[Unreview] English translation of Natalie
ems...@mindspring.com
the following invitation:
>Another thing. Italian community is trying to translate games in
english to let
>a lot of people to play them. Fabrizio Venerandi translated his
interesting
>(and very short) one room game: Natalie. We would appreciate a lot if
you could
>take a look: http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/12042. I think it
worths a
>look.
Here are some of my initial impressions on this game. [I am posting
to both the English rec.games.int-fiction and to
it.comp.giochi.avventure.testuali; to the denizens of the latter
group, I apologize, but I cannot write Italian.]
The premise of Natalie seems to be that the player is communicating
(telepathically?) with a trapped player character in a prison of some
sort -- though it soon turns out that that is not exactly the case, I
never became entirely sure what the truth was. I reached the game's
first major twist, but that is about as far as it goes.
The narrative is quite a bit more subjective than the average: this
other character (whoever he or she may be) is aware of talking to the
player, and addresses you directly. It is an interesting idea to have
the player character be a distinct person/personality from the player;
a few English games have experimented with it (LASH and FailSafe come
to mind), but the idea is not at all used up yet. Here, it generates
a few genuinely creepy moments.
However, I think the merits of Natalie are somewhat undermined by the
translation. The English is usually comprehensible, but it doesn't
feel native, and there are quite a few times when it uses the wrong
word. The punctuation is also messy -- by which I mean not just the
run-on sentences, which I take to be an intentional sign of the
stream-of-consciousness narrative, but the fact that the periods are
consistently outside quotation marks when they should be inside.
Technical punctuation problems could be cleaned up pretty easily. I
think, however, that an improvement of the translation would need to
be done by someone who is reasonably fluent in Italian and has a
native-level ability in English. This is particularly important
because of the literary ambitions of this particular game; in another
context, a serviceable but not stylish translation might be enough.
But where nuance of style and subtlety of atmosphere are required, you
need someone who is as capable a writer in English as the original
author was in Italian.
Then there is an additional issue, and I am not sure whether there is
anything that the Italian community could or should do about this.
The few pieces of IF that I've played that were translated from
Italian tend to conform to a different set of expectations than
English IF. The descriptions are often more emotional and less
objectively specific; while they seem more like literary products,
they make life harder on the player. It isn't always easy to tell
what or where the essential objects for interaction are. For
instance, in the opening scenes of this game, there are some nouns
that are examinable, and are quite important; other nouns, mentioned
in much the same way, seem to be unimplemented, and trying to interact
with them generates only the unenlightening response "I don't think I
want to hear you".
Here's a sample from early in the game:
---
>X POOLS
"I'm tired, I approach the pools and I stomp one or two of them with
my bare feet, making the water squirt all around: water falling back
on more water, accumulating, can't see anything else but water with
water inside closed itself within water opening and closing and
glittering, bouncing from the celiling to the floor.
I know there's a grid in one of the pools, I invented that before, do
you remember? I think I saw a grid."
>X GRID
"I can barely see its outlline, it looks like a rectangular grid, al
immerged
in the water, completely fown the water, that damn muddy cold water."
---
There are some misspellings (outlline, al, celiling), and words that
don't exist or are misused (immerged, fown, invented). But leaving
aside that kind of problem, which could be fixed trivially by a native
speaker with a red pencil, there remains a tendency towards
impressionism and vagueness that is strongly at odds with the
conventional approach of English-language IF.
Combined with this is a quality that reads, in English, as
self-consciously literary, whether or not it feels that way in
Italian. It draws attention to itself as a piece of written text, and
to the process of reading it. And this goes counter to my own
inclinations for IF writing. I tend to think that the purpose of IF
text, in English, is generally to provide a near-transparent access to
the world model: to concentrate the player's attention on what is, to
create a sense of physical presence and of existing in a tangible
location. There are exceptions; "Moonlit Tower" is consciously artful
in its writing, but I found that fit perfectly the precious, wrought
qualities of the game world itself, and I wasn't particularly
bothered.
Meanwhile, paradoxically, I often find the puzzles in Italian IF to be
particularly difficult and to require a great deal of reading the
author's mind. Literary IF, in the English community, is frequently
positioned as the opposite of puzzle-based IF; here is a form that is
a bit of both.
I noted similar tendencies in "Ramon and Jonathan" (which I found
incomprehensible as a result) and, to a lesser extent, in "The Land of
the Cyclops" (which I did finish, and wrote up for IF-Review). My
guess, therefore, is that these games are not badly written or
unplayable, but that the way in which the player is expected to
interact is *different* in the Italian community. It is quite
intriguing to me that different language communities might develop
fundamentally different approaches into IF. When I play IF of Italian
origin, I am more than usually aware that I am *reading*; I find
myself thinking of one of those slender, expensive white paperbacks,
like an edition of Calvino.
The game comes with a read-me file, which not only explains how to
play but provides some background to the game's concept. I read
through this, though I had a bit of trouble, again, with the
translation. This read-me speaks of the use of rhetorical imagery, of
an expectation that the player will enter into the game and understand
it in terms of this symbolism; to interact with it, in other words, at
the level of literature, rather than at the level of simulation.
So I'm forced to conclude, I think, that I'm not a very good player
for this kind of IF. It confuses me, and it turns aside my attempts
to play in the ways I'm used to. But possibly there are other people
who will find it more accessible, especially if some of the technical
issues in the prose are repaired. And if the mental switch can be
made, the results may be an entirely unfamiliar and novel IF
experience.
-- Emily
Adrien Beau
>
> The punctuation is also messy -- by which I mean not just the
> run-on sentences, which I take to be an intentional sign of the
> stream-of-consciousness narrative, but the fact that the periods
> are consistently outside quotation marks when they should be
> inside.
I prefer to use the word "messy" for a punctiation that is
inconsistent (e.g., with periods alternatively inside and outside
quotes).
In the present case, I would rather say that punctuation is one
thing they forgot to translate.
I can only speak for French, but apart from putting periods
outside quotation, we also put one space before question marks,
exclamation marks, semicolons and colons.
I have no problem switching from one standard to another, but it
took me some time before I felt comfortable with both, and before
I stopped making mistakes.
--
spam....@free.fr
You have my name and my hostname: you can mail me.
(Put a period between my first and last names).
(boa13? A nickname I didn't intend to use here).
Giovanni Riccardi
"Natalie" by Fabrizio Venerandi also tend to conform to a different set of
expectations than other Italian games. Even if the objectives are different,
both these pieces of IF are experiments.
Cyclops is an adaptation from the Classics. Natalie is an original work in
which the author tries to use different perspectives in narration and
interaction. In the beginning the player communicates in some way with the
main character, in the end you are the main character then you have to type
commands in first person. I don't know how Fabrizio translated this into
English (I played the Italian version), but I think it is not simply a
change in how you interact with the game, it also add some elements to
narration.
At this point, I think we also have to consider the differences between
Italian and English (not related with the translation).
Italian is richer than English in verbal forms in the sense that the person
who perform an action is implicit in the verb. In English you have to
include the pronoun:
"take the book" ---> the usual IF command (imperative verb)
"I take the book" ---> first person (it doesn't seem an usual IF command)
In italian the "io" (I) pronoun can be omitted:
"prendi il libro" ---> the usual IF command (imperative verb)
"prendo il libro" ---> first person command
So we have some kind of "first person imperative verbs" which you can use as
commands in a piece of IF like Natalie.
Giovanni
ems...@mindspring.com
> Maybe a good news for you: "The Land of Cyclops" by Francesco Cordella and
> "Natalie" by Fabrizio Venerandi also tend to conform to a different set of
> expectations than other Italian games. Even if the objectives are different,
> both these pieces of IF are experiments.
> Cyclops is an adaptation from the Classics. Natalie is an original work in
> which the author tries to use different perspectives in narration and
> interaction. In the beginning the player communicates in some way with the
> main character, in the end you are the main character then you have to type
> commands in first person. I don't know how Fabrizio translated this into
> English (I played the Italian version), but I think it is not simply a
> change in how you interact with the game, it also add some elements to
> narration.
True, I am commenting on a very small base of data.
Well, what do you think, then? This is a question I'm curious about
in general. If you've played games in multiple languages, did you find
that games from different communities were different in play *style*
as well as the content of the language?
And, on a related note, if the examples I quoted are all experimental
Italian IF, are there any more mainstream works that have been
translated into English? Now I'm curious whether they would also seem
different to me.
> Italian is richer than English in verbal forms in the sense that the person
> who perform an action is implicit in the verb. In English you have to
> include the pronoun:
>
> "take the book" ---> the usual IF command (imperative verb)
> "I take the book" ---> first person (it doesn't seem an usual IF command)
>
> In italian the "io" (I) pronoun can be omitted:
>
> "prendi il libro" ---> the usual IF command (imperative verb)
> "prendo il libro" ---> first person command
>
> So we have some kind of "first person imperative verbs" which you can use as
> commands in a piece of IF like Natalie.
I'd had the impression from the included notes that something like
that was going on in the Italian version.
Billy Bissette
> Combined with this is a quality that reads, in English, as
> self-consciously literary, whether or not it feels that way in
> Italian. It draws attention to itself as a piece of written text, and
> to the process of reading it. And this goes counter to my own
> inclinations for IF writing. I tend to think that the purpose of IF
> text, in English, is generally to provide a near-transparent access to
> the world model: to concentrate the player's attention on what is, to
> create a sense of physical presence and of existing in a tangible
> location. There are exceptions; "Moonlit Tower" is consciously artful
> in its writing, but I found that fit perfectly the precious, wrought
> qualities of the game world itself, and I wasn't particularly
> bothered.
I'm a casual IF player. Played games "back in the day" like Adventure
and others. Occassionally play a few games still. Sometimes the art
pieces to see how they do. Sometimes a few puzzles. Sometimes a few
experiences. English is the native language, and it is spoken with the
degree of quality that marks an American education. :p
You mention a few times the difference between what you assume are
Italian conventions and what you know as the current English conventions,
and how you think it might be an issue? Such as above, where the writing
makes you believe you are reading writing, which takes you out of the
experience?
Speaking from the perspective of a casual IF player (and one who has
not played this translation either), I find that several of the established
English conventions tend to often take me out of the experience as well.
Things that the current IF writers wouldn't complain about, or might even
complain about the absence of. At the same time, I can sometimes things
frowned upon by current conventions to be more immersive than the supposed
currently "approved" method.
All in all, I would suppose that it is your immersion into the current
English conventions that might be clouding your experience with a piece
written to a different set of conventions. (Or it could just be the
translation. :) )
Mike Roberts
> Italian is richer than English in verbal forms in the sense that
> the person who perform an action is implicit in the verb. In
> English you have to include the pronoun:
Well, this isn't really a matter of "richness"; it's just a syntax
variation. English has the same verb form, but it takes two words in
English.
> "prendi il libro" ---> the usual IF command (imperative verb)
> "prendo il libro" ---> first person command
>
> So we have some kind of "first person imperative verbs" which
> you can use as commands in a piece of IF like Natalie.
Iin that case, shouldn't the English translation of Natalie recognize the
two verb forms as well?
--Mike
mjr underscore at hotmail dot com
fabrizio venerandi
> Here are some of my initial impressions on this game. [I am posting
first of all, thank you for the "unreview".
* about english
This is a beta english version of natalie: beta not for the game, but
for the english. The man who did the translation made his best, but he
is not a english-native, so there is much work to do.
As you can see reading this message, I have not a good english, so I'll
try to find someone with a "red pencil" to do a more professional work.
* about the game
As giovanni riccardi said, in the first half of the game the player is
talking with the "character player", as two different men. So the player
uses imperative forms. After, the player found himself in the same place
of the "character player", so the parse changes: the player still talks
with the rebel "character player" using imperative forms, but he also
have to say what HE want to do, using the present form. Finally the
player sleep and dream: the parser change again, and now the player can
only see itself in the dream world made of crossroads.
* about the 'italian style'
there are 2 different schools in italy: a more "puzzle and explore", and
another more experimental and novellistic. Natalie, like francesco
cordella's flamel follows the last one.
forgive my bad english, and thank you again for the review.
f.
ems...@mindspring.com
> All in all, I would suppose that it is your immersion into the current
> English conventions that might be clouding your experience with a piece
> written to a different set of conventions. (Or it could just be the
> translation. :) )
Yes -- that was more or less my point. Having discerned that that may
be happening, however, I am fairly interested in the question of what
other approaches to IF are out there, what different communities
expect of the player, and so on.
I think the existence of conventions is more or less inevitable in any
art form that has developed a dedicated (if small) band of followers.
And I also think that, in IF, they make things easier: easier for the
player to get through the game, easier for the author to communicate
ways to make progress.
Lose those conventions, and you open up the possibility of some
interesting variations on IF, some explorations of the medium that
haven't been tried before. I think this is worth doing, but I also
recognize, and wanted to point out, that it demands more from the
player.
I can see the potential for this in Natalie, but it is very very
difficult for me to judge the quality of the effort, due to the
translation issues and the fact that I got stuck.
-- Emily
ems...@mindspring.com
>"ems...@mindspring.com" wrote:
>>
>> strongly at odds with the
>> conventional approach of English-language IF.
>>
>> I tend to think that the purpose of IF
>
>There we have the problems of "modern" English IF. At least a writer
>admits it has become conventional and self-centered.
If you can't quote a single intact sentence from the original post in
support of your response, you should probably take it as a sign that
you're misconstruing the author's intent.
Ricardo SIGNES
...and then discarded it, quoting another part altogether.
--
rjbs
Gunther Schmidl
>> If you can't quote a single intact sentence from the original post in
>> support of your response, you should probably take it as a sign that
>> you're misconstruing the author's intent.
>
...or you're an ass.
*plonk*
-- g
James Glover
if.org> wrote:
> X-No-Archive: yes
> I knew that criticism was never much welcomed here, but it's dropping to
> a new low.
>
> Anyways, "Natalie" is a nice game. Live with it, no matter if it serves
> your precious "conventions."
>
> Marco
Except I think that the author of the review would know the point she was
trying to make. You may very well think that IF has fallen into a set of
constraints imposed by convention. (To a certain degree it's bound to, if
each piece operated on a new set of rules it would make it difficult for
the players. Standard authoring systems also imply constraints.) But if
that's not the point the writer of the review was trying to make then to
try and argue with her that that is what she meant is a little, errm, odd.
You are of course to free debate that the problems she experianced with the
game were more likely due to over familiarity with the conventions, but in
itself, defying conventions can sometimes be a bad move if it means the
game/story is difficult to follow by the players. (Although of course, the
game could theoreticaly be convntional when it comes to the audience for
whom it was written.)
You may very well think Natalie is the best game ever, but that is an
opinion. To say Emily Short is wrong to dislike the game is comparable to
me calling people wrong to like marmite. (To all the americans marmite is a
strong tasting spread made from (I think) vegetable extracts. It's quite an
aquired taste and thus the advertising slogan is 'Marmite, you either love
it or you hate it.' Although personaly I have met a couple of individuals
who think it's 'Okay' Persoanly I can't stand the stuff.)
--
James Glover
E-mail: ja...@jaspsplace.co.uk
Web: http://www.jaspsplace.co.uk
MSN: ja...@jaspsplace.co.uk
ICQ: 75440795