RE: Interactive Drama: Why I've lost interest

["Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery@indiegamedesign.com>]

Joe Andrieu wrote:
> So the player can do anything they want, and as long as
> they aren't
> acting schizophrenically or intentionally acting
> inconsistently, the result
> goes through a good story: introduction, complication, climax
> and resolution
> driving by their own interests and motivations.  They get the
> emotional
> power and engagement of a good story while being the interactive lead
> protagonist.

You really expect them to achieve this by doing "anything they want?"
Even with your sanity constraints, the range of their acting is vast.
And hence their bad acting.

> _Romeo & Juliet_ is the same "story" as _West Side Story_ on
> some level.
> Clearly, offering variability while maintaining that type of
> core story is critical to interactive drama.

It is?  The goal is window dressing on the same old stories?

> Once you strip away a particular
> manifestation of story, a particular interpretation in a
> particular medium,
> I believe you can define the core story elements in a way a
> computer can
> work with, so you can consistently generate experiences that
> feel like a good story.

But the story is in the telling.  *So many* Hollywood movies have
exactly the same underlying story 'core', like the hero's journey +
obligatory love interest or some such, yet they are boring films.


Cheers,                     www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every           Seattle, WA

"The pioneer is the one with the arrows in his back."
                          - anonymous entrepreneur

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.1 - Release Date: 3/23/2005