3D media in 3D worlds

There was a watershed moment in the history of Western pop culture in 1985. That year, Dire Straits released a music video ("Money For Nothing") that was partially made with 3D, computer-generated imagery. There was a big buzz around this; I remember friends remarking about the "high-tech" appearance of the 3D characters, even though the animation looks primitive now.

Fast-forward 10 years. Toy Story became the first Hollywood film to be made entirely in 3D. The animation was far more sophisticated than the Dire Straits video, but there was still buzz about the fact that Toy Story was made using 3D animation. In the August 31, 1995, issue of The Guardian, Bob Swain called Toy Story "the first totally new movie experience of the digital age."

Now 3D animation is a staple of television and film. The inset image is a photograph my daughter took of one her favorite DVD programs, an episode of a Korean TV series dubbed into Mandarin called Pororo, the Little Penguin. She doesn't know how it was made. Nor does she make any distinction with other favorites produced using traditional animation, such as Bambi, or live-action television, such as Barney. She simply likes what she sees.

I mention these examples to illustrate the shift in popular views of 3D animation. This technology was once remarkable. It is now so common that it is taken for granted. Hollywood movies, kids' programming on television, and even advertisements are the most conspicuous examples, but these may soon be joined by a crop of next-generation 3D media formats that are being developed by academic labs, hobbyists, and a few adventurous media companies.  Examples include Video Mods, NewsAtSeven, and Machinima. I recently wrote an essay about these and other emerging media technologies, "Meeting the Second Wave: How Technology, Demographics, and Usage Trends Will Drive the Next Generation of Media Evolution," but what I am interested in discussing with the Terra Nova community is how these formats, programs, and characters might be integrated with virtual world experiences.

We know that people make friends, form teams, and respond to pitches for products and services within virtual worlds, paralleling experiences in the real world. Is it reasonable to assume that other real-world communications habits -- such as listening to, watching, or interacting with mass media -- will be transferred to virtual spaces in the years to come? If so, what 3D formats will be able to gain traction, and how will the personalization options and creative freedoms available in virtual worlds lead to new formats and usage patterns? In Second Life, there have been some very creative marketing experiments using interactive 3D buildings and objects. But why don't we see Pororo, Buzz Lightyear, the cast of Red vs. Blue, and other 3D "stars" in Second Life or other virtual worlds?

Comments

[Ren Reynolds]

1.

I’m not quite sure what you are asking here. You say:

Ian > Is it reasonable to assume that other real-world communications habits -- such as listening to, watching, or interacting with mass media -- will be transferred to virtual spaces in the years to come?

But this happens all the time right now. In fact it’s designed into some spaces. If you take Gaia as an example, one section of the virtual space (in so much as Gaia is a virtual space) is devoted to watching movies together. If you go to one of the Theatre spaces in Habbo then you will see a space with a stage, but one where Habbos can put on performances for each other.

I think it was Michael Wilson of Makena Technologies (There.com) who said at Virtual Worlds 2007, that all you need to know about social worlds of the future is Mystery Science Theatre 3000.

So is the question whether know ‘stars’ will emerge from this format? If so I guess an interesting aspect of this is the nature of avatars, in that – do the virtual communities see them as people, we would get well known personalities; or as characters? Maybe the reason we have not seen something like Buzz Lightyear emerge from a virtual world is because of this, that avatars might be performative but they are not widely received and ‘read’ as characters.

[FritzMeaning]

2.

I think its simply a matter of awareness. The internet and particularly authors/audience of TN, are part of a extremely small solipsistic inner world - and therefore the missing larger cultural insertion is really because no one cares enough.

One pet peeve though: can we please NOT link to Machinima.com for an example of "what is machinima?" That site is the poster example of what's wrong with the internet, their definition is extremely backdated and most importantly, it's down at the moment. Please link to the Wikipedia">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machinima">Wikipedia entry instead. Thanks.

[Mikyo]

3.

But why don't we see Pororo, Buzz Lightyear, the cast of Red vs. Blue, and other 3D "stars" in Second Life or other virtual worlds?

Possibly because it's so overcrowded with Captain Kirks, Darth Vaders and Aragorns?

[Ian Lamont]

4.

Ren said:

If so I guess an interesting aspect of this is the nature of avatars, in that – do the virtual communities see them as people, we would get well known personalities; or as characters? Maybe the reason we have not seen something like Buzz Lightyear emerge from a virtual world is because of this, that avatars might be performative but they are not widely received and ‘read’ as characters.

Good points. I'll try to address/expand upon some of the issues that you bring up. Virtual worlds are filled with avatars who reflect the appearances and personalities of their creators' imaginations. Acting and role play dictates their behavior. If someone were to create a Mickey Mouse avatar and "play" his personality in a virtual world, would that be much different than someone creating a scrappy "Ricky Mouse" avatar and creating a set of unique role-play behaviors that guide his behavior? To many people who have been exposed to Mickey, it would no doubt seem unusual to experience Mickey in a virtual world -- this "character" is usually seen in a performative, non-interactive context in the real world. Would they be able to get past this double-take moment, and accept Mickey as they would role-playing Ricky? How would this compare to the acceptance of someone who has never seen Mickey or Ricky?

As for the issue of why we haven't seen a Buzz Lightyear character emerge from a virtual world, I would guess that it's only a matter of time. We see lots of characters jumping from one media format to another (e.g., Superman) and there have been a few cases of characters from 3D video games crossing over to non-interactive media -- such as Lara Croft being the subject of a movie, and even the star of the first Doom game appearing in a book (he apparently has a name: "Fly" Taggart. Who knew?).

[csven]

5.

The issue you raise regarding something like Ricky/Mickey can probably go a bit further. I've been wondering about multiplicity of such characters; multiple Santa Clauses and hordes of Flying Elvii and the like (some of that spurred by an exchange on my blog regarding the show "Lost" and whether the characters might not, in fact, be avatars in an ongoing MMORPG... only the people behind the characters are hired for the duration of a plane trip; their "payment" for virtual services rendered being the flight ticket... and the rotation similar to what happens with multiple users gold pharming from one account).

As for an a virtual world avatar jumping over to another media (or even into real life), give it time.

[Mikyo]

6.

Didn't the characters in the Resident Evil movie come from a video game? And how about Riddick, the character from 'Pitch Black?" Which came first, the movie or the game?