I was obsessed by games when I was kid. They've almost lost their grip on me. Even when I go actively looking for some distraction I can't find anything good. There has been one exception in the last couple of years, minecraft.<p>There's virtually no innovation, but I'm not sure that's the reason, I think you just move on. I remember a crossover point where I looked at realistic graphics and thought "I could just go outside and go for a run" and then did.
There's an assumption behind these worried articles that there's a natural, non-virtual mode of existence for human beings when we're not reading books, watching movies or playing games. Perhaps we are living in the outdoors, breathing fresh air and weaving accessories from wild grasses.<p>However, this can't be true. As David Deutsch has argued, humans are knowledge creators: we thrive only by thinking about our environment and our problems and trying to improve stuff. It has been thus since we split from the rest of the primates.<p>We cannot perceive reality directly. Thinking itself is a form of virtual reality rendering. In order to improve stuff, we have to imagine how it could be different. So we all exist in virtual realities, whether we want to or not.<p>Obviously this doesn't address all the concerns in the article, but it might be a better starting point. One could go on to consider the educational value of games, perhaps by asking whether all learning can be regarded as forms of gaming. And then: which games are better than others and why?
Isn't most of what humans do wasteful? What about "lieing on a beach sipping cocktails to death" or "commuting to death" or "painting to death" or "watching TV to death" or "reading to death"?
If you condemn computer games, you condemn all other forms of art at the same time. So I suppose the only worthwhile conducts of human life are technological and scientific research, and building infrastructure? I don't think it is as simple as that. And if you have created the perfect infrastructure and won against cancer, then what? Why live? What did you optimize for? That we can enjoy stuff seems to make us want to live at the same time.
I've lost friends to WoW. To my perspective, they could literally be dead and I would have the same experience - I know they are online but they are completely inaccessible inside their game world.<p>That Bruce Willis movie with the immersive VR was a catchy prediction for the new opiate. Large portions of society are waiting for the chance to lose themselves in a deterministic, programmed world that is more pleasurable than their reality. It's terrifying to consider the ramifications of this. If you can plug in, feed yourself some poptarts and hydrate every 8 hours, and otherwise float in limbo being someone you love more than your real self, we're going to see entire classes of people disappear, just like my WoW friends that I'll probably never chat with again.
I've been playing Skyrim lately and I can only describe it as endlessly entertaining. I had the very same thought that the article talks about.<p>Skyrim is almost completely realistic-looking. At some point in the near future, the games we play will likely be indistinguishable from reality, or even more likely, much better than reality in every way.<p>But the more surprising thing is that Skyrim has a system that randomly generates more stuff to do than you could reasonably do in a lifetime of playing the game. Now, it's essentially the same thing over and over, but there's no reason to assume that games in the future won't become even better at this. The key point is that there is stuff to do in the game that someone didn't have to manually create.<p>The logical conclusion is that at some point in the future, there will exist an endless supply of stuff to do that is more entertaining than reality, not just in the current "addictive until you eventually get bored a year later" way, but in the "automatically generated by algorithms so complex that the game is constantly new and surprising and you will never get bored" way.<p>I wonder where that will lead. Maybe it's the ultimate bread and circus for the populous, where one could lead an extremely happy and fulfilling life in a virtual world with essentially no cost to anyone.<p>And if you take a step back, that's exactly where we are today, at least in the developed world. For the most part, if you abandon all the trappings of the modern, virtual world, you can live a happy and fulfilling life for nearly zero cost. But we choose to buy cell phones, TV's, and other forms of entertainment that aren't really necessary.<p>Beyond the necessities, it's all entertainment, including that 40 hour job that you don't really have to do to live or that startup you founded because you believe it will make your life better.
This kind of article bugs me. It's evolution in action. Think of it as speciation: H. sapiens for those that stay, H. cyberneticus for those that go down the rabbit hole. Either way, if you don't want to play - don't play! More world for you! Where's the problem here?<p>Of course, I'm also looking forward to my property values going up when all you coastal people find your houses a mile offshore, so maybe I'm just excessively phlegmatic to start with.
I'm trying to stay unaddicted and I have friends who are far better at me at it. I don't game, but like most people, I'm a FB, Quora, Reddit, HN checker and I've started to realize that I'm hitting a point of diminishing returns with all these articles, photos, memes. I still come back and love the thoughts this article and discussion have provoked, but these are few and far between.<p>It's a hard balance. It's fun to go Reddit/funny just to have a few laughs and it's fun to post links and songs to entertain friends in other states/countries, but at what point is this really good for me or satisfying? Wouldn't it be better to take all my mindshare and energy and go learn the skills that will get me a more satisfying job? Or do the things that would get me more time with women (affection/sex)? More time in nature? More friendships? Strengthen my body...etc. etc.<p>I'm still in love with physical reality. I'm always in awe of the world when I look at Boston.com's big picture or watch nature videos on Vimeo.<p>I don't really have a point, just that it saddens me quite a bit to think how much people are missing out the world. And this is in an old argument, but it's no wonder people don't care about the destruction of the species/habitat when they're so amused in some virtual world. It's hard not to cross my fingers for some massive power outage/food shortage temporary wake up call.
I've been thinking about this myself. I concluded that if a Matrix-like option was offered (not forced), where your body would be used as a power source but your mind would be in some distant, impossible fantasy world which you are able to make up yourself, many people would take that option instead of continuing to live their normal life.<p>I know that if I were offered something like that, a world where I could live out fantasies with no conditions, other than that I give up my body, I may very well take it.<p>The end of humanity as we know it, perhaps, indeed.
While I agree with most of the points the author makes, I can't see why he would concentrate on video games. It's not much harder to be addicted to the internet, or to anime or visual novels (see the Japanese hikkikomori), or to anything else that we can play/watch/do alone in the comfort of our own rooms. And these other addictions have much the same effect as those the author describes. In fact, I'd wager that most people who have played a game like Diablo 2 or World of Warcraft for a long time don't continue to do so because of the game itself, which has lost its immersive quality for a long time, but rather because of the friends they made, and the alternate society they are a part of. The greatest danger of MMORPGs is in my opinion that they are social games.
This reminds me a lot of this article: The Acceleration of Addictiveness (<a href="http://www.paulgraham.com/addiction.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.paulgraham.com/addiction.html</a>).<p>Same theme. It goes a little more into talking about societal implication; e.g. there'll be a divide in society as a result between the norm - "addiction" in some regards - and those who can/choose to stay unaddicted.
> If I could take a pill to skip meals or sleep in a healthy way, I would.<p>Multivitamins and melatonin?<p>The only real question I have is: will this super-entertainment world be better than this one outside of the entertainment-sphere? I don't really care if people waste their lives in WoW or equivalent, so long as I'm not forced to join them or support them living in that world. (I'd like to see the day when basic needs like food/shelter/water are next to free in costs so people <i>could</i> waste their lives without burdening anyone else, if they wanted to.)<p>Even if I could be convinced that joining them would make me feel so good about the decision afterwards, I'd resist in the same manner I resist buying/making meth today. I'm still fascinated by reality, and I want to continue to be the sort of person fascinated by reality, so I'll refuse your drug that would make me say the same things about your virtual reality.<p>Others here have noted that the prediction pattern-matches against lots of older ones, it certainly goes back throughout the ages. It would be amusing if Star Trek got it right in the end: a holodeck used as occasional recreation (and for other things) in the same way our t.v.s and games are used as occasional recreation, rather than something real that many people spend their lives in.
I assume the title is an oblique reference to Neil Postman's seminal book <i>Amusing Ourselves To Death</i>, in which the author argued that TV had created a Huxleyan culture in which it became impossible to carry on the kind of informed, rational public discourse that a functioning democracy requires.
It's interesting to go back and read previous generations attempts to look 40 years into the future and guess what the biggest problems will be. Generally you end up with "amusing" rather than "prescient", such that the exceptions are noteworthy.<p>While I fully anticipate that this sort of world will cause some sort of problems, I doubt we can really call them this far in advance.<p>I'd also observe that if one lives more or less their entire reality in some sort of VR simulation... <i>so what</i>? I can make arguments in both directions (at length, actually but I'll spare you) but it's too rich a question to implicitly assert an answer.
I sometimes reflect about this and one aspect that was not mentioned and I believe will have a lot of weight on how all this evolves is the maltusian limits of the real world vs the cornucopian and limitless aspect of the virtual.<p>Simple economics tell us that as population grows and natural resources are depleted, real physical goods and services will become scarce and costly especially compared to virtual ones which seem to be created with a shrinking amount of matter and energy.<p>The implication of this are interesting for the evolution of humanity.<p>Will reality become a luxury, where the common people will be able to afford nothing more than basic subsistence including low cost per calorie diet and a few cubic meters of real word dwelling? Will only the rich be able to afford the additional matter and energy to provide for further floor space, better food and physical travel?<p>The cost difference between virtual experiences and real world experiences might become so large that most people will prefer to get the better bang for the buck available virtually.<p>What are the implication for jobs, how will value be created and distributed when people spend most of their time in a virtual world? Here, I don't mean just entertainment goods that are only worth something in the context of a game. I mean things like education, artistic virtual experiences, virtual social events, virtual performances, movies, music, etc. The virtual economy will be greatly influenced by intellectual property laws and I assume, a lot of these goods will have to include DRM for sustaining jobs even if the goods are really cheap compared to real world goods.<p>What activities will give meaning to human life? Intellectual endeavors, artistic endeavors and socializing should remain low cost and may still offer a lot of depth and complexity to people's lives, especially as the tools to support these activities become better. In fact, if you evaluate your life by the breath of ideas, relationships and arts you are able to master, a life lived virtually might become more fulfilling than one encumbered by the limits of the real world.<p>How will serious social relationships evolve in virtual worlds? What are the implications for reproduction?<p>In a virtual world, it is going to be really easy to move away when not getting along with a community. It will also be really easy to create new communities for like minded individuals. People might not have to get along they might just isolate themselves in smaller communities. What are the implications for the way politics will be performed. What are the implication for law enforcement? What are the implications for war and how will all this spill over into the real world? The communities will still have to collaborate to maintain real world security and defense.<p>Then there is the issue of the physical body's health needs. Will the human body be able to adapt to this type of life?<p>Will resource scarcity push humanity to a virtual existence? When you look at people living in their parents' basement spending all their time online, sometimes because of the lack of economic opportunity in the real world, it sure makes it look like the transition has already begun.
Using technology as not only a getaway but as a replacement for the 'human OS' (if you will) has been slowly happening over the past 30 years, and will continue to happen as long as technology makes real life better.<p>Think about how you work today: you sit down in front of a screen. You sit there for 5, 8, 12 hours and stare at a screen to do your work. Millions of desk-workers everywhere have become people staring at screens for about 8 hours a day, playing with a handheld screen when not at a desk.<p>A large part of it is because technology is enabling and seen as a benefit, but that doesn't detract from the fact that it is an invasive effect in the lives of the first world. As technology gets better, becomes more enabling, and allows us to do more with it, I don't see that stopping.
This kind of stuff always reminds me of Nick Bostram and the "Simulation Argument" <a href="http://www.simulation-argument.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.simulation-argument.com</a>
This article reminds me of one of the Pendragon books:
<a href="http://djmachalebooks.com/books/pendragon/the-reality-bug/" rel="nofollow">http://djmachalebooks.com/books/pendragon/the-reality-bug/</a><p>In the book, the protagonist discovers a world in which people have abandoned reality in favor of a more enjoyable virtual world. As a result, society declines to the point where the real world is crumbling down.<p>Not saying that's what will happen, but it's an interesting read.
It's also known as superstimulus; relevant LW article: <a href="http://lesswrong.com/lw/h3/superstimuli_and_the_collapse_of_western/" rel="nofollow">http://lesswrong.com/lw/h3/superstimuli_and_the_collapse_of_...</a>
Obligatory reminder of the article I wrote 3 years ago and posted here, "Technology is Heroin" <a href="http://www.whattofix.com/blog/archives/2009/02/technology_is_h.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.whattofix.com/blog/archives/2009/02/technology_is...</a><p>Good to see people continuing to recognize this troubling fact and the community trying to come to terms with it.
There's even the theory that addiction to video games helps explain the Fermi paradox:<p><a href="http://www.edge.org/q2007/q07_print.html#miller" rel="nofollow">http://www.edge.org/q2007/q07_print.html#miller</a><p>Previous discussion: <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1550112" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1550112</a>
As if writing verbose rants (mirroring equivalent rants about movies, radio, books, plays, etc. throughout human history) is somehow a superior activity.<p><i>the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.</i><p>- Ratatouille
Hopefully capitalism and women will prevent a disaster by rewarding productive and diciplined humans with wealth and children.<p>If a society does not threaten its people with poverty, misery and slavery as a consiquence to wasting your life on video games, then that society will crumble to make way for one that does.
Quite frankly, ordinary life is not that different from WoW. You go on quests, you level-up your character through education and courses, and then you earn points (money) that you can spend on shiny things like cars.<p>Seriously.