Sorry veeddzz that post was not directed at you. Someone else had posted below you by the username "whocaresfu". It appeared to be lovelovelove on another account. That post has since been deleted.

Knowledge that life is a game. Certainty of a form of being which extends beyond the game.

Yes, because there is no awareness of gameplay. I think the most popular perspective (i could be wrong here) in the the scientific community is one of naturalism where the “you” ends with death. Not just “you” the life-character, but also consciousness and experience. This is unlike a sub-game, such as a video game, wherein once dead you continue to live and experience outside of that game. It doesn’t appear to be a game at all. It appears to be….everything.

If you look at it from a religious perspective then “good and bad” become absolutes instead of parameters of the game. And life becomes a sort-of gateway to a higher reality.

Yes. See above.

Seems like it.


Touche’

If you had certainty of gameplaying, would it be as interesting? Could the seeming seriousness of it all, add a layer of immersion to the game?

I have no basis for comparison. I imagine it would be more enjoyable with certainty. And yes it must be more immersive without.

Gaming companies seeking to develop more immersive gaming experiences (e.g., 2D -> 3D -> VR). Could it be because immersion contributes to enjoyment?

For sure. That's exactly right. I think there might be a limit to the level of immersion before it's no longer as enjoyable.

A curvilinear relationship. Im not sure about this. I'll need to discuss with more people and think it over some more.

I'd personally prefer to not know it's a game. This way there's a seeming seriousness to it all, and a good reason to get up out of bed and into work in the morning.

But ultimately, do we listen to a song just for the ending? Does the spring come faster and fancier each year? Do we dance to get to the end of the dance?

Progress seems important.
Life seems serious.

Maybe it should be that way for most.

Could you say that a game is too immersive (/stops contributing to enjoyment) when unnecessary suffering is needed to suspend players' disbelief?

Also,

would you be more likely to believe that its all gameplay IF there was no unnecessary suffering?

If suffering is necessary to suspend disbelief then suffering is valued based on the value of immersion.

I have no frame of reference. If I was born into a world without suffering I don't see why I would have any more or less reason to believe it is gameplay.