March 23rd, 2009 by admin
This is the game I worked on this past January with Parsons, Area/Code and NAPA Washington. I was Tournament Coordinator, responsible for setting up playtests of the game and making sure that teams were formed for the tournament held on February 7th, 2009.
I’m number 17 in the yellow pants.
March 10th, 2009 by admin
This is a dissertation by Jeremy Douglass at UC Santa Barbara. I haven’t started reading it yet but am very excited to read it, study the states aesthetics and techniques, and perhaps reference it as precedence in future work. Here is the link. http://jeremydouglass.com/dissertation.html
I am posting the abstract from the article here:
The Interactive Fiction (IF) genre describes text-based narrative experiences in which a person interacts with a computer simulation by typing text phrases (usually commands in the imperative mood) and reading software-generated text responses (usually statements in the second person present tense). Re-examining historical and contemporary IF illuminates the larger fields of electronic literature and game studies. Intertwined aesthetic and technical developments in IF from 1977 to the present are analyzed in terms of language (person, tense, and mood), narrative theory (Iser’s gaps, the fabula / sjuzet distinction), game studies / ludology (player apprehension of rules, evaluation of strategic advancement), and filmic representation (subjective POV, time-loops). Two general methodological concepts for digital humanities analyses are developed in relation to IF: implied code, which facilitates studying the interactor’s mental model of an interactive work; and frustration aesthetics, which facilitates analysis of the constraints that structure interactive experiences. IF works interpreted in extended “close interactions” include Plotkin’s Shade (1999), Barlow’s Aisle (2000), Pontious’s Rematch (2000), Foster and Ravipinto’s Slouching Towards Bedlam (2003), and others. Experiences of these works are mediated by implications, frustrations, and the limiting figures of their protagonists.
This is very exciting. I have played Plotkin’s Shade (1999) and am curious how Douglass describes these “close interactions.” I believe that providing a provocative voice and effecting “the limiting figures of (the) protagonists” is an important step in telling compelling stories that can be received critically.
March 10th, 2009 by admin
Today we looked at narrative in games; how it can be linear or dynamic. Particulary if it is dynamic, then how it is interactive. Nick’s theory is that there are three main categories of narrative implementation in games: to “skin” (which is a system with a narrative frame draped over it much like a skin), to tell a story (think of these as more cinematic games like Prince of Persia, Bioshock and Half-Life), then to play a story. We haven’t gotten to play a story, but in the telling of a story we examined how player agency can be sacrificed to serve the story. This is evidenced in one of the opening scences of Prince of Persia and counterpointed by the in-game freedom during cutscenes present in the game Half-Life. In Half-Life during an important narrative scene, the player can simply wander off and ignore the dramatic scene. This would be a direct dismissal of the Eco-Ebert argument of dramatic necessity, which posits that hypertext, games and interactive fiction will never outmode literature because they cannot provide dramatic necessity without contraveneing the story itself. Consider that in Prince of Persia, the player must relinquish control in order for “drama” to happen. Is this becasue the player cannot be trusted to enact this drama? That is the presumption. Players can screw things up and will; this is not to mention the fact that a game is an experience where the player is likely to make mistakes. Summarily, this reduces dramatic necessity and makes it harder for the narrative to be accepted unless the player is taken by the hand and led through the dramatic moment.
February 25th, 2009 by admin
This is where you have a summary of your project.
You should have these complete for the proposal. These may evolve but they should be concrete enough for a midterm presentation. You take information from the abstract, introduction and concept. Then define themes and keywords which will inform your search for related works and precedents. It helps to have precedents that are comparative and contrasting
How did you develop your idea: sketches, prototypes, etc? Choose methods that are appropriate to the goal. For instance, if you are interested in making art, you wouldn’t follow a methodology that explores market feasibility for a design. You should consider broad scope, specific areas of the project, etc.
This is basically the final prototype. In methodology there are continuous prototyping phases. Should be a culmination of previous prototyping.
Once you’ve developed through the implementation, how do you evealuate the success or failure of the prototype? User testing, conceptual implications, feedback and discussion. You could express results in different and creative ways such as document showing the work to people, but it has to follow and reference the methodology and implementation.
Things you think you could do in the future, could improve, could further explore, outcomes (expected & unexpected), don’t insult yourself or destroy your own work but address strengths and weaknesses.
February 17th, 2009 by admin
http://tinyurl.com/btav7k
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0042876/
February 17th, 2009 by admin
Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!