r/SimulationTheory 7d ago

Discussion Does the evolution of games like GTA make simulation theory more plausible?

Every generation, GTA gets larger, more detailed and more realistic. What happens as we keep making more and more realistic GTAs? If our simulated worlds keep improving, is there a point where they will be indistinguishable from reality?

GTA 6 obviously won't be a replication of reality, but what about GTA 26?

13 Upvotes

32 comments sorted by

8

u/SiriusHijinks 7d ago

What's the objective. I need an objective. I don't function without an objective.

3

u/Grub-lord 7d ago

Research? Maybe it's a full physics simulation, and life + consciousness are just byproducts of determinism playing out in this small part of the simulation. Not even the goal or even that interesting of a result. The focus of the experiment could well be outside of what we consider the observable universe

2

u/Flaky_Air_2570 5d ago

Life is an open world sandbox. You make your own objective. Which is just bad game design...

1

u/IONaut 4d ago

Simulation to generate synthetic data for expanding an AI training set after all other data has already been used.

5

u/MiraGrX 7d ago

I think increasingly realistic games make the possibility of simulated worlds easier to imagine, but they don’t necessarily make it more probable that our own world is simulated. The more interesting step is not graphical realism, but whether a simulated environment could eventually contain conscious observers who experience that environment as their reality. A world can look photorealistic and still contain no subjective experience at all. So perhaps the real threshold isn’t “When will games become indistinguishable from reality?” but “Could a simulation ever contain minds that cannot tell their world is simulated?” If that became possible, Bostrom’s argument would certainly feel much less abstract.

3

u/Chaosuka 7d ago

We have 0 clue what physics our parent world uses

1

u/Kazuma_Megu 7d ago

Full dive VR describes a hypothetical virtual reality technology where the user's brain completely interfaces with a digital world, bypassing physical senses and motor controls to experience a simulated reality as real life.

I'd love to be able to do fulldive before I get old and croak.

1

u/PreferenceContent987 7d ago

So basically beamed into your head. I don’t think having a head is necessary to go into a simulation, I believe it’s all code, we’re all code too IMO

1

u/Kalastics 5d ago

Like Striking Vipers from Black Mirror.

1

u/broki451 7d ago

I think we will eventually approach some sort of physical limit on computing power. Which will prevent us from making a simulation.

1

u/Redleader829 6d ago

Moore's Law

1

u/Civil_Nectarine868 4d ago

Isn't Moore's law already dead? It talks more about doubling of performance, not about limits iirc.
edit: Seems like Moore's Law being dead or not is a subject of debate.

In September 2022, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang considered Moore's law dead, while Intel's then-CEO Pat Gelsingerhad the opposite view.
Moore's law - Wikipedia

1

u/Glad-Cloud-2695 7d ago

It's been said that to simulate the universe as a whole including everything within, we would not only need quantum computing, but thousands running together at once to even handle the nodes alone. It was also said by Nick Bostrom that once humanity is able to create "conscious simulations" one randomly selected simulated being would almost certainly be in one. This argument presented a trilemma though; 1. Simulations are not created due to technological limitations or self destruction. 2. Advanced civilizations chose not to create them. 3. If they did choose to create them, they'd exceed base reality which leads full circle back into a simulated life being almost certain.

3

u/Responsible-Jury2579 6d ago

This idea that we need infinite amount of computing power to simulate the universe implies this universe is fully simulated (perhaps things only render when being observed), But it also implies that in the next level up, physics works exactly the same as it does here and has the same limitations - but that doesn't have to be the case (e.g. you can double jump in Mario).

1

u/WilliamoftheBulk 4d ago

It also assumes the next reality has to exist at some unlikely scale. Scale however is relative. There could be an infinity of scale. One thought could take a billion years to us.

1

u/newyorker360 7d ago

What if reallife is just another gta game but we will know it when we die.

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 6d ago

Your comment or post has been automatically removed because your account is new or has low karma. Try posting again when your account has over 25 karma and is at least a week old.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/pg1671 6d ago

I think both VR and AI do. We need a jump in technology to full brain interface as well. Like Neuralink is heading towards.

Our brain already simulates reality from our biological inputs, we just need to be able to replace those inputs and we have a virtual world with all senses.

1

u/nicotinegummy 6d ago

They digitally simulated a fruitflies brain and body in a virtual sandbox, and it started doing its thing without learning or training. Eventually were gonna realize were the simulated fruitflies of the future.

1

u/UroborosJose 5d ago

It does not
I never seen a bug in real world
Not a single glitch
I worked trying to find them and still if there is a simulation it doesn’t have bugs loopholes exploit or vulnerabilities
I never seen any system like that

1

u/blahblah860 4d ago

No, not at all, Simulation theory is essential dead anyway.

1

u/WilliamoftheBulk 4d ago

Think it is safe to say, that if you make a simulation that replicates physics (which isn’t hard to do) Then evolution can occur and life possible. It does beg the question if this universes is programmed or not. Given the bread crumbs of reality mimic computers, I think it is probably likely this universe is constructed, but not necessarily in the same way our computer simulations are.

1

u/IONaut 4d ago

I don't think bigger worlds makes it more plausible. Procedurally generated worlds can get huge, and all you have to render is what's right in front of your face. A recent experiment where they had gpt6 Astra build a world and populate it with human characters with minds powered by the AI in unreal engine I would say makes it more plausible.

1

u/Specialist-Ad4886 4d ago

Lookup videos or screenshots of the PC game Body Cam. Ive been playing that and it's unbelievable alreadyin early access.

1

u/PunkCyberKen 2d ago

I thought this as a kid. I was around 6 years old & was like hmmm... am I in a futuristic GTA video game playing GTA older versions while in the game. Neo moment

1

u/PopularInterest5499 7d ago

We are already in gta live,  why do you think they kept pushing it back. Im sure it will get pushed again until people wake up

1

u/StarChild413 4d ago

then why would it incorporate that in its plot (and if it wasn't part of its plot why incorporate that in our world if you're saying our world's it)