Home » The evolution, from the "mechanics" to the "metaphor"

Add new comment

Re: The evolution, from the "mechanics" to the "metaphor"

Innsmouth on August 21, 2006 - 20:55.

I don't fucking know. And I have tried to figure it out.

Maybe Raph will finish his book and give us a simple explanation, but there MUST BE a fundamental difference between those kind of games you listed and those that I could define "immersive" games.

FPS, RPGs, mmorpgs. But you can take the large majority of mainstream games that arrive on consoles and PCs and they are all of the immersive kind. On this site I write about those and that's the only "superiority" they have.

I don't care much about puzzle games and the like and I'm describing the "evolution" of something else.

And you can see the evidence of that in the example of the transition from the first shooters to the realism of the recent ones. The transition from rooms without a sense to the realistic environments, settings and mechanics is UNDENIABLE.

So I don't know. But these we have two kinds of "objects" that must be defined in some way. I do not care about the other kind. I do not write about it. But of the kind I write the "mechanics" just cannot do without the metaphor.

Reply

You are not authorized to post comments.