Still, it isn’t just the legacy of any game like this which draws and keeps an audience. It’s “immersivity”, that thing where you steep yourself in something not just once but time and again. I may have my qualms about the value of immersivity over other things, but I can’t deny its massive importance. Especially if you’re creating something you want other people to share.

What is it about a world that makes it immersive? The easy answer is details. But wait: before I get into that, isn’t it redundant to say “an immersive world”? Isn’t all world-building immersive, ipso facto?

I suspect confirmation bias is at work here. We believe world-building to be inherently immersive if only because we remember the immersive world-building best and let the rest of it slide out of mind.

I was recently reading reviews for another entry in the recent glut of young-adult dystopian romances that seem to have become all the rage lately (not to say they’re bad, just that there’s so many of them right now). The more critical reviews hammered on the book for having thin worldbuilding—in other words, there were some gestures in that direction, with some things being banned and so forth, but not much beyond that. There were some details that provided some immersivity, but not on the order of a David Belasco. Not enough there there.

A digression. The automatic shorthand for a dystopia these days seems to be “a world where things we take for granted are banned”, which is cringe-inducing for two reasons. One, it’s a narrow view of what dystopia is about: many dystopias are at least as much about what is not only permitted but mandatory, and not all that is mandatory in dystopia is uncomfortable. (The best way to keep people in a prison is to make it not only comfortable but appealing.) Two, the implications of such a simplified view of dystopian fiction are somewhat insulting: do authors (or editors and publishers) feel younger readers aren’t able to follow or comprehend the politics of a “real” dystopian novel any more? Then again, maybe with these stories it’s just a question of being just immersive enough, because the real value of the work isn’t in its dystopian ambitions but in how well it can use a veneer of such things to give spice to a romance between young lovers.

The opposite of this is the kind of kitchen-sink immersivity that one most often finds in fantasy novel cycles like George R. R. Martin’s Westeros books, or Robert Jordan’s Wheel of Time saga. Everything from a morning meal to the hem of a dress is given lavish screen time on the page, and it’s hard to argue with this approach when it seems to be at least partly responsible for the success of those books. One of the things fans of Martin and Jordan cite most is how all that detail makes you feel like you could step into the worlds they describe, etc. For people who are looking for escape of one kind or another, an ocean of pleasantly alien detail comes as a welcome balm.

But is the most total detail the best kind of detail? I don’t think so. I’d argue that it’s specific, well-chosen detail that matters as much as, if not more so, than a constant wall-to-wall carpeting of elements. We appreciate the full body of details that have added up to create the Star Trek or Star Wars universes, if only because there are so many of them added up over such a long period of time and from so many pieces of work. That said, take any one of those pieces of work—especially the founding pieces: the original Trek series, the 1977 Star Wars—and look at them close-up. They’re redolent with details, but always specific and well-chosen ones that move their respective stories forward. We don’t need to know everything about how warp drive or lightsabers work; we just need to know that they do, and any details about how can wait until the story absolutely demands them.

What makes a story truly immersive isn’t just that the details are there, but that they make you want to know more. People go back to a favorite movie or book to look for all the things they missed the first time. Sometimes those things are as much projections of the reader as they are the work of the creator, but the presence of that magnetism is unmistakable.

Tamara: It’s the question of what I would be doing instead.  My passions are writing and drawing and programming – all things that, at times, make me feel terribly inadequate and cause me to utter profanity at my uncooperative computer.  If I quit, I would have a lot more free time to spend on my hobbies… which are writing and drawing and programming.  I can’t imagine giving those up forever.

Ellen: Mostly, the statistic that the only people who are “failed” writers, artists, etc, are the folks who stopped working toward their goals. The key is to outlast doubt.

Ewen: Any number of things. Sometimes the fear of mortality or bankruptcy gets me back in line, while other times it’s not wanting to disappoint people (which can include myself).

Steve: That I can make a difference.  If I quit, I fail for sure.

Scott: Depends on the seriousness of the project.  Sometimes, stepping away for a breather is all it takes.  Get my thoughts on something else, let the back of my mind mull over the issue.  Tends to work, especially if there’s time to relax and/or sleep involved.  Returning to the project, I’ll be able to approach it in a new direction.  For life in general, sometimes it’s sheer stubbornness, placing one metaphorical foot in front of the other.  And, when things were bleakest, knowing I had two adorable cats depending on me to return home kept me going past my breaking point.

Serdar: Hubert Selby, Jr. once said, “I started writing because I did not want to die having done nothing with my life.” A case of tuberculosis at the age of 19 destroyed his health; he spent his entire adult life with maybe a fifth of the lung capacity of a normal human being. He nevertheless went on  to hold down various jobs, father children in two marriages, and survive everything from drug addictions to jail time to become one of the century’s finest writers.

I read that and I think: What’s stopping me?

When did you first realize your hardcore geekdom was a possible career?  Me, I think I was about 7 or 8.

I was into science and medicine and such, and already figured that’d be my job.  I got some encouragement from my family, and even more later on in my life.  It probably helped that only a few people even knew what the hell I was talking about, but at least no one tried to derail me.

And, decades later, it worked out pretty good.

So if you want to promote the professional geek ideal start helping out young people.  They’ve got enough challenges to face right now with a failing economy, bad school systems, poor . . . er, wait, I’m depressing myself.

Let’s focus on the positive.  If you’ve got a way with the younger generation, from experience with your own children to recently having been the younger generation, start helping them out.  Bring them into the progeeky fold.

Here’s ways where you can start helping progeeky kids with an early step up:

• If you do the con scene, do events for young creative, geeky, technical people.  Crafty things, fun events, what have you.
• Teach, work with, or other wise help at youth events and clubs.
• Encourage your local schools to start after-school classes or events on careers that you (and your friends) can speak and advise on.
• If you have kids of your own, younger siblings, or friends with kids, always be supportive of them career-wise.  Even if you don’t have children, the kids and their parents may give you ideas of how you can do more.
• If you write, then consider books for a younger set on career issues.

Think of what you can do to educate, help, and support.  For that matter, think how many parents may be thrilled that their children are getting some career ideas early that they also enjoy.  That helps a lot when they look at the cost of college.

Come to think of it the parents are someone you should keep in mind, and that’s for next column . . .

- Steven Savage

I’m feeling Krugman is actually too negative on how this could play out (it’s summarized at the article), but it’s still going to end badly for someone(s).  The real question is how the pain is spread out and which politicians want to watch things go to hell on their watch.  In short, I can see things being drawn out in the hope of a soft landing that pushes these possible scenareos out into the future, it’s just that the question of “can we kick people out of/do we leave the euro” is going to come up eventually.

This is made further complicate by the Greek political situation, which I have had trouble figuring out for years.  I’m not exactly sympathetic to Greece’s situation, let’s put it that way, though I’m anti-Austerity.

What this means for us in the U.S. is that the world economy, at any time, could have some nasty shakeup as the Euro kicks people out, gets left, new austerity measures go into place, politics change, etc.  I’m not sure what role the U.S. is taking, if any, to try and sort this mess out – it’d be very useful to do some digging.

So U.S. recovery aside and other hope, we’ve still got a big chunk of the world having economic problems.  That, in short, could mess things up for everyone else, us included.

Oh, and Canada.  Hey guys.

- Steven Savage

Resistance strikes everybody, but more so for the innovators, the creatives, the artists and writers of the world because that is the nature of what they do— making something out of nothing. It’s also scary as hell and anybody that doesn’t tell you so is lying or really just won’t admit it to themselves.

At it’s core, Resistance is the refusal to accept that things change. The problem is that change will happen whether we want it to or not  so we resist by searching for the things that will make us feel like we are on stable ground.

The success and failure of others is one source of Resistance.

I read a story  that tells me the economy is bad, so it becomes a reason that I wait till it gets better before quitting my stable job to pursue something I am passionate about. The problem with that is you could be waiting forever. The economy that looks weak now could get stronger and when it does  those who took a risk during down times usually benefit the most.

The data tells me that that there is no money in a writing career so I should steer clear and do something more stable. Well there isn’t a career out there that is stable forever. The field that looked like a sure bet now is an innovation away from becoming obsolete.

There are many out there refuse to do what they are most passionate about because of some dim night light in our mind that tells them to take the “sure bet,” but when you realize there really is not such thing there is no reason why you shouldn’t pursue the career that you are passionate about.

Resistance is insidious and takes on many forms, but the one sure characteristic is that it gets stronger and stronger the farther you step out of that safe path. Staring at the blank canvas, the empty page tends to bring it out in the artist. The internet suddenly seems so alluring in those moments.

It can also take the former of people that will come out and question your choice. Sometimes it can be family or friends and often the amount of people that question you is proportionate to how radical your idea is.

Self actualized people, the ones that are truly able to make things happen for themselves, are not just aware of Resistance they embrace it. They  think with the end in mind and  follow through with the plan that may not be comfortable or safe, but feels true to them.

My friend got a Replicator (http://store.makerbot.com/replicator-404.html) from MakerBot (http://www.makerbot.com/), and has been using it for about two weeks.  Having seen it in action, I have to say that you don’t really “get” 3D printing until you see it work, smell the plastic, worry the cats are going to play with the printer, and hold the results in your hands.

There’s something visceral about the experience when you’re there.  My friend went to Thingiverse (http://www.thingiverse.com/) to get some designs and began printing them, specifically a Heart Gears (http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:12208) for Mother’s day.  He had printed some of it when I came to visit, and throughout the evening, he continued to print and assemble parts (this is not exactly fast).  Then, in the end, it was done, from image to reality.

And then, I “got it.”

The 3D printer is not a “thing” it is the end result of several phenomena coming together.  Yes, it’s 3D printing technology, (specifically a guided nozzle spinning out plastic thread from a loop).  The printer is also something that connects easily to a computer.  It runs software that uses common formats that many people can create.  These files can be posted anywhere, and there are already sites with plenty of them.

It all came together with me holding a gift for Mother’s Day that had come out of a roll of plastic thread, a website, and an odd gizmo.

This is powerful.

It’s not something people are going to “get” easily until they see it.  When people do see items made, when they perceive the power of 3D printing, then it’s going to be very real to them.  I’m testimony to that (I’m fighting the urge to look for a spare $1750 already).

3D Printing already has enough motion that it’s more a matter of time for it to take off.  A few things that could accelerate it (and that’s both a warning and a hint):

• Prominent use on television.
• Displays in stores like Best Buy or Fry’s that show it’s power.
• Appearances at large convention events (hint, hint).
• Any prominent media mention (I already saw this in the news today).

People making 3D printers with a bit of work could easily make a craze.

You may be skeptical, but when you see it work . . . it’s hard to describe.

However a few things are also needed for the technology:

• The tech I’ve seen is pretty friendly, but still on a “hobbyist” level – you need to have some level of aptitude to get it.  Easier-to-use tech is needed.
• Better tutorials would be useful.
• Price.  Trust me, the Replicatior is drop-dead amazing, but it’s still hard to justify $1750, though trust me I am trying.  Other printers are more costly, though some come as kits (which, trust me, won’t go mainstream).

Still, I am convinced – 3D printing will have its time.  I’ve seen the future, and it smells of plastic and moves in a way that really distracts cats.

- Steven Savage

(From Deadline Hollywood)

For those not in the know, Wool is a self-published e-book series that’s apparently garnered quite a following — as the linked article puts it, “the sci-fi version of Fifty Shades of Grey“. It’s since been picked up by the Brothers Scott (Ridley and Tony) for their production company Scott Free.

As with conventional publishing, this sort of thing is the extreme exception rather than the rule — and just because a book is optioned for a film deal doesn’t mean a film is inevitable. But it’s a good sign that self-publishing is slowly shedding its stigma of being an untouchable toxic wasteland — much like the one depicted in the book itself.

Fantasy and historical pieces have set technology. One doesn’t expect cell phones, GPS, or the Internet in medieval Europe. Historical research may find new facts on events, but those can be adapted into the narrative or be used as inspiration for a new story. Steampunk adds a new technology, but typically isn’t that much more advanced than the existing tech of the Victorian era. Charles Babbage’s difference engine was never built, but he did have plans for it.

Works set in the future tend to not go into full detail of the existing technologies. The idea is that, like today, the average person doesn’t know the full details of what they’re using. The typical computer user of today has little knowledge of programming languages like C; likewise, in the future, the average user won’t need to know how the system was built but only how to use it effectively. A few works have been affected by technology changes. Most have worked around it. In particular, Star Trek introduced transtater technology as the current state of the art. In 1967, the transistor was cutting edge, but would later be supplanted by the silicon chip. Star Trek: The Next Generation adapted to the change by introducing the isolinear chip, measured in teraquads of capacity, thus allowing for improvements in Federation technology and an out for future changes of real-life tech.

The catch happens with modern and near-future works. The past thirty years have seen computers go from house-sized to handheld, communications go from expensive bulky corded car phones to the ubiquitous smart phone tied to the Internet. Storage capacity has gone from kilobytes to terabytes. What can be done to update a work properly or ensure a work doesn’t age badly?

Roll With It. Ignore the tech curve, especially if the work is set in the here and now.  The James Bond movies are a good example. All of 007′s gadgets were advanced for the time they were made, either miniaturizing existing technology or getting creative with existing items. While some gadgets are still not available, such as the BMW’s remote in Tomorrow Never Dies, they are still believable given the computerization of modern cars.

Quietly Accept the Change. If the technology isn’t as important to the story as the events and the characterization, then just use moden equipment and forget it. Why worry about the specifics when the idea in the original work was to show the characters with typical, cheap, or expensive items of the time. Update the idea, not the specifics. The James Bond movies again show a good example. The Aston-Martin DB V in Goldfinger was updated with a Aston-Martin V12 Vanquish in Die Another Day, with the tire shredders replaced by lasers. In both movies, the car represented a high-end British sports car, appropriate for Bond to drive.

Sometimes, though, there’s not getting around the curve. In this case, Avoid Specifics When Possible. Given how fast computer capacity grows, providing specific numbers will date the work. The film version of Johnny Mnemonic ran into this; the titular character was only capable of storing 160 gigbytes in his head, though he took on 320GB. Today, netbooks can have that much hard drive storage, though Johnny had the memory in his head.** Unfortunately, the numbers were needed to give the audience an idea of how much data was being stored. This leads to…

Ignore the Curve. Sometimes, there’s no getting around the technology. The devices are critical to the story. Specifics are needed, even if the values date fast. This situation is rare, but can show up, such as in Johnny Mnemonic as mentioned above.  There are still ways around the tech curve. Downplay, if possible, the technology. If adapting, acknowledge the obsolescence. If creating the original work, leave room for creative adaptation.

Finally, Play With the Curve. Not only is the old technology accepted, it’s pointed out. The 2008 film adaptation Get Smart not only brought back the gadgets from the original series, including the iconic shoe phone, but played up the tech difference with cell phones*** and had Agent 86 use the items despite their age. Often, playing with the curve is done for laughs, such as in Get Smart, but it can be done seriously.

Next time, return of the reviews?

* Technobabble: A mish-mash of technical jargon that sounds impressive but means nothing.
** Today, he’d have a USB port at the base of his neck.
*** Though a Get Smart TV reboot did introduce shoe waiting.

Anyway this article got me thinking on Microsoft’s strange mixture of effectiveness (the XBox) and meandering (where IS Office for iPad?).  The more I analyzed it, the more I came to an interesting conclusion: Microsoft’s best future is two futures.

First, Microsoft has the XBox, which is, frankly, a great machine.  It’s my current gaming console and it’s a solid product that really delivers.  Microsoft HAS won in console entertainment.  They should focus on entertainment.

They also make a bunch of money via Microsoft Office, if only due to sheer legacy usage.  They could leverage that as well.  They could focus on office products (and say what you will, but I think Excel is one of their triumphs).

I’m thinking Microsoft’s future is split straight down the middle.  They’re the serious office software people, AND the entertainment people.  Perhaps that’s why Microsoft does strange things or gets entangled in odd ventures, perhaps that’s why acquisitions aren’t always leveraged – Microsoft hasn’t acknowledged that it has two futures in one.

Plus, let me add if they do straighten this out, they’ll be a hell of a powerhouse.  For that matter, imagine an XBox with productivity tool options . . .

- Steven Savage

I bring this up for a few reasons:

• Holy cr@p that’s a lot of jobs.
• It’s a reminder banking cuts aren’t just in New York.
• It’s a reminder the UK is not as isolated as we often treat it.
• It’s a reminder financial problems are not just, well . . . Greece.

- Steven Savage