I think when it's fully immersive, it might become a huge problem...unless the robots are doing all the work by then? What do you think?
Incredibly addictive, it's one of the things that worries me about the concept of FIVR (and is the basis of a story idea I've been ruminating on). Widescale VR will completely change the dynamics of the world, although I wouldn't worry about it happening before robots "take over".
I would expect it to be very addictive. Computer and video games already are. I don't think it will need to be fully immersive in order for it to be addictive. Especially in America where people have so much free time.
I doubt it would be much more addictive than video games currently are. Whether that's "not addictive" or "incredibly addictive" is entirely up for debate. But once people get debilitating headaches from VR- and until they deal with that- it'll be less addictive than their non VR competition. But it feels like right now, VR is the "flying car" of technology. We can do it, but we can't do it well enough for it to be long-run viable.
Addiction is a function of the person, not the game. Some people have personalities or are in situations that make them more prone to addiction than normal. Look up the rat utopia experiments - basically, rats were offered the choice of plain water or water laced with opiates. Rats that were kept in social groups, in large cages with access to toys, food, and mating partners didn't become addicted to the dosed water, but rats that were isolated or deprived did. Interesting stuff.
So you could also say that addiction is a function of the society, not the game, instead or in addition to "a function of the person, not the game"? Also, true, but there's been research into how to design things to be less/more addictive. Just because no addiction is unbreakable doesn't change that some are worse than others.
Personally, I'm not sure it's that so much as that Facebook is a public "permanent record". I mean, I wouldn't let my children read what I write, when I have children. Though I do hear people get addicted to facebook.
Former Facebook exec won't let own kids use social media, says it's 'destroying how society works' Sean Parker Says Facebook Was Designed to Be Addictive
It might be. Video games certainly are so once they become immersive it'll kick everything up to eleven. That's why we read books right? To travel to mystical realms and be someone else if only for a few hours? VR... at least ideal VR takes out the middle man. The true question is how will you get people out of it? I mean if I can transfer my "consciousness" into a game then I can do that outside of the game to say... the net. turning myself into an immortal virus or a Trojan horse if I'm using VPN. Not only will I live forever -or as long as we use technology in any form- but I'd be the most power creature on this earth. So why come back to the mortal realm. Don't give me the matrix speech. We all know that this is a boring VR of the sims that our minds have been plugged into since the Y2K happened and the lizard men took over making teacup hot air balloons the main method of transportation. I'd rather not think about it or about the on-going war with the sea horses. Those bastards are out for complete world domination which is fair enough but they're just so speciest!!! Master species my.... Wait what was the question again?
I always get confused when people state something I designed to be addictive when it's really designed to earn money. Addiction earns money, sure, but it's more of an means to an end. VR is going to be really dangerous I think - because we have a metric ton of health issues right now which stem from desk jobs, essentially. It's hard to say how much medical technology will change as we reach a level where computers can do VR dives or something similar enough to be dangerous. It's kind of fun, because this is a pitfall I see writers fall into - assuming technology only develops in one facet verses progressive techniques impacting all sorts of fields. It's like saying lasers and microwaves are only useful as weapons when they clearly are being used to improve quality of life. I have to assume that there'll be a balancing act between the factors of money, usefulness, and public welfare, in the same manner we see people crying for those causes with every other bit of technology in the world. Creating something too addicting means people need to earn money to pay for it. But how many means of earning money will there be if say, a single robot kiosk can crank out all the fries and McNuggets an entire city block might want? Does the population go down due to a lack of jobs? If there's no way to earn money how do people pay for a habit? If they can't, who bothers to supply the fix since there's no earnings? Etc, etc, etc.
Like anything it can be addictive. Full Immersive would have the greatest risk of that, as people already like to retreat into other worlds when life sucks, if they can fully immerse themselves into another world then yeah the risk skyrockets. The big things to keep in mind when that technology comes about is where society is at that point. Has the government taken over and is just handing out stuff to people so they can do what ever they want? Do we have completely automated facilities producing food, maybe solent green, and other products needed for people to live? ETC? It all depends, I can totally see terminal patients being given FIVR if it will let them deal with their terminal issues.
It will. And the reasons why are obvious. It depends a bit on the generation of VR— right now, it's still a bit lackluster— but once we get full-immersion VR, all bets are off. First of all: it offers an escape that's perhaps the most perfect 'escape' imaginable. All other 'escapes' had conditions to enter. You had to translate these media to your imagination and essentially live as someone else. That's one big reason why protagonists "have" to be relatable or likable. And there always has to be conflict, so your escapist life can never be perfect or even easier than your own (unless the conflict is silly). You're given a limited amount of time to get to know these characters, and society discourages you from playing with them any more than the author originally intended (e.g. fanfiction, fan art, fan films, etc.). You are only escapist in your own mind, but everyone going back to Descartes knows that the most exciting and vivid imaginary sensations are less tangible than even the most fleeting physical sensations. Imagining myself in an electric LSD-filled harem orgy sounds groovy, baby, but every little bit of excitement is almost like a ghost compared to even the flap of a moth's wings on my elbow. So in a manner, some of this escapism simply has to always be physical and beyond you. With VR, you don't have that. You can be whatever the hell you want to be. You can play whatever character you went whenever you want wherever you want however you want for however long you want. In FIVR, you could roleplay as the hybrid of Adolf Hitler, Charles Manson, and the Devil without a hint of irony or sarcasm. Be the most evil and despicable possible creature you want with no comeuppance, no lessons to be learned, nothing other than raw primal evil. You can't write a story about that without turning it into a satirical comedy that doesn't take itself seriously because no one would read it. If you tried releasing such a story, people would call you an edgelord. At best, you'd have to keep it to yourself forever. Likewise, you can't do the same for movies or video games or TV shows, especially since the costs are so much higher. With VR, you don't have to worry about following a narrative. One of the things that upsets me a bit sometimes is how I can never truly write the story I want to write. It doesn't matter how many characters I create or how detailed the setting becomes or how cool people act— the very fact I essentially have to follow a "verse-chorus-verse" structure is the reason why it can never truly be any way other than a pruned and less-true version of it. Sure, some experimental stories break free of the pattern, but it's difficult to do it right because, unless you're literally writing an avant-garde story, you still need some form of narrative. You need some rising action, some conflict, some tension, some antagonistic force, some character archetypes or deconstructions thereof, some climax, etc. Only in FIVR could you really break that trend if you want. With VR, you have full-fledged experiences. You can actually experience real things, but on a virtual plane, and you can see how that might lead to some problems. Presumably with FIVR, you're also hacking into your brain chemicals. Maybe not the earlier versions, but later ones, definitely. So that means you could go into FIVR and take drugs. All the drugs. You could survive an overdose that would kill an elephant. You could eat and drink cocaine 24/7. If you are a sex addict, you could literally stay inside FIVR from the moment you get it to the moment you die doing nothing else— literally nothing else— other than aggressive nonstop sexual action. This is presuming that we don't live in a cheesy sci-fi novel and somehow have fully-immersive mind-uploading tier virtual reality with 2018-level technology in all other areas, including areas of automation and vitamin intake. People choosing to live in a virtual world seems almost like a no-brainer. If it's better than reality and they don't have much else to do in reality if all the jobs are automated and their bodies are hooked up for feeding (whether it's the 'classic' way of tubes into your stomach or the 'transhumanist' way of simply feeding your brain electricity and oxygen), I can't imagine why millions of people wouldn't become addicted to VR. At some point, it wouldn't even be an addiction. It'd just be an alternative way to live. A growing sentiment I've been seeing online lately is a sort of "push-back" to the traditional sci-fi and cyberpunk warnings against living in VR. Cyberpunk tells us that we should strike to live in reality, even if VR is so much cooler, because reasons. These transhumanists types ask "Why?" What is wrong with divorcing reality? And I loved the response of this 65-year-old dude (reasonably 69 now)
I suppose the question is when will we have some sort of pods like are postulated in many books? once we have them things could be could or bad, considering some already die doing MMMORPGS and some neglect children, if pods can force people out or have an interupt and or time out it might be a really good thing.
or... you could get really good pods, and bring your children into the game with you... and if they're naughty, PK is always an option... <- good parenting right here
What about VR as a rehabilitation tool or torture device? No spoilers! Black Mirror touched on the concept a bit. The dark side of LitRPG.
what? no... so they can experience the joy of VRMMORPGs lol... and so I can kill them repeatedly if they get too annoying... (just need to get children first lol...)