time critical events could help?

Sounds like a good way to make the game miserable for the explorer types that tend to like these games.
 
The one most consistently disappointing genre since after Deus Ex 1. I dislike how the genre has been streamlined and simplified with every major release.
 

HK-47

Oh, bitch bitch bitch.
Not every game has to be for everyone.

So make them for the people that already like them, I guess, instead of adding of adding time senstive mission in the hopes people will actually like being rush through on area.
 
If Prey turns out amazing and considering Dishonored 2 was also brilliant they should buy the Deus Ex franchise. It would be in better hands at Arkane..
 

Window

Member
So make them for the people that already like them, I guess, instead of adding of adding time senstive mission in the hopes people will actually like being rush through on area.

In presence of limited resources, business and financial considerations that probably makes the most sense I suppose but as someone who enjoys these games and would like to break the usual pattern of how I approach them, something more experimental (not just consisting of time critical missions - that was just a possible solution. Maybe even just eliminate death/detection tracking stats and achievements/bonuses attached to them) would be exciting to see. Again I'm not saying all immersive sims from now on should take this approach but I would like to see some which encourage an alternative approach.
 

laxu

Member
I find myself to be in the frame of mind as well and it would be great if they can find a way to incentivize players not feel compelled to adopt this playstyle, maybe even actively discourage it in certain games. Additionally, I feel the need to look in every nook and cranny of a level in these games so the times when I do happen to fast track my way to the goal or destination I often turn back and go exploring (which can be tedious sometimes). Maybe implementing time critical events could help?

The problem is that what the game tries to pose as time critical actually are not. I'm currently playing in Horizon and I know fully well that the guy I was following is not getting away if I choose to do several other missions instead. This is great for us explorer types but I think it would be better if they actually made it so that the player should follow these quests as quickly as possible or else they get a different outcome, like somebody dies or you get a different reward. Sometimes not doing it right away could turn out to be the better outcome, like some enemies have already vacated the area, another faction has killed the tough enemy you were chasing etc.

The key to this would be to allow people to go back and explore anyway. I hated how in Uncharted 4 you could miss some collectibles in areas that were perfectly backtrackable but instead the game artificially added something like a small drop and suddenly you could not climb back up even though it was something that the character normally would do with ease. There was literally no gameplay reason for this either, it was just driving down a road and suddenly there is a small cliff that prevents you from driving back or jumping over even when standing on the hood of the car.
 

Window

Member
The problem is that what the game tries to pose as time critical actually are not. I'm currently playing in Horizon and I know fully well that the guy I was following is not getting away if I choose to do several other missions instead. This is great for us explorer types but I think it would be better if they actually made it so that the player should follow these quests as quickly as possible or else they get a different outcome, like somebody dies or you get a different reward. Sometimes not doing it right away could turn out to be the better outcome, like some enemies have already vacated the area, another faction has killed the tough enemy you were chasing etc.
.

Yes, I was thinking along these line. Something with hints of Hitman: Blood Money.
 

TheBowen

Sat alone in a boggy marsh
I find myself to be in the frame of mind as well and it would be great if they can find a way to incentivize players not feel compelled to adopt this playstyle, maybe even actively discourage it in certain games. Additionally, I feel the need to look in every nook and cranny of a level in these games so the times when I do happen to fast track my way to the goal or destination I often turn back and go exploring (which can be tedious sometimes). Maybe implementing time critical events could help?

Definitely get your first point, developers need a way of encouraging people to play their own style and to remove the idea of there being a 'correct' way of playing

I love dishonored, but it falls into the category of allowing you to play how you want throughout the entire game but punishes you at the end if you played a certain way. Also a good example is in Deus Ex if you dont get to the chopper too start a quest fast enough, the character dies or is in more danger (if i remember correctly)

On your last point, I sorta disagree. I usually, in most RPG's, hate having to loot people's bodies and look for items, but in games like Deus Ex and Dishonoured I love it. Loads of side stories and things I would not have found had I not spent time searching for items, and looking for equipment and weapons gets me immersed.
 
I find myself to be in the frame of mind as well and it would be great if they can find a way to incentivize players not feel compelled to adopt this playstyle, maybe even actively discourage it in certain games. Additionally, I feel the need to look in every nook and cranny of a level in these games so the times when I do happen to fast track my way to the goal or destination I often turn back and go exploring (which can be tedious sometimes). Maybe implementing time critical events could help?

Mission-critical events is a way of developers saying to players "Hey players, wanna explore the beautifully detailed world we made? Well, too bad, you have a critical mission to finish that you'll fail if you don't hurry". It alienates the players who wanna explore the world developers have made and learn the backstory and world building

I'd rather they not go into that. Time critical missions rarely work well.

As for your first point, that's on the player, not the developer. With Prey supporting a variety of playstyles, there should be no excuse from some players feeling forced to play a certain build.
 

Window

Member
Mission-critical events is a way of developers saying to players "Hey players, wanna explore the beautifully detailed world we made? Well, too bad, you have a critical mission to finish that you'll fail if you don't hurry". It alienates the players who wanna explore the world developers have made and learn the backstory and world building

I'd rather they not go into that. Time critical missions rarely work well.

As for your first point, that's on the player, not the developer. With Prey supporting a variety of playstyles, there should be no excuse from some players feeling forced to play a certain build.
Time critical events still allow you to experiment and explore different areas across multiple play throughs. As long as there is no optimal run, there is incentive present for players to try different strategies and paths.

Accommodating multiple playstyles for me is not just about the type of powers at your disposal but also the narrative consequences and other meta level bonuses achieved from them (I don't know anything about Prey).
 

Toa Axis

Member
Definitely get your first point, developers need a way of encouraging people to play their own style and to remove the idea of there being a 'correct' way of playing

I love dishonored, but it falls into the category of allowing you to play how you want throughout the entire game but punishes you at the end if you played a certain way
. Also a good example is in Deus Ex if you dont get to the chopper too start a quest fast enough, the character dies or is in more danger (if i remember correctly)

On your last point, I sorta disagree. I usually, in most RPG's, hate having to loot people's bodies and look for items, but in games like Deus Ex and Dishonoured I love it. Loads of side stories and things I would not have found had I not spent time searching for items, and looking for equipment and weapons gets me immersed.
I see such a sentiment a lot, and I always find myself disagreeing with this assertion. The chaos system in Dishonored is certainly not the most elegant, i'll be the first to admit that... but in a game that is all about action and reaction (whether that action comes from the game's systems or from the player's own ingenuity) in a way that remains consistent with the laws that govern the game world, is going around, killing everything in sight, and then an ending reflecting the consequences of such really a punishment? The game tells you that killing tons of people will start changing the game world.
 

Window

Member
I see such a sentiment a lot, and I always find myself disagreeing with this assertion. The chaos system in Dishonored is certainly not the most elegant, i'll be the first to admit that... but in a game that is all about action and reaction (whether that action comes from the game's systems or from the player's own ingenuity) in a way that remains consistent with the laws that govern the game world, is going around, killing everything in sight, and then an ending reflecting the consequences of such really a punishment? The game tells you that killing tons of people will start changing the game world.

This issue probably ties well into what Spector was saying, finding non-combat AI and gameplay scenarios.
 

TheBowen

Sat alone in a boggy marsh
I see such a sentiment a lot, and I always find myself disagreeing with this assertion. The chaos system in Dishonored is certainly not the most elegant, i'll be the first to admit that... but in a game that is all about action and reaction (whether that action comes from the game's systems or from the player's own ingenuity) in a way that remains consistent with the laws that govern the game world, is going around, killing everything in sight, and then an ending reflecting the consequences of such really a punishment? The game tells you that killing tons of people will start changing the game world.

Should probably clarify what I meant.

I agree 100% with you on that. It makes total sense that if a person went around killing higher up officials and just random civilians that it would mess up the game world.

What I meant what that the first dishonored game, most the of the fun powers, more experimental game mechanics and techniques are all focused around the idea of killing your opponents. The game encourages you with basically its most fun way to play, but punishes you for doing so. I enjoyed playing dishonored 1 with just blink etc, but seeing all these montage and speedruns of people using the powers creatively made me feel like I massively missed something and some people who did do that feel like they missed out on a decent ending/closure.

Thankfully in dishonored 2 this was prevented as there are lots of cool powers and abilities that encourage stealth play, and chaos play.
 

HK-47

Oh, bitch bitch bitch.
Should probably clarify what I meant.

I agree 100% with you on that. It makes total sense that if a person went around killing higher up officials and just random civilians that it would mess up the game world.

What I meant what that the first dishonored game, most the of the fun powers, more experimental game mechanics and techniques are all focused around the idea of killing your opponents. The game encourages you with basically its most fun way to play, but punishes you for doing so. I enjoyed playing dishonored 1 with just blink etc, but seeing all these montage and speedruns of people using the powers creatively made me feel like I massively missed something and some people who did do that feel like they missed out on a decent ending/closure.

Thankfully in dishonored 2 this was prevented as there are lots of cool powers and abilities that encourage stealth play, and chaos play.

I mean if you are going non lethal you are going to miss out on using the lethal powers in any game. You just spec into all the traversal powers instead.
 

Memphis-Ahn

Neo Member
Some good points in this thread, but I do think difficult choices and consequences are an important element and probably the reason why the immersive sim was birthed from RPGs in the first place.
Having time-critical events does punish exploration, but what type of gamer isn't punished in some way already anyways? Going stealthily is difficult and potentially results in missing out on stuff, going guns blazing usually results in something bad happening narratively. I don't see why players who explore, and therefore are rewarded with whatever they find, shouldn't be punished in other ways. I think that as long as the results of your choices are (or feel) organic then the game is doing its job properly.
Personally, a lot of the enjoyment I get from games (cRPGs mostly) is discussing it with others and comparing how our playthroughs differed and what kinds of interesting things I missed out on because of it.
 
On the "going forward" stuff, I think they're both related. I want SOMA-style games in VR with good non-combat AI and some degree of immersive sim. Not necessarily to do action/stealth, but to feel like my choices have real consequences in a POV experience.
 
This is fascinating stuff.

The memories most players have from games are, for the most part, very specific and determined by the developers like that cutscene with some plot twist or that scripted event with a bridge collapsing in the middle of big explosions,etc.

But when it comes to Immersive Sims, like the guy Warren Spector was talking about, most memories players will have will be unique and most importantly created by themselves from non scripted situations. And that's a beautiful thing because it feels way more satisfying and genuine when something unexpected happens due to my actions as a player and not because a developer said "Here comes a cutscene where something interesting happens. Enjoy".
Its amazing how much freedom and power this kind of games give to the player.

Prey is coming out and I'll be there day one.
 

DocSeuss

Member
It's weird to see Steve Gaynor in the lineup, because Minerva's Den was... very immersive sim-lite, and his games have moved further away from that since. They're the antithesis of immersive sims now.

So immersive sim = shooter that has more going on than pure, constant, shooting?

immersive sim = first-person game in living, breathing world that reacts to your presence as if you were a part of the space.

STALKER, System Shock, Thief, Deus Ex, and Skyrim are all immersive sims.
 
immersive sim = first-person game in living, breathing world that reacts to your presence as if you were a part of the space.

STALKER, System Shock, Thief, Deus Ex, and Skyrim are all immersive sims.
Skyrim? I'd never classify Skyrim as an immersive sim
 
Skyrim? I'd never classify Skyrim as an immersive sim

While the label is surprising there, I'm not sure how you can define them in a way that honestly wouldn't include a game like Skyrim in it, that wouldn't also exclude something that really must be an immersive sim like System Shock or Deus Ex.
 

Mr. Tibbs

Member
With Prey coming on May 5, I do hope it is a success. It would be a shame for Immersive Sims to fade into obscurity again

I wouldn't be surprised if Clint Hocking's next game is an immersive-sim wrapped in a AAA brand. Night Dive and Otherside are both working on immersive-sims, and Zelda is a third-person immersive-sim, and is much more bold than titles in recent years that use "immersive-sim" as marketing/promotional talking points.

I think going forward we'll see less derivative takes on the genre and more people incorporating stable, predictable world reactivity into their original game premises in the future. They just won't call them immersive-sims.
 
I wouldn't be surprised if Clint Hocking's next game is an immersive-sim wrapped in a AAA brand. Night Dive and Otherside are both working on immersive-sims, and Zelda is a third-person immersive-sim, and is much more bold than titles in recent years that use "immersive-sim" as marketing/promotional talking points.

I think going forward we'll see less derivative takes on the genre and more people incorporating stable, predictable world reactivity into their original game premises in the future. They just won't call them immersive-sims.

Mind you, I never played BOTW, but given what I've read about it, it has all the things that makes me tick wrapped in an open-world setting.

Would be cool to see other developers take from it for open world games in the years to come.
 

Mr. Tibbs

Member
Mind you, I never played BOTW, but given what I've read about it, it has all the things that makes me tick wrapped in an open-world setting.
If you want a game that surprises you the way Dishonored did back in 2012, you should try to track down a cheap Wii U at some point. I bet you'll really enjoy BOTW even if you're not a fan of the series.
 

RedSwirl

Junior Member
I'm not sure yet if Zelda BOTW counts (it might) but Skyrim definitely does. You might not think so because of how mainstream Skyrim is, but it's definitely a child of the same school of design that birthed Deus Ex and System Shock. Elder Scrolls was inspired by Ultima Underworld which is the same game that led to System Shock and Deus Ex.

Skyrim has a world that runs on its own schedule and dynamically reacts to what you do according to its own rules. Those rules make enough sense for the game to feel like a logical space. It lets players utilize that world in ways the developer might not have envisioned.
 
Top Bottom