Pokémon GO的「擴增實境」如何可能？一種科技現象學的詮釋

How is the ＂Augmented Reality＂ Possible in Pokémon GO? An Interpretative Approach of the Phenomenology of Technology

10.29843/JCCIS.202007_(39).0004

曹家榮(Chia-Rong Tsao)

科技現象學 ； Pokémon GO ； 擴增實境遊戲 ； 混雜空間 ； 位置感知科技 ； phenomenology of technology ； Pokémon GO ； augmented-reality games ； the hybrid space ； location-aware technologies

資訊社會研究

39期（2020 / 07 / 01）

71 - 98

繁體中文

本研究嘗試探究Pokémon GO這類所謂擴增實境遊戲的「擴增實境」如何可能？不同於單純從技術的工具觀點判斷科技的「功能」是否或如何擴增實在，本研究透過科技現象學的觀點說明這是如何透過遊戲操作實作過程才得以可能的。本研究主張，這涉及了玩家將其與行動裝置間的體現及詮釋關係視為理所當然，進而得以展露出以混雜空間為其背景脈絡的行動樣態。同時，玩家的行動導向也是在融合了詮釋與體現的關係中，交織地解讀著虛擬物件與物理環境間的關係，進而實現了實在的擴增與混雜。最後，對於Pokémon GO玩家來說，「相遇」正是再凸顯了「擴增實境」現象，因為玩家們的互動持續維繫與再建構了彼此理所當然地接受（且預期對方也接受）的「實在的擴增與混雜」。

This study attempts to answer the question about how could the augmented-reality game Pokémon GO bring the experience of the augmentation and hybridization of reality. The author argues that the perspective of the phenomenology of technology is more suitable than the usual technical point of view and would bring more inspirations on this issue. From the perspective, the ＂augmentation of reality＂ results from: (1) the ＂taken-for-grantedness＂ of embodiment and hermeneutic relations between the players and the mobile devices makes the activities in hybrid space possible; (2) the players interprets virtual and physical information interweavingly on the basis of the incorporation of the embodiment and hermeneutic relations; (3) the ＂encounters＂ between players precisely make the ＂augmented reality＂ more prominent because of the interactions implying the ongoing accomplishment of the augmented reality.

1. 曹家榮(2015)。行動通訊的持續完成：「講手機」的俗民方法學探問。新聞學研究，124，1-37。
   連結：
2. 黃厚銘(2016)。「真實」的復歸：擴增實境遊戲 Ingress 社會文化意義之分析。考古人類學刊，86，43-68。
   連結：
3. Azuma, Ronald T.(1997).A Survey of Augmented Reality.Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments,6(4),355-385.
4. Bilton, N.、楊雅婷譯、王惟芬譯、黃柏恒譯譯(2011)。一位數位移民的告白：Facebook, iPad, iPhone如何翻轉我們的世界。台北:行人文化實驗室。
5. Chess, Shria(2014).Augmented regionalism: Ingress as geomediated gaming narrative.Information, Communication & Society,17(9),1105-1117.
6. de Souza e Silva, A.,Sutko, Daniel M.(2011).Theorizing locative technologies through philosophies of the virtual.Communication Theory,21,23-42.
7. de Souza e Silva, Adriana(2017).Pokémon GO as an HRG: Mobility, sociability, and surveillance in hybrid spaces.Mobile Media & Communication,5(1),20-23.
8. de Souza e Silva, Adriana,Frith, Jordan(2010).Locative mobile networks: Mapping communication and location in urban spaces.Mobilities,5(4),485-505.
9. Evans, Leighton(2015).Being-towards the social: Mood and orientation to location-based social media, computational things and applications.New media & Society,17(6),845-860.
10. Farman, Jason(2012).Mobile interface theory: Embodied space and locative media.New York:Routledge.
11. Firth, Jordan(2013).Turning life into a game: Foursquare, gamification, and personal mobility.Mobile Media & Communication,1(2),248-262.
12. Garfinkel, H.(1967).Studies in ethnomethodology.Cambridge:Polity Press.
13. Heidegger, Martin(1962).Being and time.Oxford:Blackwell.
14. Heim, M.(1993).The metaphysics of virtual reality.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
15. Hjorth, Larissa,Richardson, Ingrid(2017).Pokémon GO: Mobile media play, placemaking, and the digital wayfarer.Mobile Media & Communication,5(1),3-14.
16. Hulsey, Nathan,Reeves, Joshua(2014).The gift that keeps on giving: Google, Ingress, and the gift of surveillance.Surveillance & Society,12(3),389-400.
17. Ihde, Don(1979).Technics and praxis.Boston:D. Reidel Pub. Co..
18. Ihde, Don(1990).Technology and the lifeworld.Bloomington:Indiana University Press.
19. Levinson, Paul(2004).Cellphone: The story of the world's most mobile medium and how it has transformed everything.New York:Palgrave Macmillan.
20. Liao, Tony,Humphreys, Lee(2014).Layar-ed places: Using mobile augmented reality to tactically reengage, reproduce, and reappropriate public space.New Media & Society,17(9),1418-1435.
21. Licoppe, C.,Inada, Y.(2006).Emergent uses of a multiplayer location-aware mobile game: The interactional consequences of mediated encounters.Mobilities,1(1),39-61.
22. McLuhan, M.(1964).Understanding media: The extension of man.Cambridge:The MIT Press.
23. Rheingold, Howard(2012).Smart mobs: The next revolution.Cambridge, MA:Basic Books.
24. Richardson, Ingrid(2010).Ludic mobilities: The corporealities of mobile gaming.Mobilities,5(4),431-447.
25. Richardson, Ingrid(2012).Touching the screen: A phenomenology of mobile gaming and the iPhone.Studying mobile media:Cultural technologies, mobile communication and the iPhon,London:
26. Saker, Michael(2016).Foursquare and identity: Checking-in and presenting the self through location.New Media & Society
27. Schwartz, Raz,Halegoua, Germaine R.(2015).The spatial self: Location-based identity performance on social media.New Media & Society,17(10),1643-1660.
28. Turkle, Sherry(1995).Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the internet.New York:Simon & Schuster.
29. Verbeek, Peter-Paul(2016).Toward a theory of technological mediation: A program for postphenomenological research.Technoscience and postphenomenology: The Manhattan Papers,London:
30. Virilio, Paul,Rose, J.(Trans.)(1997).Open sky.New York:Verso.
31. 曹家榮(2012)。博士論文(博士論文)。政治大學社會學研究所。
32. 曹家榮(2013)。理解技術實作：現象學取徑初探。社會分析，7，1-43。
33. 黃厚銘(2001)。博士論文(博士論文)。台灣大學社會學研究所。

1. 辜玉潔,童秋霞,陳瓊燕,邱紹群(2023)。疫情限制Pokémon GO玩家的續玩意願嗎？。管理資訊計算，12(2)，162-180。
2. (2021)。兩岸廣告代理商擴增實境、虛擬實境行銷之採用因素研究。傳播管理學刊，22(2)，33-62。