Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Path: gmd.de!nntp.gmd.de!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!ieunet!tcdcs!rwallace
From: rwallace@cs.tcd.ie (Russell Wallace)
Subject: Re: Simulations (was Re: Choosing your IF setting / genre)
Message-ID: <1994May28.141139.9808@cs.tcd.ie>
Organization: Computer Science, Trinity College Dublin
References: <)> <)> <2s2htmINNkrc@life.ai.mit.edu> <1994May26.211217.26417@cs.tcd.ie>) <2s5is7INN5k9@life.ai.mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 28 May 1994 14:11:39 GMT
Lines: 124

dmb@case.ai.mit.edu (David Baggett) writes:

>In article <1994May26.211217.26417@cs.tcd.ie>,
>Russell Wallace <rwallace@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:

>>Remember it's supposed to be *interactive* fiction, i.e. the player is
>>supposed to have meaningful choices to make.

>Yes, but it's supposed to be interactive *fiction*, i.e., the author is
>supposed to have meaningful choices to make.

>:)

Yep... It's a bit like creating and running face to face roleplaying
games, the same sort of issue comes up: Some GMs have the plot pretty
much predetermined, but I dislike this style.  What I do when running a
game is create the background, the NPCs and so on, which I find leaves
plenty of room for creativity, but I *don't* predetermine the plot, I
let that happen as it will, from the interactions of the players and
NPCs.  Of course, to at least some extent this is a matter of taste.


>We could go on and on -- it's all a matter of perspective.  One reason I've
>come to view my bent as "better" is that it seems to me that the _fiction_
>part needs the most work.  The player does have choices to make in current
>IF games.  Most players do not seem to feel deprived when they discover
>that they couldn't really radically affect the outcome of the game.

>What is still missing are games that are good literature as well as being
>fun.  I'm not talking about the basic craft of fashioning sentences from
>words, either -- many games around now are competently written.  I'm
>talking about the greater goals of literature: to communicate in a way that
>is universal -- to deliver (a) message(s) in a way that transcends genre;
>to create characters that *live*, because the reader sympathizes.

>There are moments in existing IF.  Many people feel like they "know" Floyd.
>But we have yet to see a work that maintains this kind of intensity
>throughout.  Floyd is a brilliant stroke on an otherwise ordinary canvas.

I agree; indeed, I will agree with you that the lack of meaningful
literary content is more important than the lack of options for the
player (though I do think the latter is also an important lack).
Trinity is the only adventure game I can think of which I found
genuinely meaningful for pretty well most of the game.

>>If you, the author, have predetermined every plot point in advance, then
>>the player might as well just read a transcript of someone else solving the
>>game instead of going through the motions of playing it (other than the
>>intellectual challenge of solving each puzzle; but that's a form of
>>entertainment akin to a crossword rather than literature).

>You're reducing this case to absurdity.  Although the overall plot of
>Colossal Cave is predetermined, the player never feels as though he's
>"trapped in a glorified novel".  He feels like he's exploring a game world.
>When things happen, they certainly don't "feel" predetermined (at least not
>the first time through the game).  I agree that such plotted games have
>less replay value, but only to the extent that books do too.  (You may say,
>"Big deal, I know he's going to kill the king -- why bother?", but Hamlet
>is still compellling the 100th time around.)

A matter of opinion; I personally find that the linear nature of most
adventure games (i.e. being a series of puzzles each with a fixed
predetermined solution) is a serious lack.

>>Or read a good book, which as literature will be far better than any
>>adventure game will.

>It is truly maddening to me that most people here seem to be willing to
>accept this without a fight.  Interactive fiction is clearly a superset of
>fiction -- you can just have the "player" read a novel on the screen.
>Given this, IF works have the potential to be every bit as good as any work
>of static fiction.  (Yes, I realize it's an oversimplification, but you
>can't disagree with it in the abstract!)

Perhaps I expressed myself badly; I did not mean to  imply that
interactive fiction can never be as good as a novel, just that all
current examples in fact are not as good.

>There are many ways you could try to bring "good literature" to IF.  In
>Legend, I've tried one particular approach: I've put in quite lengthy
>sections of static prose in order to capitalize on the existing "literary
>tradition", so to speak.  That's where I develop the characters (since
>"actors" are no more than cardboard cut-outs now), and, to a certain
>extent, where I develop the overall theme of the work.  It's clumsier than
>I'd like, but as a first attempt at the method I think it works pretty
>well.  Perhaps once a few r.a.i-f readers have played through it, they'll
>be able to explain where I'm coming from better than I (who seem to be
>failing miserably).

This sounds very good.  This Legend game, is it currently available?  If
so, how can I obtain a copy?

>>And the best way to do that is to allow things in the game to interact in
>>ways that the author may not have foreseen..

>This sounds good but is unworkable in practice.  If the author hasn't
>anticipated it, the prose resulting from the action will be lame.  Good
>text generation is years off.  If there's one thing IF readers *have*
>voiced concern about, it's prose quality.

I would still rather be able to do something, even if the feedback I get
is in unimaginative prose, than be unable to do it at all by arbitrary
fiat.

>Also, there still *is* a big difference between plotted (i.e., traditional
>adventure game) IF and static fiction.  When reading a book, you can learn
>about people and witness events that make an indelible impression on you.
>Plotted interactive fiction has the same potential, but you get to *meet*
>the people and *live* the events.

>This may sound overblown, but there really is truth to it.  We recently got
>email from a player who was quite upset about having to solve a particular
>puzzle in the way it had to be solved.  Without going into details -- I
>respect this player's views and privacy -- it made absolutely clear to me
>that even fairly straight-ahead IF games really can draw the player in, to
>the extent that he feels he is *responsible* for his fictional character's
>actions.  This is a powerful medium indeed.

In this I agree, though I would say that its power is currently more
potential than actual.
-- 
"To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem"
Russell Wallace, Trinity College, Dublin
rwallace@cs.tcd.ie
