Q7: Are agency and narative structure mutually exclusive?

If we look beyond computer games, there are definitely examples of games that manage to integrate agency and narrative structure seamlessly. My example would be theatrical improvisational games where actors are given a specific situations to improvise dramatic plots.

In improvisational games, the plot unfolds according to the input of the players, giving them both local (reaction from other players is immediate) and global agency (players determine how the plot progresses and concludes). In improvisational games, the interaction between players often results in strong cause and effect relationships and plots that are complex beyond the imagination of the directors, both of which are characteristic of narratives.

Moving back to CGs, I guess, the issue of whether they will be able to integrate narrative structure and agency is really a technological one. Why I say this is because in order to simulate the seamless integration of narrative structure and agency in improvisational games, computers need to be able to simulate human-like thinking and responding (much like that in improvisational games) such that the games will be able to interact with the user’s inputs to create a narrative. To do so would require immense processing power from the computers.

In fact, CGs like Façades and Last Express have already made such attempts at integrating agency and narrative in gameplay. Façades emulates a soap opera with characters which respond to player inputs whilst maintaining a well-formed dramatic arch to provide both formal and material affordances to the player. The Last Express is a detective adventure set on the Orient Express and provides up to 30 endings in response to the player’s actions in the game.

However, due to the nature of their design, both games are relatively memory intensive – The Last Express takes up 1.8GB (which, in 1997, was quite a huge file size) to provide 39 minutes of gameplay whilst Façades takes up to 1 minute (or even longer, as we experienced in class) to load up before the game can be run.

Façades, in particular, parallels the work of cognitive scientists who simulate the workings of the brain in neural network models such that computers can behave in a human-like fashion. This points to the possibility that one day, computers will be able to simulate the dynamic workings of the human brain and generate responses similar to that in theatrical improvisational games.

Therefore, it seems possible to integrate narrative structure with agency in computer games, although it might take some time and lots of processing power for computers to truly ‘think’ like humans.

Wk 8 Q1: What is Interactive Entertainment (IE)?

Costikyan basically shoots himself in the foot by making such a sweeping statement, especially when he provides the very examples that refute his statement in the same chapter itself. The examples of MUDs, RPGs and simulations like SimCity have been described as lacking in terms of explicit goals inherent in the design itself and so despite his use of the term ‘games’ to describe them, these applications do not qualify as games per se. However, that does not stop us from classifying these applications as being an IE, from which entertainment is derived from the act of interaction in these applications itself.

A very good example of another form of an IE that would not qualify as a game would be that off the simulation Sims 2, which is interaction personified. Sims 2 can be seen as a multi-function entertainment suite which allows players to play the role of plastic surgeon, costume designer, architect, town planner and most importantly, live the lives of their character in whatever way they choose to. Like SimCity, the simulation features no explicit goals and thus no victory condition, and cannot be considered a game under Costikyan’s definition, but it would be hard to question the entertainment value of the game.

Costikyan claims that it is not possible for IEs to eschew the sense of struggle characteristic of games, but if one were to look at the performance genre of improvisational comedy (think Whose Line is it Anyway?), it might not necessary be the case. It is definitely no struggle for the audience members to come up with keywords (for use by the performers in their improvisation) in the process of being entertained. The struggling is left entirely to the performers while the audience members sit back and enjoy how the performers struggle to include their input in the performance. Costikyan specified that the struggling has to be on the part of the user’s experience which clearly is not the case in this example, thus allowing us to qualify it as a piece of non-game interactive entertainment.

From what has been suggested thus far, the definition of IE definitely extends beyond the games genre and where Costikyan has failed is to provide a definition of entertainment to provide a frame for his definition of IE. This allows for the expansion of the scope to include any form of interaction that provides a generally enjoyable experience to the interacting agent, thus refuting his claims.