Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Path: gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!olivea!hal.com!decwrl!waikato!canterbury.ac.nz!huia!greg
From: greg@huia.canterbury.ac.nz (Greg Ewing)
Subject: Re: I.F. Realities (was Re: More rambling)
Message-ID: <CGnwpp.MBz@cantua.canterbury.ac.nz>
Nntp-Posting-Host: huia.canterbury.ac.nz
Reply-To: greg@huia.canterbury.ac.nz (Greg Ewing)
Organization: University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
References:  <CGn92M.I5y.2@cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 00:44:13 GMT
Lines: 31

In article <CGn92M.I5y.2@cs.cmu.edu>, pww+@A.GP.CS.CMU.EDU (Peter
Weyhrauch) writes:
|> The question then becomes, what is the simplest possible reality that
|> can be fully simulated that allows interactive fiction to be created.

The term "interactive fiction" has no definition precise enough to
allow this question to be answered.

Seems to me that if you simulate anything other than the real world,
then your simulator *defines* what it is that you're simulating.
What sets interactive fiction apart from other, more abstract computer
games is that it draws on previous human experience for inspiration
in the same way as fictional literature.

Elements of fantasy are often included, but the simulated reality
needs to have something in common with real reality, otherwise
the game is no more "fiction" than Othello or Space Invaders.

I don't think that there's such a thing as a "simplest possible
IF world". A very simple world could be defined, but it would be
so abstract it wouldn't deserve the title of fiction. How much
reality do you need to include before it does? Where do you
draw the line?

|> 	Peter Weyhrauch
|> 	Oz Project, CMU

Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+
University of Canterbury,	   | A citizen of NewZealandCorp, a	  |
Christchurch, New Zealand	   | wholly-owned subsidiary of Japan Inc.|
greg@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz	   +--------------------------------------+
