Discussion Title: Can Virtual Travel Replace Real Vacationing?

1. E-vacations \(i.e. virtual travel\) can replace real ones.
1.1. Con: Many sites would be left undiscovered if no one goes there.
1.1.1. Con: If people visit them digitally \(like through sending a drone or something out\) and looking at the footage, it's possible to still make discoveries through e-vacationing.
1.1.2. Pro: These may be archaeological sites, that if left undiscovered, may hinder our understanding of the past.
1.1.2.1. Con: Discovering archaeological sites it the job of archaeologists, not tourists. Without proper training, random tourists who discover a new site can actually cause it irreparable harm.
1.1.2.2. Con: Additionally, people who are going on vacations rarely discover new sites anyways. Anything that's easily accessible to a casual tourist is most likely already discovered.
1.1.3. Pro: If the sites are where they live, people may not appreciate what they have if they're busy visiting everywhere else on the computer.
1.1.3.1. Pro: As depicted with the film 'Ready Player One', society turns away from the real world, sticking to only being in virtual worlds.
1.1.3.1.1. Con: \[Spoiler\] At the end of the film, the owner of 'The Oasis' temporarilly shuts down the game once a week for users to live in the real world.
1.2. Pro: Negative aspects of a real vacation can be removed from the vacation experience.
1.2.1. Pro: Traveling online, e-vacationers need not be afraid of inclement weather that could ruin their vacation.
1.2.2. Pro: No more worries about parking and waiting in line.
1.2.3. Pro: Getting ill on vacation is less likely to happen.
1.2.3.1. Pro: No risk of food poisoning due to poor hygiene conditions.
1.2.3.1.1. Con: That could happen where a person's located, including at home, if they're trying to replicate the food experience there and the food is or gets contaminated.
1.2.3.1.1.1. Con: Food quality and hygiene vary greatly between countries, so does the risk: If a tourist from a high-standards country visits a country with lower standards, the risk of food poisoning increases significantly.
1.2.3.1.1.2. Con: However, this would not increase the risk of food poisoning, as the standards of food and hygiene in the home country will be the same as in everyday life.
1.2.3.2. Pro: Jet lag is non-existent, as no long-distance travel's involved.
1.2.3.3. Con: People are still likely to experience similar conditions of a real vacation though, like [leisure sickness](https://www.avogel.ca/en/health/stress-anxiety-low-mood/leisure-sickness/) and [motion illness](https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Motion-sickness/).
1.2.3.3.1. Pro: These happen to a lesser degree though, as people are able to stop an e-vacation when they feel they're getting ill, whereas they can't as much on a real one.
1.2.3.3.1.1. Con: If people are really enjoying their e-vacation, it'll be much more difficult for them to not stop it to treat their symptoms.
1.2.3.4. Pro: Pandemic situations like Covid-19 could easily be averted and allow for their mental and phyisical health to be safe.
1.2.4. Pro: People don't require pre-arrangements or qualifications for travel/vacation activities.
1.2.4.1. Pro: E-Vacations do not require any travel permits that are usually required.
1.2.4.1.1. Pro: Prospective e-travellers are not going to be limited by travel visas or passport requirements.
1.2.4.2. Pro: There are no worries about making reservations or cancelling them.
1.2.5. Con: There is kind of a thrill that everything isn't always supposed to be perfect. If everything went smoothly, it would be kind of boring in a way.
1.2.6. Pro: Billions of dangers could be non-existient.
1.3. Pro: They're more flexible.
1.3.1. Pro: People can fit them into active schedules.
1.3.1.1. Pro: E-vacations make it easier to resume what one was doing in life before the e-vacation started.
1.3.1.2. Pro: E-vacations are shorter for the same experience and closer to where a person's errands are. So it's easier to add in than reserving days from a schedule.
1.3.2. Pro: It's easier to end a vacation when one wants to digitally than in person \(especially when far away from home\).
1.4. Con: It's not going to be socially accepted.
1.4.1. Pro: Vacationing purists won't like the idea of people taking e-vacations nor going on them themselves, because it's not a true, authentic experience at the location spot in that moment for that person in reality.
1.4.1.1. Pro: -> See discussion #30088: Traveling is worthwhile.
1.4.2. Pro: Local economies visited don't get financial support this way.
1.4.2.1. Con: This is fine, as they won't need to with the money saved from e-vacations. Locations \(like cities and countries\) will not need to spend as much money trying to attract tourism \(like building a beautiful facade, advertising, etc.\).
1.4.2.1.1. Pro: Cities \(and other places\) could instead focus more on necessities, like creating a city for workers, rather than making it look nice for visitors.
1.4.2.1.2. Pro: They can instead hire cheap 3D modelers to build entire virtual environments, which can also save a significant amount of time building structures.
1.4.2.2. Con: Localities can charge fees for online usage of their e-vacations.
1.4.2.2.1. Pro: Governments may charge a fee for the online loading of their country's data, cities, etc. for tourism if needed.
1.4.2.2.2. Pro: Localities could charge when they open their experience for digital sightseeing.
1.4.2.2.2.1. Con: There could still be ways where locals are shorted through intermediaries, like travel agents, where people after getting their help, have less money to spend on the vacation itself.
1.4.2.2.2.2. Con: Since most digital vacationing ventures are free, most people will choose the free experience instead.
1.4.2.2.2.2.1. Con: Websites, knowing about the possibilities of making money, might limit their website by starting to charge visitors, limiting the number of free choices available.
1.4.2.2.2.3. Pro: Locals may become "digital tour guides" that online goers pay to give them a personal, authentic, and unique experience that would be [hard to come by](https://geotourist.com/news/2019/07/05/visit-the-chernobyl-region-from-anywhere-in-the-world/) for no cost.
1.4.2.2.2.3.1. Pro: These could be versatile, allowing for larger groups than normally is possible.
1.4.2.2.2.3.2. Con: In the future, this may be possible through AI, so it's not clear whether people could make money from this.
1.4.2.2.2.3.2.1. Pro: Augmented reality \(AR\)'s already possible for [tour guides](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPQCTkBDWGI) at destinations. This could easily transfer to e-vacations.
1.4.2.2.2.3.2.2. Con: Regulations could be adapted that only licensed humans are permitted as guides; AI could be banned.
1.4.2.2.2.3.3. Pro: This may be easier than being a real tour guide, as a digital one might not even have to go to the locations to perform it.
1.4.2.3. Con: They can profit from data from e-vacations.
1.4.2.3.1. Pro: Localities may use data collected by e-vacations to tailor what they sell to make a larger margin of profit from it.
1.4.2.3.2. Pro: Localities may sell data that gets collected by e-vacations.
1.4.2.4. Pro: Cultures/traditions might vanish, as they're kept alive mainly by the tourism industry.
1.4.2.4.1. Pro: UNESCO creates a [World Heritage List](https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/) to create interest in the hopes that it leads to infusing funding/protections to keep practices going. Without this encouragement leading to an output, cultures/traditions may not get the support they need to sustain themselves.
1.4.2.5. Pro: Most of the economy of exotic locations, like Hawaii, rely upon tourism for their funds.
1.4.2.6. Con: Online shopping opportunities to local vendors \(souvenirs, etc.\) can be integrated into an e-vacation experience.
1.4.3. Pro: E-vacations may be stigmatized as the poor man's travels.
1.4.4. Con: You don't have to mention to anyone that you went on an "e-vacation" if you are worried about social stigma
1.4.5. Con: Since people don't leave a trace of where they went \(like showing they were physically there\), no one will know it happened, and thus it's not a worry.
1.4.6. Con: In some communities \(for example, poor communities in which no one is going to fancy "real" vacations anyway\), social stigma for e-vacations is unlikely. Some communities might even encourage e-vacations and stigmatize "regular" vacations! \(For example, hardcore environmentalists\).
1.4.7. Pro: Non-profit organizations, such as the BSA, rely upon people paying to go camping, if virtual vacations exist for those campsites, they may be shut down.
1.4.7.1. Con: But, e-vacations follow the line of "leave no trace".
1.5. Con: It's not as personal.
1.5.1. Pro: E-vacations would lead to the same experience if the same selection is picked, because the media \(video, photo, software, etc.\) would pop up the same output for each individual experiencing it. Nothing is unique to have and share with these options.
1.5.1.1. Con: Whether it's in person or not, the vacation experience could be made to be pretty similar for every individual there. Usually, it's on purpose if it's paid for \(like tourist attractions\), because everyone wants to be an equal value for the same price.
1.5.1.2. Con: Since most people choose their own e-vacation to go on, usually the experience is different.
1.5.1.3. Con: There are always going to be slight differences in experiences, no matter how similar they try to design it.
1.5.1.4. Con: -> See 1.4.2.2.2.3.
1.5.2. Pro: It's difficult to interact with a location in real time.
1.5.2.1. Con: Remotely-controlled machinery \(i.e. IoT sensors\) could be used to interact with a real location. It's seen with [workplaces](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L34AMIpoi2Y), but could one day apply to e-vacations too.
1.5.2.2. Con: Quite the opposite. With mixed reality \(like the [Hololens 2](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCL3bFuC4IA)\), people can interact with a location they're in at a deeper level and in ways that are not even possible in reality.
1.5.2.2.1. Pro: People can interact with a [virtual location interlayed](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MqGrF6JaOM) on the actual location to be able to experience both, whereas a non-digital, in-person vacation only allows for interfacing with reality.
1.5.2.3. Con: Provided there's a camera, people can experience and interact with a location virtually through '[virtual teleportation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sF9_5NYlLA)'.
1.6. Pro: It's entirely possible to have one now.
1.6.1. Pro: With enough mods, the game 'Gary's Mod' \(G-Mod\) can function as a vacation alternative.
1.6.2. Pro: The popular game Minecraft has functionality for personally-built vacations.
1.6.2.1. Pro: There have been mods for Minecraft that allow for an improved experience [via VR](https://www.minecraft.net/en-us/vr/).
1.6.3. Pro: With the great strides of VR game development, it is now possible that entire 3D environments could be recreated for vacation purposes.
1.6.3.1. Pro: VR spaces can be used to relax in, like with friends in [Facebook Horizon](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNNZRxTi7ug) using Oculus VR.
1.6.3.2. Pro: The online game [VRChat](https://www.cnet.com/news/vr-escape-rooms-from-pixar-and-oculus-vets-can-help-you-escape-for-a-little-while/) technically allows for a vacation in-game.
1.6.3.3. Pro: People are able to [visit museums in Second Life](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hdg_miZT9k), similarly to doing so in real life \(just digitally\).
1.6.3.4. Pro: [Anyland](http://anyland.com/) \([Manyland](http://manyland.com/)'s 3D counterpart\) allows for people to build and experience their own vacations.
1.6.3.5. Con: Those VR headsets tend to be a bit pricey and unaccessable.
1.6.3.5.1. Con: A great amount of vacations tend to be thousands of dollars compared to 2 VR headsets.
1.6.3.5.2. Con: One doesn't need to experience virtual reality with a headset. [Virtual reality](https://www.vrs.org.uk/virtual-reality/what-is-virtual-reality.html) is just a virtual environment designed in a way to feel real, which could be done via electronic devices most people would have - like a phone and computer. As long as someone has those, it shouldn't cost them anything extra than they already spent.
1.6.3.5.2.1. Con: Online games that include both computer, phone, and VR headset support generally require a strong processor, which can be quite expensive.
1.6.3.6. Pro: [Roblox](https://www.roblox.com/), although a game, does allow anyone to build any type of immersive world they want and let others spend time in it. So one could build a vacation land or center for others to recreate there.
1.6.3.6.1. Pro: [The game also supports VR functionality](https://en.help.roblox.com/hc/en-us/articles/208260046-Roblox-VR).
1.6.3.7. Pro: -> See 1.6.2.1.
1.6.3.8. Pro: People can have fun playing sports via simulators, like [surfing](https://nextgeneventco.com/vr-surfing-simulator-ny-nj-ct-pa/).
1.7. Pro: It's safer.
1.7.1. Pro: They help limit people from travelling and spreading infections, while simultaneously keeping people busy during outbreaks, as is seen with the [coronavirus/COVID-19](http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20200330-covid-19-virtual-travel-during-coronavirus) one.
1.7.2. Pro: Some places are too dangerous to go to in-person.
1.7.3. Pro: Some people are not healthy enough to go on real vacations that they want to do.
1.8. Pro: They preserve localities more.
1.8.1. Pro: They prevent tourists from causing problems at destinations \(like with [Venice](https://veneziaautentica.com/impact-tourism-venice/), for instance\).
1.8.1.1. Pro: Nature can be more pristine and preserved. On Mount Everest, there's a [growing sanitation issue](https://www.outsideonline.com/1965696/peak-poop-feces-problem-everest-needs-solution) the more climbers ascend it. E-vacations would limit/prevent tarnishing nature, along with the health issues associated with it.
1.8.2. Pro: Tourists tend to not understand the location they visit and can possibly change the culture and infrastructure there. Although an e-vacationer may not understand a culture, they won't mess it up as easily from home.
1.9. Pro: Virtual vacations can be more personalized.
1.10. Con: It's not real enough.
1.10.1. Pro: There are just some experiences that can't be replicated digitally.
1.10.1.1. Con: With future technology/methods invested into e-vacations, likely people won't miss any experience that they would with today's technology.
1.10.1.2. Pro: People may not be able to appreciate what they're looking at as much if they're able to go everywhere \(like too much of a good thing\). Going in person allows people to limit their exposure and thus let them enjoy the moment and place.
1.10.1.3. Pro: Where technology stands now it doesn't stimulate all human senses.
1.10.1.4. Con: One could learn a lot more than in-person.
1.10.1.4.1. Pro: People may learn more than a local would, so they'd be able to get information about a place that wouldn't be possible to get in-person.
1.10.1.5. Pro: Not everything is available online.
1.10.1.6. Con: People can get access to what they're not normally able to in person, so experiences will always be missed no matter which path a person takes. If the experiences gained from an e-vacation are better than in reality, then this would not be a worry to not go on e-vacations.
1.10.1.7. Pro: You cannot meet new people; socialize, flirt, or make new friends in spontaneous interactions that would happen only by being there.
1.10.2. Pro: It's essential to leave our home for a change and visit other places for a vacation to be considered one.
1.10.3. Pro: E-vacations don't replace a real vacation for everyone.
1.10.3.1. Pro: Experienced that are digitized must be recorded by someone experiencing a real vacation first.
1.10.3.1.1. Con: Once an experience is documented, it could be experienced by billions. So it just needs to happen once \(most of the time\) by one person for the e-vacation to replace a real one. So not much is needed to replace it.
1.10.3.2. Pro: E-vacations don't capture the fun experiences of real ones.
1.10.3.3. Con: Most vacations are already documented or have enough of a selection to not necessitate the creation of new ones.
1.10.3.4. Con: With technology, experiences won't need a person to go somewhere in reality to recreate it digitally.
1.10.3.4.1. Pro: Drones could go to locations and capture vacations that people would've needed to record themselves.
1.10.3.4.2. Pro: People may recreate environments located in person through documentation \(like people's memories and online resources - like pictures\) digitally \(like through CGI and VR\) to not require a person going to a place to record it.
1.10.4. Pro: Virtual travel is fake no matter how real it seems to be. People realize that, which ruins the experience.
1.11. Pro: They're easier to accomplish.
1.11.1. Pro: -> See 1.2.4.
1.11.2. Pro: It's possible to squeeze more activities within less time.
1.11.3. Pro: They're much cheaper \(or practically free\) for the vacation goer.
1.11.3.1. Con: The bandwidth for the experiences may be too much to be able to do many without incurring hefty charges for electronic services \(internet, phone, etc.\).
1.11.3.2. Con: People could make it as expensive as they want, just like a regular vacation.
1.11.4. Pro: Recording a vacation's much easier to do, as one's on an electronic already that will store the experiences.
1.11.5. Pro: They're easy to experience with others.
1.11.5.1. Pro: People who would be traveling with them don't need to be gathered, as an e-vacation can be experienced simultaneously with other people.
1.11.6. Pro: People don't have to wait to go, as it's instantaneous.
1.12. Con: It's less private.
1.12.1. Pro: Data about the vacation, the choices and interactions will be collected, processed and sold - as in today's internet.
1.12.1.1. Con: If someone saves the files to their computer, even though the first e-vacation is collected, all recurring ones aren't.
1.13. Pro: They're more eco-friendly.
1.13.1. Pro: Multiple locations do not need to be created \(as construction's expensive\) for one tourist person if everything's all in one place at home.
1.13.1.1. Con: Without visitations by tourists to locations already established, they may not get enough funding to prevent deterioration of sites.
1.13.2. Con: If people visit places that they can walk to, it may be more eco than being on electronics \(especially if they're not powered by renewable energy\).
1.13.3. Pro: Less people traveling on airplanes due to vacationing may add pressures onto carriers to be more eco-friendly to compete with e-vacations.
1.13.3.1. Con: A lot of airlines may fail due to this, and even ticket prices may increase for business flights.
1.13.4. Pro: Delicate sites \(ecologically and historically\) would be left untouched by human impact more than if people go there.
1.13.4.1. Con: Sites might get neglected though if no one visits them.
1.13.4.1.1. Pro: Historic buildings need maintenance in order to prevent them from eroding.
1.13.4.2. Pro: People may hunt less \(especially [wildlife](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/03/coronavirus-botswana-hunting-season-cancelled-200324063714759.html)\) if they visit places in-person.
1.13.4.3. Pro: The coronavirus/COVID-19 shows that when people stop visiting tourist places, the locations become [less polluted and allow wildlife to be less disturbed](https://www.theartnewspaper.com/news/venice-clean-coronavirus).
1.13.4.4. Con: Poaching could [happen more](https://news.mongabay.com/2020/04/sri-lankas-covid-19-lockdown-sets-wildlife-free-but-raises-poaching-threat/) without vigilance from tourists.
1.13.4.5. Pro: Wild animals could [return](https://news.mongabay.com/2020/04/sri-lankas-covid-19-lockdown-sets-wildlife-free-but-raises-poaching-threat/) to their natural food supply \(i.e. the environment they're in\) when tourists stop feeding them.
1.13.4.5.1. Con: Human activities may have had a negative effect on animals' natural food supplies; therefore, those animals rely on human help.
1.13.4.5.1.1. Pro: Many animals from zoos and aquariums did not survive for lone once they were freed.
1.13.5. Pro: There's less distance traveled through fossil fuels.
1.13.5.1. Pro: With climate change occurring, reducing fossil fuel usage would help out with decreasing one's contribution to the climate.