games are fun... until you have to write about them.
Consider the work you created for project 1. Is this work actually a game? Why/why not?
In our project, we created an interactive movie, “The Charming Prince”. I would contend that this work is more of a movie than a game, but it still possesses numerous game-like qualities. I will use the guidelines for defining a game from Costikyan in “I Have No Words & I Must Design”.
Firstly, our interactive movie provides decision points (kernels) that give the user choice and control. Different combinations of these decisions result in 4 different outcomes, three of which are bad while only one path leads to a happy ending. This is analogous to many computer games, where the player either succeeds of fails. However, we added variety to this by having 4 unique endings, such that even as the user fails the mission, he can experience different outcomes from doing so. The user also has to think to make sense of how each outcome is achieved. This brings us to the next characteristic of our interactive movie, that it involves solving a puzzle. For instance, the user has to find out that the apple Little Red Riding Hood offers Prince Charming can be used to swap the poisonous apple the witch intends to use to kill the princess. Different pieces of narrative extracted from various fairytales are linked together to give the user these ideas on how to handle situations. The user will then be able to make wise decisions and unravel the correct path. Another game-like property is the presence of a goal or mission. It is stated early in the movie that the mission is to save the princess, and it even requires the user to agree to embark on the mission before the movie can proceed. And to accomplish the mission, there is also considerable “struggle” against the witch. Finally, our interactive movie has existents (apple, money, etc) that have endogenous meanings to only the movie.
Our interactive movie is however not quite a game in various ways. There is no direct competition in any sense, be it from other users or from a running time. The user can also choose not to participate in any of the decision making points and simply sit back and enjoy the movie. There is also no intensive control given to the user, for instance, the user cannot control where Prince Charming walks to or how he fights the witch.
On a final note, our interactive movie is an antithesis to Costikyan’s argument that “the search for non-game interactive entertainment is wrong-headed, … Any form of 'interactive entertainment' that isn't a game must be non-interactive; or not entertainment; or pointless”. Our movie allows the user to interact with the system, make decisions that affect outcomes and certainly is entertaining.
In our project, we created an interactive movie, “The Charming Prince”. I would contend that this work is more of a movie than a game, but it still possesses numerous game-like qualities. I will use the guidelines for defining a game from Costikyan in “I Have No Words & I Must Design”.
Firstly, our interactive movie provides decision points (kernels) that give the user choice and control. Different combinations of these decisions result in 4 different outcomes, three of which are bad while only one path leads to a happy ending. This is analogous to many computer games, where the player either succeeds of fails. However, we added variety to this by having 4 unique endings, such that even as the user fails the mission, he can experience different outcomes from doing so. The user also has to think to make sense of how each outcome is achieved. This brings us to the next characteristic of our interactive movie, that it involves solving a puzzle. For instance, the user has to find out that the apple Little Red Riding Hood offers Prince Charming can be used to swap the poisonous apple the witch intends to use to kill the princess. Different pieces of narrative extracted from various fairytales are linked together to give the user these ideas on how to handle situations. The user will then be able to make wise decisions and unravel the correct path. Another game-like property is the presence of a goal or mission. It is stated early in the movie that the mission is to save the princess, and it even requires the user to agree to embark on the mission before the movie can proceed. And to accomplish the mission, there is also considerable “struggle” against the witch. Finally, our interactive movie has existents (apple, money, etc) that have endogenous meanings to only the movie.
Our interactive movie is however not quite a game in various ways. There is no direct competition in any sense, be it from other users or from a running time. The user can also choose not to participate in any of the decision making points and simply sit back and enjoy the movie. There is also no intensive control given to the user, for instance, the user cannot control where Prince Charming walks to or how he fights the witch.
On a final note, our interactive movie is an antithesis to Costikyan’s argument that “the search for non-game interactive entertainment is wrong-headed, … Any form of 'interactive entertainment' that isn't a game must be non-interactive; or not entertainment; or pointless”. Our movie allows the user to interact with the system, make decisions that affect outcomes and certainly is entertaining.
posted by päwz2zprίηt at 3:06 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home