Interfax China is reporting that by year's end "Anti-Japan War Online," an MMORPG developed by PowerNet Technology in cooperation with the China Communist Youth League, will begin commercial operation...
Side-stepping the charged politics of this for a moment, I wonder. How closely can virtual worlds mimick the real one before it unsettles? Yet another uncanny valley, of a cultural sort?
I don’t think it’s a case of closeness in a broad sense. The question comes down to specific aspects of given game play elements. Let’s look at games generally, the examples are easily applicable to MMOs, but let’s keep it simple for now.
Tetris is fairly abstract, it mimics the world to the degree that it follows geometry and things drop as if released and as if acting under gravity. But it’s not an accurate representation of life.
However change the images to photo-realistic representations of bodies being put into a mass grave – that would be unsettling.
Similarly take my old example of a white dot moving round a screen turning green dots to red, the game being that you must change as many as you can in 60s. It’s just pixels, against black. There is nothing else on the screen.
Then keep the artefact -exactly- as it is, but change the narrative to say that what you are doing, what is symbolised, is a game of rape against the clock - again, unsettling.
So I don’t think it’s easy to separate out the closeness of an MMO in general, its society and politics for example, from particular game elements and their visual or symbolic abilities to disturb.
Though I think that there is an interesting case in point: http://www.atari.com/us/games/tycoon_city/pc >Tycoon City: New York being developed by Deep Red. Tycoon City simulates NYC. Yada yada we’ve seen that a gazillion times - right? Wrong. This simulates the city and 100,000 individuals. Every single darn one of them. You can click on one and find out about them, watch them live. I guess it is kind of uncanny. But as with all games that fetishise detail there is a vast amount that is left out. Do they tap into the NCY economy – no (yes they could, I asked), do they link to the crime figures – no, do the simu-citizens kill and rape just like good-ol-NY, nope. Would we want them too – hmmm.
Posted by: ren reynolds | Aug 25, 2005 at 13:49
Reading the article actually makes the politics somewhat less charged than it first appears.
The name sounds odd to Western ears (and of course there's the political context of the current Sino-Japanese tensions) but this actually sounds like a hybrid of America's Army and an RTS.
Posted by: Scott Jennings | Aug 25, 2005 at 13:54
before anyone cries foul -- luv the "down with biz in the ebil empire of china" advocates, but all business is regulated in every country -- note that this is a pretty clear example of advergaming... or "propagaming?" however, the u.s. is no different.
America's Army, anyone? players go through a simulation of boot camp before they can kill. they're constantly fed "uncle sam wants you" propaganda throughout the game. in combat, players can only play as u.s. soldiers, and kill only non-u.s. player models.
the game has a ranking system, but has an additional layer of tying flesh to digital: there are a set of ranks to identify real-world u.s. military personnel. so one would have their in-game rank, as well as their real-world rank.
the effect is essentially no different than this communist youth developed game.
as for the last question, i think the main appeal of virtual worlds, and other forms of mass entertainment, is that they're Not like the real world. ultimately, i believe escapism will win. sure, Anti-Japan Online is a form of escapism, but there will be a point where reality and virtuality will coincide -- something impossible with games like WoW or MU (except social meating).
people with anti-Japan agendas will do something about it in real life. they'll stop playing the game. people without those agendas won't play the game at all. people with anti-Orc agendas can't do something about it in real life. they'll keep playing the game. ^_^
Posted by: hikaru | Aug 25, 2005 at 13:57
charged politics...
Sino-Japanese tensions
It may be difficulty to portray the historical facts of that period in a way that would be seen as neutral (e.g. given all the controversy surrounding textbooks). Maybe that won't be important, ala "its a game." Or maybe it will. I suspect the answer will be decided outside of this game world and its players.
Posted by: nate combs | Aug 25, 2005 at 15:40
luv the "down with biz in the ebil empire of china" advocates, but all business is regulated in every country
So, according to this logic, China being, for six years running, the number one imprisoner of journalists is not a problem, because all journalists are regulated in every country...
Posted by: galiel | Aug 25, 2005 at 16:57
Good comments on the actual political aspects above so I wont go into that, cause God only knows how far we could analyze it. To answer the actual question "how close?", I think of an aspect that currently (meaning within the next decade of games/vworlds) is unable to be simulated - pain.
So lets assume a vworld has reached the precipace of its "uncanny valley".
A photorealistic world where interactions were as real as possible seems like something we are all striving for (we as in the industry), but in order to properly simulate reality, there must be a check on limitless freedom. IMHO, the most effective check would be pain. A perfectly simulated world would allow for a Matrix type leaping from buildings, but without the fear of pain/dying. Its this lack of fear that would tether the world to the still "sympathetic/likable" portion of Masahiro Mori's graph. Because who wouldn't enjoy a world where you could do all the extreme sports you ever dreamt of without risk. (though some might argue the risk IS the fun)
The only flaw to this (yes, picking apart my own thoughts) would be the ability to harm others or ones self and the reality of the portrayal of that harm. (i.e. bloody mess splattered on the ground after aformentioned Matrix leap who then walks away, still bloody)
If the world allowed for all physical interactions to result in realistic consequences, then that could very well lead to the world itself taking a leap down into the "uncanny valley", becuase who wants to go into a virtual world and see the grisly results of murder, assault, rape, etc.? And believe me, in a perfectly simulated photorealistic world with limitless freedom, people would do all of the above.
To quote from the OP's links:
"...if the entity is 'almost human', then the non-human characteristics will be the ones that stand out, leading to a feeling of 'strangeness' in the human viewer."
In the same way, if the vworld is almost real, but we have no consequences/pain to counteract the evil side of humanity, then we will be repused by how close the depravaty of the vworld is to our own.
Posted by: Jonas P | Aug 25, 2005 at 18:34
galiel: So, according to this logic, China being, for six years running, the number one imprisoner of journalists is not a problem, because all journalists are regulated in every country...
yes, no problem at all. there are laws in place in every country covering game biz and journalism. in the u.s., we jail people for breaking press laws, just like china.
the reality is, if you're going to play in any pool, read the sign first. don't start crying if you piss in the pool and get thrown out with your trunks around your ankles...
this goes for any country, but if you want to do business in china, you play by china's rules. don't walk into china and expect china to suddenly change their policy to mirror your political biases.
this is a business issue, not a political one. we're not here to argue the evils of communism or democracy.
Posted by: hikaru | Aug 26, 2005 at 17:23
Aside from other Chinese considerations into Internet censorship, game banning, MMO limitation, etc. this particular product sounds generally like any number of Western games that simulate historical campaigns - Rome: Total War, Sid Meier's Gettysburg, etc.
The most troubling aspect may be its connection with the China Communist Youth League. Not sure what that's all about but one assumes a propagandist view. Of course, Japan is almost universally seen as the aggressor in that particular conflict...
Posted by: Dennis McCauley | Aug 27, 2005 at 13:22
Dennis>
(A) this particular product sounds generally like any number of Western games that simulate historical campaigns
...
(B) assumes a propagandist view. Of course, (C) Japan is almost universally seen as the aggressor in that particular conflict
Great points (A-C). Then (B) is the crux of the issue. As pointed out earlier, however, (B) in itself is not an issue/unique (America's Army), unless, I suspect, it is somehow inciteful of other tensions.
Jonas>
A photorealistic world where interactions were as real as possible seems like something we are all striving for (we as in the industry), but in order to properly simulate reality, there must be a check on limitless freedom. IMHO, the most effective check would be pain. A perfectly simulated world would allow for a Matrix type leaping from buildings, but without the fear of pain/dying. Its this lack of fear that would tether the world to the still "sympathetic/likable" portion of Masahiro Mori's graph. Because who wouldn't enjoy a world where you could do all the extreme sports you ever dreamt of without risk. (though some might argue the risk IS the fun)
This harkens back to discussions about whether the current industry / game-design bias towards using time (loss) as a common denominator means of inflicting penalty can provide a sufficiently rich means for building realistic interactions in worlds.
While I'm not sure people would sign up (or if anyone would want them to sign up!) to play in a world where they can suffer serious (real) bodily harm - nonetheless, I wonder if there are other penalty schemes that are at once balanced within the world and yet more enabling of realism.
Posted by: nate combs | Aug 28, 2005 at 12:00
A VW doesn't fit into the "uncanny valley" scenario because it can never become more than virtual; it would have to overlap in the physical world in some way. The human-like robot is unsettling because it is a box of parts simulating a human and acting on the real world. A VW is an simulation of a world limited to the inside of a box of parts.
Also, the player's involvement in the VW is being simulated, where the person's relationship with a robot is not being simulated. You could say that they are inverses of each other. A VW is a human pretending to be in a virtual world, and a robot is a virtual person pretending to exist in the actual world.
I'd say that a VW would only become unsettling when the experience of something the player consideres horrible or morally wrong becomes convincing. Technology is a limiting factor as well. VW's probably won't be unsettling as long as they run on PC's, and I certainly don't look over my shoulder to see if my Roomba is stalking me.
Posted by: Jim Self | Sep 08, 2005 at 19:21