History Headscratchers / ReadyPlayerOne

*** Alternatively, OASIS seems to work on a free-to-play model wherein the entire game is theoretically free but getting to the coolest stuff the fastest requires money; perhaps OASIS gets to have Star Wars in it if Disney gets a cut of the item transactions. In other words, talk to Han Solo all you want, but you have to pay for an actual lightsaber.

*** In addition to the above here, in some modern MMOs, if a fight with an enemy is started and you can get out of the area, the enemy will stop chasing you. A great example are some of the Arkfalls in the video game Defiance. If you find yourself in the middle of it and don't want to participate, you can run or drive out of the area and any enemies that spawned and chasing you will stop following you will stop and turn around. So, combine healing potion and her being able to move fast (considering she has the Chucks with speed and flight), she could try to start the task of trying to beat the Lich King, and when she loses and he begins to try and kill her, she can heal and get the hell out of the Tomb of Horrors faster than most people can.

* So this is a headscratcher from somebody who enjoyed the book, but found this to be the largest plot hole. How did OASIS get popular as an mmo with a permadeath system in place? I understand the idea of an extremely immersive mmo that has slowly replaced traditional life, but who in their right mind would devout so many hours into an mmo where if you slip up once it's game over, restart from the beginning. Could you imagine if WoW launched with such a system? Now I understand from a narrative point of view it's important to have a constant threat, but why couldn't a system like in .hack//SIGN work. Where you need to log out properly to save your level and progress, or you log back in to your last save. And if you die you revert to a previous save. It just feels like a misunderstanding to why rogue are interesting. It's a small investment usually a few hours overall, and when you die you get to experience a new game entirely with a new character and load-out. Generally it sounds like OASIS is a static environment so if you die you just have to slog through the same stuff again if you even get that far after resetting. And I don't remember reading any proper explanation in-universe to the permadeath.

*** Well, I think the WMD situation is actually helped by the fact that OASIS has permadeath. Imagine the frustration you as a player go through if you lose so much as an hour of progress. I've even actually abandoned some games for a while simply because I forgot to save and now I have to play for a few hours to get back to where I started. Now multiply that feeling hundreds or thousands of times over. People get married. It's not even a lifestyle. Players could grow so attached to their characters that dying in the game would almost be like dying in real life. In a world where people could just respawn then people would feel free to unleash everything upon everyone because of little consequences, but introduce permadeath and the massive player investment and you get the same kind of mortal fear that prevents nuclear weapons use in real life. Also, look at the EVE community if you want an idea of how an economy works under the constant specter of destruction. In addition, yes, tons of property can be destroyed at any given moment, but we still have an economy in spite of WMDs in real life; sure, the ''possibility'' is terrifying, but they've been around so long and there are so many diplomatic protocols and safeguards in place to prevent the extinction of mankind that we can just go about our lives like normal; nuclear weapons have gone from an OutsideContextProblem for diplomats and military planners to something that's just an accepted part of international politics. Lastly, perhaps some high-level players have established some sort of balance of power to prevent conflict.

** One of the worlds mentioned being in the OAISIS is [[WorldOfWarcraft Azeroth.]] Canonically, it went online in 2012, whin WOW was still very popular. Did they wait until everyone jumped ship to buy out Blizzard? Or maybe you need an active subscription to WOW to be allowed on that particular planet, making it effectively a port?
*** Considering that the books are set in 2044, and WoW right now gives a partial version of the game for free, possibly Blizzard, by then, have taken it like a lot of games, and made it 'fully free forever'. However, items still need to be bought and paid for, and likely Blizzard takes a cut for items from sales on Azeroth.

*** In addition to the above here, in some modern MMOs, if a fight with an enemy is started and you can get out of the area, the enemy will stop chasing you. A great example are some of the Arkfalls in the video game Defiance. If you find yourself in the middle of it and don't want to participate, you can run or drive out of the area and any enemies that spawn and start following you will stop and turn around. So, combine healing potion and her being able to move fast (considering she has the Chucks with speed and flight), she could try to start the task of trying to beat the Lich King, and when she loses and he begins to try and kill her, she can heal and get the hell out of the Tomb of Horrors faster than most people can.

*** Considering that the books are set in 2044, and WoW right now gives a partial version of the game for free, possibly Blizzard, by then, have taken it like a lot of games, and made it 'fully free forever'. However, items still need to be bought and paid for, and likely Blizzard takes a cut for items from sales on Azeroth.

** One of the worlds mentioned being in the OAISIS is [[WorldOfWarcraft Azeroth.]] Canonically, it went online in 2012, whin WOW was still very popular. Did they wait until everyone jumped ship to buy out Blizzard? Or maybe you need an active subscription to WOW to be allowed on that particular planet, making it effectively a port?

*** Since the book takes place in the relatively distant future, a lot of "cult classic" works will also be even cheaper to license.

** They aren't treated as public domain. The book outright states that works like Star Wars, Firefly, etc. were licensed from their owners. Basically OSS paid Disney and other copyright holders to use their works in their game. As the OASIS expanded it became a very good idea to license your works to GSS because it was incredibly profitable.

* What year does this book take place in? The book jacket says it's the year 2044 and the creator of OASIS is sixty-seven when he dies which means he was born in 1977 but in the book it says that the creator was eight in 1980 and should of been born in 1972 which would mean the book takes place in 2039.
** See WritersCannotDoMath.
** Actually, since Halliday died in 2039 and the book takes place 5 years after his death, it would be 2044.

*** Maybe they are public domain. This is an alternate history, and the only reason Disney still has rights over everything is because they keep [[MovingTheGoalposts having the definition for public domain changed]]. Given that those corporations will have likely folded by then anyway, they actually would lapse into public domain anyway.

** Maybe they are public domain. This is an alternate history, and the only reason Disney still has rights over everything is because they keep [[MovingTheGoalposts having the definition for public domain changed]]. Given that those corporations will have likely folded by then anyway, they actually would lapse into public domain anyway.

* This is certainly going to negatively impact the film adaptation even with Spielberg at the helm, but were all intellectual property laws suddenly abolished? How did OASIS get off the ground without massive legal battles over its content? Surely the CrapsackWorld's big media companies aren't going to lose creative control over their works without a fight. YouTube barely escaped shutdown by Viacom lawsuits after implementing draconian automated ContentID. How would Disney feel about its brands (Star Wars, Marvel, etc.) being treated as if they were public domain in the OASIS?

* This is certainly going to negatively impact the film adaptation, but were all intellectual property laws suddenly abolished? How did OASIS get off the ground without massive legal battles over its content? Surely the CrapsackWorld's big media companies aren't going to lose creative control over their works without a fight. YouTube barely escaped shutdown by Viacom lawsuits after implementing draconian automated ContentID. How would Disney feel about its brands (Star Wars, Marvel, etc.) being treated as if they were public domain in the OASIS?

* Were all intellectual property laws suddenly abolished? How did OASIS get off the ground without massive legal battles over its content? Surely the CrapsackWorld's big media companies aren't going to lose creative control over their works without a fight. YouTube barely escaped shutdown by Viacom lawsuits after implementing draconian automated ContentID. How would Disney feel about its brands (Star Wars, Marvel, etc.) being treated as if they were public domain in the OASIS?

** Well, every quest needs a bad guy. Maybe Halliday probably knew long before hand that IOI would attempt to try to take over OASIS by joining in the Hunt and cheat every which way they could to be able to get to the end, which is probably why he didn't establish any rules for the Hunt. Think of it like this: would ''Lord of the Rings'' have been as exciting if there were no bad guys impending on the Fellowship's quest to destroy the ring? No, it wouldn't have. Would ''Left 4 Dead'' be just as enjoyable if there weren't infected people trying to kill your character and the team you're a part of? No, it wouldn't be. Halliday could have purposefully set this up so that whoever it is that are at the top of the list would have a common enemy to face (much like how any players of D&D would have as well). So, he ended up asking Og to be like a Dungeon Master like he did years ago when they used to play D&D in the basement, making sure those who played fair in the Hunt completed the quest and not to impede on the battle with IOI because they were the Hunt's version of the monsters that the players had to face.

** Well, every quest needs a bad guy. Maybe Halliday probably knew long before hand that IOI would attempt to try to take over OASIS by joining in the Hunt and cheat every which way they could to be able to get to the end, which is probably why he didn't establish any rules for the Hunt. Think of it like this: would ''Lord of the Rings'' have been as exciting if there were no bad guys impending on the Fellowship's quest to destroy the ring? No, it wouldn't have. Would ''Left 4 Dead'' be just as enjoyable if there weren't infected people trying to kill your character and the team you're a part of? No, it wouldn't be. Halliday could have purposefully set this up so that whoever it is that are at the top of the list would have a common enemy to face (much like how any players of D&D would have as well). So, he ended up asking Og to be like a Dungeon Master, making sure those who played fair complete the quest and not to impede on the battle with IOI because they were the Hunt's version of the monsters that the players had to face.

** Well, every quest needs a bad guy. Maybe Halliday probably knew long before hand that IOI would attempt to try to take over OASIS by joining in the Hunt and cheat every which way they could to be able to get to the end, which is probably why he didn't establish any rules for the Hunt. Think of it like this: would ''Lord of the Rings'' have been as exciting if there were no bad guys impending on the Fellowship's quest to destroy the ring? No, it wouldn't have. Would ''Left 4 Dead'' be just as enjoyable if there weren't infected people trying to kill your character and the team you're a part of? No, it wouldn't be. Halliday could have purposefully set this up so that whoever it is that are at the top of the list would have a common enemy to face (much like how any players of D&D would have as well).

** Well, every quest needs a bad guy. Halliday probably knew long before hand that IOI would attempt to try to take over OASIS by joining in the Hunt and cheat every which way they could to be able to get to the end, which is probably why he didn't establish any rules for the Hunt. Think of it like this: would ''Lord of the Rings'' have been as exciting if there were no bad guys impending on the Fellowship's quest to destroy the ring? No, it wouldn't have. Would ''Left 4 Dead'' be just as enjoyable if there weren't infected people trying to kill your character and the team you're a part of? No, it wouldn't be. Halliday could have purposefully set this up so that whoever it is that are at the top of the list would have a common enemy to face (much like how any players of D&D would have as well).

* So you've started with your friend a universal simulation that is now basically the most important thing on the planet, improving the lives of billions. Your friend dies, but before dying he initiates this crazy game where the winner will get everything. An evil megacorp comes up and makes it abundantly clear it intends to win the game and ruin everything forever, and it resorts to all sorts of underhanded tactics including actual MURDER to achieve this goal. You have an immortal avatar so you can wish this entity eliminated and it will instantly vanish from OASIS - but you don't do it, instead only helping from the sidelines. How is this logical in any way? How does it not make Morrow a petty egomaniac more interested in the fun of the game than in doing the right thing? Sure, he eventually helps the main characters and enables them to win the heavily-rigged-against-them game, but doesn't *actively* do anything to prevent all the cheating and patently unethical tactics IOI are employing. How does this satisfy Halliday's request of keeping the game fair?

*** First, Art3mis stated that she was nearly killed, not killed every time, and she always stocked up on healing items beforehand. Also, they do lose everything upon actual character death.

** One of the complaints that Art3mis has was that the Lich was always beating her at Joust, and ended up killing her. Either she sinks a lot of money into reobtaining the necessary items, or she is able to store items into either an account or private chatroom rather than the avatar (i.e. only loses inventory items.) This could be similar to a "medium-core" death system where there's a major penalty for dying but you don't lose absolutely everything.

* So this is a headscratcher from somebody who enjoyed the book, but found this to be the largest plot hole. How did OASIS get popular as an mmo with a permadeath system in place? I understand the idea of an extremely immersive mmo that has slowly replaced traditional life, but who in their right mind would devout so many hours into an mmo where if you slip up once it's game over, restart from the beginning. Could you imagine if WoW launched with such a system? Now I understand from a narrative point of view it's important to have a constant threat, but why couldn't a system like in .hack//SIGN work. Where you need to log out properly to save your level and progress, or you log back in to your last save. And if you die you revert to a previous save. It just feels like a misunderstanding to why rogue are interesting. It's a small investment usually a few hours overall, and when you die you get to experience a new game entirely with a new character and load-out. Generally it sounds like OASIS is a static environment so if you die you just have to slog through the same stuff again if you even get that far after resetting. And I don't remember reading any proper explanation in-universe to the permadeath.

** See WritersCannotDoMath.

What year does this book take place in? The book jacket says it's the year 2044 and the creator of OASIS is sixty-seven when he dies which means he was born in 1977 but in the book it says that the creator was eight in 1980 and should of been born in 1972 which would mean the book takes place in 2039.