Re: [Fwd: Gamasutra article]

[WFreitag@aol.com]

Will anyone be upset if I mention the elephant in the room?

Which is this: what we call drama is, by nature if not by definition, 
extremely unpleasant to participate in. The "better" the drama, the more this 
is the case. If we do manage to make that drama interactive, then the 
"better" the interactivity, the more this becomes a problem. 

To watch a performance of Hamlet might be uplifting. To portray Hamlet in a 
damatic performance may be deeply enlightening. To _be_ Hamlet just sucks. I 
choose "not to be," and I think the vast majority of audiences will always 
agree with me. What I want more of in my interactive worlds is solidity, 
responsiveness, richness, accessibilty, beauty, and depth. Drama? Give that 
to somebody else, and I'll watch.

Computer games are fun because their interactivity is comedic, not dramatic. 
I doubt Gamasutra would accept an article arguing that in order to attract 
new or more sophisticated audiences computer games should be "less fun." But 
if you phrase it as "more dramatic" instead, people think you're saying 
something profound. I say, horsefeathers.

- Walt