Jump to content
tkdguy

Futuristic Sports & Entertainment

Recommended Posts

Well, "interactive holograms" is not the same thing as "a holodeck". If you're playing 3D Asteroids on a one cubic meter display that can only generate white line wireframes, you've still got an "interactive hologram" and you're still using it for entertainment. All I'm saying is:

1) Video games exist and a popular form of entertainent

2) Video games have been created for every form of display tech

and from these facts we can predict that:

3) Video games will be created for whatever future display technologies that come along.

 

The same thing goes for input devices, obviously. When motion controls were invented, we saw a wide range of games created to explore the possibility spaces they opened up. If someone invents a volumetric projection system that can sense when you touch the projected elements, people will create games that explore THAT interface as well. Asking "will interactive holograms be a form of future entertainment" is essentially asking "will people keep making video games".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm holding on to the hopes of virtual reality LARPing for cash and prizes, ala Dream Park.

 

The original LARPers play through the adventure. Then that adventure's recordings are cleaned up and sold as movies and the adventure itself is packaged for home computers so that you can take the role of one of the adventurers and play with the others from the original cast. The GM's, players, and various technicians share the profits.

 

In the Dream Park world, such adventuring is big business with a place like Dream Park outdrawing Disney World. And watching LARPing feeds or VR adventuring at home is ubiquitous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the most shown future sports in the Schlock Mercenary Comics has actually been parkour. The "Parkata Urbatsu" variant.  Particular in low gravity environments or with low level flight suits/power armors. The "Malcop command" part of Book 11 introduced it:
https://www.schlockmercenary.com/2009-12-29

Particular in the backdrop of the station this took place on:
https://www.schlockmercenary.com/2010-01-03
The station was centuries old and "one of the last spin gravity habitats in existence."


Just do not put any fragile aliens into the path:
https://www.schlockmercenary.com/2013-01-01
Meanwhile Schlock (a very resilient alien) became a natural master in it. Not having to worry about breaking bones and crushing organs certainly helped. Meing a amorph only made it better.

 

They later applied that in a earth megacity with the following results:
- It does still count as reckless endangerment to do it. One reason nobody does in most places
- it works well enough with walkways and the like
- It does not work in traffic. 800 years of autonomous driving and colission prevention measures make you unable to "kick the broad side of a bus": https://www.schlockmercenary.com/2014-10-07

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2018 at 3:31 AM, Zeropoint said:

The same thing goes for input devices, obviously. When motion controls were invented, we saw a wide range of games created to explore the possibility spaces they opened up. If someone invents a volumetric projection system that can sense when you touch the projected elements, people will create games that explore THAT interface as well. Asking "will interactive holograms be a form of future entertainment" is essentially asking "will people keep making video games". 

Something I find worth noting regarding input, that the Keyboard has thus far resisted any attempts to be replaced as the default Input method. And I am confident that will continue until we got a working neural interface.

 

There have been numerous attempts to have a new input methods that replace Keyboards as the mainstay:
- the Mouse
- Gaming Console Controlers

- voice control
- touchscreens
- motion controls
- VR

 

But in every single case the result was one of these things:

- it stayed a niche thing
- the Input was keyboardified. More Keys were added. Particular noticeable with modern gaming mouses and controlers.

- a software keyboard on the OS Level was added. Particular in touchscreens and consoles, but Windows got one too as part of it's "disabiltiy support"

- the platform provider relented and just outright started supporting Keyboards. It actually can be hard to differentiate between a thin laptop and a tablet with Keyboard in a shared casing.

 

The only thing that stayed was the keyboard. Wich itself was ported over 1:1 from typewriters. The Caps and Capslock keys are still in the place where they needed to be on the typewriter for historical and/or mechanical reasons. So the keyboard has survived challenged but undefeated since about 1874. We expanded it by a few new keys (Control, Alt, Tab; Media Keys). But nothing major changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2018 at 9:23 PM, Christopher said:

Something I find worth noting regarding input, that the Keyboard has thus far resisted any attempts to be replaced as the default Input method. And I am confident that will continue until we got a working neural interface.

 

You're not wrong, although I'd say that the mouse is a lot more than a niche item. Mouse and keyboard together, though . . . that's an incredibly powerful and versatile setup that can control just about anything adequately and a surprising variety of things well.

 

Regarding my quoted statement about motion controls, it's worth noting that while developers were eager to explore motion controls, most of what was tried kind of sucked, and outside of VR, the idea has mostly been quietly dropped. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the same thing happen to interactive holograms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2017 at 2:45 AM, tkdguy said:

 

Electric violin is another option.

 

 

Long ago, Einstein (disguised as Robin Hood) was famous for playing electric violin on Desolation Row. Then something went wrong and he was reduced to sniffing drainpipes while reciting the alphabet.

 

I can imagine film studios of the future building "dream cast" movies where any actor who was ever recorded on film, video or audio can be cast in any role in a film. Which would make life hard, if not impossible, for actual actors -- if they can get reliable virtual casts, why use unreliable human beings?

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is NO field of human employment which is safe from being automated out of existence. We have little time remaining to make sure that "robots doing all our work for us" is a GOOD thing for society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/21/2018 at 6:48 PM, Michael Hopcroft said:

I can imagine film studios of the future building "dream cast" movies where any actor who was ever recorded on film, video or audio can be cast in any role in a film. Which would make life hard, if not impossible, for actual actors -- if they can get reliable virtual casts, why use unreliable human beings?

 

 There was a famous case, arising from Back To The Future II. This is from an October of 2015 article from The Hollywood Reporter:

Quote

The 1990 lawsuit that Glover filed against Universal Pictures for violating his right of publicity predated other famous cases including Vanna White's lawsuit over a Wheel of Fortune robot hostess in a blond wig and Gwen Stefani's legal action over a digital avatar in the Band Hero video game....


...In recent years, Glover has taken credit for changing Screen Actors Guild rules on the illicit use of actors. Kari believes that's accurate, though a spokesperson for SAG-AFTRA says the guild can't identify changes to its agreements. Nevertheless, the Glover case did raise quite a bit of consciousness throughout Hollywood about the possibilities and risks of reusing an actor's performance and has become quite excellent shorthand for the types of publicity rights disputes inherent in new technologies. It's quite amazing that the Chicago Cubs are making a World Series run this year, but nobody should forget the unintentionally visionary nature of the George McFly character in the film.

 

The situation now, is that to use an Actor's likeness you need to clear it with the estate, or the actor themselves, especially if they are represented by the Screen Actors Guild.  The fact that they used Peter Cushing's likeness in "Rogue One", was because the BAFTA rules are different from SAG. Also the Peter Cushing performance in the movie was performed by an actor that wore the costume, and moved through the scene, and did an impression of his voice.  His performance was used as refer3ence for the CG crew place their model in the scene. Having watched a play through of Assassin's Creed, It's going to be a long time, before Actor's aren't necessary. it's just going to be hard to become a "star", if your face is never shown, because of extensive CG, and possible voice replacement as well. We also still have a few years before we defeat the uncanny valley. the audience reaction to the Cushing character model seems to be split 50/50 with some creeped out, and the others okay with it. Eventually we will gdt to "Cortana" level AI controlled characters, but it's going to be a long way off.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

Having watched a play through of Assassin's Creed, It's going to be a long time, before Actor's aren't necessary. it's just going to be hard to become a "star", if your face is never shown, because of extensive CG, and possible voice replacement as well.

Didn't Andy Serkis win a price for his Gollum Performance?

And didn't he even made a life appereance as Gollum on a screen during that ceremony?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Christopher said:

Didn't Andy Serkis win a price for his Gollum Performance?

And didn't he even made a life appereance as Gollum on a screen during that ceremony?

I did not know that, but then I stopped watching the Oscars about 2007 when they didn't really cover movies I liked any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spoke with one of my students (an aspiring art student), who believes that art will become more digital in nature, as traditional methods of creating art are becoming obsolete*. And most galleries will be online rather than in museums.

 

*Edit: My sister disagrees with that sentiment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...