|
Post by jorpho on Feb 20, 2018 11:58:50 GMT -5
I see there was some discussion about this over here, but no thread, so: I got this book for Christmas and just finished reading it. I have read that the movie deal was apparently signed a year before the novel was actually published – Mr. Cline being a screenwriter by profession – and in that regard it makes sense: it's not so much a novel as it is an exceptionally elaborate pitch paper. (It reminds me a little of Neil Gaiman's Interworld in that regard, which he wrote because he figured there was no better way to get across the idea of this Saturday-morning cartoon he'd dreamed up with someone else. Needless to say, Interworld is also pretty sub-par.) At least it's readable, and I was eager to see how it ended. But the characters are all just so flat - there's no sense of weight. If I watched each of my favorite movies dozens of times over until I had completely memorized all those movies, I probably wouldn't like them so much anymore. In fact, I'd probably be sick of them, and be resentful of whatever had compelled me to watch them so many times and thereby ruined something I had once enjoyed. But so much of the book is just "gee whiz, here's an 80's thing, it was so cool, of course I know everything about it already". There's just no sense of the toll, or even the joy, that such obsession may bring. It's kind of depressing. I'm sure there's already been much written about the "love interest" and how she comes across as just another handy quest item with conditions to be fulfilled, but it's hard to get too worked up about that when none of the other characters exhibit any depth either. I was really hoping for a fancy denouement like in Heinlein's Glory Road that would pull back the curtain and turn everything on its head, exposing the existential futility of it all. I do feel like the parts of the book that take place in the real world ironically feel so much more real, but it would be giving Mr. Cline too much credit to suggest he was going for that. (There's this one throwaway line about how Halliday "wanted a schoolkid to find it" that hints at greater depth. Maybe he had higher aspirations at one point before his agent told him, "This a pitch paper, so stick to the basics" ?) The whole thing feels like a deeply cynical marketing exercise, produced precisely to appeal to a focus-tested slice of the population to maximize profitability. I rather hope the movie bombs spectacularly. Word is that Armada is even worse, being stripped even of the 80's nostalgia angle. I'll admit that I can't even recall hearing of Ladyhawke before I read this book and I will probably seek it out now. But if there's one thing that totally killed the immersion for me: Freakin' Zork! How could an 80's-obsessed nerd read about "trophies in a dwelling long neglected" and not immediately make the connection to what is probably the single most well-known text adventure of all time!? It's not like the game was forgotten in the book's world considering it had an entire virtual planet dedicated to it.
|
|
|
Post by moran on Feb 20, 2018 15:50:26 GMT -5
I finished the book a little over a week ago. I liked it enough to finish it, it was nothing special. A lot of it read like he just wanted to impress people with how much he knew about the 80s. The story was cliche and mostly predictable. And if there's one thing I can't stand is the author/narrator explaining in detail what certain plot devices mean. A lot of it read like a half-assed history lesson. Maybe its because I knew just about every reference except for the setting for the location of the first key. I know nothing about the world. The characters felt very disposable( some proven by the bombing of the stacks ) and one dimensional. And by the second act I kind of hated Wade. He just rubbed me the wrong way for some reason, he started to feel rushed and there seemed to be a lot of missing character growth in between. As for the setting, it read more as a cautionary tale for a future that we should avoid rather than it being some wonderland for video game fans. The movie looks to have taken many liberties with source material.
|
|
|
Post by alphex on Feb 20, 2018 16:21:19 GMT -5
The book was reommended to me about a year ago, so I ordered it when I wanted free shipping for a couple CDs via Amazon. Afterwards, the person who recommended me the book mentioned she liked the Transformers movies and would not have cared if the new Blade Runner was completely silent because it's all about the images anyway... and when the movie deal for RPO came up, the internet was suddenly full of hate on the book because it's supposedly awful.
I haven't started reading it yet and it's not exactly a priority due to all of this. Is it in fact better than its newly gathered reputation after all?
|
|
|
Post by moran on Feb 20, 2018 16:37:26 GMT -5
Its not a bad book, but definitely not a spectacular, must read book either. It really reads like someone's first novel, but I found it enjoyable enough to finish. If you have other things that you are looking forward to reading don't put those on hold for RPO, but its worth having in your queue. If I had to compare it to anything, I'd say its a mix between Hunger Games and Stephen King's Running Man with a little bit of Philip K. Dick-like world building. But not as good. Don't know if that really helps or not.
|
|
|
Post by GamerL on Feb 20, 2018 18:34:44 GMT -5
I first read the book when it first came out in 2011, before it was even announced that Spielberg was doing the movie. It's fine, it's not without its flaws but anyone who says it's terrible either hasn't actually read it or read it wanting to hate it, while the characters and story may be a little flat out it does a good job theorizing what a virtual world might be like and gets your imagination going. Hopefully the movie will be good too, I'll definitely see it. As for the setting, it read more as a cautionary tale for a future that we should avoid rather than it being some wonderland for video game fans. That's another element I don't think gets enough credit, it's made clear how miserable the real world is in this future and I think it's meant to be more disquieting than the pure "wish fulfillment" fantasy people often present it as. The book is overall very prescient, remember when it was first published was actually before the first Oculus Rift Kickstarter, VR was very much in a theoretical place in 2011, it's honestly amazing to me how far VR has come in just 7 years and the world has become a much worse place since 2011, so you can definitely see the desire people would have to escape into a virtual world. Plus like any good sci fi novel it also acts as a metaphor for the here and now, what are already doing if not using technology to fuel nostalgia so we can escape a miserable present? Ready Player One just extrapolates what that might be like 30 years from now, in fact it's almost eerie, I can easily see the future being exactly like Ready Player One.
|
|
|
Post by jorpho on Feb 21, 2018 0:41:41 GMT -5
It's fine, it's not without its flaws but anyone who says it's terrible either hasn't actually read it or read it wanting to hate it, while the characters and story may be a little flat out it does a good job theorizing what a virtual world might be like and gets your imagination going. Something can get your imagination going and still be terrible. For instance, I find myself imagining all the much more worthy stories that are out there that will languish in obscurity forever while something like this rises to prominence. Word is he's writing a sequel. It's amusing to imagine a followup in which the Big Evil Corporation decides to change tactics and manages to get a significant proportion of humanity hooked back on match-3 cellphone games, while the OASIS dwindles into a pale shadow of its former glory as its users abandon it. But no, it will probably be much the same. What makes you think so? There were "VR" displays back in the 90's, after all, and there were definitely elaborate tales about what people might do with them. (Crichton's "Disclosure" springs to mind, though "Neuromancer" is probably a much better example.) I sure haven't heard of any particularly compelling VR content that has emerged. I might add that the book never really makes a compelling case for why you'd particularly desire a full haptic suit and omnidirectional treadmill and so on, or anything more than an ordinary visor and gloves. The only suggestion is that it might be useful for workouts, but I have a hard time believing such a suit would provide sufficient resistance as to be a compelling alternative to ordinary exercise equipment. And there's a throwaway line about how it could create new kinds of sporting events, but that's barely explored at all. People have expressed similar sentiments since the dawn of time.
|
|
|
Post by GamerL on Feb 21, 2018 6:54:21 GMT -5
What makes you think so? There were "VR" displays back in the 90's, after all, and there were definitely elaborate tales about what people might do with them. (Crichton's "Disclosure" springs to mind, though "Neuromancer" is probably a much better example.) I sure haven't heard of any particularly compelling VR content that has emerged. I might add that the book never really makes a compelling case for why you'd particularly desire a full haptic suit and omnidirectional treadmill and so on, or anything more than an ordinary visor and gloves. The only suggestion is that it might be useful for workouts, but I have a hard time believing such a suit would provide sufficient resistance as to be a compelling alternative to ordinary exercise equipment. And there's a throwaway line about how it could create new kinds of sporting events, but that's barely explored at all. You're telling me Ernest Cline was not the first person to write a book about VR? No shit. And whatever VR headsets existed back in the day were archaic, big bulky CRT based stuff that was not even close to what people imagined, VR was seen as the next big thing in the 90s but was considered dead in the 00s, people used to mock the idea of playing a game while having something strapped to your head back then, for any potential VR people saw more promise in holograms like the holodeck in TNG, not stuff strapped to your head. So for Cline to write about VR headsets in 2011 was pretty novel until all of a sudden it became a reality, it blows my mind how much progress has been made on VR since 2011, it was certainly more than I was expecting, so you better believe I'd call that prescient. And the fact that we have Donald Trump for a President, which sounds like a joke from some dystopian novel (Will Wheaton is President in Ready Player One, though that's not meant to be a bad thing it's still presented as a "haha, what if a celebrity was President?" absurdity), so Cline's prediction of things getting worse also seems pretty prescient because there is literally no denying things are worse now than in 2011. So we already live in a world of bleak political situations and virtual reality, nether things are as dramatic as in the book but you can easily see where things might be headed 30 years from now.
|
|
|
Post by moran on Feb 21, 2018 8:52:34 GMT -5
I'm almost interested in a sequel only to see what he comes up with. I don't like supposedly happy endings, so I'd like to see the turmoil that may happen after the fact. Dune Messiah style.
The more I see trailers for the movie, I feel that maybe it will be a more cohesive story. I don't think it looks particularly great some of the stuff that I liked form the book seems to have been changed drastically.
|
|
|
Post by jorpho on Feb 21, 2018 9:21:46 GMT -5
And whatever VR headsets existed back in the day were archaic, big bulky CRT based stuff that was not even close to what people imagined, VR was seen as the next big thing in the 90s but was considered dead in the 00s, people used to mock the idea of playing a game while having something strapped to your head back then, for any potential VR people saw more promise in holograms like the holodeck in TNG, not stuff strapped to your head. So for Cline to write about VR headsets in 2011 was pretty novel until all of a sudden it became a reality, it blows my mind how much progress has been made on VR since 2011, it was certainly more than I was expecting, so you better believe I'd call that prescient. So... you're suggesting progress has been made because VR headsets are no longer "bulky CRT based stuff"? I might add that shutter glasses were also available back in the DOS days. I certainly don't understand what you mean by people seeing more promise in holograms. 2011 was something of a high point, but it's not like things are now objectively worse in every way than they have ever been. Another thing conveniently left out of the book is that people spent a good chunk of the 80's being completely terrified of the distinct possibility of global thermonuclear war. And the President at the time was a former movie star. Also, Will Wheaton is described as VP of the "OASIS User Council" and a protector of user's rights, not a conventional "president".
|
|
|
Post by moran on Feb 21, 2018 10:33:03 GMT -5
Another thing conveniently left out of the book is that people spent a good chunk of the 80's being completely terrified of the distinct possibility of global thermonuclear war. And the President at the time was a former movie star. I would say that something that that he may have gotten right. A lot of people today view the 80s as a pop culture utopia. Their own personal Xanadu where the only bad thing that ever happened was New Coke.
|
|
|
Post by 🧀Son of Suzy Creamcheese🧀 on Feb 21, 2018 11:33:26 GMT -5
I saw a trailer for the movie yesterday at the theatre. Can't say it looks very interesting to me. Plus all I can think of when I hear Ready Player One is that terrible job they did on the movie poster. Doesn't help that you see that poster a couple times when you exit the theatre.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Feb 21, 2018 11:45:50 GMT -5
I read it awhile back, closer to when it came out. It's fine. It's one of those stories that relies pretty much on the novelty of its concept, everything else regarding the narrative is just only serviceable. Claims about it being "nostalgia bait" aren't wrong, but I don't see a problem with it either.
What I do find amusing is how quickly the reception turned on this book. It felt like it was written in a different era (even though it was only, what, seven years ago?) before "geek culture" became more conscious of its ugliness, partially brought on by things like Gamergate. One of the major parts of criticism of the book how it doesn't deal with negative aspects, which it's not interested in and was never equipped for. In respect, I think a similar story written under this light would be a much more interesting read, which in turn makes Ready Player One seem really shallow in comparison.
That being said, some of the criticism that's bandied around is kind of disingenuous. I've seem people clip out passages out of context, implying that it's nothing but shameless namedropping of pop culture artifacts, particularly the one where he talks about his tricked out DeLorean (I think it was that one). I don't remember if this was addressed in the text or just my projections, but I felt that it was much of it was meant to be tongue-in-cheek and at least kind of silly.
|
|
|
Post by lurker on Feb 21, 2018 12:26:12 GMT -5
I read it awhile back, closer to when it came out. It's fine. It's one of those stories that relies pretty much on the novelty of its concept, everything else regarding the narrative is just only serviceable. Claims about it being "nostalgia bait" aren't wrong, but I don't see a problem with it either. What I do find amusing is how quickly the reception turned on this book. It felt like it was written in a different era (even though it was only, what, seven years ago?) before "geek culture" became more conscious of its ugliness, partially brought on by things like Gamergate. One of the major parts of criticism of the book how it doesn't deal with negative aspects, which it's not interested in and was never equipped for. In respect, I think a similar story written under this light would be a much more interesting read, which in turn makes Ready Player One seem really shallow in comparison. That being said, some of the criticism that's bandied around is kind of disingenuous. I've seem people clip out passages out of context, implying that it's nothing but shameless namedropping of pop culture artifacts, particularly the one where he talks about his tricked out DeLorean (I think it was that one). I don't remember if this was addressed in the text or just my projections, but I felt that it was much of it was meant to be tongue-in-cheek and at least kind of silly. The funny thing is that it's a description of the author's own DeLorean.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2018 15:38:49 GMT -5
Yeah, he literally owns that car and drives it around. This book is fap material for the worst sort of nerd.
|
|
|
Post by GamerL on Feb 21, 2018 17:40:37 GMT -5
I read it awhile back, closer to when it came out. It's fine. It's one of those stories that relies pretty much on the novelty of its concept, everything else regarding the narrative is just only serviceable. Claims about it being "nostalgia bait" aren't wrong, but I don't see a problem with it either. What I do find amusing is how quickly the reception turned on this book. It felt like it was written in a different era (even though it was only, what, seven years ago?) before "geek culture" became more conscious of its ugliness, partially brought on by things like Gamergate. One of the major parts of criticism of the book how it doesn't deal with negative aspects, which it's not interested in and was never equipped for. In respect, I think a similar story written under this light would be a much more interesting read, which in turn makes Ready Player One seem really shallow in comparison. That being said, some of the criticism that's bandied around is kind of disingenuous. I've seem people clip out passages out of context, implying that it's nothing but shameless namedropping of pop culture artifacts, particularly the one where he talks about his tricked out DeLorean (I think it was that one). I don't remember if this was addressed in the text or just my projections, but I felt that it was much of it was meant to be tongue-in-cheek and at least kind of silly. 7 years ago was a very different era and I think a lot of flak the book is getting is exactly due to that, it's from a different, less introspective era of nerd culture and nerds like the protagonist of the book are well and truly in the doghouse with many people these days. I've also seen people taking passages out of context, the one I saw was a description of the Atari Swordquest contest. Yeah, he literally owns that car and drives it around. This book is fap material for the worst sort of nerd. Have you actually read it? Like I said, people are hating on it because they see it as symbolic of a type of nerd they hate nowadays, but it's really got nothing to do with that, people are projecting.
|
|