Today’s tough choices aren’t like those that captivated audiences of the past: Pepsi vs. Coke? McDonald’s vs Burger King? Peanut M&Ms vs plain?
Choosing sides was fine, but the implications were not so all-consuming.
In 2016, options are a lot more life-changing, course-charting: Trump vs. Clinton? Democrat vs. Republican? Virtual reality vs. 360-degree video?
The last question is the one I’m grappling with after my recent introduction to both worlds, and I’m definitely torn.
Virtual reality puts me right in the center of a new world, able to immerse myself completely in it. But it requires a bit of awkward head gear that may leave me connected to a computer. It makes me a bit dizzy and it still doesn’t feel as real as it proponents promise.
360 video, for now, is more of what I like. I see the panoramic world from all new perspectives, and it’s real, not created or “staged” for the experience. A camera does the work and I’m not harnessed into any gear that causes the effect.
I tried a few simulated experiences on YouTube — jet-flying, skydiving and roller-coaster riding never seemed so thrilling. But without the VR head gear, I’ve still not felt fully immersed. But it’s piqued my curiosity.
I’m looking for authenticity and control, and I’m leaning toward the option that gives me both for now. But I’m certain, as with the classic decisions of the past and present, the debate over the future will never be resolved.
CMSU Reflections 