Observations
Murphy talked about closed narrative and open narrative. Extrapolating from those concepts, it is interesting to consider "interactive narrative" as a structural interplay: Narrative as interplay of closed and open systems. I did like her implicit substitution of navigating for "reading". Though, not new concept by interaction design and IF, I like the metaphor for "navigating" for reading in general. There is a suggested moving from and to something as an anchor in the text built within this.
Thinking along the lines of my trying to develop duration as a method of comparative analysis in interactive texts, B. Oldenburg did make a few references to "time" as a major force of predetermined narrative. Another panelist suggested, more or less, that urgency could be part of the recipe for "compelling experiences" in the story world.
Investigate:
Sony "Wonderbook": method of navigating through "Theater in the round book"
New Term:
Skeuomorphism: familiar analog elements used in digital design (page turn)
Though I've heard it said before, I kind of felt a bit leery of Tracy's advocation for a "artful reader".
It seems to desire an interpretation that is "artful" according to the standards of the designer and speaks to a sense of elitism towards the lesser masses of cultural consumers. It is difficult to have such control over readers in the real world. But, I think that fortunately for her, the "literacy" she speaks of and wants others to have with her systems will probably be increasingly prevalent in a media infused society. She speaks to how we must build a "sensitive reader". Though, I do agree with her concept of "playful literacy" as a learned behavior.
Tawny though seems to be very with it. I liked her reference to the significance of the reset button in storytelling.
Questions
What is the real/ideal audience for the Walden piece? What is the imagined audience? Is there a desired outcome/goal or path that the developers would prviledge over others. Seems possible. Very much a conceptual piece rather than a well plotted "art game" or even as a commercially viable game. Seems like a lot of work and resources went into this. Where does conceptual work draw the line in execution? Some of the concepts of sublime vs. need were the most interesting part
Kevin Slavin: Games poorly "Transmit a message" but good at "producing literacy of the system". These should have been clarified. How would he define transmit a message?
Lots of generalizations in the panel from outside specialties that felt kinda awkward. Impression I got and heard from others. Though the most successful panel I've been to in terms of generating dialogue compared to sxsw and many other conferences.
Contacts/Research
Panelists with potentially overlapping research & contacts for press release
Intel: Tawny Schlieski "Interaction and Experience Research Group"
Moonbot: Brandon Oldenburg "Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lesmore"
No comments:
Post a Comment