DMCT Week 4

It seems as though human kind has always tried to craft new, virtual worlds. From the cave paintings in Lascaux, France to the hyper-realism of Chuck Close, art represents ways through which humans can craft alternate realities and attempt to immerse themselves within them. Since the rise of digital media, virtual realities (VR) present opportunities not only for immersion, but also for interactivity. However, the ideal of full interactivity still presents a variety of problems that I wish to briefly discuss here.

Ryan (1994) offers definitions of immersion and interactivity. In analyzing VR as a semiotic phenomenon, Ryan (1994) argues that Steuer's notion of "telepresence" offers us a way to look at the interactions between immersion and interactivity. However, in order to truly become immersive the computer itself must become transparent so the user can fully present in the mediated environment. This transparency is problematic for interactivity.

To be fully interactive would mean that the user could enter the code and reprogram how the system of the virtual reality functions. Ryan (1994) discusses a virtual golf game and says 'if the user ... hits a golf ball he wants it to land on the ground, and not to turn into a bird and disappear in the sky" (26). However, in a fully interactive game, the user could turn the golf ball into a bird or even a dinosaur. Full interactivity is in some ways the opposite of the Platonic cave. Plato talks about those chained to the wall, escaping and moving to the world outside the cave. A fully interactive game would have the user move from outside the cave to inside and manipulate the shadows on the wall. The user would become the force creating the shadows on the wall, while also totally immersed in what was being created.

So full interactivity presents an opportunity to become completely in control of the VR process. It also presents problems because to be in control of the VR, means that one cannot be totally immersed in the process. It also means that a serious knowledge of computers is required for the manipulation of the code. If the interface becomes invisible, only those who have a superior knowledge of how computers function could continue to manipulate it while those who have now knowledge would continue to be manipulated by the VR spectacle. The power relations between video game producer and high knowledge user would change, but those without specialized knowledge could not use the full interactivity. Instead they would become fully immersed in the VR spectacle without any authorial controls. They would continue to be manipulated without recognition of said manipulation. Knowledge (of computer processing) would become power.

The concept of a video game that is fully interactive has yet to come to fruition. However, if one were designed and the user were able to fully manipulate the code and structures of the game, the concept of fully interactivity may be presented and used. However, full interactivity does not just mean that the game is successful. Instead, it presents a whole new set of power relations that still derive from the commodity spectacle of the video game itself.