Making interactive stories

["Andrew Stern" <andrew@interactivestory.net>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-idrama@flutterby.com [mailto:owner-idrama@flutterby.com]On
> Subject: Gaiden

Can't resist jumping into the fray! :)

> The subject of interactive storytelling is a practical
> matter as I see it, not a philosophical one.

I agree... instead of trying to agree on a catch-all definition of
interactive story, we should realize that each of us probably has their own
particular vision of what an interactive story could be.  There are probably
a thousand and one ways to define what an interactive story is.  It's like
trying to define what a "videogame" is; there is no singular definition,
it's a general term.  There will be many genres of interactive stories, and
it may even be difficult to define a characteristic that they all share.
Likewise, there are lots of ways of going about designing and creating them.
(Albeit no one has yet made one that satisfies me.)

While it's fun to debate this, and I'm sure we'll continue to do so, the
only practical way to figure this all out is to actually try to build
interactive stories.  My collaborator (CMU grad student Michael Mateas) and
I are trying to do just this -- to take the bull by the horns and build a
short but complete interactive drama.  A primary design goal for us is to
push as hard as we can on giving the player as much agency as possible in
the story.  We have defined our vision of the story we want to build
(http://www.interactivestory.net/papers/MateasSternAAAIFS00.pdf), and have
so far completed our first year of designing, writing, and coding.  Progress
is slow but steady.  We have two more full years to go before we're done,
which includes collaboration with a character animator and voice actors;
realistically that's how long this will take.  This is a self-funded
labor-of-love art/research project that will be released as a free download.
And we will publish a few more papers along the way (plus Michael's thesis)
explaining our techniques and results, which we hope will jumpstart more R&D
by others.


> Looking at the power of modern personal computers
> it's a little mystefying to still hear complaints and excuses about the
> limits of technology.

Right.  The hardware is now fast enough to do some hardcore processing, time
to use it.

> But it's going to take a broad array of talented people rolling up
> their sleeves and hammering out the elements to see a resurgence of
> interactive fiction as a competitive game-type. The means to the end are
> pretty obvious, unless it has to be an easy answer.

Yes it's obvious that we need to roll up our sleeves and try build these
stories, but it's not obvious how to go about it.  The devil's in the
details and this is a very, very difficult thing to try to tackle.  Our
paper describes some of our approach; our next paper will describe more
(we're working on it...)

To give ourselves the time and creative freedom we need to create the
interactive story we want to make, we opted for the "two guys in a garage"
independent approach, versus trying to accomplish this in the game industry
(where I worked for 8 years).  Although paying the rent is a major issue for
us, the freedom of not working within the confines of a game company's
conservative mindset has been critical.

From what I can tell, it doesn't seem like the game industry is prepared to
invest the time and money into the R&D required push interactive stories to
the next level...  So a more scrappy independent approach seems necessary.
I encourage others to go for it!

Chris has been at it for a while, which is an inspiration.  He's got his own
particular vision, which is great, although I differ with him on several
points. :)  I'm also inspired in spirit by independent artists and
filmmakers who somehow find a way to get their art made, against all odds
(time, money, etc).  That's the mode you've got to be in to make this
happen.  I'm always surprised that there haven't been more independent
efforts to create better interactive stories.  Hence the urgency to go for
it.

Andrew