I can't get lost. Does anyone else have this?

I'm not certain what it's called exactly, but when you watch a movie, read a book, play a game, or whatever there's this agreement that you have with the author to get lost and absorbed into the material where you believe the narrative.

When you read a book, you begin to paint the story in your mind in vivid detail and live in that world.

When you watch a movie or a show, you often begin to relate to the character that make you feel connected to them and may see them as a friend.

When you play games you become the character and get lost in their world, completely absorbed by it.

I think it's called "stepping through the window" or something like that. But basically, you allow yourself to believe the story to be true in that moment.



Okay, so you got all that?

Here's the thing: I've never got that. Like ever. Whenever I've digested any kind of story I've always remained completely aware in the front of my mind that there is a person on the other side inventing it. When something interesting happens I don't think "Oh wow, that just happened", I think "Oh man, that was really clever of the writer". And I've been that way as long as I can remember.

Now don't get me wrong, I love good story telling and I detest mental pollution like Michael Bay movies. I still appreciate the art of it. I just never could lose myself in it. I don't know, maybe I'm on the spectrum or something.

So what's the point in my narcissistic prattling?

Well, I'm trying to figure out what that should mean about me and how I approach story telling. I've often stated that I think that story in video games are mostly pointless, and that if I wanted a story I'd read a book. This is obviously been met with disagreement. But now I'm wondering if I'm in fact just on the fringe about story telling in games because I'm not able to lost like most people.

What do you all think?

Also, does anyone else have the same issue as me where they can't get absorbed into a story?

 

have you ever played Deus Ex for PC ? ... (the original, not its crappy sequels)

idk that game was AWESOME!! ... takes awhile before the story becomes super gripping, the generic-ish beginning i guess is supposed to be generic feeling , HR sucks really bad .. lol


idk most games nowdays suck really bad... i cant get into any of em .. Red Orchestra 2 sorta LOLS not really a story ..(hmm actually i never played SP), i just like the russian music, and theres like a romanticism i felt, Russians vs Nazis, its like old Knights stories or something like that, legendary vibe, had me looking up russian statues and music and stuff someday,

yeah idk besides Deus Ex most game storys arent that interesting, just wanna play the game , skip cutscenes, like the old Metal Gear Solids (1,2,3, havent played newer ones) (has HUGE cutscenes) SNORE!! skip skip skip

hmm besides that idk... i never really read for entertainment... some book about the civil war was interesting, and about some resistance fighters vs nazis (but i was kinda forced in school to read em lol) ... i always prefered to read technical/science literature.

i guess theres been some movies i really got gripped into sometimes, very few,

 

I know what you mean. I bet you'll be far from the only one on this forum that recognizes the sensation you just described because it's a sensation inherent in analysis. What you're talking about is objectivity. It's what journalists reach for when reporting on a multifaceted issue; it's what judges reach for when making decisions based on law. Analysis requires a certain distance from the object being analyzed (hence, "objective"). Perhaps you tend to approach media (or even the world) analytically.

The word objective has been dragged through the mud so frequently that I should clarify that I don't mean emotionless, purely logical, or prepossessing the truth, but rather abstinence from imaginative participation. When people talk about being "absorbed" into a book (also, "immersed"), they are really describing a process of participation with the text. This participation involves filling in the empty spaces between words with their own sensory details and significance, and not just recording a literal meaning. Every art object invites participation, you know? To accept the invitation requires an act of imaginative re-creation (hence the term, "recreation"). You can participate in a game by exploring its systems, but I agree that games are not as good at inviting participation with a story the way a book would be. Why? I've got a couple of ideas, if you'll bear with me:

1) The problem is that games demand players be analytical in order to avoid failure. Very simple games still require mastering an input system and learning rules before any story can be attempted. Even navigating a menu counts! Since my theory is that analysis and participation lie at opposite ends of a spectrum of 'absorption,' this means that games are always yanking players away from participation with a story in order to focus on analyzing a system. Only once a player has intimately internalized a system (in the same way a fiction reader has long since internalized the process of buying a book, turning pages, and of course, reading) can the story be seamlessly accessed. The problem is, every game requires learning a new system.

Even the most basic choice-based interactive fiction requires that players navigate a model of space, usually the dreaded north south east west, often collect and combine objects, and solve puzzles. These all require analysis and systemic mastery before the game will permit participation with the story. A good example of this is the appropriately lauded, but no less alienating to fiction readers, iOS game Device 6.

(I have to point out that books sometimes pose puzzles and employ systems that must be mastered, just like games sometimes attempt to tell a story. Footnotes are a simple example of a textual system, another are poetic schemes like parallel structure and inversion. Both can require an analytical yank if not very familiar. Think back to when you were first learning a language, even English; understanding what something meant in that language was an analytical act, and it precluded participation until that act was completed. How hard is it, after all, to write poetry in a second language? Nabokov doesn't count.)

2) Many games with "cinematic" ambitions don't do themselves any favors by constantly narrowing the margin in which imagination can survive when playing them. The point of increasingly photorealistic graphics is somehow to compel immersion and absorption, yet they accomplish the very opposite by robbing players of the opportunity to participate imaginatively.

--

TL;DR: I believe that studying a medium can make it harder to participate in it. Film students always complain that they can't enjoy films anymore. If you try to study the art you are consuming, then maybe that's why it fails to tempt participation and absorb you. I know that it's become hard for me, too.

 

I never really thought about it, but you're correct, analysis and participation do seem at odds. And personally discovering mechanics and mastery are my two favorite aspects of games, with creation being a close third, so maybe that co-insides with what you're saying.

Lord knows that I have a hard time reading fiction anymore, but love reading factual things.

I wonder how common that kind of mind set is? Obviously, taking a poll about it in a forum about game development may be a lousy place to get a grape shot of the general populous.

EDIT: Oh, and I actually went to public school in America so we ain't never read some foran poems. We speak Merican! (spits "tabaccy")

 

yeah that "suck really bad" i said, i think has alot to do with the great graphics nowdays, it feels too real, nothing is left to imagination, and whenever something feels out of place of conforming with what you expect from reality, it feels like its broken ... when yeah, you can do anything in a game, but when you associate it so much with reality, it just feels .. weird

 

Are you referring to "willful suspension of disbelief"?

But yeah, I find that something has to be exceptionally good these days for me to care enough to get absorbed by it. You can still have fun without that, but then it becomes more of an ironic enjoyment rather than an engaged enjoyment.

Stories in games can be great, but remember that the thing that sets games apart from other forms of media is their interactivity. The story should either be a part of that (ie: the player is an active participant in determining the outcome) or support it (ie: provide scenarios for the player to solve and motivation for them to do so). If it gets in the way then it's probably not doing its job, and should be re-thought or maybe dropped.

Most importantly, remember that playing a game can be its own narrative. Day Z is a great example of players getting a setting and a scenario and, just from that, ending up with their own stories. Compare that to say, Bioshock Infinite, which had a heavily cinematic and scripted story, but where that story isn't personal to any one player. Both of those games get messages across in a shooting game: one provides it via exposition interspersed with gunfights where the other does it by sticking a bunch of people in a giant playpen with some crafted rules and seeing what happens.

 

Yes! I believe that is what I'm trying to refer to.

I'm not so certain that it's a matter of quality or presentation for me. I just simply can't turn off my awareness to the fact it's a story. Like my brain isn't programed that way.

 

I have pretty much stopped reading fiction and rarely watch hollywood action hero movies anymore. I hate to sound like I'm above it as that's not really the case. It's more like I'm unwilling to invest myself into the story because it feels like it's written for somebody else.

 

Willful Suspension of disbelief means rather that you accept illogical behaviour as part of the world you are engaged in. It means for example that you don't question that the Doom Marine can carry 10 weapons and store the remaining 9 he doesn't carry in his pocket. Or that he can run 30 mp/h.

The semantics don't matter here, though. I sometimes get it that I start analyzing rather than being engaged in the Story of a movie or game. Usually for me that is a bad singn, though. If a Story is gripping enough then I absolutely engage in the world. When something is off or just plain stupid I start anazlyzing and see the movie, game, whatever with a Logical eye.

Should you be able to engange in a world? I don't know. People are different. I can Play a game totally for it's Story (Life is strange, The Last of Us) but I can also Play a game for the gameplay rather than the Story (Mega Man, Fallout Shelter or even casual things like Bejeweld). If everybody needed a Story to engange in a game then there wouldn't be as much diversity. So if Story isn't your thing then focus on the gameplay. Just don't smacktalk Story games just because you don't like them. Live and let live and everything is okay, if you ask me.

 

Zelda (masks), GoldenEye & Moulin Rouge.

 

I believe the term "immersion" is the most commonly used one for the state that you can't get into. Immersing myself into a game is a form of escapism for me. A friend once said "you don't like games at all, you just like escapism" and there is something to it. The older I get the harder it has become for me to immerse myself in something and that also means it has become harder to enjoy games or media at all.

Hands up everyone who'd say they are on the way to becoming a jaded cynic! I have the theory that this is a natural process that makes it harder to immerse yourself as you grow old and bitter. Can anyone confirm this?

To answer the original question "how to approach storytelling under these special conditions" my answer is "by the book!". Continuing my tradition of recommending books that I have not read more than a few pages of as "great books" I highly recommend "Story" by Robert Mckee. If you read that book and apply what you have learned I'm pretty sure your games will be praised for their above average storylines. Imho story writing can be approached in a very mechanical way of thinking without being able to really feel the emotions or state of mind you want to evoke in your audience.



I for one think that Deus Ex Human Revolution was great! I loved the first one too, but after replaying the first mission a few months ago I have to say I honestly think human revolution is the better game. The ending was absolute crap though and the bossfights were also totally out of place.

One of the other highpoints in immersive gaming experiences that I recommend to everyone is System Shock 2.

 

How do you go with those older style games that had no obvious story? Or a superficial introduction? When you are talking to people about them do you Focus on the analysis of the gameplay/mechanics or do you relate it like a story? Maybe, as was suggested above, modern games are trying to dictate the story more than you are able to focus on while also analysing what you are doing & what to do next. If there's to much story then your imagination takes a break & the bit focusing & analysing moves/tactics becomes more prominent which lifts you from whatever immersion may have been available.

 

I can get lost and immersed in my own code for hours. Does that count?

 

You sure it's not submersed, as in drowning in your code?


The discussion has been framed as immersion, but the flip side is engagement. Do you find yourself caught up in monkeying with something? Are you constantly trying to dissect something, which keeps you from being immersed?

I pretty much have this problem reading. I can't read fast enough to feed myself information before I start playing with everything that's been put in my head. I've read the same paragraph several times, because each time I get to the end I have to put the play on hold and figure out what I missed.

 

Looking for the technical terms? Here's a few relevant ideas.

• Immersion - becoming 'lost' in content - usually implies passive consumption (i.e. movies)
• Engagement - 'lost' in content, while playing an active role (i.e. games)
• Flow - "When you're so engaged in an activity that nothing else seems to matter." - engagement with specific pre-reqs and outcomes, like distortion of time, loss of sense of self.
• Presence - "being there", "feeling transported to another place". Often researched in relationship to VR worlds.
• Suspension of Disbelief - willingness to set aside details, to accept the reality being presented to you. Ex Forest Gump could do all those things. Spider Man was made amazing, by one spider bite.

More info is here, here, and here.
Gigi

 

Going back to semantics real quick, all those technical terms and definitions are correct, and they refer to what the OP was trying to recollect as "breaking through the fourth wall". The linked wikipedia entry also mentions the fifth wall, which is a little bit more accurate for the discussion, in that the OP (and some others, including me) is stuck beyond this fifth wall with critics and analytically minded people being unable to "participate" in the fiction.

There are several contributing factors to this, of course. First thing that comes to mind is that entertainment is a dime a dozen now, especially with the internet and on-demand video services. Choosing the entertainment that particularly resonates with you to get you immersed/engaged is not only harder to find, but the ocean of media out there dulls the senses, and desensitizes you to the things you actually do like. I'm also thinking about Youtube, and how it's really quick to see things that are real, but are hard to believe, making any fictional stories less believable.

As already mentioned, being in the industry can ruin the magic for some. It definitely has for me. Knowing how to make a game has made me discount any sort of tricks a game has to keep me immersed. And the same with movies. CG was very interesting back in the day, like Terminator 2, but now I just assume the entire screen is CG, like any Michael Bay film. And even non-CG films, heading towards higher definition to make you feel like you're "in-the-scene" (like that motion smoothness setting on your HDTV) fail to immerse me. The higher fidelity just makes the characters in The Hobbit look like a bunch of fools LARPing at the Renaissance faire (full disclosure: I have not seen the Hobbit movies).

And I have to mention Pixar, too. I can get pretty immersed in the older films, but ever since the Disney merge, they've been shelling out mediocre content that is just not engaging at all. I once wanted to work there, but then made it a point to not want to work there, in fear of demystifying the magic, because Pixar films used to be top-notch.

And more generally speaking, as you get older, you are exposed to more education and experiences that also ruin that magic i.e. Santa, Doom, freedom in America, etc.

I bet there *is* some entertainment that will make you escape. You just have to more actively look for it, which sucks, and you may not even find it.

For me, I've been thoroughly let down by modern movies. I still am very immersed in older movies, even watching them over and over again, like The Shawshank Redemption, Gladiator, Alien/Aliens, The Godfather, and I guess it's mandatory to add Star Wars IV-VI. I found TV to be a lot more engaging with shows like Breaking Bad, The Wire (yes, I'm one of these people). Used to like 24 before realizing how ridiculous it is.

And as far as games go, I've been significantly let down. Though, I felt Bioshock Infinite was pretty engaging. I also thought Half Life 2 is well done. You can play as Gordon Freeman, or yourself playing as Gordon Freeman. Whichever is the case, I think it's pretty immersive.
And although I really like XCOM, I don't think those sorts of games can be gauged against a "suspension of disbelief", because I'm playing that game more like chess than I am a commander of an elite military anti-ufo team. That may be the OP's point exactly, but I feel that if you enjoy a piece of entertainment in your own way and aren't jaded by its lack of immersion, why bother wondering?

 

Read out loud post to my gf, confirmed answer to OP "OP has no imagination".

 

There could be a few psychological reasons. Maybe you are very aware of the bigger picture and thus its hard for your mind to get lost in details. Maybe you are more intellectual and lack empathy. Maybe have strong beliefs that don't allow your perception to flex as much. Maybe its a personality thing. Best guesses.

 

Even better OP now is a definition psychopath.

 

@Azmar bye troll. Blocked.

 

Neither funny nor accurate.

Didn't mean to click "like", I missed the reply link with my click.

 

Too much in this thread to read, but I will say that I experience this immersion with books, but rarely with games or movies. I'm definitely in the "who cares about story" camp when it comes to games: I always skip the story and get annoyed when it wont let me.

Edit: With games I get immersed in the gameplay elements: the stats, the management, the numbers, the cards, the items, the moves, etc.