[Red Herring]

Hoi chummers, I've ran in the shadows for years, but I've never been 100% clear on just how the Matrix and SIMsense works.

When you're directly plugged into the matrix via a Direct Neural Interface how "real" does everything feel? Does everything feel completely real or is it a bit "off"? This question gets especially odd when you consider the different shapes your persona can take the form of. For instance does this mean if my persona was a giant dragon I would know what it's like to be covered in scales, have wings and a tail, and breath fire? Does this mean cybersex on the matrix is just as good as the real thing? Does this mean I can know what it's like to get laid as a dragon? (Also, ew)

We also know BTLs share the same degree of intensity as Hot SIM. Are these the methods required for the matrix to feel truly real or are they "realer than real"? Or do these methods still not full capture the feeling of reality and it's just the fact SIMs can play havoc with people's emotions that makes BTLs and Hot SIM so addictive?

Lastly, where do Ultraviolet Nodes fit into all this?

[Marcus]

So if you think about all interaction/feel/experiences are really series neural transmissions to the brain. Sim-sense feels as real as doing see/touch/smelling/feeling as if you experienced through your normal senses. BTL is literally that feeling cranked up even higher intensity, it's a stronger more "real" feeling. It's just done through an alternative direct link to the brain. So say you enjoy eating your favorite meal. Imagine instead of eating it, you could just experience it through, plugging in a chip, then imagine you could make it literally taste twice as good.
That's just the food porn example. There lots of other interest things to consider in exploring this. Imagine Churches where they pipe righteousness and faith right in with Choir songs. Where you go to Simsensetube and experiences a whole play list of things. The sky is the limit.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

I can't recall which one but there's an old 1st or 2nd edition adventure (where the runners go to FDC) and the plot twist for that 'run is that they never actually went to FDC, it was all a test of a matrix-like simsense pod where the runners were unwitting guinea pigs to see if they'd realize it was never reality.

[Lorebane24]

It's possible that there is more concrete info out there, but I think this is largely up to you as a GM, and how you want it to function in your world, and I think this is something a lot of GM's forget.    In my games, I prefer to think of Simsense as a cheap imitation for the real thing, but it's still pleasant (and addictive) because it allows you to experience things you otherwise never could.  I interpret it as not so much being addictive because of the great feeling it gives you (unlike BTLs) because it makes escapism very easy and very thorough.  I actually go a bit further and dump the common assumption that someone going full VR just goes limp and falls over, because what about I rigger on a motorcycle?  In my games, at least, when someone jacks into VR, their brain essentially partitions itself, only staying active enough in the physical realm to do things like, breath, stay sitting up, and the occasionally subconcious tic that reflects what their conscious mind is doing in a matrix.  So a decker will still absently tap their deck and stay sitting upright in their chair, but they are otherwise zoned out and oblivious.  A rigger's knuckles might go white from their hands locking around a wheel, and they'll make minor adjustments as they turn the car, but's it's largely a subconscious side effect of their mind telling the vehicle to move.

[Sphinx]

Check out the "Sim Dreams and Nightmares" digital supplement.

[frederick.johansen]

I would imagine a significant part of how complete a simsense interaction is would be the source of the simsense information.  For example, you make your persona look like a dragon (excellent example, BTW).  Unless you have applicable simsense data when you create the persona, or it comes with the icon when it is purchased rather than user created, then your persona would not give you the actual feeling of being a dragon.  Of course that simsense information would be available and could be integrated, but would still be limited by the data.  Did the dragon making the simsense recording eat food during the recording?  Then you know what it is like to eat as a dragon.  If they didn't, having the recording won't let you know what that experience would be like.  The dragon sex question would be same.  :-)  I also think that would be where "holes" would appear in any simsense experience.  Any specific activity that hasn't been experienced and recorded by someone in a simsense rig would be missing from the simsense data, and so the experience would have to be extrapolated from available data.  I should expect that there would be a lot of extrapolation given that most simsense consumers won't be doing the exact same things as the simsense recorder did while recording.  Right off the bat, they have a different body so the recording would have to be adjusted to make sense for them.  A simsense user could also consume simsense in a completely passive fashion, making no attempt to make it seem that they are the one having the actual experience.  Such an experience would be a perfect rendition of what the recording contains, but would also absolutely be obviously someone else's experience.

I like the idea of "the run that wasn't" simsense.  It would be a huge challenge to the computers involved to fill in all the information not available as regular simsense recordings, and to do so to a degree that it couldn't be noticed by the users.  I imagine that when simsense users want to feel like the simsense is real, they get pretty close to what they are looking for.  I don't think that it would normally be able to fool most people, under normal circumstances. 

I also believe that BTLs, while intense, would be wildly obvious as synthetic experiences.  A BTL user would not feel like the BTL has any real bearing on what a regular experience of the same type is like....but then, that's the point, isn't it?  :-)   

I will have to look at the simsense book mentioned however, as my analysis could be completely out of sync with the authors intend.

[Senko]

Personally I've always seen its reality as a combination of factors . . .

1) Level of immersion.
2) Level of programming.
3) Level of reality.

Level of immersion is the various sim levels i.e. trodes, cold sim, hot sim. So lets take a mage with no link to avoid corrupting their magic just acting via glasses and gloves with links in them. At that point it wont be very real at all even the "sensations" they do get are limited by the interface gloves can do pressure but not pin pricks or heat for example. Moving up a step to cold sim you are now interacting directly but there's still that safety cut out. You can now feel all the sensations heat coming off a fire, the cool breeze off the snowy slopes, your simdates arm around and so on. Its real but at the same time its muted, you can feel all these things but the dangerous ones are kept from getting too bad as the suppliers don't want their people to suffer. Step into the game's fire and you'll feel the "heat" but you wont feel actual burns. In hot sim that buffer's gone your now getting 100% input and since its taping directly into your own mind everything is going to be feeling exactly like real life or more intense depending on the programmers intention.

Which brings us too level of programming what your looking at here is just how well someone has actually programmed the sim your interacting with. On the one end of the scale you've a shoddy, put together with a my little programmer kit room with bugs and missing commands so the fire doesn't actually have any heat linked to it, the breeze moving the plants is glitchy and the rasberries smell like bananans. At the other end you have a sim put together by someone like fast jack where everything is going to be 100% how they want it. All the sensations will be there and set up correctly.

Finally we have level of reality this one links back to the level of prgramming but the difference is that faults in the first one are due to the programming being lacking here its dependant on what the programmer can actually put in. For example putting in the feeling of wearing a pair of silk stockings is easy grab a person off the street, pay them 10 yen to wear a rig and you can record the sensation of what it feels like to wear stockings. On the other hand trying to program the feeling of being a giant dragon isn't easy because even if you could convince one to wear a rig it may not record properly so most of those kind of things would be composites based on what the programmer thought it should feel like because anyone experiencing it isn't going to know any better most of the time. It feels real but programmer A's idea of what being a dragon feels like might not be the same as programmer B's so in the game dragons, dragons, dragons being a dragon feels one way while in the game mazes and monsters it feels another. Which can lead to situations of people posting about how mazes and monsters feels fake and they should have programmed like dragons, dragons, dragons.

So to respond to your direct questions. . .

Q1) When you're directly plugged into the matrix via a Direct Neural Interface how "real" does everything feel? Does everything feel completely real or is it a bit "off"?
A1) When your directly plugged into the matrix via a DNI how real it feels depends on the program but it can feel completely real if done well enough and intended for that purpose.

Q2) This question gets especially odd when you consider the different shapes your persona can take the form of. For instance does this mean if my persona was a giant dragon I would know what it's like to be covered in scales, have wings and a tail, and breath fire?
A2) You would know what a given programmer thinks that feels like, if the programmer is able to record a beings sensations in certain circumstances it would be identical to how they'd experience it in real life yes.

Q3) Does this mean cybersex on the matrix is just as good as the real thing? Does this mean I can know what it's like to get laid as a dragon? (Also, ew)
A3) Probably depends a bit on the level of immersion. I'd think cold sim sex might feel a bit muted while hot sim sex would be completely indistinguishable from the real thing. Its why things like BTL programs are so addictive and dangerous you are literally getting a better than life experience (unless your someone like Arnold Rimmer who's own mind hated him and turned him into a broke female prostitute in the books). However since no one really know's what it feels like to have sex as a dragon (trying to record that would be a good way to get eaten) what your probably really experiencing is sex as some type of lizard (an iguana or komodo dragon perhaps) scaled up in size.

We also know BTLs share the same degree of intensity as Hot SIM. Are these the methods required for the matrix to feel truly real or are they "realer than real"? Or do these methods still not full capture the feeling of reality and it's just the fact SIMs can play havoc with people's emotions that makes BTLs and Hot SIM so addictive?

Lastly, where do Ultraviolet Nodes fit into all this?