The
ending of the novel Ready Player One was shocking, but also predictable
at the same time. I was glad to see that near the end Parzival finally ventured
outside, and got a decent taste of the real world. It’s alarming that during
the majority of this book, he hadn’t left his room. Its reassuring that Cline
alludes to the idea that the real world has some perks over the simulated, and
that in the end, Parzival wants to remain in reality. This may be a sweeping
generalization, but I feel that the real world has a certain "je ne sais quoi"
that the virtual can never quite capture, no matter how much the simulation
feels real, there is always a part of it that will never fulfill all the
sensation that can be felt in the real world. Similar to the uncanny valley, it’s
hard to be fully immersed or to fully believe the simulation is real. Like wade
and the others, they sunk into the simulation and let themselves get lost in
it, but they always come back. This makes me question: is there a way to become
fully immersed? And fully integrated within a machine? Or will reality prevail
as the medium people use to communicate with one another? This OASIS like
reality is potentially possible. Would we potentially see users login to their
visor units and log into their jobs and school, or will reality remain the most
popular medium for people to engage with one another?
In order to answer the question whether there is a way to become fully immersed, w must look to the gaming community. As a fan of the FPS called Call of Duty, I have had the opportunity to interact with people who one might classify as heavy gamers. I have met gamers who consume hours upon hours, when playing the game, without them realizing. Some gamers I have met so well versed with the game that they have calculated how much time does their to take to even turn. Some claim that after the have had their daily dosage of the game, they continue to see apparitions of their avatar for the rest of the day. Some even go as far as to claim that they 'feel' when their avatar is hit by an opposing player. Immersion or Reality?
ReplyDeleteMostly due to my research paper for this class, I have been contemplating the nature of reality for a while now. Reality has been philosophically defined as something that exists independently of ideas concerning it. With this definition, reality is not just defined by our perceptions of the world around us it is defined as the world around us as it actually is. That being said, I don't think it is ever possible to truly understand reality because as humans we are not fully equipped to perceive everything that reality encompasses. Being in a simulated computer game will never be the same as reality if reality has nothing to do with our state of mind. Perhaps with this taken into consideration reality doesn't even matter. The only thing that matters is our perception of our surroundings and what we build as reality in our minds. Thus it would be possible to completely lose touch with "reality" when immersed in the virtual world.
ReplyDeleteI had never seen the benefits of being immersed in a virtual world before reading this book, but I still don't know if immersion will become a social norm. Even though most people in America has some sort of technological device there is still some sort of aversion to heavy use and intensive technologies. For example, even thought the gamer population can be seen to have long hours of play time, how many Americans would actually consider themselves a gamer? How many have even tried to play a video game other than FIFA, Dance Dance Revolution, or Wii bowling? Maybe coming from a girl's perspective it's a little different. Though that might be a realistic issue in the future of immersive technology. For some reason, there is a gender gap in the use of video games, at least between the people I know. Until an immersive reality because better for everyone and not just the anti social, that type of manufactured reality won't happen.
ReplyDeleteIn the future, the creation of a virtual world like the Oasis is possible; however, for a virtual world to become the preferred method of socializing, working, and learning, it would have to be cheap enough for a large portion of society to use it. Therefore, I think it is very unlikely for a virtual world to become preferred over reality because of the developments in technology that would be required to make it more appealing than reality. The idea of the Oasis may be an appealing concept for gamers and others who constantly use technology, but I believe there will always be a large majority of society that has no interest in living in virtual world.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is completely possible for people to choose the fake world like that of the Oasis. When reality is not what you want it to be the allure of the virtual rises. While not all people would choose a virtual world their will always be people like Cypher from the Matrix who prefer the comfort of a fake world than face the harsh truth of reality.
ReplyDeletePhilip Rosedale, creator of Second Life, is at it again. His first attempt to do what Halliday did never became more than a profitable application for a niche audience of gamers and fans of virtual fashion who wanted to create their own content.
ReplyDeleteWe'll see how Rosedale's "High Fidelity" does when it appears. Like human colonization of the planets, something as futuristic as an OASIS-like world has long been a dream deferred. And like space travel, a number of young and rich entrepreneurs are doing all they can to make the vision real.
Note in the link to the post about Rosedale, that skeptics and utopians both are there (Iggy is me, a definite skeptic). The best remark in that camp comes from "Fleep Tuque," an academic I know well in her real-life identity. She writes:
"I'll watch the progress like everyone else, but I still think the biggest challenges for the future metaverse are social/cultural, not technical. Prettier graphics won't solve the social barriers."
Divij, you use my favorite adjective, FAKE!
ReplyDeleteWhen I use that in virtual-world educators' meetings, I get avatars yelling at me. If it were a combat-enabled zone (as in parts of Cline's novel) they'd shoot me too.
Now why IS that??