I was interviewed by the Seattle Times for a story they ran on my company recently. The journalist was very interested in exploring how virtual worlds were in danger of being more exciting than the real world. My response was “What would you rather your kid be doing, eating chips in front of a television by himself or having a heart pounding battle with his friends online?” I worry about my kids spending too much time in front of a screen but I’d rather it be an interactive one than a passive one.
Castronova brings up some of the same concerns in his book Synthetic Worlds. I definitely recommend the book to people interested in the subject of virtual worlds but I don’t share the concern. I’m quite happy that there are virtual places for me to visit and explore even if it’s not quite as tactile as the real thing. I guess the main thing is that I know the difference and enjoy both RL and VL for different reasons. Both are a great break from the other.
June 19, 2007 at 1:37 pm |
First post!!! yeah!
I don’t think virtual worlds are in danger of becoming more exciting than the real world… yet. If that’s true than there is something seriously wrong with the real world you live in, and that can be changed easily. For example, I recently bought a motorcycle. Riding it 80mph on the freeway is way more exciting than any video game I’ve ever played.
That said, I enjoy virtual worlds and experiences that let me break out of the limitations of life on earth. That’s the domain of entertainment. RL is not a clear cut experience with 60 distinct XP levels. It’s tough, hard, sometimes messy, but also rewarding. And sometimes you do get that “level-up” feeling. VL lets you have success in a clearly defined way which can also be quite entertaining, though sometimes can actually be more work than it is worth. I always thought The Sims sucked because I ended up feeling like a slave to my Sim. What fun is that?