GMU:Immersive Essays/Emil Reinert: Difference between revisions

Line 19:

As a result, a game that simulates the real world, and a player that connects the gameplay to this real world, can be played intuitively by a player that knows its controls. The more a player has played the game, the more the player has learned and the more the more intuitively a player can interact with the game. That is the power of games, because with increasing gametime, those layers in between real and virtual world fade and a virtual becomes a ‘self’.

Until now we have talked about perfect simulations, where nothing unreal ever happens. But in reality that is not always the case. Imperfections, errors, glitches and bugs exist, impossible to the real world, which makes a game a game. As a matter of fact there are even so called ‘speed runs’ where a player uses those imperfections in order to finish the game as fast as possible. The speed runner usually perfectionates every move to get the best times by playing it over and over again. But how can a player understand glitches and use them in an intuitive way while there is no matching real world scenario? The same way games that do not simulate consistent real world physics; Games that might even require the player to become an understanding of something they cannot understand?

Until now we have talked about perfect simulations, where nothing unreal ever happens. But in reality that is not always the case. Imperfections, errors, glitches and bugs exist, impossible to the real world, which makes a game a game. As a matter of fact there are even so called ‘speed runs’ where a player uses those imperfections in order to finish the game as fast as possible. The speed runner usually perfectionates every move to get the best times by playing the game over and over again. But how can a player understand glitches and use them in an intuitive way while there is no matching real world scenario? The same way games that do not simulate consistent real world physics; Games that might even require the player to become an understanding of something they cannot understand?

At this point it gets interesting because how can we really know if we understand something if there is no real way of proving it.

~~Nevertheless~~, if the game follows an internal rule, which it does, there is a way to play the game and to even enjoy it.

Either way, if the game follows an internal rule, which it does, there is a way to play the game and to even enjoy it.

Existing Games already do it and that’s what I am doing. I am trying to create the game Beyond Space 18 which simulates an intuitive gameplay but also requires the player to use an understanding beyond the real world - an understanding of the virtual world.

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 As a result, a game that simulates the real world, and a player that connects the gameplay to this real world, can be played intuitively by a player that knows its controls. The more a player has played the game, the more the player has learned and the more the more intuitively a player can interact with the game. That is the power of games, because with increasing gametime, those layers in between real and virtual world fade and a virtual becomes a ‘self’.
-Until now we have talked about perfect simulations, where nothing unreal ever happens. But in reality that is not always the case. Imperfections, errors, glitches and bugs exist, impossible to the real world, which makes a game a game. As a matter of fact there are even so called ‘speed runs’ where a player uses those imperfections in order to finish the game as fast as possible. The speed runner usually perfectionates every move to get the best times by playing it over and over again. But how can a player understand glitches and use them in an intuitive way while there is no matching real world scenario? The same way games that do not simulate consistent real world physics; Games that might even require the player to become an understanding of something they cannot understand?
+Until now we have talked about perfect simulations, where nothing unreal ever happens. But in reality that is not always the case. Imperfections, errors, glitches and bugs exist, impossible to the real world, which makes a game a game. As a matter of fact there are even so called ‘speed runs’ where a player uses those imperfections in order to finish the game as fast as possible. The speed runner usually perfectionates every move to get the best times by playing the game over and over again. But how can a player understand glitches and use them in an intuitive way while there is no matching real world scenario? The same way games that do not simulate consistent real world physics; Games that might even require the player to become an understanding of something they cannot understand?
 At this point it gets interesting because how can we really know if we understand something if there is no real way of proving it.
-Nevertheless, if the game follows an internal rule, which it does, there is a way to play the game and to even enjoy it.
+Either way, if the game follows an internal rule, which it does, there is a way to play the game and to even enjoy it.
 Existing Games already do it and that’s what I am doing. I am trying to create the game Beyond Space 18 which simulates an intuitive gameplay but also requires the player to use an understanding beyond the real world - an understanding of the virtual world.