At a local exploratorium they have had some interactive exhibits similar to Dynamicland. Each one was just single purpose and one some level the docents pater included something akin to “revolutionary”. Watching my preschooler interact with an exhibit, “so simple a preschooler can interact with it” get both frustrated and bored with the novelty rather quick.
Tossing a physical puck that can split virtual light was not as interesting as using real physical plastic prisms, filters and lenses. The “virtual biome” table where one could add or subtract food, animals, mountains, water, etc… was equally frustrating, not because it was too abstract, but because of scale. “It should be iPad sized.” The lag on both was also awful. So we sat and observed people. Most people didn’t quite get how to interact meaningfully. And some young teen ever 5-10 minutes or so would salt the world with too many predators. As the whole thing was also projected on a screen behind the main exhibit, it could have as easily been a set computers using interfaces people were used to using.
I am wondering if all this focus on externally projected interfaces and interactions are just a short lived technological branch will find some niche , but will never take off because we will all have some sort of networked digital overlay with us at all times, via glasses or something.
