Immersion vs Convenience

[Haywire5714]

From what I've read on the forums these two seem more or less proportional; so which one do you prefer?

Also do you think that Blizzard has made things too convenient already? or are we in a good spot right now.

[Terahertz]

I would lie if I said I preferred immersion, but that's because I haven't been immersed into a game for quite some time now so I've basically forgotten what it feels like. Then again, a convenient game can also be an immersive game.

Have to say though that WoW, in it's current state, seems to be more convenience based than immersion based. I mean, I haven't felt immersed into the story of WoW since wrath of the lich king :/

[Itisamuh]

If the convenience takes away from the action and danger (example: flying mounts) then I prefer immersion. If the feature just arbitrarily gets in the way (example: soul shard farming) then I prefer the convenience option, which is to remove it. I think other than flying mounts the game is in a pretty decent spot right now, regarding this issue. The queue systems on everything arguably hurt immersion for some, but I find them necessary in modern gaming. Maybe they could make it where you have to queue at the summon stone, or enter the instance portal when the queue pops (or both.) This would at least keep people from sitting in the cities all the time, but still keep the benefits of random solo queuing.

[Deleted]

Finding a balance between the RPG aspect of the game and efficient gameplay is very difficult. In my opinion they lost that battle a long time ago. They keep lifting the restrictions/inconveniences while completely neglecting and not adding any new RPG elements, which makes the game feel flat.
Of course once they make something convenient, players will never want to go back, that's obvious. That's why they have to be (should have been) very careful about doing it, because it carries long-term consequences.

[Natylyaz]

These two concepts are not necessarily opposite.
Some vanilla lovers (often big hairy trolls) soom to suggest immersion was so awesome back in the day, and that convenience killed it.
But there was nothing immersive about spamming a (virtual) chat in towns to find a group.

Immersion can be achieved through many other more interesting means, like voices, music, cut-scenes, story-driven questlines, dynamic world...
All of which can be added without hurting convenience.

[otarma]

Open-world can be immersive. It also requires certain graphic quality. If the world looks too shabby, then I have problem blending in.

In the past WOW was focused on raiding, did not give enough attention on immersion. And to be frank, I think it is not what WOW is good at.

[GennGreymane]

If you want immersion you have the Elder Scrolls series. (maybe not ESO because we have no idea what that will be like)

The fact that queue based content reminded me of fps games and fb games made me unsub. Quiet and eerie dungeons is not fun.

[ComputerNerd]

Immersion is a personal experience, as it is driven by the enjoyment of it.
Different people will find different things enjoyable or immersive.
Some people like ground mounts, some do not.
Therefore nobody can rightfully argue that a convenience is bad in the name of immersion, as in reality they are arguing that their personal experience should dictate how others play the game.

[bergmann620]

From what I've read on the forums these two seem more or less proportional; so which one do you prefer?

Also do you think that Blizzard has made things too convenient already? or are we in a good spot right now.

I think we're a bit convenience-heavy. That said, I think plenty of things can be both.

I think the game could use a system of portal attunements before being able to port to dungeons/raids. Further, flying mounts could be granted on a per-zone basis by completing quests up to a point at which a map was awarded.

I think the minds at Blizzard could do a better job of building things that were both immersive, and allowed you to earn convenience.

- - - Updated - - -

Therefore nobody can rightfully argue that a convenience is bad in the name of immersion, as in reality they are arguing that their personal experience should dictate how others play the game.

Actually, I can rightfully argue it, as my opinion. In the end, the game is developed based on the Devs' opinions regarding what is best for the game.

[Orange Joe]

From what I've read on the forums these two seem more or less proportional; so which one do you prefer?

Also do you think that Blizzard has made things too convenient already? or are we in a good spot right now.

I don't think either one is exclusive.

[MoanaLisa]

They don't need to be mutually exclusive. Most people these days have played the game for a while now which, like it or not, reduces immersion. Immersion in that case is a fleeting thing and very likely more related to story line than anything else. Most of the suggestions I've seen to make the game more immersive would increase the tedium as well.

[Darmalus]

Immersion and convenience are not opposites. Immersion and conservation of detail are opposites.

For me, soul shards and ammo were not immersive, they were inconvenient chores that broke immersion. Nothing breaks immersion like hearthing back to town for more ammo.

The most recent immersive thing (to me) in WoW was the Tillers. I talked to these people, helped them with their problems and in the end they gave me gifts. At the end of it I felt like a real member of the community.

Mists in general has been very immersive for me. NPCs that aren't quest objectives or vendors or quest givers, they just live there. They make the world feel bigger, like it's still alive when I'm not there. That's what I need to feel immersed. Dalaran has some of this, it vanished in Cata, and Mists has a ton of it.

[Deleted]

I loved TotGC.

[melodramocracy]

Immersion isn't a cut and dry game element, as everyone experiences it differently. I can be audibly and visually immersed in a game due to details of the world around me without doing much of anything specific. Or I can be immersed in a game via the details of the game itself. Or some combination of both.

I can think of few, if any, introduced convenience factors that actually add immersion to a video game, and this one is no exception. This is why you see so many people claim that removal of various components is 'dumbing down' of the game, because that's exactly what it is. It's removing a very basic decision / result line from the player, however rudimentary it might seem. Ammo removal was a good basic example of one, as it not only removed decisions from hunters, but also removed a potential revenue stream from a profession. All of these could have been expanded on instead of removed, and made for far more interesting game elements, (random example: bringing weight or burden into the system, and high burden ratings impacting agility). This brings an addition choice to the hunter... do I go out for this raid burdened, knowing that the first few fights it may not adversely affect me? Do I bring fewer arrows if I'm out solo? The removal of ammo also cost a decision process (do I spend extra for good ones?) for the hunter as well as the profession, as there were quite a few possibilities that could have been implemented (lighter arrowshafts that gave a crit bonus, etc). Such things are probably best discussed for another title altogether.

The other factors that tend to weigh in on a sense of immersion as far as MMO's go are travel (in most cases, the faster you can travel, the more immersion breaking it is), and risk of loss or setback through various means. In WoW's favor, it still handles travel relatively well, though being able to portal via 'looking for' and BG queues is a mis-step. Other games do even worse though. GW2's portal hop system, combined with the lack of actual open world, makes it a terrible terrible game experience. SWToR suffers a similar fate, though by the nature of the game, more can be forgiven here. In short: loading screens = bad. Instant teleportation = also bad.

WoW essentially has zero loss or setback, which results in zero risk for the gamer, which of course adds up to a less interesting and memorable game experience. This is why the vast majority of content that exists in the game is viewed as tedious... because there's nothing at stake in any of it. This is why you get folks in BG's and LFR that simply don't care about the outcome.... because they're going to lose nothing in the process of putting as little effort in as possible (rpg smarter, not harder!)

WoW needing to stick to immersion via game mechanic details for it's future is important, because it really can't pull it off graphically. That's not Blizzards fault, that's just how things are dealing with how this game is built, and how accessible it is on low end systems (which is a smart move on their part). And that graphical attention to detail gap is just going to continue widening over time. In their defense, WoW has a stylistic approach that is immediately recognizable, makes it look cool in its own right, and less dated overall as time goes by than titles that try to go after realism.

[SL1200]

I prefer convenience. It pains me to see them going in the other direction. I don't like it at all. Immersion isn't something i can identify with. I got shit to do in real life. I don't have time to watch my character do figure 8's and circles while he's on a flight path.

[Punisher069]

They don't need to be mutually exclusive. Most people these days have played the game for a while now which, like it or not, reduces immersion. Immersion in that case is a fleeting thing and very likely more related to story line than anything else. Most of the suggestions I've seen to make the game more immersive would increase the tedium as well.

I've noticed that as well. Personally, I think MoP was the most immersive expansion, but much like all the others it faded away on my 2nd character. I remember having to get stacks and stacks of ammo, it didn't feel immersive, just more of a chore to be done before I raid.

[Wondercrab]

A well designed game should be able to provide both. When a developer (like Blizzard, with some of the design choices they make) forces one on players at the expense of the other, it's usually pretty telling that they're missing a beat along the way.

[Dooney]

Haven't been "vested" in WoW since Lich xpac. Does seem as if most recent features are designed to facilitate play rather than provide actual play.

[championknight]

One doesn't have to look very far back to know they got this wrong during Cata

The implementation of flying and world of portalcraft are prime examples

The former is NOT due to flying itself, it is due to the lack of added content after you get flying at 60 and the nerfing of Azeroth quest exp (forcing you to go to Outland to get your levels). Not sure why Blizzard shot itself in the foot for this

Portalcraft doesn't need to be explained, Lagwind and Lagrimmar with 4 other faction cities totally empty were evidence enough

[Krazzorx]

I guess it depends what you view as immersion. What I view as immersion is a good story and enjoyable environment. While I don't want absolute convenience (hgwt), its so nice not to get ammo anymore.

Also, comparatively, WoW has never been an RPG immersive game compared to competition. WoW never had the strict death penalties for instance. So its not like WoW went from a super immersive game to one without it. Oh, and that BC rainbow quest armor was real "immersive". Not saying WoW didn't lose RPG immersion, it has, just saying it wasn't heavy in it in the first place.