I have played computer games on and off for the past decade. There are plenty of MMORPG's around, but SL is unique. As I walked around Orientation Island and a few other places I was surprised by the number of people who approached me to talk. Someone even gave me a bunch of objects such as a skin, some clothes, and a tattoo. (They were ugly but I actually felt the need to put them on since he had taken the time to give them to me. Yuck. It took 20 minutes to get my original form back.) At first I didn't grasp the fact that interacting with others is the whole point. The objective is not to rescue a princess and kill the dragon (though I'm sure there is an island for that), but just to be in this virtual world.
Many people use SL as a means to get away from reality for a bit... perhaps even to define a new one. The experience as a whole reminded me of lucid dreaming. From the age of 8 to about 14, I would have one or more lucid dreams about every other night. It was thrilling! As in SL, one of the first things I learned to do in my dream was to fly.
So how does SL compare?
Unfortunately it is far less realistic. A lucid dreamscape is incredibly realistic, in fact for some the visuals are more stunning and detailed than RL. I'm not convinced that any virtual environment can ever match up. SL does have its advantages though. You can connect whenever you want! As an adult, initiating lucidity is difficult. Staying asleep once lucid is even more challenging. Plus, in SL you can interact with other real people.
After typing that last point I stopped to think for a bit. What if you could just interact with computer-created avatars? Would that be good enough? What if the AI was very convincing? I wonder
-Axle Rubble
4 comments:
Wow. You post this comment after I watch the following 2 shows this past weekend: Vanilla Sky and Beowulf.
SPOILER ALERT! If you haven't seen Vanilla Sky yet and dont want to know details, stop reading. In Vanilla Sky Tom Cruise's character find himself in a lucid dream after being cyrogenically frozen for a couple hundred years and is asked if he would like to continue in his lucid dream or be "awakened". A facinating choice if you ask me. One that has been repeated in literature in different ways several times (remember the ultimate prize in Highlander was mortality!)
I also saw Beowulf in 3D this weekend and if you have not seen this yet, you are missing out on a visual feast. I was impressed by Shrek the Third but this movie even stepped it up a bit more. There were scenes and closeups in that movie that I would have totally believed were real actors. The technology was amazing.
Seeing both of these movies (Vanilla Sky and Beowulf) in the same weekend while my mind is searching for answers about second life and it's place in our world and the future, I can not help but think we are indeed headed into the matrix. While the visual technology of SL is not parallel to that used in hollywood YET, I think in time (not as long as many may think - remember the internet went mainstream only 10 years ago)second life and other virtual worlds will take on a visual qualiy that will be very close to RL. Over time this techonolgy will become ubiqitious (as cell phones are now, and wireless internet is becoming). Once this happens, look out!
I have had some pretty "crazy" converstations with my fiance while exploring some of the potetential consequences for our move into the virtual and what impact that may have on society and humankind itself!
It seems we have a recurring theme of virtual vs. real and the question of science fiction becoming science reality. I try to avoid TV when possible but found myself watching 20/20 this weekend doing a program on the science of "happiness." Seems the people who are happiest are those who have strong human bonds -- social beings that we are.
This leads me to the question I've been wrestling with ever since... does "plugging in" Matrix style give us those social bonds or isolate us from "real" bonds? Is one a threat to the other or even dangerous to us in the long haul? Or, does it give us the opportunity to connect in a world that feels increasingly isolated? A recent study of teens and social networking found that they aren't giving one technology up for another, or isolating themselves, but are becoming "super communicators," using all of the technologies to keep up with their social circles.
I keep coming back to the importance of balance. It seems we've got to find the positive opportunities in both the virtual and real worlds and find balance (OK, so I'm a positivist...).
Donna, the question of balance comes up for me too. Having had a hubby that would literally play games for hours, I worry about balance. I force my child to play outside, I encourage him to "play" (he's not 3 yet, so play is sort of a loose term for Mom ro Dad playing a game while he tells us what to do) games too of course, but in our house we try to balance video games with board games or card games. We also have creative play items like castles with knights and dragons, and a farm house, and a tree house with animals, etc. We encourage him to play as he chooses, but occassionally, we just have to turn all the electronics off and encourage him to play with other toys and in other ways. I worry that he won't develop his social skills like body language, etc. But at the same time, what if this were to become the new form of social interaction? It's almost like balance has to change for every generation. Just as spending 2 hours a day watching TV was considered more than enough, now, most people watch well more than that. In my school days, around 2 hours a night of homework was normal, but when I was teaching, I found that it was expected that children have roughly 3-4 hours of homework a night. That seems absurd to me.
So what is the balance right now?
I fully understand the idea that both of you (donna and terapyn) have stated. When I was younger, my mother made it a rule that I only was allowed to use the television 1 hour a day (which included video games), thus "forcing" me to do other recreational things like going outside. Unfortunately I do spend a lot of time in front of the computer (mainly schoolwork), so I guess I have gotten a little sloppy over the years. Though I do try to maintain the balance between electronics and motion activities.
But going back to the original topic, I doubt second life was suppose to represent real life (the teleporting, flying, and furries were a dead giveaway). Though even if it was mainly used to create for everyones pleasure, I does create some problems. For example, while some people use second life for social interaction, while others use it for business, some people prefer to use second life for nothing other than to piss people off. From what I heard, a person was trying to do an interview for cnet, when a few people came in and disrupted the interview with inappropriate images. Thus bringing up the major question, when is free speech and interaction too much.
Post a Comment