This is a pretty important study from the University of Bath adding some academic weight to what we see in the marketplace: When it comes to virtual experiences, player emotion and agency (i.e. the ability to meaningfully interact in the world) is more important than graphical realism or immersion (field of view):
Field of view and visual realism – achieved through cutting-edge graphics and usually powered by high-end headsets – can be relatively unimportant in creating a believable VR experience. Far more important is the way a user is made to feel (e.g. happy or scared) within the virtual environment, the study found. Dr Crescent Jicol, principal investigator of the study, said: “A lot of money goes into making headsets and screens better and into rendering virtual worlds more realistic, but more effort needs to be centered on improving the user’s emotional experience.”
This specific study was conducted in VR with over 300 volunteers, but the results probably apply to flatscreen 3D experiences just as neatly. And again, we already know that immersive graphical realism per se does not in itself translate to the most popular games/virtual worlds:
It's partly why Roblox and Minecraft are so extremely popular, far outpacing AAA games with high-end graphics. The AAA game industry will typically dismiss this by saying, "Oh that's because they're cheap/free games for kids", but that misses the importance of player agency and emotion.
The same is true in VR, with most (nearly all?) of the most popular games putting more focus on player engagement and emotion, than high-end graphics.
For instance, many people in the VR industry were surprised when Gorilla Tag, a multiplayer game with relatively low-end graphics, became a huge hit. But of course it did: You're a gorilla (joy)! Playing tag (agency)!
Hat tip: Thanks to Wm Annis for sending this!
Please support posts like these by buying Making a Metaverse That Matters!
Comments