It's 2010 - Who is working on the Holodeck?

Established in this IBM ad for a product people no longer use, people supposedly have no need for flying cars due to their ability to get things done via the internet without the need for mass air transit. Besides, with the way automobiles are looking nowadays, we'd never get that bad-ass red fake-IROC-Z/DeLorean mashup from M.A.S.K. that Matt Tracker drove. Instead, we'd probably get something that looked like the Nissan CUBE with telescoping wings. That's not a future Avery Brooks wants to live in. It's not a future I'm looking forward to.

Let's get this out of the way right now -- I realize that the concept of the Holodeck is some contrived lunacy that was hatched by the writers of Star Trek: The Next Generation. It never really had a logical base like the tricorder or the communicators/comm-badges that were used. It seemed like a convenient way to have diversionary episodes that took place in locations that weren't on the vacuum-sealed Enterprise-D set, and if we suspended our disbelief just enough, we could excuse it as being science-fantasy. The only problem with this science-fantasy is that it's perhaps the Holy Grail in terms of video game immersion, reactivity and interactivity. Using the Holodeck, a person could have any sort of adventure that they could construct with very precise limitations. Want to ride on a horse? Be Sherlock Holmes? Have sex? Play James Bond with friends' faces super-imposed as members of the story? It's fantastic! However, looking at things with that suspension of disbelief removed, and it all falls apart.

When one looks at how far video game technology has come since its relative birth in the 1970s, it's difficult to not want to "reach for the stars," pardon the reference. Even within just the past ten years, video games have reached into the lives and homes of millions of people with almost greater penetration than social networking. Video games haven't been "just a child's toy" for nearly 20 years now. I will never forget the train ride home from E3 in 2004 wherein I saw four elderly women playing competitive games of Puyo Pop on the Game Boy Advance. Technology, exposure, integration and acceptance - it's all there! I have seen it!

Where are video games going, though? Are we going to the Holodeck grid, or simply staying in the set-top boxes we've been switching in and out since the Atari? Unfortunately the answer is the set-top box and the reasons for this (apart from the obvious technobabble) have more to do with industry stagnation than a resistance to innovation. Am I being arrogant for saying so? I don't care. I contend that, for the most part, we've been playing the same sort of video games for over a decade now, only with beefed graphical capabilities and fancier controls.

Do I have a proposed solution for this? No, I suppose not. I don't have the money or wherewithal to deal with the risks involved with trying to start a gaming revolution. Publishers don't appear to be comfortable taking the risks needed to branch out and fund innovation, and at the same time many developers are keen to keep making the same sorts of games (albeit with refinements) and eschewing the advance.

There will be a time for innovation, but I suppose now is not it. The Holodeck will have to wait. This was a Pulse Rifle Rant.