Musings On Experience Richness

What would you think of when talking about rich experiences in games? Perhaps immersive graphics with amazing visual effects and directional audio so good that you can pinpoint where the other player dropped a coin. Then a tank rolls by in a massive cloud of dust and roaring metal, knocking a building down like it is nothing, then is stopped. By a bush.

Moments like these destroy immersion because of its sheer incongruence. Surely a tank that can flatten a house could most definitely flatten a bush. Yet it does not, and that moment manages to negate all the effort going into making the rest of the world perceptually realistic.

I was talking to a friend who played Life Is Strange. The conversation went towards the moment where Max was in the room, and the stereo was on. Max could just walk over to the guitar and pick it up, playing along. As an adventure game, Life Is Strange is not particularly high fidelity nor is it chock full of interactions. Yet, the very specific interactions that are allowed are all well aligned with what the game is about. Max cannot demolish a house nor can she wreck a bush, but that was never part of the narrative nor the fantasy. Instead, artistic license was taken to allow Max to rummage containers in her own peculiar nosey way, and she can take back interactions with other characters using her time control powers. Given the congruence of the interactions with the premise of the game, players are not led to question why the grass does not burn: There is no reason to burn the grass in this game. As a result, the relatively simple art and interactions do not detract from the premise, and this comes together as a title that somehow provides a rich-feeling experience.

I would consider, then, that experience richness is a different but not entirely independent dimension from presentation style. While a detailed realistic presentation style may cost large multiples of a simpler presentation, style alone does not guarantee an increased feeling of congruity with the implied rules of the universe. For example, the early adventure puzzle series Myst by Br?derbund Software was visually stunning in its era, but all available interactions were limited to puzzle elements. This constraint in movement and actions actually heightened the moments when something finally comes together and a new aspect or area of the game reveals itself. 

It would be good to see more tightness in design within the industry, such that interactions are not added for their own sake but with a specific purpose in mind. By extension, the conceptualization of a game should carefully consider the player expectations a concept implies. This is not a matter of more is more, but that relevant is more. Knowing this does not only have implications for enjoyment of a game by players, but the saved effort and expense on unnecessary embellishments will also create a tighter and more polished game experience. 

What would you have done differently on your projects to provide your players a richer experience?