Tap A to run, in rhythm with the footsteps on the pavement. It's so real! You'll actually feel as though you are running!

Yes GTA IV, this is pretty realistic, but it's not necessarily fun. Neither is having cars control like they have a titanium rhinoceros stuffed in the trunk while it may be similar to what my driving test was like.

All of this is defended under the umbrella of "immersion", but I think we need to step back and check what the definition of immersion is.

I personally think it's the ability of a game to make you so involved in the events happening on the screen that you forget all about the world around you. I suppose making a game as realistic is possible is a very easy way to achieve this, but there is a very heavy price to play realism.

If we loved real life that much, we wouldn't play video games. I mean don't get me wrong, basic laws of realism are necessary.

You shoot people, they grunt and flinch.

When you walk, you put one foot in front of the other.

Etc. etc. etc.

But isn't there a place we should draw the line? I'm not saying GTA IV is a bad game in any way shape or form; I don't believe it is anywhere near a perfect score but I'd be willing to give it like a 9.2 - 9.5 easy.  But I mean, how many people would complain if the driving controls were smoothed out, so that you could drift like Burnout or something? Or we just held down A to sprint instead of tapping it?

I own both Crackdown and GTA IV, and while GTA IV's campaign lasted me a lot longer than Crackdown's, I go back and dick around in Crackdown a LOT more than GTA IV.

And while I begrudgingly gave Modern Warfare 2 the best shooter award for the 360, this wasn't for its realism. It was for its polish, balanced gunplay, and stellar level design.

I could DEFINETLY do without the 6 inch jumping radius and pink gelatin all over my face whenever I get shot.

People make fun of Halo for being about a Power Ranger with a gun taking on neon space muppets in a ludicrous storyline, but there's a reason I defend the Halo series to the death as overall the best shooting series (even beyond Half-Life).

Sticking Grenades? Varying Vehicles? Powerups? A freaking Warhammer and Energy Sword? Being able to change rocket trajectory using other explosives? And all having it form a very balanced game?

Yes it's colorful and almost childish at times, but it's so creative and fun that I've never understood how people wouldn't rather perform a Goose-splat than see "had problems migrating host" or run around a city naked spraying sewage on houses in Saints Row instead of driving Roman to the nearest strip club.

And in terms of "immersion", you know what I personally consider the most immersive game thus far? Super Mario Galaxy 2. A game about an Italian plumber whose vertical leap exceed 3 times his height and runs around different planets jumping on walking mushroom creatures.

Realistic? No.

But I'll be damned if my basement around me didn't completely melt away to be replaced by the whimsical colors and epic music of the Mario universe every time I pushed the power button.

Realism isn't bad, and without it we wouldn't have games like GTA IV, Modern Warfare 2, or Half Life 2 which despite my gripes are still good games.

All I'm saying is, a game doesn't need to be realistic in order to be immersive and that's something game developers should consider before they make us alternate RT and LT to make our character breathe.