After I saw Avatar in 3D I thought to myself, "Wow! The visuals were spectacular!" I saw Avatar in
2D on Blu-Ray and left the room saying to myself, "Wow! The visuals
were spectacular!" Moving from 3D to 2D, the movie was no less pleasing
to the eye. The measure of 3D's worth is when a movie is re-experienced
without the technology and unless the differences are so remarkable 3D
becomes a necessity, its just a toy filmmakers like to show and tell.
After the presentation, the class leaves noting its appeal, but are more
entertained by the pet rabbit. The audience will always be an observer
of movies, no matter how close they feel to the action. 3D is more
suitable for video games--by manipulating depth perception, the
interactivity with games can increase, nearly combining reality and the
fiction on screen.
The history of video games can be described as a long attempt to push
the player into the screen, lessen the distance between the gamer and
the world they interact with. The player is miles apart from Space
Invaders. There's the console and controller, buttons that control the
action, and then there's what's on the screen: tiny sprites that
represent a spaceship and aliens. But gamers have seen Apollo 13 and
it's not the same as what's on the screen. There the disconnect between
gamer and the world they play with.
But games get more detailed--a greater reflection of the world we live
in. Unlike its counterparts like Mario and Sonic, Mortal Kombat removed
the cartoon graphics and actually formed characters and settings that
looked real, using digitzed footage and stop motion, from the movement
of the characters to the joyful expression on Kano's face after breaking
Sonya Blade's back. I think Congress had a reason to be concerned about
the game's violence during the early 90s, considering the certain
realism brought to the characters. But we're so far along with video
games, the graphics of the original Mortal Kombat may not resonate with
gamers as it did back then.
In this generation, we're not looking at abysmal live action movies
like in the original Resident Evil, but environments are realistic in
the sense the design is detail and the physics are remarkably like our
own. Gamers may not relate to the polygon, blocked shapes of Final
Fantasy 7 anymore--in my senior in high school a friend play the game
for the first time and hated the graphics--but Lightning in Final
Fantasy 13 or Nathan Drake in Uncharted are more pleasing to look at,
mostly because they are designed and move like actual people.
Content on the screen is fixed; the gamer has a visual treat. Actual
interactivity with games is the next step. So developers go from wired
controllers to wireless controllers. Gamers can move throughout their
room, get into comfortable positions, pass controllers to friends
without tangling wires, they can get as close or as far away from the
screen as they want. Nintendo takes advantage of this free motion with
the Wii Mote.
There are still buttons, you even have the option to use a controller,
but the joy of the Wii is in actually whacking a tennis ball with your
hand, or rolling a bowling ball across a lane. With Project Natal, your
body is the controller. And that's a mechanical description for a very
human and organic existence. With Microsoft's controller-free
peripheral, we ourselves become technology.
With 3D, images pop out of the screen and characters interact with you.
Manipulating depth perception creates the idea that gamers are actually
in the world, reinforced by the movement of your body and your voice.
Is this simulated reality? The 3D technology we might see at E3 may be
rudimentary--we're still looking at objects from a screen--but if this
is the trend of gaming, if controllers are put down and the body is the
key component to a game, integrating 3D and motion control can lead to
something in the next one or two generations.
Of course, these obvious and plain thoughts come from observation and
imagination--nothing I have said, if it is not already red and large on
the screen for the reader to see, comes from an expert of technology.
But the imagination can run wild, as the saying goes: years ago we were
limited by technology, now our only limit is what we can imagine.
The question is whether or not you feel comfortable with being a part
of a game's world--stepping out of one reality and into another. At the
moment, less than 10 percent
of gamers plan to buy Microsoft's Natal or Sony's Move. Interests may
change after E3 this week as more information will be presented.
Nevertheless, integrating 3D and motion control almost feels that the
mechanical and the flesh have combined, like planting a microchip in the
brain.
It is very Ghost in the Shell; very reminiscent of the .hack series,
where you log in to a game and may never log out. It will be
fascinating to see where 3D technology and motion control leads to. As
obsolence settles in, computer scientists may build upon these projects.
What new issues could come from these two pieces of technology? What
role can simulated reality play in equality, politics, the economy, and
education?
No comments:
Post a Comment