For example, I sense some antipathy about
simulating reality. I gather that there is some
angst that VR will somehow become "another" form
of advertising or "another" way of reinforcing
dearly-held paradigms upon the masses.
Actually, I think that the great future of
VR is in its ability to simulate, with a high
degree of accuracy, reality. This will allow
people to engage in social and technological
"gedanken experiments" for real world concepts
without the high cost and risk associated
with normal DDT&E.
I don't think there is anything wrong trying
to simulate a mode of transportation, as I wrote
earlier, as long as one is aware that the
objective is to simulate a mode of transportation.
So if the purpose of the "experiment" is to
try to understand how people might walk through a
specific architecture, what better way to get
some results cheaply than setting up a VR world to
get people to "walk" through that architecture?
Fundamentally this could provide designers with
a new way to improve productivity. For example,
it would be possible for an architect to provide
potential customers with a "walk-through" of a house
that isn't built yet. They could then provide
that architect with suggestions for what they might
like to change. All prior to pouring the concrete.
People interested in the creative possibilities
of VR should do everything they can to assure a
healthy VR industry -- even if, at first, it seems
to reinforce traditional patterns of behavior.
Once the industry is well-established as something
that can make money (gasp!), then nothing will
prevent its evolution into new (even potentially disruptive)
forms.
historian@mcimail.com
The Opinions presented here are those of the author only,
and do not reflect the opinions of his employer, or
any one else for that matter.