Anti-Romance
okbl...@my-deja.com
being repeated is that you can't make the reader feel a certain way
about a certain character--something critical to IF. While we have
certain conventions for *prohibiting* a player from making a protagonist
do something, the author taking control of a protagonist to make the
protagonist *do something* in character often alienates the player.
But what if you went the other way? What if instead of a wonderful,
healthy relationship with another, the main character is being drawn
into an abusive relationship? The whole point, then, would be trying to
keep the character from doing stupid things, like getting back with the
abusive one or stopping destructive behavior.
After all, people in such relationships often explain their actions by
saying "I was out of control."
Then again, maybe contemporary IF is dark enough....
--
[ok]
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jim Aikin
>
> But what if you went the other way? What if instead of a wonderful,
> healthy relationship with another, the main character is being drawn
> into an abusive relationship? The whole point, then, would be trying to
> keep the character from doing stupid things, like getting back with the
> abusive one or stopping destructive behavior.
>kiss alan
What? After that black eye he gave you?
>give beer to alan
Not a good idea. You know what kind of mood he'll get into.
>apologize to alan
Oh, come on! He's the one who should be apologizing.
>alan, give me a divorce
Alan scowls at the TV and pretends not to have heard you.
>again
"Fer Chrissake, can't a guy get any peace an' quiet around here?"
>n
The front door is locked, and Alan has the key.
...well, it's going to be a long game, I can see that.
--Jim Aikin
Dan Schmidt
| But what if you went the other way? What if instead of a wonderful,
| healthy relationship with another, the main character is being drawn
| into an abusive relationship? The whole point, then, would be
| trying to keep the character from doing stupid things, like getting
| back with the abusive one or stopping destructive behavior.
You find your eyes drawn once again to the phone. Maybe everyone else
is wrong; maybe the two of you do have a chance; maybe this time
things will work out. It's really unfair to cut things off without
giving her one more chance, isn't it?
>DRINK CHAMPAGNE
--
Dan Schmidt | http://www.dfan.org
Don Rae
> What? After that black eye he gave you?
>
> >give beer to alan
> Not a good idea. You know what kind of mood he'll get into.
>
> >apologize to alan
> Oh, come on! He's the one who should be apologizing.
>
> >alan, give me a divorce
> Alan scowls at the TV and pretends not to have heard you.
>
> >again
> "Fer Chrissake, can't a guy get any peace an' quiet around here?"
>
> >n
> The front door is locked, and Alan has the key.
>
> ...well, it's going to be a long game, I can see that.
>
A very long game indeed. I agree with your viewpoint, because this
situation just gives me the shivers, and it's not something I think I would
ever play for the sake of "entertainment". The only purpose in this
approach, that I can possibly imagine, is to provide an illustration of
abuse to battered spouses.
Even if this situation was attempted to be turned into a conventional form
of "game", as it were....it cannot possibly get too much better....given the
seriousness of this situation and all that it implies. (I'll illustrate
this using a Hollywood-type resolution to this problem).
>OPEN THE DRESSER DRAWER
You open the dresser drawer, revealing a pair of socks, your nightgown, and
the knife you've been saving, in case you ever get the courage to use it.
>TAKE THE KNIFE
Taken.
>E
Living Room
The couch is in the middle of the room, and the television set is in the
corner.
The television appears to be showing a professional wrestling match.
Alan is lying on the couch. The only thing he's wearing is a pair of torn
underwear. His right hand is clutching an empty can of beer. He appears to
be watching the wrestling match with great interest.
Alan notices you.
"Can't you see my beer is empty? Get up off your lazy a** and bring me
another one b****, before I have to teach you another lesson in manners.
Man, I don't know why I put up with you sometimes." Alan throws the empty
beer can at your head, and you feel a sting of pain as a sharp corner of the
tin cuts your eye.
>STAB ALAN WITH THE KNIFE
Shocked, Alan attempts to grab you as you scream in rage, and thrust the
knife into his ribcage! You plunge the knife viciously in and out of his
chest, and blood spurts out all over your shaking hands! Alan gasps once,
and his eyes look pleadingly into yours, then the light fades from them
forever. You feel....empty.
You hear a voice coming from the hallway outside your apartment.
"Mary, someone's screaming again in 12A. I think someone's in trouble in
there. Call the cops."
Graphic, yet probably necessary. I don't think I can quite understand why
anyone would want to play such a hostile and depressing scenario in any
"game". This is simply a tragedy, with no possibility of enjoyment for the
player.
People play IF games to explore, solve and enjoy them, hoping for pleasant
resolution as a reward for their puzzle-solving efforts. The player, who is
personally involved with the experience of playing the game, usually has to
be able to derive enjoyment from the experience in order for it to be a
quality experience.
How can anyone possibly derive anything, other than a grim and bitter taste
in the mouth, from this?
- Don
Jesse Burneko
> Graphic, yet probably necessary. I don't think I can quite understand why
> anyone would want to play such a hostile and depressing scenario in any
> "game". This is simply a tragedy, with no possibility of enjoyment for the
> player.
>
> People play IF games to explore, solve and enjoy them, hoping for pleasant
> resolution as a reward for their puzzle-solving efforts. The player, who is
> personally involved with the experience of playing the game, usually has to
> be able to derive enjoyment from the experience in order for it to be a
> quality experience.
>
> How can anyone possibly derive anything, other than a grim and bitter taste
> in the mouth, from this?
Sorry for stepping in here especially since I haven't had time to properly
follow this thread. But I really dislike this sterotype of IF. To me IF
is NOT a game. It is underexplored literary medium. Personally, puzzles
exploration etc. are fun but that is not the be all end all of IF.
One of the goals of any work of literature is take make the reader feel
and epathise with characters. I mean MOST classic works of litterature
are not cheery and many dramatic films aren't either and yet people read
and watch these for entertainment. What better way to make your reader
empathise with a character than to make them BE that character. I think
the abuse scenario you just outlined is an EXCELENT use of the medium. I
had intense emotional responses just reading the transcript I can only
imagine what it would be like to have actually interact with such a thing.
I know there's a lot of discussion going on here about how you can't make
the reader feel certain things. Personally when I read a book, I can buy
that. It's my perogative to pass judgement over the characters. However,
when I play IF I open up and readily buy into the central character. I
give the author that leeway. I say okay, the author has defined my role
to be such and such, well I'll just have to think and act like such and
such and if this is what I'm ment to feel then I'll just feel that. But
then again this is why I like acting. I get handed a character to play
and then I *WORK* to feel and think and act like that character and I do
the same with IF. I start up IF EXPECTING to do that. But that's just
me.
Jesse Burneko
okbl...@my-deja.com
"Don Rae" <game...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> How can anyone possibly derive anything, other than a grim and bitter
> taste in the mouth, from this?
As I said, maybe contemporary IF is dark enough.
However, I agree with Jesse that it's a valid use of the medium. What
the person takes away from the experience depends on the author's
handling of the subject and the reader's mindset.
Murder is not the only way out of an abusive relationship and, actually,
hadn't even occurred to me when I wrote the message. I actually wasn't
thinking of a one-sided physically abusive relationship at all, for that
matter. Most of us have known people who were just bad for each other
and yet remained together no matter what, feeling literally compelled to
remain or return to a relationship that is mutually destructive.
But then, I'm not big into the whole victim thing, so I would tend to
think of it that way.
Don Rae
> Sorry for stepping in here especially since I haven't had time to properly
> follow this thread. But I really dislike this sterotype of IF. To me IF
> is NOT a game. It is underexplored literary medium. Personally, puzzles
> exploration etc. are fun but that is not the be all end all of IF.
Granted. But they do represent an element of the plot, because it gives the
player the experience of having their own actions actually mean something -
and that they actually influence their environment around them. Without
this element, it's just fiction.
> One of the goals of any work of literature is take make the reader feel
> and epathise with characters. I mean MOST classic works of litterature
> are not cheery and many dramatic films aren't either and yet people read
> and watch these for entertainment. What better way to make your reader
> empathise with a character than to make them BE that character. I think
> the abuse scenario you just outlined is an EXCELENT use of the medium. I
> had intense emotional responses just reading the transcript I can only
> imagine what it would be like to have actually interact with such a thing.
"Excellent", perhaps in regards to creativity. But would it make an
"excellent" story? Would it result in an "excellent" experience? What of
"excellence", in terms of the supposed moral of the story?
I think it's a tad nieve to try and present a story, then to try and justify
the actions of the player afterward when you force them into an action that
may be questionable from a moral standpoint. This kind of thing never
works, unless you are doing so to present a biased viewpoint, one way or the
other.....ie. "She was justified in killing him, because etc etc" vs. "She
was not justified in killing him, we have society's laws to consider etc
etc." This kind of thing can be done, but the work itself is ultimately
going to get judged upon the viewed results, as much as the author is likely
to be judged as well.
I think I was trying to illustrate the idea - that if you're the character,
you are will have some ability to make the decisions....but to a certain
point only. Unfortunately, those decisions have to be pre-determined within
the work, due to the necessity of moving the plot forward eventually. From
the perspective of the author, you would have to give the player character
the tools to deal with the problems you present to them, but the
implications of the tools themselves provide harsh focus to "how" the player
decides to play out the situation.
For example, there may be other ways for the player character to deal with
this example described situation, such as calling a friend or the police for
help, or calling a social services organization, or just moving out when the
guy isn't looking. But for the sake of plot construction, from the
programmer's point of view, all of the variations or consequences are not
probable within the bounds of telling a story, simply because of the
different consequences that can result from such actions.
If the character "kills the abusive spouse", then spends the rest of the
game trying to "justify their actions", the author's personal viewpoint on
the matter will come shining through for sure, based upon the conceived
consequences - it may not be a compatible one for the player, who is free to
read the game responses with relative antipathy.
If the whole game was spent trying to escape from this despicable
individual, it might be playable, but you are expecting a lot of emotional
involvement from the player, simply because you're placing "them" in "this
situation" - and you're hoping that they won't quit playing the IF
experience in disgust.
And you might compare this to another situation, where you're "playing a
soldier in the middle of a war", and you are given a "knife" object to use -
the moral implications of using it might be entirely different.
The difference is in the application of the puzzles you present to the
player, and the tools you give them to resolve the problems. In this
particular case, concerning any decision to put a "knife" object in there
for the player to use on the "Alan" character....it would be the author (me,
for instance) implying to the player (you) in a direct fashion: "Here is
the way you must solve this problem of yours. I've told you that you can
use the knife, if you've got the guts."
What would this particular puzzle setup imply about the author, then?
When writing conventional fiction, the author can distance themself a bit
more easily from the reader, treating the characters as if they have to deal
with all the consequences of their actions on their own. Writing "IF",
however, places a lot more of the author's and player's personal judgement
into the game experience, based upon the implemented "solutions" to any
dilemnas (puzzles) that are presented to the player.
So the very act of writing such a work can be detrimental to the author,
since it has the appearance of revealing your personal character to the
player (whether or not this is actually true). I'm not saying that this
example is impossible to manage - but it would have to be done in a very
long drawn out fashion.....perhaps you could make the example "knife"
decision the "absolutely last resort", when the player has reached an
arbitrary "adequate level of helplessness". You might have to have the
player's character talk and agonize a lot, trying to decide whether or not
that the action should be done or not. Then the player (you), acts as the
inner consciousness that decides - ok, go ahead and do it. I give you
permission. Ever hear of the "automatic reaction" defense in these
real-life cases? You would be supplying this "automatic reaction", in this
case, if you were playing this game!
Chilling, isn't it? It could work, but not without a certain cost to the
author (if not the player). It's one thing to have mindless violence in
video games, blood splatters, special effects, heads decapitated, or to
display this kind of situation in a form for viewing or reading - but it's
another thing entirely to take someone you don't know at all (the player),
and put them in a situation where you're forcing them to accomplish
something like this (deal with the abuse situation) in a manner that is
entirely at the author's discretion (solve the puzzle my way, or you''ll be
miserable and you won't make it).
If I released an IF work/game like this, my name would probably be
mud....such a work might be hailed as a "breakthrough" or appreciated in
creative terms, but this means very little if you're the tiniest bit
concerned about how you affect your audience, or what they will think of you
afterward.
- Don
Jesse Burneko
> Granted. But they do represent an element of the plot, because it gives the
> player the experience of having their own actions actually mean something -
> and that they actually influence their environment around them. Without
> this element, it's just fiction.
Oh, I agree. And I often forget when I say, "I really don't like puzzles
in IF" that everyone doesn't know (or agree with) my definition of
what a puzzle is (to me at least). I won't go into it again since I
posted sometime back my position. If you don't know you can either look
up my old post or think about this: By my definition of what a puzzles is
and isn't Infocom's Deadline is puzzleless.
> I think it's a tad nieve to try and present a story, then to try and justify
> the actions of the player afterward when you force them into an action that
> may be questionable from a moral standpoint.
Which is precisely why you don't force them unless, as you say, you as the
author or trying to make a point. When I design a work of IF (don't look
at the stuff I've released the stuff I'm talking about only exists on
paper at the moment) I think of my central character and I consider all
the problems this character has to overcome. Then for each problem I
consider all possible (or at least as many as I can) solutions to this
problem. Then I throw out the ones that I as an author am either
unwilling or incapable of dealing with. Then I throw out all the ones I
think are inconsistent with the player character as I've defined him or
her. Then I'm left with a small subset of the original possible
solutions. These are the ones I implement. I consider the plot
ramifications and repeat this process for all the problems in the story
until I reach some reasonable ending or set of endings.
> For example, there may be other ways for the player character to deal with
> this example described situation, such as calling a friend or the police for
> help, or calling a social services organization, or just moving out when the
> guy isn't looking. But for the sake of plot construction, from the
> programmer's point of view, all of the variations or consequences are not
> probable within the bounds of telling a story, simply because of the
> different consequences that can result from such actions.
Yes, but a good IF author/programming using the medium to its fullest
potential WILL implement all or some of these alternatives. In essence
telling many stories. See my above process for designing IF.
> If the character "kills the abusive spouse", then spends the rest of the
> game trying to "justify their actions", the author's personal viewpoint on
> the matter will come shining through for sure, based upon the conceived
> consequences - it may not be a compatible one for the player, who is free to
> read the game responses with relative antipathy.
In any written work the author's personal viewpoint is going to come
shining through. That's why an author writes to begin with. They have
something to say.
> If the whole game was spent trying to escape from this despicable
> individual, it might be playable, but you are expecting a lot of emotional
> involvement from the player, simply because you're placing "them" in "this
> situation" - and you're hoping that they won't quit playing the IF
> experience in disgust.
Actually, I would consider my work a success if I could inspire such a
strong emotion. Tell me, wouldn't you be proud to write a book that was
banned somewhere?
> The difference is in the application of the puzzles you present to the
> player, and the tools you give them to resolve the problems. In this
> particular case, concerning any decision to put a "knife" object in there
> for the player to use on the "Alan" character....it would be the author (me,
> for instance) implying to the player (you) in a direct fashion: "Here is
> the way you must solve this problem of yours. I've told you that you can
> use the knife, if you've got the guts."
Giving the knife to player would impy that the player has the OPTION to
use it. IF as I've described above would have alternatives. Unless of
couse the author is trying to make a statement. But in this case I would
start the story just after the murder has been commited with some kind of
intro text stating that the point of the story was to defend your actions.
> What would this particular puzzle setup imply about the author, then?
Hip Hip Hooray!? Sorry, but I'm all for the justifyable slaughtering of
abusive spouses and I'm not affraid to admit it.
> When writing conventional fiction, the author can distance themself a bit
> more easily from the reader, treating the characters as if they have to deal
> with all the consequences of their actions on their own.
I disagree. All characters are an extention of the author's perceptions
and viewpoints. A character is either cast in a favorable or disfavorable
light or perhas treated with indifference. If a character cast in a
favorable light does something you as a reader disagree with then you will
most likely disagree with the author on those issues (unless of course the
character is portrayed as having made a mistake with those actions.)
> Writing "IF", however, places a lot more of the author's and player's
> personal judgement into the game experience, based upon the implemented
> "solutions" to any dilemnas (puzzles) that are presented to the player.
I completely disagree. In fact I would almost argue that there is MORE
judgement of an author in a novel than in IF. In a novel the author is
making ALL the decisions and therefore every decision a character makes is
a direct reflection of the author. However, in IF the author can provide
alternatives and therefore alow some of those reflections be of the
reader. Of course the reactions to those reflections will in return be
reflections of the author and so on but still you see the point.
> If I released an IF work/game like this, my name would probably be
> mud....such a work might be hailed as a "breakthrough" or appreciated in
> creative terms, but this means very little if you're the tiniest bit
> concerned about how you affect your audience, or what they will think of you
> afterward.
All authors are concerned about how something will affect the audience.
The author strives to achieve a certain effect. You are successful if
that effect is achieved regardless of what the effect is. And as I've
stated before whatever you write you open yourself up to judgement of your
personal character.
Jesse Burneko
Don Rae
> Yes, but a good IF author/programming using the medium to its fullest
> potential WILL implement all or some of these alternatives. In essence
> telling many stories. See my above process for designing IF.
(Ah, for the luxury of time - if I only could spend all of my time doing
world modelling, anticipating all reactions to the author-presented
environment, to implement a fully dynamic universe!)
:)
> Actually, I would consider my work a success if I could inspire such a
> strong emotion. Tell me, wouldn't you be proud to write a book that was
> banned somewhere?
If my only purpose was to "sell a lot of copies", maybe...but writing to
achieve "notoriety" is not my favorite choice for fame, no.
"Writing IF" is simply not the same as "writing a book". The mediums are
distinctly different, for all the reasons I've specifed thus far. You are
almost always limited by first person viewpoint of the story situation, and
you rarely get the whole picture of the antagonist(s) motivations. This
places stricter limits on how much understanding you can have about the
protagonist, which can only be overcome by extremely perceptive writing -
this is not easy to do in the "COMMAND ME - GET RESULT" style of interface.
>
> > What would this particular puzzle setup imply about the author, then?
>
> Hip Hip Hooray!? Sorry, but I'm all for the justifyable slaughtering of
> abusive spouses and I'm not affraid to admit it.
>
Perhaps I share your opinion in some parts of my mind, but perhaps I don't
in others.
I am more of a philosopher in such matters, and much less a moralist. I
don't pretend to know all the answers to difficult problems such as these,
nor do I attempt to try and impose my moral judgement too much. When one
presents this type of opinion, one often declares oneself to be on "this
side" of the issue at hand - and this can be interpreted literally that one
has a closed mind concerning the subject matter. If that's what the
author's goal is, fine - but it is impossible to expect that the work will
have mass appeal, simply because it dares to upset others.
When I write "IF", vs. any other story I've ever written - I'm finding that
the medium simply imposes these kinds of severe limitations, to the extent
that forces the author to always interpret the experience of the interaction
level elements for the player.
Can you then reach a large audience? Maybe, but usually only if you can
make your views universally appealing enough. If you're going for "shock
value", you'll reach only those who WANT to be "shocked". If this is
satisfying enough to the author, then by all means.
> > Writing "IF", however, places a lot more of the author's and player's
> > personal judgement into the game experience, based upon the implemented
> > "solutions" to any dilemnas (puzzles) that are presented to the player.
>
> I completely disagree. In fact I would almost argue that there is MORE
> judgement of an author in a novel than in IF. In a novel the author is
> making ALL the decisions and therefore every decision a character makes is
> a direct reflection of the author. However, in IF the author can provide
> alternatives and therefore alow some of those reflections be of the
> reader. Of course the reactions to those reflections will in return be
> reflections of the author and so on but still you see the point.
I'm sorry, but I'm going have to state that this is simply not true - my
experience in being both a writer and a programmer by profession...argues
otherwise. The nature of IF demands that you must code every single
possibility of your plot into it, more or less forcing the player to
interpret the "COMMAND ME - GET RESULT" interaction method in exactly the
same way as you do....of which is also limited by the player's "first-person
perspective" of the plot situation.
By contrast - in a novel, you have more luxury to lay out all the story
elements at a pace you feel appropriate, and you can choose any viewpoint
you wish for it at any time, for any length of time - the global viewpoint,
the protagonist's viewpoint, the antagonist's viewpoint, a group's
viewpoint, an observer's viewpoint, etc etc....this leaves much more room
for broad based interpretation of the events by the reader.
In IF, the pace of the plot also has to be constant enough to sustain
interest - enough for them to see it though to the end. The author of the
"IF" work always needs to steer the player to the desired end result(s),
because the plot has to move forward somehow in order to sustain the
player's interest in the "interactive" portion of the experience!
(I've never bothered to finish certain games, because the author never got
to the point quickly enough.)
> > If I released an IF work/game like this, my name would probably be
> > mud....such a work might be hailed as a "breakthrough" or appreciated in
> > creative terms, but this means very little if you're the tiniest bit
> > concerned about how you affect your audience, or what they will think of
you
> > afterward.
>
> All authors are concerned about how something will affect the audience.
> The author strives to achieve a certain effect. You are successful if
> that effect is achieved regardless of what the effect is. And as I've
> stated before whatever you write you open yourself up to judgement of your
> personal character.
>
Successful....regardless of the effect you achieved? There are degrees of
"success".
It is pathetically easy to set out to anger or shock someone else, and then
achieve a certain notoriety by doing so. This can be defined as "success",
if you really want to define it as such.
(In any literary work....you can decide to force the reader to experience
exactly what you want them to experience, period. Anyone can write like
this - there's nothing special about it at all. Highly repugnant situations
are fairly simple to describe, and leave virtually nothing to the
imagination, except the overall feeling of - "get me the hell out of this,
already!")
It is much harder to a present an entire situation, and then demonstrate how
the protganist might choose to deal with their situation in their own unique
manner, leaving the entire meaning of the story's experience up to the one
who views it. This is a higher degree of "success", the kind of success
that is often recognized universally to almost everyone who reads the work.
Given the choice, I'd personally rather play or read material that
represents more the latter.
I truly believe that the best writers are the ones who can truly write in a
state of true objectivity, presenting a given situation, character-based or
otherwise, from any viewpoint they want to - thus limiting or eliminating
the potential judgement of the author's own character entirely. I favor the
reader's understanding of the story's characters, and of the examples they
represented to the reader. (Very few authors have achieved this level of
quality in their writings - Mark Twain, Harper Lee, and Isaac Asimov to name
a few).
In viewing the subject of "spousal abuse", among other moral-based crimes -
the sharp examination of what is "good" and what is "evil" does not often
bring about any real level of reader introspection, because it's usually
much easier to write an emotional interpretation of highly subjective
moralities than it is to examine the antagonist(s) motivations as a
counterpoint.
This is why I can't understand how "spousal abuse", as a "game subject", can
ever truly provide an IF player with a quality experience, no matter how
well it's written or presented. The emotionally charged content of it is
further limited by IF design limitations, which are subject to the "COMMAND
ME - GET RESULT" problem - this can never adequately express anything beyond
the player character's reaction, frustration, and anger with their current
situation according to the author's descriptions, leaving the reader/player
only with a sense of "raw emotion" in the wake of completion, assuming they
really want to charge that far into such raw content (which I severely
doubt).
Make no mistake, I can sometimes appreciate emotionally-based "shock effect"
kinds of work if it's really thought out logically enough. But...more often
than not, this kind of work is simply "abrasive", since it usually cannot
help but represent the emotionally biased viewpoint of the author.
Thanks for the discussion, it was rather inciteful...
- Don
Adam J. Thornton
> JUMP OFF BALCONY
Adam
--
ad...@princeton.edu
"My eyes say their prayers to her / Sailors ring her bell / Like a moth
mistakes a light bulb / For the moon and goes to hell." -- Tom Waits
cmshaw
>If the whole game was spent trying to escape from this despicable
>individual, it might be playable, but you are expecting a lot of emotional
>involvement from the player, simply because you're placing "them" in "this
>situation" - and you're hoping that they won't quit playing the IF
>experience in disgust.
No, it wouldn't be much of a *game* -- but it might be a very effective
way to illustrate an educational point. Domestic abuse is one situation
in which almost everyone has their own opinion about what they would do
if *they* were caught in it, which makes the IF interface a useful one.
Granted, there would be an enormous amount of research necessary; you'd
want a reasonably concise list of the usual actions taken by battered
spouses and the statistical spread of the usual reactions, probably with
a random factor for that edge of unpredictability. It would be rather
chlling to "play", of course, especially since a "winning" scenario
might not exist for most courses of action -- which would be the point,
I think, that this "game" could teach.
Caitlin
--
cmshaw -at- lambda -dot- net -without- any fancy signature line
*** for obvious reasons, you can't use the email in the headers
Philip Goetz
> situation just gives me the shivers, and it's not something I think I
would
> ever play for the sake of "entertainment". The only purpose in this
> approach, that I can possibly imagine, is to provide an illustration of
> abuse to battered spouses.
> People play IF games to explore, solve and enjoy them, hoping for pleasant
> resolution as a reward for their puzzle-solving efforts. The player, who
is
> personally involved with the experience of playing the game, usually has
to
> be able to derive enjoyment from the experience in order for it to be a
> quality experience.
>
> How can anyone possibly derive anything, other than a grim and bitter
taste
> in the mouth, from this?
>
> - Don
Don: I'm still torqued from writing about the collapse of text adventures
and the
artistic destruction of the video game industry, from the complete lack of
response
to my offer to pay thousands of dollars for a short IF, and from playing
Hunter S.
Thompson in a LARP, so I'll try to answer this as politely as I can at the
moment
without medication:
Who the HELL said that IF is about "entertainment"? Is 1984
"Entertainment"?
Is Lord of the Flies "Entertainment"? Is The Trial or Hamlet or King Lear
"entertaining"?
For that matter, is Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List "entertaining"?
Don't box IF into pleasant little puzzle-solving excursions. This is art.
Some art is pretty. Some is painful. Picasso's "Guernica" and Munch's
"The Scream". IF can aspire to this. Come on, authors, prove me right.
I want IF that hurts. Hurt me! Hurt me!
Phil Goetz
Philip Goetz
> > personal judgement into the game experience, based upon the implemented
> > "solutions" to any dilemnas (puzzles) that are presented to the player.
>
> I completely disagree. In fact I would almost argue that there is MORE
> judgement of an author in a novel than in IF. In a novel the author is
> making ALL the decisions and therefore every decision a character makes is
> a direct reflection of the author. However, in IF the author can provide
> alternatives and therefore alow some of those reflections be of the
> reader. Of course the reactions to those reflections will in return be
> reflections of the author and so on but still you see the point.
> Jesse Burneko
An interesting thing I've observed in multiplayer IF is the subtle,
intriguing
difference in tone when a work is produced by many different authors, each
having control over one character. There is no authorial judgement, no
clear
implications as to who is right and who is wrong. It gives the work a
truthfulness that is impossible to achieve in ordinary fiction.
Phil Goetz
fl...@populus.net
IF
Philip Goetz wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Who the HELL said that IF is about "entertainment"? Is 1984
> "Entertainment"?
> Is Lord of the Flies "Entertainment"? Is The Trial or Hamlet or King Lear
> "entertaining"?
> For that matter, is Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List "entertaining"?
>
> Don't box IF into pleasant little puzzle-solving excursions. This is art.
> Some art is pretty. Some is painful. Picasso's "Guernica" and Munch's
> "The Scream". IF can aspire to this. Come on, authors, prove me right.
> I want IF that hurts. Hurt me! Hurt me!
[necessary spoilers below]
I daresay that some of the best IF does exactly that. Photopia wouldn't
have been half as moving if there wasn't that moment of terrible, gut-wrenching
recognition. I-0 and Varicella would have been standard puzzle games but for
that substrata of Something Very Unpleasant just beneath the surface. There is
much "entertainment" value in these games, but what raises them to the levels
they have reached is what is on the other side of the coin: the ugly stuff we
don't Want to see but find ourselves coming face to face with anyway. Someone
wrote me once and asked why none of my games have happy endings. I responded
gently that happy endings are not required ;)
Ian Finley
Rich Pizor
the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]
In article <y74c4.22882$W2.2...@iad-read.news.verio.net>, Philip
Goetz <pgo...@i-a-i.com> wrote:
> Who the HELL said that IF is about "entertainment"?
Well, the market forces of capitalism leap immediately to
mind...entertainment outsells ennui more often than not in the digital
realm. (I certainly haven't seen many titles based on the works of
Samuel Beckett, for example...) Hard to say whether this is because the
latter hasn't been overly tested (AMFV is the only one that leaps to
mind but I'm sure there are others) or whether it's because people buy
games to escape, not to bog down; cynicism isn't escapism for most.
> Is 1984
> "Entertainment"?
> Is Lord of the Flies "Entertainment"?
>Is The Trial or Hamlet or King Lear
> "entertaining"?
Depends on what you define "entertaining" as...I personally find a
well-done version of King Lear to be very entertaining -- ok, at a
different level than say Pauley Shore, but entertaining nonetheless. I
also find Monty Python entertaining. No accounting for taste I guess.
> For that matter, is Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List "entertaining"?
For some people, sure. Some people also find Titanic entertaining.
Others still prefer a Bach symphony, others a Metallica concert. One of
the great things about the freedom of expression is the array of work
that is produced and, by extension, the array of audiences it's
produced for.
> Don't box IF into pleasant little puzzle-solving excursions. This is art.
> Some art is pretty. Some is painful. Picasso's "Guernica" and Munch's
> "The Scream". IF can aspire to this. Come on, authors, prove me right.
> I want IF that hurts. Hurt me! Hurt me!
There's a fundamental question that you're missing here, which is this:
do IF authors *want* to hurt you? I haven't lurked long enough that I
feal qualified to make a judgement, but I'm guessing that for most the
answer is no.
Rich, de-lurking again after an interstate move
Gene Wirchenko
>> A very long game indeed. I agree with your viewpoint, because this
>> situation just gives me the shivers, and it's not something I think I
>would
>> ever play for the sake of "entertainment". The only purpose in this
>> approach, that I can possibly imagine, is to provide an illustration of
>> abuse to battered spouses.
Not just entertainment, but it might be informative.
>> People play IF games to explore, solve and enjoy them, hoping for pleasant
>> resolution as a reward for their puzzle-solving efforts. The player, who
>is
>> personally involved with the experience of playing the game, usually has
>to
>> be able to derive enjoyment from the experience in order for it to be a
>> quality experience.
Or satisfaction. Maybe, someone would get an idea how the abuser
clicks and that would help them or help them help others.
>> How can anyone possibly derive anything, other than a grim and bitter
>taste
>> in the mouth, from this?
Data is data. If the presentation were good, some might learn
how an abuser operates. This could have good consequences.
>Don: I'm still torqued from writing about the collapse of text adventures
>and the
>artistic destruction of the video game industry, from the complete lack of
>response
>to my offer to pay thousands of dollars for a short IF, and from playing
>Hunter S.
>Thompson in a LARP, so I'll try to answer this as politely as I can at the
>moment
>without medication:
>
>Who the HELL said that IF is about "entertainment"? Is 1984
>"Entertainment"?
>Is Lord of the Flies "Entertainment"? Is The Trial or Hamlet or King Lear
>"entertaining"?
>For that matter, is Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List "entertaining"?
It sounds quite sensible to me, so here, I'll say it: "Among its
pluses, IF is good entertainment.". Yes, it is. Yes, it is. I
haven't seen it, but presumably, it is. Yes, it is. I haven't seen
it, but presumably, it is. I haven't seen it, but presumably, it is.
>Don't box IF into pleasant little puzzle-solving excursions. This is art.
>Some art is pretty. Some is painful. Picasso's "Guernica" and Munch's
>"The Scream". IF can aspire to this. Come on, authors, prove me right.
>I want IF that hurts. Hurt me! Hurt me!
Ah, you want entertainment! You have even stated how you want to
be entertained. That's good. Go for it!
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
I have preferences.
You have biases.
He/She has prejudices.
Philip Goetz
art.
> >Some art is pretty. Some is painful. Picasso's "Guernica" and Munch's
> >"The Scream". IF can aspire to this. Come on, authors, prove me right.
> >I want IF that hurts. Hurt me! Hurt me!
>
> Ah, you want entertainment! You have even stated how you want to
> be entertained. That's good. Go for it!
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Gene Wirchenko
I may be being pedantic here... but that's never stopped me before.
No, I do not want entertainment. When I read a physics textbook,
that is not entertainment. If I read the newspaper, that is not
entertainment. (Unless you define "entertainment" to mean
"anything I choose to do", which makes the word useless.)
But there is no hard dividing line between those activities
and what I look for in fiction.
Phil
Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
>I may be being pedantic here... but that's never stopped me before.
>
>No, I do not want entertainment. When I read a physics textbook,
>that is not entertainment. If I read the newspaper, that is not
Different tastes.
>entertainment. (Unless you define "entertainment" to mean
>"anything I choose to do", which makes the word useless.)
No, it's still a useful distinction: doing something that I want
to do vs. something that I don't want to be doing.
>But there is no hard dividing line between those activities
>and what I look for in fiction.
Sincerely,
Joshua Wise
--
Play Deephome, a Dwarven adventure based in the long abandoned city of
Deephome. Fight dark spirits and reclaim the city for your people!
http://www.angelfire.com/nj2/Yesuslave
Philip Goetz <pgo...@i-a-i.com> wrote in message
news:%rOc4.23891$W2.2...@iad-read.news.verio.net...
> > >Don't box IF into pleasant little puzzle-solving excursions. This is
> art.
> > >Some art is pretty. Some is painful. Picasso's "Guernica" and Munch's
> > >"The Scream". IF can aspire to this. Come on, authors, prove me
right.
> > >I want IF that hurts. Hurt me! Hurt me!
> >
> > Ah, you want entertainment! You have even stated how you want to
> > be entertained. That's good. Go for it!
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Gene Wirchenko
>
> I may be being pedantic here... but that's never stopped me before.
>
> No, I do not want entertainment. When I read a physics textbook,
> that is not entertainment.
Actually, some of us do read physics text books for fun...
If I read the newspaper, that is not
> entertainment.
In my humble opinion, the newspaper is one of the best sources for all kinds
of creative and fictional work. I sure as hell don't trust what it says as
TRUTH.
(Unless you define "entertainment" to mean
> "anything I choose to do", which makes the word useless.)
> But there is no hard dividing line between those activities
> and what I look for in fiction.
>
> Phil
When it comes down to it "entertainment" is so subjective that it can't be
generalized. A movie that one person might find entertaining, another
person might find so emotionally wrenching that the word "entertaining" is
offensive. I happen to be one of those people who likes to watch and read
things that a lot of people would find boring and have really no interest in
things many people find entertaining. I suppose that your choice of what
you are "entertained" by may be different, but entertainment can range from
the most informative and "boring" to the most mindless and "exciting."
(Perhaps I'm being a little off topic, but I hate it when semantics are
brought up, not because I don't think semantics should be brought up, but
because I can't help myself from commenting on them. :) )
Josh
Philip Goetz
> >"anything I choose to do", which makes the word useless.)
>
> to do vs. something that I don't want to be doing.
>
>
> Gene Wirchenko
No; not unless you can convince me that you ever do things
that you don't want to do. If you ever do things that you
don't want to do, then you are either a) controlled by aliens,
b) suffering from a mental disorder, or c) using a meaning of
"want" that must be elucidated so as to mean approximately
what you are trying to prevent the word "entertainment"
from meaning.
Phil
Gene Wirchenko
>> >entertainment. (Unless you define "entertainment" to mean
>> >"anything I choose to do", which makes the word useless.)
>>
>> No, it's still a useful distinction: doing something that I want
>> to do vs. something that I don't want to be doing.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Gene Wirchenko
>
>No; not unless you can convince me that you ever do things
>that you don't want to do. If you ever do things that you
Piece of cake.
Three examples are doing income tax forms, getting up some
mornings, and losing my temper (in most cases).
>don't want to do, then you are either a) controlled by aliens,
>b) suffering from a mental disorder, or c) using a meaning of
>"want" that must be elucidated so as to mean approximately
>what you are trying to prevent the word "entertainment"
>from meaning.
Sincerely,
Quentin.D.Thompson
"Philip Goetz" <pgo...@i-a-i.com> wrote:
> > A very long game indeed. I agree with your viewpoint, because this
> > situation just gives me the shivers, and it's not something I think I
> would
> > ever play for the sake of "entertainment". The only purpose in this
> > approach, that I can possibly imagine, is to provide an illustration of
> > abuse to battered spouses.
>
> > resolution as a reward for their puzzle-solving efforts. The player, who
> is
> > personally involved with the experience of playing the game, usually has
> to
> > be able to derive enjoyment from the experience in order for it to be a
> > quality experience.
> >
> taste
> > in the mouth, from this?
> >
>
> Don: I'm still torqued from writing about the collapse of text adventures
> and the
> artistic destruction of the video game industry, from the complete lack of
> response
> to my offer to pay thousands of dollars for a short IF, and from playing
> Hunter S.
> Thompson in a LARP, so I'll try to answer this as politely as I can at the
> moment
> without medication:
>
> Who the HELL said that IF is about "entertainment"? Is 1984
> "Entertainment"?
> Is Lord of the Flies "Entertainment"? Is The Trial or Hamlet or King Lear
> "entertaining"?
> For that matter, is Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List "entertaining"?
>
> Some art is pretty. Some is painful. Picasso's "Guernica" and Munch's
> "The Scream". IF can aspire to this. Come on, authors, prove me right.
> I want IF that hurts. Hurt me! Hurt me!
Ho hum. Well, I think I've posted about this already, but just to reiterate:
THERE'S NO SHAME IN ENTERTAINMENT, DAMN IT!! (Caps intentional.) Some IF is
entertainment plain and simple, some is artistic, some is a little of both,
but THERE'S A TIME AND PLACE FOR EVERYTHING IN THE IF WORLD. Entertainment
and art, in addition, are often in the eye of the beholder : I've had reviews
of my Comp game treating it as art, as entertainment, and as in-joke IF, and
I had NO PROBLEMS with either of those points of view. I want an IF world
where "Curses" and "Firebird" coexist with "Photopia" and "Worlds Apart", not
an exercise in masochism,
>
Hope this hurts (or whatever)..
Quentin.D.Thompson. [The 'D' is a variable.]
Lord High Executioner Of Bleagh
(Formerly A Cheap Coder)
Quentin.D.Thompson
"Philip Goetz" <pgo...@i-a-i.com> wrote:
> > >entertainment. (Unless you define "entertainment" to mean
> > >"anything I choose to do", which makes the word useless.)
> >
> > No, it's still a useful distinction: doing something that I want
> > to do vs. something that I don't want to be doing.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Gene Wirchenko
>
> No; not unless you can convince me that you ever do things
> that you don't want to do. If you ever do things that you
> b) suffering from a mental disorder, or c) using a meaning of
> "want" that must be elucidated so as to mean approximately
> what you are trying to prevent the word "entertainment"
> from meaning.
> KILL TROLL WITH SWORD
The troll falls to the ground, screaming exultantly. "Hurt me! HURT MEEE!" it
screeches, before disappearing into a puff of green smoke. Bite me,
Jon Ingold
..But isn't everyone taking this a little seriously?
Don't get me wrong - I'm not belittling the problems of abuse etc. it's just
that in an IF game it's NOT REAL. So - although I wouldn't use that instance
myself - is there no room for Black Comedy in this Genre.
Lot's of really good comedy films feature death and murder and really unfair
things happening to perfectly decenty people. But they're still
entertaining, because everybody knows it's not real; and even if it mirrors
reality people are usually happy enough to ignore that. Take "Arsenic and
Old Lace" - a very funny film, with a relatively high body count, lots of
lugging corpses around while mugging... and it's referenced in "Suspect" so
perhaps some of the old Infocom bulk agrees with. me..
So yeah, while their are some scenarios I wouldn't use (Holocaust, Torture
etc.) for comic purposes - let face it, there are some people who will; and
a very small percentage of those will do it well enough to make it
worthwhle. If you write bad black comedy it's the worst thing in the world.
If you write good black comedy - well - everyone feels they shouldn't like
it.. but...
Jon
Philip Goetz
> >that you don't want to do. If you ever do things that you
>
>
> Three examples are doing income tax forms, getting up some
> mornings, and losing my temper (in most cases).
You don't have to do income tax returns if you don't want to.
The thing is that you want to stay out of jail. Thus you /do/
want to do income tax returns, as opposed to not doing them
and going to jail.
Phil G.
Gene Wirchenko
>> >No; not unless you can convince me that you ever do things
>> >that you don't want to do. If you ever do things that you
>>
>> Piece of cake.
>>
>> Three examples are doing income tax forms, getting up some
>> mornings, and losing my temper (in most cases).
>
>You don't have to do income tax returns if you don't want to.
I know, but my point is that I do do them.
>The thing is that you want to stay out of jail. Thus you /do/
>want to do income tax returns, as opposed to not doing them
>and going to jail.
No. I don't want to go to jail and I don't want to do income tax
forms. My arm is twisted though and so I do the tax form though I
don't want to.
The government keeps you out of jail by collecting your taxes.
This should not be confused with bribes.