> You know what’s fun? A stick. A stick is fun. A ball is fun.
Having a body is fun. I think that's one reason why VR has such quick hype/death cycles--it doesn't do a good enough job of fooling your body. Conventional games induce more like a dissociative or hypnotic state where you temporarily forget your body. That can range from very, VERY abstract (like Pong or Pac-Man, or BABA IS YOU), or built on an attempt to simulate the real world as convincingly as possible through high-end graphics and physics engines.
One of the things that made Untitled Goose Game so much fun for me was that playing it made me _feel like a goose_. It made me want to run around doing goose things for goose reasons. You can spread your wings and honk, regardless of whether it advances the game. A similar game that came out called Little Kitty, Big City offers the promise of the same idea but as a cat instead of a goose. I tried that game but never felt like a cat playing it, instead it felt like being a person controlling a cat. These are such subtle shades of gameplay and storytelling that I have a hard time imagining LLMs being useful in the design.
At Disney, they had an immersive Star Wars VR experience that I don't think is there any more (and was extremely pricey for a session).
They tricked the senses by having physical objects you could touch for every space in the game environment, there was stuff like wind, you could feel the heat of lava radiating off the ground in some spots - and body packs that would jolt you if you got shot, and a physically held "blaster" with haptic feedback.
I was blown away at how good it was and how immersive it felt. But, you need an entirely custom experience and game room and as I said it was very expensive (probably for good reason).
I think there's a certain antipathy between "hustle culture" and gaming
https://components.news/the-gamer-and-the-nihilist/
that is is, people who are caught in AI FOMO are performatively trying to appear to be productive and that's the opposite of fun.