Alternate vs. Alternative, is there really a distinction?

To answer my own question: yes, I believe that there is an obvious distinction to be made between alternate and alternative realities. As we discussed in class, the alternate reality is a state which we are constantly moving in and out of whereas the alternative is very much a state of complete and utter immersion.

In setting up this disctinction between the alternate and alternative, it seems as though we have nicely set one apart from the other. We can define them and label one instance as "alternate" and another as "alternative". But what happens when this distinction is blurred? What happens when the lines which we seem to be able to so clearly draw lose their polarity and begin to interact with and define one another? I believe that the sphere of the "alternate reality game" does just this; it blends the alternate and the alternative and develops itself into something not completely divorced from either category, but rather is a summation (to use a mathematical term), or more descriptively, a delicate balance between the alternate and the alternative which complements each and makes them both more "real" and believeable.

This marriage of the alternate and the alternative is born out of the need for one to the other. From what was discussed in class today we came to the conclusion that at some point, an alternate reality game needs to make the claim that it is not a game at all, but rather that it is a complete reality in and of itself. In making this claim however, the alternate has become, by definition, the alternative. When a reality is "alternate" it is finite and can be entered into and exited from at the will of the person or entity which is interacting with it. But when a reality is alternative, it is by definition completely divorced from any other reality, and therefore requires complete immersion and interactivity within itself. The entity that is interacting with that alternative reality must divorce themself from any outside influences and take on the material culture, language etc. of that alternative reality. Therefore the alternative is in no way alternate, there is no possibility for an alternative reality to recognize that some other reality exists outside of itself.

It is this tension between the need for the alternate to define itself as alternative, and the need of the alternative to have nothing to do with the alternate that creates the whole of the alternate reality game. I believe that it is the result of this tension that creates the play-space of that game. Some people will view the alternate reality in much more alternative terms than others. These are likely to be the more "die-hard" fans that we have discussed in class; the ones that the marketers are looking to pander to, the ones that cannot, or rather will not divorce the reality of their "real" life from the reality of the game. On the other hand, there will be aspects of the alternate throughout the alternative immersion in the game. For example: paratexts are, by definition, outside of the game itself (assuming that they are epitexts), but people will use them to help further their immersion into a game. By using an epitext, I would argue that they are utilizing an alternate mode of immersion into the game itself, while at the same time reinforcing the alternative aspects of the game. The epitext itself is outside of the alternative, and therefore comprises the alternate, but it is used to gain further immersion into the altenative. The best example I can hive of this is the use of a game walkthrough in order to more fully immerse oneself into the game structure.