Times chief film critic on videogaming

[Laine]

But you're a freak. In a good way.

I tell a lie. I played Gauntlet and Dizzy on the Spectrum for hours.

So I had a head start.

[Pob]

I think he has a point here. One of the things books,films and music has over games at the moment is that not only do they have different genre's but they also have different levels within genre's, that would appeal depending on whether your looking for a summer blockbuster or if you are looking for something more cerebral.

At this point gaming can't offer this level of depth. Partly this is due to cost,( do you think Requiem for a Dream would have got made if it cost the same as Spiderman 2), but i think its also to do with associating difficulty with age range,as simpler games generally have a very kiddy image, so would be unlikely to catch the eye of someone who only buys a game now and then.

What you end up with is games that try to do everything. They try to appeal to the summer blockbuster crowd, whilst at the same time trying to appease the hardcore gamers as well, with increased difficulty and length.

Also, Ico is a critically acclaimed game adored by dedicated gamers as a pinnacle of game design. The average punter couldn't give a toss about it. A literary equivalent would be James Joyce's Ulysses and a cinematic equivalent would be Citizen Kane.

You wouldn't expect someone who hasn't read a book since they were 14 to get anything out of Ulysses, and those who aren't familiar with film history or film making techniques tend to find Citizen Kane dull.

If he wanted a cinematic game, maybe he should have tried Driv3r

[squirtle]

and those who aren't familiar with film history or film making techniques tend to find Citizen Kane dull.

Pfft! I've got a bloody degree in Film Studies. Citizen Kane is a boring, stultifyingly dull film. So there. Deep Focus? So clever because it lets the viewer decide what they want to look at. Pah! Deep Focus - the cop out of a director who doesn't know what he wants the audience to look at.

[Badger]

I'm not sure his (the reviewer's) point was that he couldn't handle a joystick. He was arguing that progress in a game like Ico is built upon a foundation of games language that has been in-built in players over the years.

His analagy to the cryptic crossword wasn't just a throwaway line: cryptics have a language and unspoken rule base on which they are constructed. You want to complete the Times cryptic crossword and you'll have to understand the language and be aware of the rules. A newcomer will be lucky to get past the first answer cold.

His point was that a game like Ico, one held up as a "classic" (his word) by the gamesplaying critical fraternity, demands its player (at least in his experience) have a rudmentary undertsanding of the language of preogression on which games are built.

The article is fundamentally about the synergy between games and films (he cites the fact Sony had a booth at Cannes this year as a superficial case in point) so the point must be that whereas you needn't be well versed in the language of film screen-writing to appreciate a classic film- to appreciate a classic game you must have the appropriate skill set.

that's my reading of it at least.

Fair point, but films wok in the same way.

Anyone can get enjoyment out of a kid's comedy...e.g. Home Alone.

But last week I went and saw Zatoichi, without my girlfriend because she wouldn't have appreciated it. I was able to discuss it with a fellow fan of Japanese cinema with reference to the different culture, the histroy of cinema in Japane, the myths and legens, stuff like the Hagakure, and other Takeshi Kitano films.

My girlfriend would have seen it as two hours of pointless, gory sword-slashing...

His choices of games seem a little odd, but I still say if it was a 30 year old guy, he'd be alright with the basics. My in-laws came to stay, and despite not playing games before, managed passable Streetfighter 2 attempts. My girlfriend, who had only ever played Mario 10+ years earlier, is now a pretty good Halo player...

In fact, Halo would have been the perfect choice, as the intro-training section immerses you rgadually into the game, much as the intro of a film...

[roadkill]

In fact, Halo would have been the perfect choice, as the intro-training section immerses you rgadually into the game, much as the intro of a film...

But the content of Halo is why it's not the perfect choice.

People that like it shouldn't underestimate how repulsive many people (and I'm going to include myself here) find the usual sci-fi and "fantasy" subject matters. I remember Ste_Pickford once said "never buy a book with airbrushed mountains on the cover" and he's right. You can't expect people who don't like that kind of thing in other mediums to suddenly not mind ridiculous sci-fi/fantasy stuff in games because they're simply not going to.

Too many games cater for the late teen male geek aesthetic these days.

[Sportello]

Lets face it, most games fall into cliched characters and situations (Loner hero; A level set on a train; Turning 'badass') too easily.

That's why, among other reasons, Ico and Prince of Persia remain outside the relative mainstream. Almost cliche free.

[Jim Miles]

I have a lot of time for James Christopher - his Times film reviews are decent, even when I don't agree with them. His comments about the difficulty of games are interesting but I think he's falling into the trap that many older people do when trying to get into computer games: they don't realise how much hard work being good - or even 'adequate' - at games is.

Computer games do follow many conventions which we take completely for granted but which confound non-gamers trying to get to grips with games for the first time. However, it's not computer games' obligation to all appeal so readily to anyone - like many sophisticated art forms you need to learn and study before you can fully appreciate them. ICO is a case in point - seasoned gamers such as ourselves understand the language of the puzzles and exploration, it's second nature to breeze through, as a classical music lover can interpret a piece of music in ways many other people aren't trained to. We know the conventions and other people wanting to get into games seriously should learn them. Or how about this? stick to watching and reviewing films.

I'd love to take James Christopher to school on Ikaruga and Radiant Silvergun. It would take a week just to explain the basics and evolution of the shmup genre to these classics, let alone the finer points. It would be hilarious trying to explain such things to someone who has no idea at all.

[Monkichi 2.0]

I think I saw everything Pong had to offer in about the first two minutes of play.

I saw everything Gall... erm, better not

Yeah, I agree with both your posts (The ones quoting me). If I'm proving his point then I obviously misubderstood what he was saying and hence I agree with him.

[roadkill]

It would take a week just to explain the basics and evolution of the shmup genre to these classics, let alone the finer points. It would be hilarious trying to explain such things to someone who has no idea at all.

Actually I don't think that's true. I am no shooter fan at all, but appreciate Ikaruga as a one off very decent game. As long as I don't expect to ever finish it.

The other problem is that it's fine for us to sit around smugly going "you need to play [old game] to find out why" when you can't actually buy said old game in order to play it and learn, so the market is going to either stay as it is, or shrink. There aren't any games now that act as step up games to these supposedly more acquired taste ones.

I was slightly annoyed by the bit in Sunshine with a beam of sun and it takes my friend to go "look up into it" which isn't the most obvious thing to do. He knew to do this from having played 64 so much. I didn't have a clue, and I'd played 64 quite a bit.

If you look at the great games of all time for inclusiveness they're arcade games. Dead easy to pick up, but with plenty of lasting depth for people that invest the time. Games like Sega Rally, Puzzle Bobble, Metal Slug, Tekken etc. can all be at least enjoyed by an absolute beginner because of the simple premise and (relatively) simple controls, but also have a level of depth that rewards time in them. Only in their later incarnations (see Capcom fighting game 2057) do they require prior knowledge of the series.

It's obsession with concepts like immersion that's killing gaming off. Many people are quite happy with reality, and are quite content not aspiring to be in another universe, but just want to play with elements in that universe as a very external observer.

[zuum]

gozaimas has already extracted the salient points of the article but I've attached the whole thing below.

It's interesting as well in the light of how games are increasingly marketed in terms of the experience they provide or their story rather than concentrating on technical details. Of particular note has been the recent tv advert for Splinter Cell 2 where they describe it as a "techno thriller" rather than a game and emphasise the Tom Clancey connection. Maybe cinema is the future of videogames.

Lights, buttons, and action!;Games;Click

James Christopher

1,120 words

24 June 2004

The Times

Click 6

English

© 2004 Times Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved

Are computer games the future of cinema? The Times chief film critic James Christopher tries gaming for the first time and gives his verdict

I'm deeply unimpressed by Mark Hammond. He's meant to be the toughest geezer in the London underworld, yet he's a bumbling oaf when push comes to shove. I should know because I am Mark Hammond, and I've been pushing and shoving his buttons on my PlayStation2 handset for the past three days. I want revenge and I want it now.

My wife has been murdered outside a health club in Covent Garden, and my five-year-old boy has been lifted by a gang of foul-mouthed, Vinnie Jones lookalikes. Unfortunately, I'm as useful as Clint Eastwood with a broken hairdryer.

I've spent two days chasing the getaway car through the streets of London. I've mangled umpteen pedestrians, flattened entire platoons of policemen, and trashed countless vehicles. When I finally corner the bored villains in a shabby warehouse in South London, I go into "stealth mode". I coolly pull a large fat handgun from my jacket, and ingeniously contrive to put it straight back into its holster when three psychos bearing sawn-off shotguns come within point-blank range. Six blasts and much guffawing later, those tired, optimistic words appear with grim familiarity: "Mission failed: new game?"

Welcome to the future of film: an interactive world in which you call the shots in scripted thrillers that come complete with their own directors, writers and acting credits for every character and voice on the screen. Yes, these role-playing marvels have been around for years. But such is the speed and skill with which game scenarios are put together now that the entire process is starting to overlap, even overtake, the film models on which they feed. You can star as Harry, Hermione or Ron (or all three) in the Electronic Arts game version of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban - a film that's barely been out for three weeks. You can criss-cross four continents with Pierce Brosnan in James Bond 007: Everything or Nothing (a film yet to be made). Early next month, the developer Capcom is releasing a game called Onimusha 3, which will "star" a digitally captured version of the Hollywood actor Jean Reno (above).

What's astonishing is how receptive the big studios - and increasingly the film-makers - are to this naked opportunism that plays fast and loose with Hollywood's most precious franchises. When Peter Jackson signed up to direct The Lord of the Rings trilogy, he also insisted on taking charge of the accompanying video games.

Arguably the most significant statement-of-intent was the presence this year of Sony Computer Entertainment at the Cannes Film Festival. This was the first time a big interactive gaming company has set up shop at the largest art house festival in the world. Fish out of water? I've rarely seen a happier school of sharks. The Sony tent occupied a large slice of the Croisette beach, and the stream of bigwigs and stars who jetted in to Nice were airlifted by helicopter from the airport to their circus.

The only surprise is how long it has taken the company to get here. Sony are reacting so fast to the advances of film software, and the structure and content of films themselves, that certain lines are beginning to blur. Games such as The Getaway feature real actors who are wired up and painstakingly digitised by the game's programmers. Meanwhile, digital effects are taking over from the actors in films such as Spiderman 2 and The Day After Tomorrow. Irony or synergy? It's difficult to decide.

A puritanical fear is growing in some quarters of the film industry that the giants who rule the world of games might actually start leading the way - that the scenarios painted by gaming companies will have an unnatural influence on the kind of films that studios intend to make. The conspiracy theorists have a point. In 2003 American cinema box-office receipts totalled $9.5 billion. Total sales of gaming hardware and software stood at $10 billion. The figures may be skewed by the inclusion of pricey gaming consoles, but the trend is undeniable. By the beginning of January 2004, 99 million basic PlayStation units had been sold worldwide. On top of that, 70 million PlayStation2 units have been bought since 2000. Microsoft's Xbox console remains a distant second to Sony's behemoth, but is making its presence increas-ingly felt as a second-choice console for more serious gamers.

Nevertheless, I'm not entirely convinced that the techno- logical marvels offered by Sony or Microsoft can shape or steal the audiences for tomorrow's films. The interactive games that I've struggled to control have formulaic scripts, and the "cyber-scanned" images of actors leave much to be desired. But the main stumbling block to the future is sheer incompetence: software virgins such as me can struggle for weeks and never get beyond scene one. The problem for people like me is this: hardcore game players have become bored with the cliches of their chosen pastime, and developers have responded by making the games more intricate, and therefore more baffling to the novice.

Take Sony's classic title, ICO, a heroic adventure that requires the mental agility of a crossword puzzle genius. A young boy is whisked from his medieval village and imprisoned in a gothic castle. He has to use wit rather than weapons to negotiate a labyrinth of vast stone chambers. A lever on the handset allows you to scrutinise every corner of each room; a button allows you to zoom in on specific details; and a gear stick allows you to move the young turk with extraordinary sensitivity. The complexity and "realism" of this interactive film is the beautiful, spooky thrill. The atmosphere reminds me of Hayao Miyazaki's 2002 Berlin Film Festival winner, Spirited Away, and I derive a great deal of pleasure from making this spindly youth charge full tilt into brick walls. This proves to be the only lean pleasure that I can "direct" in ICO because I can't for the life of me figure out how to get past the first (and presumably easiest) reel of the story. What's undeniable is the addictive misery of the challenge. Hours of frustration turn me into a bleary-eyed zombie. The chief film critic of The Times stumped by scene one of his epic interactive movie? Frankly, it's a humiliation I can live without.

© Times Newspapers Ltd, 2004

Document T000000020040624e06o0003e

© 2004 Dow Jones Reuters Business Interactive LLC (trading as Factiva). All rights reserved.

[Jim Miles]

Thanks, I'm going to print that out.

[Badger]

But the content of Halo is why it's not the perfect choice.

People that like it shouldn't underestimate how repulsive many people (and I'm going to include myself here) find the usual sci-fi and "fantasy" subject matters. I remember Ste_Pickford once said "never buy a book with airbrushed mountains on the cover" and he's right. You can't expect people who don't like that kind of thing in other mediums to suddenly not mind ridiculous sci-fi/fantasy stuff in games because they're simply not going to.

Too many games cater for the late teen male geek aesthetic these days.

Yes.

Star Wars was a huge f***ing failure.

As was Aliens

And Independance Day

Whereas Ico appears to be a fantasy type world....which is a better choice how?

My girlfriend doesn't read sci-fi books or watch sci-fi films. Doesn't play many, if any computer games except lemmings, bust-a-move, and lots of Halo.

[Jim Miles]

To the extent of being better than you right? You have to get her to play at a meet and pwn us all.

[roadkill]

....which is a better choice how?

Neither are particularly good choices.

People on here have an amazing gift for forgetting that more people can not like something than like it, and it still be popular. See Big Brother. I bet 30 million people in the UK can't stand it, but many do. The market for Big Brother hate is as much if not bigger than Big Brother love. The same applies for any of those films.

What can we tell about any fans of Star Wars, Independence Day or Aliens?? They're all geeks. Very very few other people like them.

The reason sci-fi/fantasy stuff sells is because it's fanbase is so loyal. Anything different has to actually sell itself on merit, which is something you'd rather avoid doing when you have so many millions of dollars running on it. The old comic industry relied on this to it's peril, and now is a mere shadow of it's former self. Games will go the same way if current trends into monotony continue.

The other thing that's funny is the way arguments on here, about any subject other than games, will use units sold as an quantitative measure of quality. We know it's nonsense when applied to games, and it's nonsense applied to films or any other medium.

[bplus]

for one thing training missions shuld be made easier:

Splinter cell allowed me to run around for half an hour before a figured out i could lean against a wall and walk.

Ninja gaiden after five mins of falling of the same ledge I called it quits , there are more fun things to do with my time thanks very much.

and i ve been playing games since i was four, god help the poor sod who has never played one before.

[Jim Miles]

What can we tell about any fans of Star Wars, Independence Day or Aliens?? They're all geeks. Very very few other people like them.

Since when do more people hate Star Wars and Aliens than love them?

Still, I like the point about sales figures. Sometimes it's hard to find another indicator though. Magazine scores?

[Badger]

Neither are particularly good choices.

People on here have an amazing gift for forgetting that more people can not like something than like it, and it still be popular. See Big Brother. I bet 30 million people in the UK can't stand it, but many do. The market for Big Brother hate is as much if not bigger than Big Brother love. The same applies for any of those films.

What can we tell about any fans of Star Wars, Independence Day or Aliens?? They're all geeks. Very very few other people like them.

The reason sci-fi/fantasy stuff sells is because it's fanbase is so loyal. Anything different has to actually sell itself on merit, which is something you'd rather avoid doing when you have so many millions of dollars running on it. The old comic industry relied on this to it's peril, and now is a mere shadow of it's former self. Games will go the same way if current trends into monotony continue.

The other thing that's funny is the way arguments on here, about any subject other than games, will use units sold as an quantitative measure of quality. We know it's nonsense when applied to games, and it's nonsense applied to films or any other medium.

Top 250 films voted on imdb

3: Lord of the rings: TROTK

8: Lord of the Rings: TTT

9. Lord of the Rings: TFOTR

10: Star Wars

13: Empire Strikes Back

All-time non-usa box office:

2: Lord of the rings TROTK: $752,200,000

3. Harry Potter Sorcerors Stone $651,100,00

4 Harry Potter Chamber of Secrets $604,400,000

5 Lord of the rings the two towers: 581,200,000

7: Lord of the rings the fellowship of the ring: $546,900,000

9: Independance Day 505,000,000

10: Star Wars Episode 1: $491,314,983

The Lord of the Rings has been voted one of the top books of our time. It's been read by millions....

How exactly do you judge mainstream if not by sales and popularity? The only non-sci fi/fantasy films in the top ten are Titanic, Jurassic Park, and Finding Nemo...

Sci Fi not popular? So none of these films are mainstream?

Bladerunner?

Terminator?

Aliens?

Men In Black?

ET?

[roadkill]

Since when do more people hate Star Wars and Aliens than love them?

Hate might be strong, but if you say what proportion of the population has seen them then it really isn't as many as us youthful males might think.

One statistic recently absolutely astonished me. I must confess to not knowing the exact source of this, but apparently 1 in 9 people in Japan have played computer games. Initially this might sound high, but when you think about it it's really insanely low, especially for a nation that we regard as having such a high number of games players.

It's a bit like the fact one of my favourite comics artists, Junko Mizuno, is a big fan of the Spice Girls. It just doesn't quite make sense to our phenomenally insular view of the world.

Another example: Bollywood is more popular than Hollywood. Living in the west we might find that very difficult to believe, but it's true.

[Badger]

Neither are particularly good choices.

People on here have an amazing gift for forgetting that more people can not like something than like it, and it still be popular. See Big Brother. I bet 30 million people in the UK can't stand it, but many do. The market for Big Brother hate is as much if not bigger than Big Brother love. The same applies for any of those films.

What can we tell about any fans of Star Wars, Independence Day or Aliens?? They're all geeks. Very very few other people like them.

The reason sci-fi/fantasy stuff sells is because it's fanbase is so loyal. Anything different has to actually sell itself on merit, which is something you'd rather avoid doing when you have so many millions of dollars running on it. The old comic industry relied on this to it's peril, and now is a mere shadow of it's former self. Games will go the same way if current trends into monotony continue.

The other thing that's funny is the way arguments on here, about any subject other than games, will use units sold as an quantitative measure of quality. We know it's nonsense when applied to games, and it's nonsense applied to films or any other medium.

By the way, how did you go from mainstream, to dismissing quantity gfigures because it's all about quality?

Mainstream entertainment is quite often shallow and meaningless to appeal to the most possible people.

And by definition, mainstream has to be the ones which sell the most, otherwise they aren't mainstream.

[bplus]

It might have been said before but I think games are just going to become part of the merchindising of films

"got the t-shirt, the mug, the limited edition lighter and the videogame......."

[roadkill]

How exactly do you judge mainstream if not by sales and popularity?

One word: Bollywood.

[roadkill]

The Lord of the Rings has been voted one of the top books of our time. It's been read by millions....

"Of engineering students named Dave."

There are millions of geeks.

More people haven't read it than have read it.

[Badger]

Bollywood top grossers of last decade...

Gadar Jun-15-2001 Rs. 65,00,00,000 Rs. 74,43,47,155

2. Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham Dec-14-2001 Rs. 45,00,00,000 Rs. 51,53,17,261

3. Koi Mil Gaya Aug-08-2003 Rs. 48,84,16,386 Rs. 51,49,85,756

4. Kaho Na Pyaar Hai Jan-14-2000 Rs. 35,00,00,000 Rs. 41,59,72,722

5. Kal Ho Na Ho Nov-27-2003 Rs. 35,84,86,066 Rs. 37,79,87,354

Just need to figure out a conversion into dollars...

figures from www.ibosnetowrk.com

The top one grossed: 16,252,121.29

[Badger]

"Of engineering students named Dave."

There are millions of geeks.

More people haven't read it than have read it.

That's true of anything, except possibly the Bible.

More people haven't seen Titanic than have seen it.

Your pseudo-intellectual cobblers impresses noone...

[Badger]

Hate might be strong, but if you say what proportion of the population has seen them then it really isn't as many as us youthful males might think.

One statistic recently absolutely astonished me. I must confess to not knowing the exact source of this, but apparently 1 in 9 people in Japan have played computer games. Initially this might sound high, but when you think about it it's really insanely low, especially for a nation that we regard as having such a high number of games players.

It's a bit like the fact one of my favourite comics artists, Junko Mizuno, is a big fan of the Spice Girls. It just doesn't quite make sense to our phenomenally insular view of the world.

Another example: Bollywood is more popular than Hollywood. Living in the west we might find that very difficult to believe, but it's true.

It's not that bad.

How many can play a musical instrument?

Or have tried playing football?

Or have been to the cinema?

Needs some context. How does that differ over generations?

I'm guessing less than 1 in 9 Japanese pensioners has played an Xbox, but significantly more teenagers would have indulged...

[Badger]

One word: Bollywood.

So how many Bollywoods does something need to be awarded to be popular?

[Jim Miles]

edit: I'm responding to a post on the previous page but I missed it somehow and thought it was worth replying to.

Actually I don't think that's true. I am no shooter fan at all, but appreciate Ikaruga as a one off very decent game. As long as I don't expect to ever finish it.

Fair enough, but for me Ikaruga is about mastering the game. It's like the difference between watching a sport on TV and understanding the subtleties of playing it properly. There's a lot of depth there which takes time to learn and appreciate. There are also conventions and tricks which have been used in many games before it as well as clear influences. I believe taking gaming seriously should be about studying and appreciating such factors too. Understanding how Metroid Prime relates to other Metroid games (gameplay-wise) and being knowledgable of the previous titles might be an example of this. It's a bit like when you're really into films and find it important to look influences and historical context.

The other problem is that it's fine for us to sit around smugly going "you need to play [old game] to find out why" when you can't actually buy said old game in order to play it and learn, so the market is going to either stay as it is, or shrink. There aren't any games now that act as step up games to these supposedly more acquired taste ones.

Most older games can be played through emulation, but still there does seem something unreasonable about insisting people to catch up on ancient titles. It's complete ignorance of gaming history that irritates me, not that people haven't poured hours into every game in existence.

I was slightly annoyed by the bit in Sunshine with a beam of sun and it takes my friend to go "look up into it" which isn't the most obvious thing to do. He knew to do this from having played 64 so much. I didn't have a clue, and I'd played 64 quite a bit.

Ouch!

If you look at the great games of all time for inclusiveness they're arcade games. Dead easy to pick up, but with plenty of lasting depth for people that invest the time. Games like Sega Rally, Puzzle Bobble, Metal Slug, Tekken etc. can all be at least enjoyed by an absolute beginner because of the simple premise and (relatively) simple controls, but also have a level of depth that rewards time in them. Only in their later incarnations (see Capcom fighting game 2057) do they require prior knowledge of the series.

That's a good point, but I suppose such games aren't as helpful to James Christopher in drawing comparisons with films so it's inevitable he'll run into 'inclusiveness' issues tackling the titles he did.

It's obsession with concepts like immersion that's killing gaming off. Many people are quite happy with reality, and are quite content not aspiring to be in another universe, but just want to play with elements in that universe as a very external observer.

When I think about good gaming recently, it could be described as immersive - getting in the zone in Rez, Frequency, Super Monkey Ball etc., feeling like I was there in the castle in ICO or wandering a living breathing city in Vice City and also being transported to foreign environments which seemed so real in Halo.

These are perhaps different kinds of immersion but then perhaps immersion is just a buzz word?

[___]

Are computer games the future of cinema?

x 1,000,000

[roadkill]

So how many Bollywoods does something need to be awarded to be popular?

How about the number of people watching Bollywood films vs numbers watching Hollywood ones?

Get out of your insular little world. This is like the "discussion" the other week about women playing games. Dominated by one guy going "my girlfriend likes the sort of games I do so women generally do". Do not extend your immediate experience and assume that everyone behaves in the way those that you choose to be around do.

Games people (and this includes the development community) generally underestimate just how much reach other mediums have, and just how niche they actually are. Every other medium goes to much greater lengths to analyse the sort of people consuming their stuff than games people do, largely to tell advertisers, but also to enable them to produce stuff to attract audience to attract advertisers. (Advertisers/brand owners interchangable there). I get the distinct feeling if the games industry was fractionally as comprehensive in it's research as the tv industry is they'd come to some pretty nasty conclusions very quickly, which is why they don't do it, it is easier to bury your head in the sand, as I think you are doing.

[roadkill]

When I think about good gaming recently, it could be described as immersive - getting in the zone in Rez, Frequency, Super Monkey Ball etc., feeling like I was there in the castle in ICO or wandering a living breathing city in Vice City and also being transported to foreign environments which seemed so real in Halo.

These are perhaps different kinds of immersion but then perhaps immersion is just a buzz word?

I hope so. Much like "emergence" in which I'm somewhat knowledgable and cannot stand it's constant misuse in the games community.

I don't think being in a zone is the same as immersion, otherwise Mr Driller would be the most immersive game ever, but that really wouldn't make any sense at all. Being a Monkey in a ball is pushing it, but being a drill, no. I think Vice City and first person shooters are certainly aiming for what I'd class as immersion, ones where the player considers themself actually in it as opposed to an external manipulator.

Interesting view of yours regarding Ikaruga. I simply have to accept I'm not going to master it, or it becomes an exercise in sheer frustration.