问题：

我们仍然不时听到这种论调：只有坐在卧室中的大屏幕前，手握一个控制器才能获得真正的沉浸体验。果真如此吗？你能不能在移动平台上获得这种主机游戏体验？你能看出手机和平板电脑在这方面的区别吗？

回答：

Ben Cousins（DeNA欧洲游戏工作室主管）

iPad 4具有：

*更高的分辨率

*更优质的色彩再现

这两点都比市场上任何电视机更强。

现在坐在你的游戏电视屏幕前，就像玩游戏时那样手握一个全屏的iPad，将它抬起来放在电视机前。99%的人会注意到iPad屏幕比电视机更易占据他们的视野。视场（FOV）覆盖面正是沉浸感的一个核心元素。

现在戴上耳机就可以获得一种比扬声器更棒的音频沉浸感。

我不认为会有人表示电视机游戏还会比这种上体验更具沉浸感。

Stuart Dredge（《卫报》记者）

很显然的：这要看游戏本身。一款在手机上极具沉浸感的游戏，总好过一款在主机上并不那么沉浸性的游戏。如果是在火车长途旅行过程中戴着耳机玩手机游戏，这种效果就更棒了。

但单独比较硬件，我觉得膝盖上放一个iPad玩游戏的沉浸感，类似于在房间角落电视机玩游戏——此时iPad这种较小的屏幕在我看来却非常之大。另外，如果我戴着耳机（无论是在手机、平板电脑还是主机）都会进一步加深我的沉浸感。

没错，内容为王：我们有可能制作出像主机游戏那样极具渲染性的手机游戏，这不仅仅是屏幕大小和图像分辨率的问题。

还有一种论调是有些最佳手机游戏只有在较短的时间才会具有沉浸感，那么《Words With Friends》有沉浸感不？当你在有一堆游戏要应付，时常看到系统闪出的通知，这就很容易让你分心，从而显得其他游戏更缺乏沉浸感。

Simon Oliver（HandCircus设计师）

在此我完全同意Stuart的观点——在晚上戴着耳机玩《行尸走肉》是我最近几年最有沉浸感的移动游戏体验之一，这当然是与游戏内容有关。

Eric Seufert（Gamefounders导师）

我在iPad上玩《行尸走肉》远比看它的同名电视剧更有沉浸感。坦白讲，我认为这款游戏的编导和导演更棒（所以将这两个拥有共同IP的作品进行对比有点不合适），但我在看电视剧《行尸走肉》时却从来没有被吓到，而玩iPad游戏时却是惊险不断。

Martin Darby（Remode首席内容官）

构成“沉浸感”的因素有许多：内容、游戏时间、交互性，更不用说观看者的眼光了（游戏邦注：他们很容易被特定事物所吸引）！

我认为由于硬件的关系，我们还得从另一个角度来看待问题。我认为我们在更成熟的平台创造“沉浸感”时，一般容易忽略主机游戏及其相关的用户的两个特点。

1.更长的游戏时间和心流状态

2.熟练操作实体控制器的人已经进入物我两忘的状态。他们眼睛盯着屏幕，感觉到了自己的操作（我玩FPS的时候，并不会意识到自己握着控制器。我只是看着屏幕，我动动手指，屏幕上就会发生相应的情况，这真神奇！）他们并不需要触碰屏幕！我还认为对于那些已经习惯于这种设计模式的群体来说，触碰屏幕还是一种破坏沉浸感的体验。

在我看来，“传统”调整机制很适合触屏手机/平板电脑。但如果看运行速度更慢的游戏，它们在个人连网设备上都更具社交元素：我认为我们才刚开始，我还认为手机与平板电脑在这一点上的表现也并不相同。我认为平板电脑就是因为屏幕更大所以才会比手机更具沉浸感。

Felicity Foxx Herst（GREE产品经理）

我在移动设备上当然有深度的沉浸体验。姑且不论分辨率，我认为关于FOV和耳机的观点很有说服力——在iPad上戴耳机玩《Sword and Sworcery》的感觉像是被传送到了另一个世界，这也是我在任何平台上最喜欢的游戏体验之一。

阻碍游戏沉浸感的并非硬件，而是商业模式和设计样式——短小时间的设计，持续连接的游戏玩法并不能创造出传统的“沉浸感”游戏体验，即那种忘记其余世界，全心投入探索深度的虚拟世界中的感觉。很显然并非每款手机游戏都属于休闲类型，而平板电脑上更长时间的体验也表明这种更深度的游戏体验存在市场。但人们对免费下载模式、更廉价的开发和服务产品而非内容产品的期待注定这个平台上不会有太多此类作品面世。

坦白而言，我并不是说你一定要有一支大型的主机开发团队去制作出超逼真的画面或者需要一种订阅/预付费模式来创造沉浸性内容。《Sworcery and Journey》就是一种兼具沉浸感和风格化图像的游戏，MMO或《半条命》式的虚拟世界也比线性内容更有深度——只是多数人难以通过在移动平台制作这类游戏而盈利。

iPad版的《行尸走肉》就是一个被反复提及的绝佳典型。虽然我认为将它和电视剧进行对比并不妥当——怎么会有人同时在主机和平板电脑上玩游戏？我相信在iPad上玩游戏会很不错，但也曾和同伴坐在沙发上玩这款游戏的PS3版本，一起经历斗智斗勇和惊险时刻——位居同一地点，背靠沙发，面对大屏幕的多人游戏仍然有它自己的优势。

Tadhg Kelly（Jawfish Games创意总监）

正如其他人所言，内容才是主导FOV和音效的因素。但这也要看界面。

主机或掌机游戏体验对于手机或平板电脑的一大区别在于实体感。前者的控制器有按钮和触发器，以及手柄等东西，而触发或操纵这些东西可以将你的身体引入游戏世界。但玻璃材质的触屏却很难传递这种感觉。像《愤怒的小鸟》这种游戏可以通过触屏创造一种拉伸弹弓的感觉，其他游戏是通过绘画来实现这一点。虚拟摇杆存在拇指咬合性的问题，或者在驾驶过程中倾斜控制的准确性等问题，但普遍问题就是许多游戏都难以克服的一种分离感。

所以，对《行尸走肉》这种游戏来说并不是什么大事，但对更为动作导向的游戏来说，就会出现准确性、响应性、可靠性和扩展性等问题。这也正是为何除了画面质量或音乐效果之外，我认为动作类游戏在移动平台仍然无法大显身手的原因。这种设务缺乏实体控制方式，触觉反馈等要素，导致游戏魅力大打折扣，因此无法令玩家真正融入游戏世界。也许iOS对控制器的支持有助于克服这一点，但仍然有待观望。

Kristian Segerstrale（Playfish首席执行官）

我希望大家更关注玩家所能容忍的“最长不间断游戏时长”，而非“动作游戏”或“非动作游戏”的话题。毕竟在当前这种多任务处理和注意力缩短的时代中的一个社会性问题，它不仅仅是平板电脑规格尺寸变化的问题。

很显然，沉浸感和游戏长短之间存在关系，但这也会涉及到设计问题。这让我感觉多数“动作游戏”（无论是MOBA还是FPS）的成功和粘性是来自同步多人模式和相关玩法模式。真正的问题恐怕是那些游戏时间相对更长，不中断的同步多人玩法是否能被平板电脑游戏玩家所接受。

作为集点小组中的一员，我发现自己玩过平板电脑之后，就很难再返回《英雄联盟》参与每日40分钟不间断的任务了。我觉得这几乎令人痛苦，因为我的手机信息在响，而我却只能在自己的游戏英雄下次死亡时再快速查看信息，而我在《Clash of Clans》中仅需完成2分钟的攻击就可以查看信息了。

所以我认同Ben的看法。

Anthony Pecorella（Kongregate虚拟商品游戏制作人）

这个问题的答案让我很纠结。我的直觉是直接为主机游戏辩护。我自诩是一个正宗的游戏玩家，即主机和PC游戏用户。我实际上在平板电脑游戏中投入时间更多，但我之后还是觉得不太满足。

我同意触感控制方式可能破坏沉浸感的观点，Felicity对本地多人游戏的观察很深入。我甚至还准备用电影院和IMAX的成功典型作为论据，说明更大的屏幕更易产生沉浸感。

但我推荐大家看看这个视频，数数看视频中的球有几次经过玩家。

这对我们相当有启发。现在再回想下原版GameBoy，这个东西很小，丑陋，听起来很糟糕。但我们还是深深为其灰色的基调而着迷。

事实上，人类大脑是一个不可思议的过滤设备。我们只会“看到”自己眼睛可视的一小部分内容（游戏邦注：例如，多少人曾经注意到自己的鼻子呢？）当我们集中关注游戏时，我们可以深深融入其中，无论其控制方式、图像、FOV或音效质量如何，书籍对人的吸引力或许就是一个最明确的例子。

所以，现在我就要被迫“昧着良心”说话了。设备问题无关紧要，正如之前所言，媒体和内容才是沉浸感的决定因素。虽然有些题材和平台面临特定的挑战，但游戏开发者却总能突破技术局限制创造惊人的娱乐体验，这对手机来说也同样如此。

Oscar Clark（Applifier倡导者）

我们可以退一步来看吗？我认为这个问题存在一种根本性的偏见。它假设有一种沉浸感，这种沉浸感应该是一种持续体验。它认为沉浸感应该是通过特定设备体验游戏的当前时刻。

我当然希望进入这个世界的时候能够将身边的世界排除在外。但我使用的每个设备都有不同的使用模式。Ben对于平板电脑和耳机极具沉浸感的评价完全正确。这正是我坐在环绕立体声电视前面的感觉。但它们是有区别的。我是先根据自己当前所处的情况选择玩游戏的设备，而非根据游戏体验来选择设备。

我花3分钟玩《Triple Town》时也同样具有沉浸感，最后往往发现40分钟不知不觉就过去了。我在玩《CSR Racing》并坐在那里等待，通过手机查看燃料是否加满以便再次赛车时也同样有这种感觉。它们是不同的体验，但彼此并没有高下之分。

对我来说，游戏的沉浸感质量只有在你玩游戏的时候才会开始，我认为特定的控制界面是一种会转移注意力的东西——只要界面设计有效，我回想起进入该世界的情况就会觉得游戏真的具有沉浸感。我想玩
《Triple Town》的愿望和想玩《Bioshock Infinite》或《天际》的感觉并没有什么不同。

游戏破坏自身内部一致性时最容易打破沉浸感，这并不只是与玩家所使用的设备大小有关。在《Last of Us》中可以获得一种美妙的沉浸体验，但我每次用枪杀死一个敌人却发现没有子弹时，这种沉浸感就会荡然无存。这非常令我恼火，它破坏了沉浸感。

当然，我们希望制作人们会喜欢，能够让我们暂时逃避现实的游戏，但不要将设备规格作为失败的借口。而应该让这种设备体验扬长避短。

如果你想让我用社交功能玩游戏也行，但这并不会带来沉浸感。这只是一大群玩家和大家相互依存的活动。同真人打交道需要付出精力，在不能确保安全性的情况下，将玩家投入即时同步游戏是一种不智之举。

Jas Purewal（Osborne Clarke律师）

针对这个问题我有以下几个回答：

1）目前Tiger Style Games所发布的两款游戏——《蜘蛛：布莱斯庄园》和《火星漫步》都融入了极为出色的游戏机制，拥有醒目的图像和音频，最重要的是，逐步展开的微妙而强大的故事。《蜘蛛：布莱斯庄园》的故事是“我所探索的这个家庭究竟发生了什么毁灭性的事件？”，《火星漫步》则是“之前的火星生命从何而来，我该如何让它再次复苏？”

2）Ndemic Creations的《Plague，Inc》。当你开始设计和部署你惨无人道的瘟疫时，你就很难去关注游戏时长，直到你获胜或者人类获胜为止。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

[Gamesbriefers] Can you get the immersion of console games on mobile platforms?

By Gamesbriefers

Question:

We still hear people saying that the only way to get a truly immersive experience is on a large screen that dominates your living room with a controller in your hand. Is that true? Can you get the immersion of a console game on a mobile? Do you distinguish between mobile and tablet in this regard.

Answers:

Ben Cousins1Ben Cousins Head of European Game Studios at DeNA

iPad 4 has:

Higher resolution

Better color reproduction

Than any commercially available television.

Now sit in front of your gaming TV. Hold a full-size iPad as you would when gaming, now raise it up so it is in front of the TV. 99% of people will notice that the iPad’s screen takes up more of their field of view than the TV. FOV coverage is one of the key elements of immersion.

Now place a pair of headphones on for better audio immersion than you could ever get from speakers.

I can’t see how anyone can argue that TV gaming is more immersive than this.
Stuart DredgeStuart Dredge Journalist at The Guardian

The obvious, boring thing to say: it’s mostly about the game. A super-immersive game on a phone trumps a not-that-immersive game on a console. And I’ve missed stops on trains far too often for comfort when playing a mobile game with headphones on.

But comparing hardware to hardware alone, I find sitting with an iPad in my lap can be every bit as immersive as playing on a TV in the corner of the room – smaller screen closer to me feels pretty big, if we’re talking size. And again, if I’m wearing headphones (on either phone, tablet or console) has a big impact on how deep I’m sucked in.

But yeah, CONTENT IS KING and all that: it’s perfectly possible to make a mobile game that’s as immersive as the best that console has to offer, and it’s about more than just screen-size and graphics.

Oh, and also there’s an argument that some of the best mobile games aren’t trying to be immersive in long bursts, but more shorter, bitesize bursts. Is Words With Friends ‘immersive’? When you have a bunch of games on the go and notifications pinging in regularly, it’s more that it makes everything else less immersive as you’re easily distractable
Simon OliverSimon Oliver Designer at HandCircus

Yup totally agree with Stuart here – playing Walking Dead on iPad at night with headphones was one of the most immersive, moving gaming experiences I’ve had in years – its all about the content.

eric seufertEric Seufert Mentor at Gamefounders

Not necessarily analogous but I felt far more immersed in the Walking Dead game (on iPad) than I felt in the TV show. To be fair I think the writing and direction waere probably better for the game (so the comparison is a bit strained aside from having the same IP), but I have never been shocked or surprised when watching the Walking Dead series, whereas I have been with the iPad game.
Martin DarbyMartin Darby CCO of Remode

Many factors make up “immersion”: the content, the playtime, the interaction, not to mention the mind/eye of the beholder (how easily they are captivated and sucked in by certain things)!

I would say that it is possible, but that it needs to be arrived at from a different angle due to the hardware. I would say that established console gaming and its associated customers generally have two things that we take for granted when creating “immersion” on more mature platforms.

Generally longer play sessions to get into the flow

People adept with physical controllers forget they are there. They are looking at the screen and feeling their actions (when I play an FPS I am not consciously using the controller. I just look at the screen, my hands do stuff, and stuff happens! Magic!). Ergo, they don’t have to touch the screen! And it could be argued that having to touch the screen is immersion breaking for a certain group of people more used to these design patterns.

In my opinion, *traditional* twitch mechanics are a poor fit for mobile/tablet with touch. However in terms of games with a slower pace, perhaps majestic, or perhaps slow and foreboding, all with more of a social element on a personal connected device: I think we’re only just getting started. And I think it does vary from mobile to tablet. I think tablets are simply more immersive than phones dude to their screen size.

Felicity Foxx HerstFelicity Foxx Herst Product Manager at GREE

I’ve certainly had deeply moving, immersive experiences on mobile devices. Resolution regardless, I think the points about FOV and headphones are compelling – playing Sword and Sworcery on iPad with headphones a few years back truly felt like being transported to another world, and remains one of my all-time favourite game experiences on any platform.

It’s the business model and design paradigm more than the form factor that presents a blocker – designing for short burst, always connected gameplay does not make for a traditionally “immersive” game experience, in the sense of forgetting the rest of the world to explore a deep, well-realized virtual space. Obviously not every mobile game is designed to be casual, and longer sessions on tablets have indicated a market for deeper experiences for some time now. But the expectation of mobile games being free to download, cheaper to build and service products rather than content products means there is little precedent.

To be clear, I’m not saying you need a big console dev team for ultra-real graphics or a subscription/pay up-front model to create immersive content – Sworcery and Journey are both super immersive with stylized graphics, and an MMO or Second Life style virtual world could be far deeper than linear content allows – it’s just that most people aren’t making money doing this on mobile right now.

Walking Dead iPad is a fantastic example that’s been brought up a few times. Though I think it’s a mistake to compare the TV programme to the game – has anybody played the game on both console and tablet? I’m sure it would have been wicked on iPad, but I played it on PS3 with my partner together on the sofa, struggling with the decisions and emotional fall-out together – local multiplayer being one place where the lean-back big screen still has the advantage in the living room.

tadhg kellyTadhg Kelly Creative Director at Jawfish Games

As others have said, it’s about content, dominating FOV and sound. But it’s also about interface.

One of the key distinctions between the console or handheld experience over the mobile or tablet is physicality. You have buttons and triggers and joypads and such, and the ability to trigger or manipulate those things brings your body into the game. With glass touch screens that sensation is harder to convey. Some games like Angry Birds manage it by creating a believable sense of elasticity, others by making a game out of drawing. However a lot of the console-y (or would-be) games that have attempted to make the crossover feel muted. There are issues of thumb occlusion for virtual joypads, or the accuracy of tilt in steering, but also just a general sense of separation for many kinds of games that’s hard to overcome.

So for games like The Walking Dead that’s not such a big deal, but for more action-oriented affairs it is. Issues like precision, responsiveness, reliability and extensibility of control all come into play. This is why, beyond questions of graphical flair or mood music, I think we have yet to see much in the way of action-oriented games that really works for mobile platforms. The lack of physical control, haptic feedback and so on takes a lot away from games, makes it harder for them to bridge the divide and make you believe that you really are in another world. Perhaps iOS controller support will help to overcome that, but we’ll have to wait and see.
kristian_segerstraleKristian Segerstrale CEO of Playfish

I wonder if the more relevant question is not about “action games” or “non action” games but rather the “max uninterruptible game session length” players will tolerate – which may as much a sociological issue of increased multi tasking and shortening focused attention spans rather than a form factor change to tablets.

Clearly there is a relationship between immersion and session length. But it’s also a matter of design. It feels to me that the success and stickiness of most “action games” – whether MOBAs or FPSs – is really about the synchronous multiplayer mode and associated game play patterns. The real question might therefore be whether true synchronous multiplayer with the requirement of a relatively long, uninterrupted game session is tolerable for tablet gamers.

As a focus group of one I actually found it very hard after mainly playing on tablets to go back to League of Legends and do my daily 40min+ uninterrupted match. I almost find it distressing that my phone is buzzing with a message and I can only check it quickly next time my hero dies, vs after my attack in Clash of Clans which only lasts 2 minutes.

Agreed with Ben that cracking it is worth billions. If you do, please hit me up for funding.

Anthony Pecorella Producer for virtual goods games at Kongregate

I struggled today with an answer to this question. My gut instinct was to jump to the defense of consoles. I self-identify as a gamer, and in that I mean consoles and PC. I actually spend more time on my tablet gaming, but I generally feel less satisfied afterwards, for whatever that can be interpreted as.

I agree with points about touch controls potentially breaking immersion and Felicity makes a great observation about local multiplayer. I was even getting ready to make an argument based on the success of movie theatres and IMAX in favor of bigger screen immersion.

But then I remembered this video. Try to count the number of times the ball is passed between the players.

So, that was likely rather enlightening. Now think back to the original GameBoy. That thing is tiny, ugly, and sounds awful. And yet we were able to get deeply enhanced in its grey-hued chip-tuney allure.

The fact is, the human brain is an incredible filtering device. We only “see” a small fraction of what I’d visible to our eyes (how many of you were aware of staring at your nose, until just now?). When we get focused we can get deeply involved in something regardless of controls, graphics, FOV, or sound, books being perhaps the clearest extreme example.

So now I’m forced to argue against my gut. The device matters very little, and as it was wisely said before, the media and content are the defining elements of immersion. There are specific challenges for some genres and platforms (console FPS or not, not even Halo Wars could bring RTS to a controller), but game developers have always worked within limitations of technology to create amazing entertainment experiences, and that’s no different for phones.
Oscar ClarkOscar Clark Evangelist for Applifier

Can we step back a little? I think there is a fundamental prejudice in the question. It assume that there is one kind of immersion and that immersion has to be a constant stateroom be valid. Indeed it assumes that the immersion has to be about the current moment of play through a specific device.

I, of course, want to suspend disbelief, I want to be able to exclude the world around me whilst I enter this world. But each device I use has a different mode of use and engagement profile. Ben’s comment about a tablet and headphones being incredibly immersive is spot on. So is the feeling I get in front of my TV with surround sound. But they a different. I choose the device according to my current circumstances and the different conditions I’m in before I choose one or the other of these experiences

But it is also immersive when I think I’m spending 3 mins playing Triple Town and it turns out that 40 mins have passed. Or when I was playing CSR Racing and sat their waiting, checking my phone to see if my fuel had replenished enough to be able to race again. They are different experiences but none the less delightful.

For me the immersion quality of a game only starts while you are playing the game and as far as i am concerned the specific control interface is a red herring; as long as it works. I know that a game is truly immersive when I think about how I can get back into that world; when I dream about play it. I dream about Triple Town just as much as I did Bioshock Infinite or Skyrim.

Games break that immersion too readily when they break their own internal consistency; not because of the size device the player uses. Take Last of Us a beautiful amazingly immersive experience, but I kept dropping out of the immersion whenever I killed an enemy with a gun, only to get no ammo. That really annoyed me; breaking the immersion.

Of course we want to make games people will love that allow us to escape reality for a brief moment; but don’t let the device format be an excuse for failure. Use that device experience to its strengths.

If you want me to get into Social Play too I can too…but it’s not about immersion. It’s about the critical mass of players and interdependence theory. It takes effort to engage with real people and the payoff has to be worth it; dropping players into a real-time synchronous game without making it safe to do so is a fools errand.
jaspurewalJas Purewal Lawyer at Osborne Clarke

I wanted to give a couple of responses to Nicholas’ request for examples:

(1) Both of the games released to date by Tiger Style Games – Spider: the Secret of Bryce Manor and Waking Mars. They both blend excellent game mechanics with arresting graphics and audio with, most importantly, a subtle but powerful story that builds over time. In Spider it’s “what happened to destroy this family whose home I’m exploring?” and in Mars it’s “who gave Mars life before and how I do it again”?

(2) Ndemic Creations’ Plague, Inc (disclosure: I act for them). Once you’ve started designing and deploying your humanity destroying plague, it’s hard to look up from the game session until either you’ve won or the human race have.（source：gamesbrief）