Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Path: gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!fs7.ECE.CMU.EDU!cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!pww
From: pww+@A.GP.CS.CMU.EDU (Peter Weyhrauch)
Subject:  Re: I.F. Realities (was Re: More rambling)
Message-ID: <CGpwpn.4t9.2@cs.cmu.edu>
Originator: pww@A.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
Sender: news@cs.cmu.edu (Usenet News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: a.gp.cs.cmu.edu
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1993 02:39:19 GMT
Lines: 57


Hi, Phil.

Phil, I agree fully when you write that "any implemented IF world is
consistent on its own terms, since every outcome is algorithmically
determined."  The wording of my question was poor.  I shouldn't have
used the word consistent, because I didn't mean it any mathematical
sense and perhaps that overshadowed my meaning.

I am not making myself clear.  I do not want some kind of lifeless
symbolic world that is mathematically sound and consistent.  I want
the real world with real characters and real stories.

Greg:

Greg, I think we are speaking the same language.  When you say there
isn't one simplest world for interactive fiction I agree.  It was just
my way of phrasing the question.  I would be satisfied to learn what
you thought a simple world mechanics for your type of interactive
fiction could be.

I understand "interactive fiction" as a topic does have these
ambiguities.  I am interested in interactive fiction based on
relationships between the interactor (player) and the characters of
the story, under the influence of some kind of plot, perhaps similar
to plots found in movies.  Once again, this description is ambiguous,
but I hope more narrow that the whole field of interactive fiction.
In particular, I am less interested in puzzles and more interested in
experiences with characters.

I would like to hear a discussion about the space of possibilities for
interactive fiction, given current techincal limitations.

Here's two examples of what I mean:

1. For many stories, modelling precisely the behavior of liquids may
   be unnecessary.  Although this world is inconsistent with the real
   world, it may be satisfactory for telling stories.  Perhaps it
   depends on the exact details of the interactive story, but for most
   stories we can safely ignore this detail.  I mean, when the player
   is getting into some conversation with a character about the plot
   point at hand, it hardly seems relevent to dwell on the mechanics
   of water.  Now, LOVE, on the other hand, is very important to model...

2. I think we can never have satisfying interactive fiction based on
   characters until we can really model physics and reality.  Unless
   our models are very realistic I can't see a player sympathizing with
   a character, since they all seem so unrealistic.  If the player
   can't sympathize with any characters then all is lost.  Therefore,
   we should be concentrating on puzzle-based i.f. for now, since our
   domain will be more limited, and therefore we can do a better job.
   
Now I happen to agree with opinion one, and disagree with opinion two,
but I want to hear your opinions.

	Peter

