tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-57101372024-03-09T17:34:22.836+10:00Explorer Streetbuilding and refining my viewsJameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.comBlogger787125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-91820147871121326572024-03-09T17:32:00.002+10:002024-03-09T17:33:51.009+10:00Broadening the notion of affordances<p><span face="-apple-system, HelveticaNeue" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: 17px;">In the design of physical objects and user interfaces, an object’s “affordances” are how the object’s appearances suggest to the user how the object should be interacted with.</span></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3XTNrkDxuFww-X-4i1d8m5q8pKxBUAN_MRzuahmvycnEc41QTah51up1gUTS5dXzOWo91SxQesQ7K4nu1o8ISrn_au2IfBbTpe44KBCfn31kew4CdT_l0fNeHikqCstnns12_U-je_cF_mF5KnJ9HAPSBfKdTNp30ScWgHMLRu78JfYde07M4kQ/s296/8C27B0E3-EAC9-4511-85C3-9CA3E7B9ABA0.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="170" data-original-width="296" height="170" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3XTNrkDxuFww-X-4i1d8m5q8pKxBUAN_MRzuahmvycnEc41QTah51up1gUTS5dXzOWo91SxQesQ7K4nu1o8ISrn_au2IfBbTpe44KBCfn31kew4CdT_l0fNeHikqCstnns12_U-je_cF_mF5KnJ9HAPSBfKdTNp30ScWgHMLRu78JfYde07M4kQ/s1600/8C27B0E3-EAC9-4511-85C3-9CA3E7B9ABA0.png" width="296" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;">Different door handles have different affordances.</div><p></p><p></p><div style="text-align: center;">Image source: <a href="https://www.pixelfridge.digital/what-are-affordances-and-why-do-they-matter/" target="_blank">What are affordances, and why do they matter?</a></div><p></p><div dir="auto" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: -apple-system, HelveticaNeue; font-size: 17px;"><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: -apple-system, HelveticaNeue; font-size: 17px;">In this post, I want to broaden the meaning of “affordances”.</div><div dir="auto" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: -apple-system, HelveticaNeue; font-size: 17px;"><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: -apple-system, HelveticaNeue; font-size: 17px;">Multiple tools may be all used for the same kind of task. Eg for recording textual information, there’s pen and paper, a word processor, a whiteboard, and voice notes. </div><div dir="auto" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: -apple-system, HelveticaNeue; font-size: 17px;"><div dir="auto" style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">While the standard notion of affordances in design is “how the object suggests it may be used, before it is used”, the notion we’re describing here concerns how the object, while it is being used, shapes how the user does the task.</div></div><div dir="auto" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: -apple-system, HelveticaNeue; font-size: 17px;"><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: -apple-system, HelveticaNeue; font-size: 17px;"><span style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">A whiteboard suits getting info down fairly quickly, in bullet points, and for drawing arrows between items to show their relationships.</span></div><div dir="auto" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: -apple-system, HelveticaNeue; font-size: 17px;"><span style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br /></span></div><div dir="auto" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: -apple-system, HelveticaNeue; font-size: 17px;"><span style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">A word processor encourages writing in full sentences. Because we can easily see what we’ve already noted down, they also encourage us to write in sequences of sentences and paragraphs.</span></div><div dir="auto" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: -apple-system, HelveticaNeue; font-size: 17px;"><span style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br /></span></div><div dir="auto" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); caret-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: -apple-system, HelveticaNeue; font-size: 17px;"><span style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><div dir="auto" style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Pencil and paper seems to be part way between the free-form nature of the whiteboard and the more regimented form of the word processor.</div><div dir="auto" style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><div dir="auto" style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Voice notes are more focused on the present moment. You can’t see what you’ve already said, and it’s more effort to go back to hear the early part of the note. They’re good for brainstorming.</div><div dir="auto" style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="border-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">The traditional notion of affordances covers how the design of an object affects a user’s expectations about how to use that object, before they actually use it. We’re expanding this notion to also include how an object’s design shapes the way it is used by a user.</div></div></span></div>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-2868638341529121872024-01-26T17:42:00.007+10:002024-01-26T17:54:56.144+10:00Interactive storytelling: Fictional realism<p>This post is about the notion of "fictional realism", which I am using to mean a fictional account that is nonetheless meant to 1) accurately portray the time and place where it is set, and, optionally, to 2) focus more on this portrayal, than on presenting a story to the reader/viewer.<br /><br />Examples of fictional realism include the TV shows <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wire" target="_blank">"The Wire"</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sopranos" target="_blank">"The Sopranos"</a>, the movie <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casino_(1995_film)" target="_blank">"Casino"</a>, the novel <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Day_in_the_Life_of_Ivan_Denisovich" target="_blank">"One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich"</a>, and the game <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attentat_1942" target="_blank">"Attentat 1942"</a> <a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/676630/Attentat_1942/" target="_blank">(Steam page)</a>. Most of these examples have a fairly strong storytelling focus, so don't fit the optional second criteria.<br /><br />A work of fictional realism may be intended to convey the same kinds of details that a non-fiction work may convey, but to do so using fictional characters (or fictionalised versions of real people), in fictional situations (or fictionalised versions of real situations).</p><p> </p><p>"Interactive storytelling" can be used for fictional realism. One of my interests is in using interactive storytelling for exploring a strong form of fictional realism, meeting the second criteria described above (focus more on the portrayal of what life was like, than on presenting a story to the reader/viewer), that presents what it'd be like to be a specific character in a specific situation. So that the player can learn about the player character, about what they do, how they do it, and how they react to situations. Like worker on a sailing ship in the 17th century spice trade. What was their work like? How did they perceive their job (exciting? a journey of exploration?). What were their relationships with the various other sorts of people on the ship?<br /><br />Interaction could help place the player in the character's shoes, to help immerse them in the character's world. I'd like to use interaction to let the player <i>experience</i> what it's like to be that character. There is the dictum 'show, don't tell'. I want 'experience, don't show or tell'.</p><p>I have some ideas about how the interactive storytelling could work,
such as to achieve this, though I won't get into such details in this
post.<br /><br />Fictional realism can be used in an educational context. Or be an enriching kind of entertainment. By giving the player interactivity, and letting them experience what it's like to be that character, we hope we can make a compelling way to experience fictional realism.</p><p> </p><p>I think that <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2024/01/interactive-storytelling-behavior.html" target="_blank">behavior-psychology congruence</a> is a core requirement for fictional realism, and I'll explore this in a future post. In brief, I want the player to control the character such that the character acts in a realistic way.</p><p> </p><p>I've also written about the notion of 'strong storytelling', which we can think of as effective or good storytelling. Strong storytelling has a strong focus on plot, and moving the plot forwards. Thus it will tend to cut-out details that aren't relevant to the plot. Thus it would cut out the sorts of details I'm interested in, in fictional realism. The sort of 'day in the life' details.<br /><br />Compared to strong storytelling, fictional realism is more like real-life. Real-life tends not to be like a story. In stories, all the details are there to serve the overall goals of the story, like its climax, conclusion, and themes. In real life, things happen, but it's just one thing after the other, and they aren't there to result in some climax and conclusion. <br /><br />There is, however, no reason why a work of fictional realism couldn't have a plot. It could. It's just that the fictional realism details will dilute the story details, thus making it a weaker form of storytelling.<br /><br />Strong storytelling and fictional realism are just different forms, each with their own pros and cons.<br /></p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-32920442813922839392024-01-26T16:22:00.000+10:002024-01-26T16:22:28.266+10:00Interactive storytelling: Behavior-psychology congruence<p>We wish to introduce the notion of a fictional-character's behavior being congruent, or not, with their psychology. This will help us to, in subsequent posts, look at how, in interactive storytelling, the player having control affects the storytelling. <br /><br />We use 'psychology' to mean two things: the character's makeup and circumstances.<br /><br />A character's makeup, is their nature, their personality, their character, and how they think about situations. Such details are a result of their nature, and nurture. How their character is shaped by their life experiences. It includes how their personality might be changed by brain damage or a brain tumor. Or how medications they are taking affect their personality.<br /><br />By a character's circumstances, we mean what has been going on in their life. Perhaps they have had a stressful few weeks at work. Maybe a loved one died a few months ago, and they are going through grief. Or maybe they started a new relationship and they are happy as a result.<br /><br />I don't think there's a hard-and-fast distinction between a character's makeup and their circumstances. These are just rough categories. <br /><br />In real life, a person's behavior is always congruent with their psychology (their makeup and circumstances). In fictional works, we almost always strive to make a character's behavior congruent with their makeup and circumstances, though we may fail to achieve this. So there can be a lack of congruence.<br /><br />Behavior-psychology congruence doesn't just apply to "realistic" characters. It applies to all characters, even wacky and "out there" cartoon characters. Wile E. Coyote from the Warner Brothers cartoons wants to catch the Roadrunner, and sets up traps for this purpose. Despite many failures, he's never one to give up trying. The Roadrunner, in turn, likes running fast along roads, and seems to take joy in making the Wile E.'s traps backfire on him. These characters are not realistic, they're not at all like real coyotes and roadrunners. But Wile E.'s psychology is to want to capture the Roadrunner, and to setup traps to do so, and so Wylie's behavior is congruent with that.<br /><br />If a character has a cartoony makeup then their behavior should be cartoony as well, and good writers will make sure their behavior is congruent with their makeup and circumstances.<br /><br />If there were scenes where Wile E. was sincerely explaining to other characters that he has been vegan since he became an adult, because he believes no animals should be harmed, then this would not be congruent with his established psychology.</p><p> </p><p>In fiction, a character's behavior may be incongruent with their psychology, because of poor writing, poor acting, or poor directing. We can imagine that a very inexperienced writer setting out to write a novel. Earlier in their draft they gave the main character a gentle personality, whereas later on in the draft they gave them an aggressive personality, where the author didn't realise this change had happened. Which leads to inconsistencies in how that character is portrayed, with no explanation in the novel of why the character is different.<br /><br />We may have a philosophical objection to this talk of incongruence between a character's psychology and their behavior. If all we as viewers or readers see is the character's behavior, and we infer their personality from that, then it would seem to be impossible for there to be such incongruence. Any apparent incongruence would just seem to be incongruence because we didn't yet know enough about the character's psychology. The philosophical objection is that we can only know behavior, so behavior is what defines our picture of the character's psychology, thus /by definition/ there can never be incongruence between them. Any /apparent/ incongruence is simply because we have formed an incorrect picture of their pscyhology, by jumping to incorrect conclusions about it based on the prior behavior of theirs that we've observed.<br /><br />If a <i>real</i> person's behavior seems incongruous with their psychology, then it <i>is</i> our understanding of their psychology that is wrong (or incomplete). But here we are not talking about real people, but characters in fiction, fiction that may be written by a beginner, or an untalented, author.<br /><br />In fiction (novels especially), the author may explicitly describe aspects of a character's personality. This way, that character's behavior can be incongruous with the stated aspects of the character's personality, if the writer is inexperienced or otherwise not very good. <br /><br />But even when the character's personality is only inferrable from behavior, it is still possible for the two to be incongruous. It can be possible to infer psychological traits from behavior, and so we may have two sets of behavior B1 and B1, which reflect psychological traits P1 and P2 -- and P1 and P2 may conflict. A character may be terrified by speaking in front of their class, one point, and yet later inexplicably be supremely confident speaking in front of a large group. We're not saying it's impossible for there to be such a transformation; we're talking about the case of a story that has not included any details explaining such a transformation. At least one of those two behaviors is therefore incongruous with part of the person's psychology.</p><p> </p><p>We usually expect that if the character seems to be acting incongruently with their established psychology, that the story will provide an explanation of why. But it may not, and the incongruence may be a result of poor writing (or acting or directing).</p><p> </p><p>In subsequent posts, we'll look at how interactivity, in interactive storytelling, can lead to incongruence between a character's behavior and their psychology. The basic idea is that if the player can control a character's actions, then those actions will tend to reflect the player's psychology, not the character's. Using the terminology of those future posts, we'll explain why behavior-psychology congruence is necessary for strong storytelling and fictional realism.<br /></p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-30773907974330452792024-01-25T14:36:00.000+10:002024-01-25T14:36:09.646+10:00Interactive storytelling: Environment and storytelling<p></p>In a video game, the environment includes the locations the player sees as they traverse the game world. The environment includes the objects they can interact with, such as objects they can pick up and look at, doors they can open, lights they can switch on, etc.<br /><br />We'll look at the ways a game's environment can contribute to the storytelling in interactive storytelling like video games. Then we'll look at how effectively each of these ways can contribute to storytelling.<p></p><p> </p><p><b>The setting<br /></b><br />The game environment provides the setting for the story. A story about an ad executive living in New York City obviously is set in New York City. A story may lean heavily into its setting, and concern the nature of that setting -- like one that concerns the culture in New York City. Or the story's setting can be more of just a backdrop, where the same story could potentially be set in a number of different places, without changing much about it.</p><p> </p><p><b>The stage necessary for story events<br /></b><br />The game's environment may contain details necessary for enabling certain story events. A dense town or city, with suitably-small gaps between the rooftops enables a story event in which the protagonist is chased by several bad guys over rooftops.</p><p> </p><p><b>Atmosphere and world building<br /></b><br />An environment of moss and plant-covered ruins could contribute to a post-apocalyptic atmosphere. Posters plastered around a city, instructing the populace on how they should behave, could contribute to the world-building and atmosphere of story set in a fascist country. Dim lighting, with a yellowish hue, along with strange sounds, could give an alleyway an eerie atmosphere.<br /><br /><br /><b>Characterisation<br /></b><br />The environment can contribute to characterisation. If a character's house is neat and tidy (or very dirty, and messy) that will convey something about their personality. As could the paintings we find in their house, or the entries in the diary hidden under their pillow.<br /><br /><br /><b>The main plot<br /></b><br />The environment can contribute to the main plot. The space under a bed may contain a piece of evidence that conclusively shows who's guilty of a murder. A character finding it will be a major plot point.</p><p> </p><p><b>Backstory<br /></b><br />The environment can contribute to backstory. Backstory concerns past events, prior to the events the player is currently experiencing in the main story-thread. Those events could have occurred before the start of the main story thread. They could have happened a <i>long</i> time ago. Such distant backstory includes 'lore', that concerns historical details of the setting. Lore may be found in tomes that the player finds, or some runes written on some ruins.<br /><br />We'll also take 'backstory' to include details that may have only recently happened. For example, halfway through the story the player might receive details about something that had happened a hour prior -- that is, an event that occurred well after the point in time where the story began. We'll call this backstory, too.<br /><br />Environmental details that contribute to backstory include artefacts like diary entries, letters, memos, and books.<br /></p><p><a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2022/08/interactive-storytelling-audio-and.html" target="_blank">Audio-logs</a> are a means to fill the player in on backstory that's used in video games. Audio-logs are sound recordings that the player can listen to. They may be physical objects, like a tape recorder, that the player can find and play. Such might be a sound recording of a diary entry or voice note. Or an audio-log recording might automatically start playing when it is 'triggered' by the player's actions -- like if the player enters a particular room, or perhaps opens a particular person's locker.<br /><br />Audio-logs were popularised in the first-person shooter <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BioShock" target="_blank">BioShock</a> (2007), which used them as the main means to tell its story. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dear_Esther" target="_blank">Dear Esther</a> (2012) and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gone_Home" target="_blank">Gone Home</a> (2013) are games entirely focused on exploring an environment and finding audio-logs, in order to piece together their stories. Those latter two games are key examples of the genre that came to be known as "walking simulators".<br /><br />There are also what I've termed <i>audiovisual-logs</i>, used in games like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vanishing_of_Ethan_Carter" target="_blank">The Vanishing of Ethan Carter</a> (2014), where they only play a small role, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everybody%27s_Gone_to_the_Rapture" target="_blank">Everybody's Gone to the Rapture</a> (2015), and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_(video_game)" target="_blank">Tacoma</a> (2017). Audiovisual-logs allow the player to see an audiovisual recreation of some past event, in the location where that event occurred. The player can walk around and through this recreation while it is playing.</p><p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDEXpRj-fX5XlMHvq-baHRZaRpCCmOTlsrIUCcetgtGgiKhPnzE6iZQIGvouMO_jzerkj6_bdYVAs_8cv4CstjU5ws9lyEl7ZNgBuwCECeddmTBrSf5vkDSmfa9LLsKJ2dgj9vqVSnqZGwqbcE2Ibx8-rBhUqnC1xv_KllXTUYOEraIcVWZ1sGkw/s960/env-EverybodysGoneToTheRapture-1.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="540" data-original-width="960" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDEXpRj-fX5XlMHvq-baHRZaRpCCmOTlsrIUCcetgtGgiKhPnzE6iZQIGvouMO_jzerkj6_bdYVAs_8cv4CstjU5ws9lyEl7ZNgBuwCECeddmTBrSf5vkDSmfa9LLsKJ2dgj9vqVSnqZGwqbcE2Ibx8-rBhUqnC1xv_KllXTUYOEraIcVWZ1sGkw/s320/env-EverybodysGoneToTheRapture-1.gif" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">(an audiovisual-log from Everybody's Gone to the Rapture)</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKnCjDOcH9CVcGAdNSo7muGPHmpT6kUXol602jNG1h6utrlSFRM0qli-C_BS-gmLWG-k8xdBXJisWKQUsKsmVSy97fFTppurSiwg6w3L0AcN8aUTZ4GXQ7rolHg4woxZ9D-srxFPwCVw6b_AISfR74PZRCD-s873uaBE2Jazshat42uh-DzkZP6g/s960/env-Tacoma-1.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="540" data-original-width="960" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKnCjDOcH9CVcGAdNSo7muGPHmpT6kUXol602jNG1h6utrlSFRM0qli-C_BS-gmLWG-k8xdBXJisWKQUsKsmVSy97fFTppurSiwg6w3L0AcN8aUTZ4GXQ7rolHg4woxZ9D-srxFPwCVw6b_AISfR74PZRCD-s873uaBE2Jazshat42uh-DzkZP6g/s320/env-Tacoma-1.gif" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;">(an audiovisual log from Tacoma)</div><p><br /></p><p>The following links are to the original videos those gifs were created from. <a href="https://youtu.be/jvfmmD-EaiQ" target="_blank">Everybody's Gone to the Rapture</a>, and <a href="https://youtu.be/7QrjsQaKG3c" target="_blank">Tacoma</a>.<br /><br />Audiovisual-logs are the core means of storytelling in Everybody's Gone to the Rapture and Tacoma. In The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, they only play a relatively-small role[1].</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[1] In that game, there are certain puzzles, each of which concerns finding out how a particular character died. At the completion of each one of these puzzles, the player is shown a cut-scene showing the full details of how the character died, and then after that the player can follow a floating light. When they get to the light's resting place, they can see a short audiovisual-log of what came next, after the overall happening they've just seen the cutscene of.<br /></span></p><p style="text-align: left;">For more details on audiovisual-logs, see the audio-logs link, above.<br /><br />There's what I've termed "frozen-moment-logs". The only game I know of that uses these is The Vanishing of Ethan Carter (2014). The player will come across places where they can unlock a frozen-moment-log, consisting of a static 3D image of some past occurrence (backstory) there, that the player can walk around and view from different angles. In that game, these logs appear as part of larger puzzles.<br /> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjONLShGcL17WehQLYXW0ZwW8oU9vt9M_g90TasxlQo3vSh34BHObPA7xAwm6JNiLYLcilh982COHzBvnmb2XNs2i3CcBBdH147cZFkdSpQXL_TE2BbNq7-KGwu8BhLMFJfxAS3cuZsnOlP8ininY1c24tlXSuv9-PtC2bozGF7WAA-PYpcog4fHg/s960/env-TVoEC-froz-moment-log.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="540" data-original-width="960" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjONLShGcL17WehQLYXW0ZwW8oU9vt9M_g90TasxlQo3vSh34BHObPA7xAwm6JNiLYLcilh982COHzBvnmb2XNs2i3CcBBdH147cZFkdSpQXL_TE2BbNq7-KGwu8BhLMFJfxAS3cuZsnOlP8ininY1c24tlXSuv9-PtC2bozGF7WAA-PYpcog4fHg/s320/env-TVoEC-froz-moment-log.gif" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;">(a frozen-moment-log from The Vanishing of Ethan Carter)<br /></div><div><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>Another technique, where the environment contributes to
backstory, is what I'm calling "Inferred Backstory". This is where
environmental details enable the player to infer some past events.<br /><br />In
a post-apocalyptic game, the player may come across a dilapidated
house, and in one of its bedrooms find two mummified corpses in the bed,
frozen in an embrace. On the bedside table may sit a framed photo of a
happy couple, along with an empty bottle of sleeping-pills.<br /></p><p>From these details, the player may infer that the couple was once happy, and loved each other, but ended up finding their circumstances untenable. They may imagine the couple coming to this realisation, taking the sleeping pills, and tearfully embracing each other in the bed as they awaited their fate.<br /><br />Inferred backstory is often like a little puzzle, where there are clues and the player infers the backstory from them. Usually it's a very simple puzzle.<br /><br />'Inferred backstory', as we are using the term, concerns <i>any</i> cases of where the player infers prior details from present-moment details. That can include when a player immediately and effortlessly infers some prior details, including details that recently occurred. E.g. they're in a forest and come across some fresh large-animal droppings. They'll immediately infer there was recently some kind of large animal in this place. Some other examples where the player will make immediate and effortless inference: if the player came across the charred remains of a fire, or doors that been broken open.</p><p>And of course, by inferring details that have recently happened (e.g. a large animal being here) we may also infer present-moment details -- e.g. that the large animal may be nearby us right now. </p><p>Carson[2] calls these cases of inferred backstory "cause and effect" vignettes, and the above description of them is based on his article.</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[2] <a href="https://www.gamedeveloper.com/design/environmental-storytelling-creating-immersive-3d-worlds-using-lessons-learned-from-the-theme-park-industry" target="_blank">"Environmental Storytelling: Creating Immersive 3D Worlds Using Lessons Learned from the Theme Park Industry"</a>, by Don Carson, March 2000</span><br /></p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><br /></p><p><b>To effectively communicate story-relevant details<br /></b><br />This section draws a lot from <a href="https://www.gamedeveloper.com/design/environmental-storytelling-creating-immersive-3d-worlds-using-lessons-learned-from-the-theme-park-industry" target="_blank">Carson</a>.<br /> <br />The environment should be designed to effectively communicate important details to the player. Details like where the player is, what sort of place it is, and where they should go next. Usually, we want the player to be able immediately determine such details.<br /><br />These kinds of concerns don't, of course, only apply to the environments in games. They also apply in movies, TV shows, theatre, and theme park rides. Think set design.<br /><br />Here are some details that we want the environment to communicate to the player. Which details in a location are the most important story-relevant ones. The atmosphere of a location, and the kind of place it is. What objects and features are important for the player to be aware of. And where the player should go next.<br /><br />The following can aid in that communication. We can draw attention to important details by how we arrange the objects and features in that location, and by how those objects and features are lit. And by not including too much detail in the location, especially detail that's of little relevance to the story. We don't want to confuse or overwhelm the player.<br /><br />Contrast can be used to heighten qualities. For example, if we make the player crawl through a narrow passageway to reach a cave chamber, that can heighten the feeling of how large that chamber is. Or, if we want the player to feel that the temple in the forest is a pristine place, we can make them experience a disordered space (like thick jungle) before they find it.<br /><br />The environment can be designed to guide players as to where they need to go next. For example, in a dark area, having a well-lit large object in one corner, that the player will want to investigate, where this will take them to the exit from this location, to the next place they need to go to.</p><p>Many of the ways that the environment can contribute to storytelling are <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Show,_don't_tell" target="_blank">showing rather than telling</a>. Rather than explicitly describing the atmosphere and world building of an environment (perhaps by a character commenting on them), environmental details can show them. With inferred backstory, the player draws their own conclusion about what happened.<br /><br />And, as <a href="https://www.gamedeveloper.com/design/environmental-storytelling-creating-immersive-3d-worlds-using-lessons-learned-from-the-theme-park-industry" target="_blank">Carson</a> points out, the player being able to discover details like artefacts (letters, memos, audio-logs), and inferred backstory, themselves, can be a more enjoyable experience for them than them simply being told those details. (That discovery is part of the gameplay, so the enjoyment comes from the gameplay. It doesn't come from the storytelling).</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Summary of how the environment may contribute to storytelling<br /></b><br />To summarise, the environment may contribute to the following elements of a story:<br /></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>The setting (e.g. NYC)</li><li>The stage enabling certain events (e.g. rooftops for a chase sequence)</li><li>Atmosphere and world building (e.g. moss-covered ruins, strange sounds)</li><li>Characterisation (e.g. a character's messy room)</li><li>The main plot (e.g. evidence of who the murderer is).</li><li>Backstory (e.g. diary entries, audio-logs, audiovisual-logs, frozen-moment-logs, and inferred backstory like the corpses in the bed).</li></ul><p>And there are techniques that can be used to effectively communicate such elements of the story. For example, to highlight the size of large cave chamber, make the player crawl though a small space to get to it.</p><p> </p><p><b>Environmental storytelling<br /></b><br />The reader may have noticed that we started this post with the heading "Environment and Storytelling" <i>not</i> "Environmental Storytelling". For these are two different things. "Environment and storytelling" refers to <i>all</i> of the ways that the environment contributes to storytelling. Whereas "Environmental storytelling" refers only to a subset of them.<br /><br />"Environmental storytelling" is a commonly used term to describe storytelling in games. It is used to refer to only cases where the environment contributes to <i>backstory</i>.<br /><br />For some people, "environmental storytelling" refers to <i>all</i> of the ways that environmental details can contribute to backstory: diary entries, letters, memos, audio-logs, audiovisual-logs, frozen-moment-logs, and inferred backstory (like the corpses in the bed).<br /><br />For other people, "environmental storytelling" has an even narrower meaning. For them, it <i>only</i> refers to cases of inferred backstory, and does <i>not</i> refer to cases like diary entries, letters, memos, audio-logs, audiovisual-logs, and frozen-moment-logs.<br /><br />Both definitions of "environmental storytelling" involve environmental details that are leftover from, or reflections of, the past (in the broad sense of "prior to the current moment", not just things in the more distant past). Obviously that's the case for Inferred Backstory like the corpses in the bed. It's also the case for things like diary entries, letters, memos, audio-logs, audiovisual-logs, and frozen-moment-logs.<br /><br />In this post, we'll use "environmental storytelling" in its broader sense, which includes all the ways that environmental details can contribute to backstory.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Environment and storytelling in movies and TV<br /></b><br />Movies and TV use the story's environment (sets, and on-location shots) for storytelling purposes, and of course have done so since well before video games came onto the scene. Movies/TV and games mostly use their environments in similar ways for storytelling, except for some of the ways backstory is used.<br /><br />(As well as movies/TV, theatre, theme parks, and theme park rides, all use the environment to contribute to storytelling. But this post will focus only on video games, movies, and TV).<br /><br />Movies/TV can use environmental details to contribute to:<br /></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>The setting (e.g. NYC)</li><li>The stage enabling certain events (e.g. rooftops for a chase sequence)</li><li>Atmosphere and world building (e.g. moss-covered ruins, strange sounds)</li><li>Characterisation (e.g. a character's messy room)</li><li>The main plot (e.g. evidence of who the murderer is).</li><li>Backstory ('environmental storytelling', e.g. diary entries, audio-logs, audiovisual-logs, frozen-moment-logs, and inferred backstory like the corpses in the bed).</li></ul><p>One difference, regarding the techniques that can be used to effectively communicate such elements of the story, is the following. In games, the environment can be designed to guide players as to where they need to go next, which obviously doesn't apply to movies/TV/cutscenes. Whereas in movies/TV/cutscenes, the cinematography, lighting and set-design can guide where the viewer looks during scenes.<br /><br />In a moment we'll get into some differences in how backstory (environmental storytelling) is used in movies/TV compared to games.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Why is environmental storytelling more common in games?<br /></b><br />The environmental storytelling techniques (contributing to backstory) are either less common or not found at all in movies and TV. This includes things like diary entries, audio-logs, audiovisual-logs, frozen-moment-logs, and inferred backstory like the corpses in the bed.<br /><br />There's a clear difference between games and movies/TV in this respect, as games often heavily rely on such environmental storytelling. In games, it's often the main form of storytelling that's used. In movies and TV, it tends to be a supplemental form of storytelling.<br /><br />What is the reason for this difference?</p><p> </p><p><b>Cost and ease<br /></b><br />Movies and TV are focused on "cinematics" -- visual portrayals of actors and environments. Whereas game development companies have a primary focus on gameplay. In most cases, it requires additional resources for the game developer to be able to include "cinematics" in their games. And smaller game developers may not have the skills and/or budget for this.<br /><br />Compared to cinematics, it's cheaper and quicker to add artefacts like diary entries and letters to a game. Audio-logs require hiring voice actor(s), but a game might have a total of less than 1 hour of audio-log audio, which can be recorded quickly and thus doesn't require the expense of hiring a voice-actor for a long period of time.<br /><br />On the other hand, high-quality animated cutscenes take more time to develop, and require animator(s) and voice actor(s). FMV (full motion video) or motion-capture for cutscenes requires (real or virtual) sets, and hiring actors. Motion capture requires specialised equipment (either purchased or hired) and the skills to turn it's output into animation. I imagine that the time and money required for cutscenes is similar to the time and money required for audiovisual-logs.</p><p> </p><p><b>Visual mediums excel at visual-action storytelling<br /></b><br />Here's a reason that environmental storytelling is used less in movies/TV. Movies and TV are primarily visual, and excel at visual-action storytelling. This is the visual depiction of action (what I referred to as 'cinematics', above). By 'action', I don't mean just things like fights and shootouts, as you'd find in action movies. I mean 'action' in a general sense, of the visual details that can be captured by a video camera. This could include characters simply talking to each other, or a tense scene where two characters are sitting in the same room, each silently trying to ignore the other.<br /><br />In constructing visual action, all the tools of acting (performance), cinematography, editing, and so on, are brought to bear. Visual-action storytelling is a strong form of storytelling.<br /><br />If the movie or TV show contains backstory, it's usually presented through visual action -- that is, through a flashback. Environmental storytelling also conveys backstory, but it mostly does /not/ do so through visual action. In a moment we'll examine this, and see why environmental storytelling tends to thus be a weaker form of storytelling[3].</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[3] Before leaving this topic, we can note that one kind of use of inferred backstory in movies/TV is where the 'clues' are amongst the background details of scene(s), that might only briefly be in shot. Most people watching the movie/show wouldn't notice them, and they're there as interesting details or "easter eggs" for repeat or careful viewers. And/or as details designed for other viewers to subconsciously take in.</span></p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Games excel at visual-action gameplay, but not visual-action storytelling<br /></b><br />Like movies and TV, graphical games are also a visual medium -- with the addition of gameplay. They excel at incorporating gameplay into visual-action. Consider first-person shooters, platform games, racing games, etc. However, games do <i>not</i> excel at incorporating gameplay into visual-action <i>storytelling</i>.<br /><br />That's why, if a game is to include visual-action storytelling, that's done in a cutscene (effectively a little movie) that is separate to the main gameplay. Cutscenes are usually <i>non-interactive</i>, though they can include simple forms of interactivity like Quick-time Events (QTEs) and "Choose Your Own Adventure"-style choices. We don't have a way of integrating the player having control over a character and movie-like visual action.<br /><br />In visual-action storytelling, all the tools of acting (performance), cinematography, editing, and so on, are brought to bear. But, during gameplay, when the player has moment-to-moment control over a character (like the character's movements), it's not possible to strongly exploit those tools of visual-action storytelling.<br /><br />Here we'll turn our attention to cutscenes. These aren't a form of environmental storytelling, but looking at them will help convey the point that games are poor at integrating interaction/gameplay with strong visual-action storytelling.</p><p style="text-align: left;">In <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2024/01/interactive-storytelling-types-of.html" target="_blank">this earlier post</a>, I looked at the types of cutscenes in games, and the ways interactivity and cutscenes can be mixed together.<br /><br />The standard non-interactive cutscenes are strong visual-action storytelling, but the involve no interactions at all.<br /><br />In QTE-and-Choice cutscenes, simple player inputs are incorporated into the strong visual-action storytelling. These are interactions like QTEs (Quick-time Events), and choices where the player can choose from a small menu of options, such as dialogue choices or choices about which course of action to take (save Billy or save Jenny, from the oncoming horde of zombies).<br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">QTE-and-Choice cutscenes are strong forms of visual-action storytelling, however as far as interactivity goes, they contain weak forms of interactions/gameplay. The player has very limited control over a character.<br /><br />During-gameplay cutscenes are how most of the cutscenes are handled in games like Half-Life 2 and the Dishonored games. The player still has some degree of control over their character, while some scripted events occur around them. The player may be able to freely turn their head to look around, or that plus the freedom to move around (within the constraints of their environment, like brick walls etc).<br /><br />As that earlier post argued, During-Gameplay cutscenes have stronger forms of <i>gameplay</i> but weaker forms of storytelling than non-interactive cutscenes.<br /><br />So none of the kinds of cutscenes involve strong visual-action storytelling along with strong interaction/gameplay.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Returning to environmental storytelling, audiovisual-logs, like in Everybody's Gone to the Rapture, present visual action, but since it is visual action that the player can walk around and through, the tools of cinematography and editing can't be brought to bear on it. Like with during-gameplay cutscenes, the player is reduced to a spectator of the events.<br /><br />In summary, even though visual-action storytelling is the strongest form of storytelling in a visual medium, games are not very suited to it. To use visual-action storytelling, games have to either include non-interactive or Q&C cutscenes, which clash somewhat with the interactive nature of games, or D-G cutscenes which have more interaction but weaker storytelling.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Environmental storytelling is more compatible with gameplay<br /></b><br />That it's difficult to insert gameplay into visual-action storytelling is a reason why environmental storytelling is so often used in games.<br /><br />Environmental storytelling can form part of the gameplay.<br /><br />In it, the player explores the environment, and finds artefacts (like diary entries, letters, memos, audio-logs, and audiovisual-logs). A player who is not looking carefully might miss some of the artefacts. That exploration and finding is part of the gameplay.<br /><br />Audio-logs can be listened to while the player is still engaging in gameplay, where they're moving around and continuing to explore.<br /><br />When an audiovisual-log is playing, the player can move around, and within, the recreated visuals. The player may move around to find a good view of all the action, to follow a particular character around, or to be closer to one particular conversation (if there are multiple happening at the same time). The audiovisual-logs in Tacoma allow the player to scrub back and forth in the log, to find pertinent details.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Environmental storytelling (e.g. diary entries, audio-logs, audiovisual-logs, frozen-moment-logs, and inferred backstory like the corpses in the bed) can present a kind of puzzle to the player. Something unknown, in the past, has happened, and environmental storytelling provides some clues to its nature. It's like each bit of environmental storytelling is a puzzle piece and the player needs to figure out how they fit together, to see the overall picture of what happened. This is a very common pattern in games that heavily use environmental storytelling. For example, in BioShock, Gone Home, Everybody's Gone to the Rapture, and Tacoma. (Note that this can be done in other mediums, like movies/TV, and novels. But games more often make use of such).<br /><br />So all these forms of environmental storytelling are more compatible with gameplay. Environmental storytelling brings storytelling into the main gameplay parts of the game, rather than having it be fairly distinct from gameplay, as with cutscenes.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Environmental storytelling is generally a weaker form of storytelling<br /></b><br />While environmental storytelling allows storytelling to be better integrated with the gameplay, it unfortunately involves a weaker form of storytelling.<br /><br />We've stated that visual-action storytelling is the strongest form of storytelling in a visual medium. This, and some subsequent sections, look at why environmental storytelling is weaker than visual-action storytelling.<br /><br />To clarify, I'm saying they're <i>generally</i> weaker forms of storytelling, not that they're bad. They can be quite effective. However, when they are <i>heavily relied upon</i>, like they often are in games, that will tend to weaken the overall storytelling.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Environmental storytelling conveys backstory. I suggest that storytelling that focuses on the main story thread is, generally speaking, stronger storytelling than that focusing on backstory. This is debatable, but I think it's the reason that backstory tends to be used sparingly in most movies and TV shows.<br /><br />And, if backstory is used, it's more strongly presented with flashbacks, which present the details through visual action. Environmental storytelling mostly does not convey details through visual-action. So these forms of environmental storytelling are generally weaker forms of storytelling.<br /><br />Audiovisual-logs, such as used in Everybody's Gone to the Rapture, and Tacoma, are the only form of environmental storytelling that's via visual action (during-gameplay cutscenes also use visual action, but they are, like normal cutscenes, not a form of environmental storytelling). Though, as mentioned before, audiovisual-logs can't make use of cinematography or editing, as the player is still in control of a character. The camera needs to be suited to moving a character around. Editing involves cutting out parts of the action, showing only the details before and after it, and that doesn't mesh well with gameplay. Still, audiovisual-logs have the potential to be fairly strong forms of storytelling -- similar to flashbacks.<br /><br />All the other forms of environmental storytelling are not presented through visual action. They may be <i>textual</i> artefacts like diary entries and letters. And <i>auditory</i> ones like audio-logs.</p><p style="text-align: left;">What about inferred backstory, like the corpses in the bed? Here the backstory is told using visual details (from which the player infers past events). But those are present-moment visual details; the backstory being conveyed is not shown visually. It doesn't, for example, show the visual action of the couple taking the sleeping pills and getting into the bed.<br /><br />The player coming to their own realisation of what happened, through the environmental storytelling, is something that a number of players enjoy. This is part of the appeal of environmental storytelling. However, I don't consider this to add a lot to the strength of the storytelling.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;">We can draw a distinction between artefacts that provide narrative details, and those that don't, but which convey narrative-relevant information. We can call these narrative and non-narrative artefacts.<br /><br />Artefacts like diary entries and letters can be either narrative or non-narrative. They can convey narrative backstory, like a diary entry recounting an event that occurred. A non-narrative example is a diary entry that said "Bought new clothes at shops" and then went on to list the items of clothing. This is just some information, though from it the player may infer some narrative-relevant details (that the person who wrote it cared a lot about their neighbour, who they bought a number of items for).<br /><br />(To turn to textual mediums for a moment, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistolary_novel" target="_blank">epistolary novels</a> tell a story through letters sent between characters. "Epistolary novels" is also often used in a broader sense, covering stories told through any kinds of artefacts, such as diary entries, newspaper clippings, or other kinds of documents. Some well known examples are "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrie_(novel)" target="_blank">Carrie</a>", by Stephen King (1974), "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_(Byatt_novel)" target="_blank">Posession</a>", by A. S. Byatt (1990), and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Mole" target="_blank">the Adrian Mole series</a>, by Sue Townsend (1982-2009). Such novels show how something akin to environmental storytelling can be used quite successfully for storytelling. I believe that using artefacts in this way is much more suited to textual mediums, and much less so in visual mediums like visual video games. This is because they are textual artifacts, which means they fit in with the textual nature of novels. Whereas, showing textual artefacts on screen for the viewers to read, or having them read out by a character, is not as suited to the visual-action character of visual mediums.)</p><p style="text-align: left;">I contend that such non-narrative information is, generally speaking, a weaker way of conveying details that are part of the narrative.<br /><br />Audio-logs may simply be recorded versions of artefacts like diary entries, which may or may not be focused on narrative details. Narrative audio-logs might, for example, contain a recording of when some bad guys stormed a character's office, and took them hostage. That is, an audio-log may contain a recording of an event that happened. Audiovisual-logs will usually convey narrative details.<br /><br />Inferred backstory (like the corpses in the bed) also conveys narrative details.<br /><br />Here's a summary of the ways the environment may directly contribute to the narrative and those that do so indirectly.<br /><br />These environmental storytelling techniques directly contribute to the narrative. Those that contribute to:</p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>The main plot (e.g. evidence of who the murderer is).</li><li>backstory (with <i>narrative</i> artefacts)<br />(e.g. certain of: diary entries, audio-logs, audiovisual-logs, frozen-moment-logs, and inferred backstory like the corpses in the bed).</li></ul><p style="text-align: left;">Environmental storytelling techniques that only <i>indirectly</i> contribute to the narrative/plot:</p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>The setting (e.g. NYC)</li><li>The stage enabling certain events (e.g. rooftops for a chase sequence)</li><li>Atmosphere and world building (e.g. moss-covered ruins, strange sounds)</li><li>Characterisation (e.g. a character's messy room)</li><li><i>non-narrative</i> artefacts conveying backstory (e.g. diary entries, audio-logs).</li></ul><p style="text-align: left;">And where environmental details are used to effectively communicate story-relevant details (e.g. to highlight size of large cave chamber, make player crawl though a small space to get to it). <br /><br />Audio-logs and inferred backstory that convey narrative details, don't do so through visual action, so they are generally weaker forms of (back)storytelling than flashbacks, which do.<br /><br />To help reinforce these points, we can note that movies and TV <i>could</i> employ an equivalent of audio-logs. There could be scenes where a character is listening to a sound recording. Or where the audience hears a character reading out a diary entry or letter. The visuals might show the character driving in their car as they listen to the audio recording, or walking around their house while reading the diary entry or letter.<br /><br />Because the focus of such scenes would be on the audio, the visuals would essentially serve as a background to the audio. The visuals couldn't convey any substantial narrative details, as that would distract the viewer from the audio. So thus it'd be weaker storytelling, because it's not focused on visual action.<br /><br />That such scenes are, as far as I'm aware, rare in movies and TV is, I suggest, because they're a weaker form of storytelling.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Pacing<br /></b><br />Another reason flashbacks are a stronger means of conveying backstory is that their visual-storytelling benefits <i>pacing</i>. Pacing is an important part of storytelling. A story may concern some events that take place over a week, but they -- as represented in a movie or TV show -- may do so through only a couple of hours of visual action. They condense the details. They filter out the narratively-irrelevant details, to leave a more narratively-concentrated end-product. If the narratively-interesting details are padded out with a lot of irrelevant details, it will slow down the pacing, and dilute the narrative.<br /><br />A heavy focus on environmental storytelling, as is often found in games, negatively affects the pacing. It slows the pacing.<br /><br />Imagine if, during a movie or TV show, there were several occasions where the main character read a full-page diary entry, letter, or memo. Where, each time, the shot of them reading it lasted long enough for the character to read the full text. (Their reading of it might be conveyed with a voice-over representing the character's inner voice, as they read the page). That would, I think, make the pacing feel quite strange. It'd be jarring, to go from the normal speed of the pacing in a movie or TV show, to these really slowed-down segments.<br /><br />(And this is on top of the fact that gameplay itself, also slows the pacing of the storytelling. Because there'll be long segments of gameplay-focused action in between each narrative-focused segment, and the gameplay is usually not conveying much vis a vis the game's narrative).</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Limitations to narrative complexity of audio-logs and inferred backstory<br /></b><br />I mentioned earlier that audio-logs and inferred backstory can convey narrative details. They are, however, quite limited in their ability to do so.<br /><br />An individual audio-log or inferred backstory instance can only present fairly short and simple narrative details. And there are fairly strong limits on how substantial/complex the overall narrative details from the totality of the audio-logs/inferred-backstory.<br /><br />With inferred backstory (like the corpses in the bed) there's visual details from which the player can infer past events. But it's difficult to convey a lot of detail in this fashion. The player has to infer -- figure out -- the events from the clues. It would be too complex for the player to infer more than a simple set of details. For one thing, it would be very challenging to indicate the sequence of the events.<br /><br />Audio-logs that convey narrative events (like a recording of a kidnapping) need to be relatively brief. Audio-logs are designed such as to not get in the way of gameplay, while the player is listening to them. While listening, the player can still continue to explore around, and possibly even take on some enemies. While listening, they'll be watching visuals (of their environment) that are likely pretty unrelated to the content of the audio-log. Which means they face distractions while listening to the audio-log. They won't usually be paying 100% attention to it. So the player would have trouble being able to properly take in longer audio-logs. Also, if audio-logs were lengthy, then while the player is still listening to one, they might get into a situation (like a major fight with multiple enemies) where 1) they can't focus at all on the audio-log and 2) the audio-log might distract them from the gameplay. (Though this latter point might be addressable by a means to pause audio-logs).</p><p style="text-align: left;">All of the narrative audio/audiovisual -logs, and all of the inferred backstory, in a game, could together contribute to the overall narrative. However, there might be an average of, say, 10-30 minutes of playtime between each audio-log or inferred backstory that the player comes across. During which time the player is undertaking gameplay. This places fairly heavy demands on the player's memory, and the game designer can't expect that the player will be able to recall a lot of the specifics presented in earlier audio-logs and inferred backstory instances. Therefore, individual audio/audiovisual -logs and inferred backstory have to be designed to be somewhat stand-alone. They can't be narratively connected together in intricate ways.<br /><br />So there are limits on how substantial/complex the overall narrative, conveyed through multiple audio/audiovisual -logs and/or inferred backstory instances, can be. One other reason for this, that applies to a number of games, is that different players may come across the audio/audiovisual -logs and/or inferred-backstories in somewhat different orders.<br /><br />In contrast, visual action can convey a lengthy sequence of events (like, a whole movie's worth).</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Contrived nature of audio-logs<br /></b><br />Audio-logs are also somewhat contrived. Why were these recordings made in the first place? It might make sense if they're like diary entries or voice notes that a character made. But it doesn't if they're a recording of a narratively-significant event that happened. Who thinks to switch on a recorder just before a significant event? And why are the audio-logs found in various different places in the environment? Often it doesn't make sense. So this contrivance is another reason why you wouldn't have characters in movies/TV finding such audio-logs.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Audio/audiovisual -logs are only compatible with certain story settings<br /></b><br />And both audio-logs and audiovisual-logs are also only compatible with certain kinds of stories. Neither of them could appear in a realistic story set in the 1700s. Audiovisual-logs, further, need to be in a story that contains elements that are magical, supernatural, alien, or high-tech.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;">In summary, environmental storytelling consists of generally-weaker forms of storytelling, and the reason they're often used in games is that they fit better with gameplay than do other means of storytelling.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Where next?<br /></b><br />Given the storytelling limitations of the environmental storytelling we've looked at, are there other ways environmental storytelling could be used, that might be better for storytelling?<br /><br /><b><br />Further exploring the use of audiovisual-logs<br /></b><br />Audiovisual-logs have potential because they can present narrative details through visual-action. The player sees the characters and events being portrayed. Yet, I'm only aware of three games that use them. One (The Vanishing of Ethan Carter -- see below) barely uses them, and the other two (Everybody's Gone to the Rapture, and Tacoma) don't lean much into the visual action.<br /><br />I expect further exploration of the use of audiovisual-logs in future works. Especially since it should become cheaper and easier for game developers to create them. Motion capture and animating the captured data, is only going to get cheaper and easier over time. AI will likely play a role in that. AI will likely make it quicker and easier to record and process the motion capture data, and to generate animated models from it.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Audiovisual-logs with full character-detail<br /></b><br />In The Vanishing of Ethan Carter (2014), the audiovisual-logs have a quite minor role. Each one is quite short -- probably 5-10 seconds long -- and there's only a few of them in the game (probably 5-10). In these you see the representations of the characters like you would in a cutscene, except you are there in the scene and can move around and look around while you're watching it play out.<br /><br />In Everybody's Gone to the Rapture (2015) and Tacoma (2017), the audiovisual-logs are the main source of the storytelling, but at the same time, those games don't lean much into the visual action in the audiovisual-logs, because they show highly abstracted representations of the characters.<br /><br />In <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everybody%27s_Gone_to_the_Rapture" target="_blank">Everybody's Gone to the Rapture</a> (2015), the characters are represented by glowing, dancing points of light. It makes it difficult to even get a clear view of the characters and their movements.<br /><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh__EylBix6csNGiI6i6fSwyJ5j2vpRWR3ehLQHWrBfEG2GCWcZA_iAUV8ke2S7xPoTTMtT6pJbh2ynIPuAj3puiJp_XpTI8BnMbxwNP7FmzLXKmSsMecjo2Z7kF_ud-6o0oS5kyuYYZHDdj82BcVnX6rZdCAr_mTCw0nhumuf4pouCg_7Qwo1zXQ/s960/env-EverybodysGoneToTheRapture-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="540" data-original-width="960" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh__EylBix6csNGiI6i6fSwyJ5j2vpRWR3ehLQHWrBfEG2GCWcZA_iAUV8ke2S7xPoTTMtT6pJbh2ynIPuAj3puiJp_XpTI8BnMbxwNP7FmzLXKmSsMecjo2Z7kF_ud-6o0oS5kyuYYZHDdj82BcVnX6rZdCAr_mTCw0nhumuf4pouCg_7Qwo1zXQ/s320/env-EverybodysGoneToTheRapture-1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div></div><div><div style="text-align: center;">(A still from an audiovisual-log in Everybody's Gone to the Rapture. From <a href="https://youtu.be/jvfmmD-EaiQ" target="_blank">this</a> one-minute video. It's from early in the game.)</div><p style="text-align: left;">In <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_(video_game)" target="_blank">Tacoma</a> (2017), you can see the shapes of each of the characters, but those shapes are just filled in with a single colour, where each character has their own colour. These character representations are more 'readable' than the ones in Everybody's Gone to the Rapture. However, in both of these games, you can't see any details of the character's faces. Without facial details, the audiovisual-logs are missing an important part of visual action.<br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcBn7IA5IXFxdOM2LqZ9JyKWfgtRQUduDf9xCIUxiBvaLcI7IfGG39SEAYlw8apQYzXoFVtYyjW2ddz2_q5FZVLuSsiXKVkoNM-lAjRfwiZv9oS5n1k9wwzLHQ1jF9QDf5ga23c1l4YxNOf6fOfBG1IQw9O-u2a5DMnPLq2thB9lU0d16ECmLhnA/s960/env-Tacoma-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="540" data-original-width="960" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcBn7IA5IXFxdOM2LqZ9JyKWfgtRQUduDf9xCIUxiBvaLcI7IfGG39SEAYlw8apQYzXoFVtYyjW2ddz2_q5FZVLuSsiXKVkoNM-lAjRfwiZv9oS5n1k9wwzLHQ1jF9QDf5ga23c1l4YxNOf6fOfBG1IQw9O-u2a5DMnPLq2thB9lU0d16ECmLhnA/s320/env-Tacoma-1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;">(A still from an audiovisual-log in Tacoma. From <a href="https://youtu.be/7QrjsQaKG3c" target="_blank">this</a> trailer for the game)</div><p style="text-align: left;"><br />Those two games may have used highly abstracted representations of the characters for technical reasons (e.g. for performance). But whatever the reasons were, it seems clear to me that audiovisual-logs showing full details of the characters are far superior. The characters might be shown as semi-transparent, to indicate that you're seeing the details of a past event. Current gaming hardware should be able to handle showing such details, without any problem.<br /><br />We can call these 'audiovisual-logs with full character-detail'. It's something I expect to see explored more in the future.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Audiovisual-logs about ongoing or future situations </b><br /><br />Existing audiovisual-logs convey backstory. In The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, Everybody's Gone to the Rapture, and Tacoma, the player enters a situation where a series of events has taken place in the past, before they arrived[4]. The player's goal is to try to understand what happened. </p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[4] or not quite so, for one of these games. But to explain would be a spoiler.</span></p><p style="text-align: left;">Rather than conveying details that happened a while prior to the current moment, audiovisual-logs could be used to convey events that happened only a short while ago, events that are happening now but in a different location, or even <i>future</i> events that haven't happened yet.<br /><br />So despite what I've said elsewhere in this post, environmental storytelling is not inherently restricted to conveying backstory. What it can't convey are the generally stronger, from a storytelling perspective, details that are happening here and now where the player is.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>NPC-perspective audiovisual-logs<br /></b><br />Audiovisual-logs present some past situation involving some NPCs. Instead of presenting them from the player's point of view (POV), as is normally done, they could be presented through the POV of one or more of those NPCs.<br /><br />The player could freely switch between the POVs of the different NPCs in the situation. Or perhaps there could be a puzzle element to it, where the player has to do something to unlock each of the different NPCs' POVs.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Combining inferred backstory with audiovisual-logs<br /></b><br />The Vanishing of Ethan Carter contains puzzles where the player has to discover clues about some past events, and then put those clues in the correct temporal order. This is the player inferring some backstory from the clues. At the end of this process the player is shown a brief audiovisual-log.</p><p style="text-align: left;">There are other possible ways of combining inferred backstory and audiovisual-logs, that are yet to be explored. For example, the following.<br /><br />The player comes across some clues to some inferred backstory, and once they've seen them all, the game could play an audiovisual-log of the backstory details.<br /><br />For this to work, the game has to know that the player has noticed those clues. The game could have a 'look' verb, that the player could use on objects. And if the player has 'looked' at each of the clues, the game could play the audiovisual-log.<br /><br />Or, to make it more challenging for the player, them noticing the clues might require them to apply a separate 'is clue' verb to each of the items they think are clues. That way, a player who just looks at every available objects (as players tend to do in games) would <b>not</b> thereby automatically find all the clues.<br /><br />In The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, the player is required to put the clues in the correct temporal order. But there could be alternatives to this. Like correctly linking each clue to the person that left it behind.</p><p style="text-align: left;"><br /></p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Interaction within visual action, to enhance the storytelling<br /></b><br />My primary interest is in storytelling, and how gameplay, or interaction, could be used to enhance the storytelling.<br /><br />In a visual medium, visual action is the strongest way to convey storytelling details, so I am interested in how interaction can be used within visual-action storytelling, to enhance that storytelling.<br /><br />I mentioned earlier that it is difficult to include gameplay within visual-action storytelling. With most of the means of environmental storytelling, the gameplay sits outside of full visual-action storytelling. Currently the only options for interaction in visual-action storytelling are QTEs, choosing from a small menu of actions (e.g. which of the two people do I try to save?), and during-gameplay cutscenes (which are not a form of environmental storytelling, just like cutscenes are not a form of environmental storytelling).<br /><br />During-gameplay cutscenes (see post about <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2024/01/interactive-storytelling-types-of.html" target="_blank">the different kinds of cutscenes</a>) are one way of combining gameplay and cutscenes. So far they have been used in relatively-few games, and their use could be explored further. <br /><br />I think there are a lot of unexplored options for using interaction within visual-action storytelling, and it is these that I am primarily interested in exploring. But that is a topic for another post.<br /></p></div>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-69520220711488346862024-01-24T23:22:00.006+10:002024-01-25T12:59:41.532+10:00Interactive storytelling: Types of cutscenes in games<p>Video game cutscenes are like little movies, played between gameplay segments. They, like movies and TV show episodes, are a sequence of one or more scenes, where each scene is a sequence of one or more shots.<br /><br />There are 1st-person shots and scenes, which show the action from the perspective of a particular character. And there are 3rd-person shots and scenes, which don't show the action from the perspective of a particular character, but rather the view from where the camera is located and facing[1]. </p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[1] there are also scenes rendered in Virtual Reality, in VR games and movies. These add an extra dimension of immersion.</span><br /></p><p>In movies and TV shows most shots are 3rd-person shots, with the occasional 1st-person shot thrown in. In games, 1st-person (cut)scenes are more common. For example, in the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_(franchise)" target="_blank">Metro games</a>, the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dishonored_(series)" target="_blank">Dishonored games</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_3:_ODST" target="_blank">Halo 3: ODST</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo:_Reach" target="_blank">Halo: Reach</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberpunk_2077" target="_blank">Cyperpunk 2077</a>. The reasons for this needn't concern us in this post.<br /><br />Video game cutscenes can include interaction. This post looks at such cutscenes, and how the interactivity in them affects the strength of the storytelling in them.</p><p></p><p> </p><p><b>Visual-action storytelling</b><br /><br />Here we introduce the notion of "visual-action storytelling". It will help us discuss the affect of interactivity on cutscenes in games.<br /><br />The primary form of storytelling found in movies and TV is "visual-action storytelling", in which we see the story events occur. By "action" I don't mean in the sense of an "action movie", with weapons, fights, and chase-scenes. I don't mean something that has to be highly dynamic. The "action" is just what the viewer sees unfold over time, and that includes very still scenes where very little is happening.<br /><br />Visual action is made up of components like the actor's performances, the sets, the cinematography, and the editing.<br /><br />If there was a movie that was just 1.5 hours of a character recounting a story to some others, where all the footage was just of the storyteller and their audience, this would be a very weak form of visual action. It would contain visual action of the storyteller and their audience, but no visual action of the story being told. In that situation, the "real" story details are being <i>told</i>, not <i>shown</i>.<br /><br />Whereas if instead of focusing totally on the storyteller and their audience, there were also visual-action scenes showing the events of the story that's being recounted, that would be a stronger form of visual action. In that version, the movie's viewers would be <i>shown</i> the visual action of the story details.</p><p> </p><p><b>Interactivity in visual-action storytelling</b><br /><br />Normal cutscenes are non-interactive. In video games, some degree of interactivity can be introduced into the visual-action storytelling of cutscenes. Though, as we'll see, it's only limited forms of interactivity, and their addition can lessen the strength of the visual-action storytelling.<br /><br />The following looks at the different ways interactivity can play a role in the visual-action of cutscenes.<br /> </p><p><b>QTE-and-choice cutscenes<br /></b><br />Two forms of interactions that may occur within cutscenes are QTEs (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quick_time_event" target="_blank">Quick-time Events</a>) and making choices.<br /><br />Imagine a story-focused game, where, after much journeying the player makes it to the castle, and gains an audience with the king at the king's court. There's a cutscene of the player character entering the court and talking to the king. As the cutscene continues, the situation goes south, and a fight breaks out between the player's character and the guards.<br /><br />One way that fight could be implemented would be with normal gameplay, where the player moves their character about, attacks with their weapons, and blocks with their shield.<br /><br />Alternatively, the fight could be a continuation of the cutscene. That way, the fight could be made to look very cinematic. It could contain dedicated character animation and performances, be 'shot' in a cinematic way, use various camera angles and movements, and be edited to look spectacular. However, the player would lose direct control over their character.</p><p>Imagine a moment during the cutscene where an enemy swings their sword at the player, and the player dodges to the left, just in time to avoid the blade. A QTE (Quick-time Event) could be used for making the character dodge the blade, to add some interaction into the cutscene.<br /><br />Here's how the QTE would work. As the enemy goes to swing their sword, time will slow down a bit, and the screen will show a prompt, telling the player to press left on their joystick. The player would (usually) have a small window of time to enter that input. If they enter the correct input within the time limit, they succeed at that QTE -- and successfully dodge the sword -- otherwise they fail at it. The penalties for failure depend on the game and the particular situation in it. The penalties could be minor, all the way up to player's character dying.<br /><br />As another example, during the fight the player could be grabbed from behind by some of the guards, and there could be a QTE prompt telling the player to quickly tap (and keep tapping) one of the controller buttons. If the player taps the button fast enough, they'll escape the grips of the guards.<br /><br />Remember that in both of these examples, the action would be shown in a cinematic fashion, just like in a movie.<br /><br />Other types of inputs used in QTEs include moving a joystick in a particular path (e.g. in a full circle, or to right and then anticlockwise, to up). And on touch-screen devices, the player may need to tap on hotspots on the screen, or slide their finger along a path (e.g. a circular path). The QTEs can be <a href="https://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2024/01/intreactive-storytelling-action.html" target="_blank">action-mirroring inputs</a>.<br /><br />QTEs are divisive. Many players do not like them. They see QTEs as a fairly pointless attempt at including a bit of gameplay here and there in cutscenes. They may not find QTEs enjoyable.</p><p>One thing that I think all could agree on is that QTEs are a fairly simple form of input. The game tells the player what to do, and when to do it, and the player just needs to follow the instructions properly. Performing the input(s) for a QTE is a fairly rote task. The player doesn't have much agency when it comes to QTEs. (We'll talk about choice below, and choices may be implemented as part of the QTEs, so in this sense they can provide some agency).<br /><br />Choices provide another means for there to be player-interactions within cutscenes. At points in cutscenes the player can be presented with a choice from a small menu of options, and -- like with QTEs -- there will usually be a time limit for making the choice. The choice might be between a small number (2 to 4) of dialog options or action options.<br /><br />As an example of choices between action options, there might be a oncoming zombie horde, where the player has to quickly choose between saving one of their companions, Joe or Jackie. Especially in timed action choices, we may consider these kinds of choices to be a kind of QTE.</p><p>We can call the kinds of cutscenes just described "QTE-and-Choice cutscenes" (or "Q&C cutscenes" for short).<br /><br />The addition of QTEs and choices don't weaken the strength of the storytelling in these cutscenes. They're just like normal cutscenes, except for the introduction of some basic forms of interaction (QTEs and choices).</p><p> </p><p><b>During-Gameplay Cutscenes<br /></b><br />There are kinds of cutscenes that can play during the gameplay scenes in games. With these, the player still has some control over their character, while, at the same time, cutscene-like details play out around them. We'll call them "during-gameplay cutscenes" (or "D-G cutscenes" for short).</p><p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-Life_2" target="_blank">Half-Life 2</a> is the classic example of a game that includes during-gameplay cutscenes. Almost all of its cutscenes are of this sort. The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dishonored_(series)" target="_blank">Dishonored games</a> are another example of games with during-gameplay cutscenes. The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_(franchise)" target="_blank">Metro games</a> also contain a fair number of D-G cutscenes.</p><p>Half-Life 2 is a first-person shooter in which some hostile aliens have invaded earth. The game starts with you disembarking a train, and soon after you see an alien guard, holding a large baton, shove a person they're overseeing. As you walk past some of the humans there, they say things to you. Soon, you reach a checkpoint, where you're taken away to an interrogation room, where the helmeted alien who led you there takes his helmet off, to reveal themselves to be a human -- a person that your character knows. The entire time all this unfolds, the player has control over their character's movement (though of course where they can move is constrained by the walls etc in their environment), and can control where their character is looking.<br /><br />Such during-gameplay cutscenes consist of scripted dialog and events (animated occurrences), that are triggered by the player's actions. For example, an NPC saying something to the player might be triggered by the player walking close-enough to the NPC. Or the player performing actions, like picking up a gun on the ground, might trigger some during-gameplay cutscene.<br /><br />The cutscene elements of D-G cutscenes can consist of any scripted details. They could be as simple as some characters talking. D-G cutscenes can also be of any length. Some may quite brief, lasting only a couple of seconds. <br /><br />One form of D-G cutscene is where the player's character and NPC(s) are having a conversation as they walk along. These are epitomised by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naughty_Dog" target="_blank">Naughty Dog's</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncharted" target="_blank">Uncharted games</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_of_Us_(franchise)" target="_blank">The Last of Us games</a>. Yahtzee Crowshaw calls these "<a href="https://youtu.be/sZDARCBm_gg" target="_blank">Walk and talk sequences</a>". <br /><br />We wouldn't normally think of these Walk-and-talk scenes as kinds of cutscenes, but they match the criteria laid out above, of being scripted details that play out during gameplay. In this case, there is the scripted movements of your NPC companions, and the scripted dialog said by your character and the NPCs.<br /><br />These conversation-focused D-G cutscenes don't have take place while the characters are walking. They can occur during any kind of activity the characters are undertaking, like climbing a structure, or fighting against enemies.</p><p>Games like Rockstar's <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Theft_Auto" target="_blank">Grand Theft Auto (GTA) games</a> have a huge amount of D-G cutscene detail going on all around the character during gameplay. There's vehicles on the roads, people walking about, and so on. We wouldn't normally think of these as kinds of cutscenes, but they meets our criteria. In this case, the scripted details are more "background details", that are in-part there to give the cities a lived-in feel. They're always rolling, and aren't there to play a specific role in the plot.<br /><br />Other well-known games with D-G cutscenes are the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_(franchise)" target="_blank">Metro games</a>, and the recent <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_War_(2018_video_game)" target="_blank">God of War</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_War_Ragnarök" target="_blank">games</a>.<br /><br />In a D-G cutscene, the player's control may be restricted in certain ways. They may be able to look around, but not move around, such as in the opening sequence of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elder_Scrolls_V:_Skyrim" target="_blank">Skyrim</a>, where the player wakes up as a prisoner, in a horse-drawn cart. Or in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_2033_(video_game)" target="_blank">Metro 2033</a> where the player is sitting at table, with other characters, in a bar.</p><p>Arguably, the greatest implementation of during-gameplay cutscenes thus far, is the gang's camp in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Dead_Redemption_2" target="_blank">Red Dead Redemption 2</a>. The camp seems to have a life of its own, outside of the existence of the player's interaction with it. Characters go about chores, have conversations amongst themselves, sit around the campfire at night drinking, chatting, and playing musical instruments, before retiring to their tent once it gets late enough for them. And the player can choose to, or not, take part in the goings on, such as the conversations.</p><p> </p><p><b>Mixing during-gameplay cutscenes and other forms of cutscenes<br /></b><br />During-gameplay cutscenes and other kinds of cutscenes can be seamlessly mixed together. For example, in the aforementioned scene in Metro 2033, where you're sitting at a table with a few others, having drinks and conversation. Most of the time it's a D-G cutscene, where characters are talking and the player can freely look around. But at times, NPCs will propose a toast, at which point it will show a short non-interactive 1st-person cutscene, where you grab your drink and take as swig of it, and put it back down.<br /><br />It's possible to mix all three types of cutscene -- non-interactive, QTE-and-choice, and during-gameplay -- within the one overall cutscene.</p><p> </p><p><b>Downsides and limitations of during-gameplay cutscenes<br /></b><br />During-gameplay cutscenes sound good on paper. They enable gameplay/control and visual-action storytelling to be integrated. They appear to be the best of both worlds. We may wonder why they aren't used more in games. One reason is that they have a number of limitations and downsides. We'll look at these now.</p><p> </p><p><b>During-Gameplay Cutscenes Weaken and Constrain the Visual-Action Storytelling<br /></b><br />Movie/TV scenes and cutscenes use cinematic techniques, throught the use of camera angles, camera movements, and editing (cuts). In D-G cutscenes, because the player has control, the same camera that's used in gameplay -- whether first- or third- person -- is still used in the D-G cutscene. That lessens the strength of the storytelling, to some degree.</p><p>Movie/TV scenes and cutscenes involve real/virtual actor's performances. These performances include the<br /></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_(stage)" target="_blank">blocking</a> (including the marks where they stand and move at each moment of each shot)</li><li>physical interactions between characters</li><li>body language, including posture, how they move, facial expressions, gestures, etc.</li><li>dialogue</li></ul><p>And their timing is crucial to their performances.<br /><br />And of course the performances involve interactions between characters. Eye-contact between characters. Where a person is standing and facing in relation to others, and how people walk around, amongst others. When two people meet for the first time. When a person approaches another to ask them for assistance. Or when there is flirting between people. When there's a group of people, and someone is speaking, there's how others are listening, and their reactions. Vigorous agreement, vs indifference. And so on.<br /><br />All those body language and performance details have meaning, meaning that they communicate. A lot, for example, is communicated by the nature of the eye-contact between people. For example, the differences between avoiding eye contact, confident eye contact, aggressive staring, and flirty eye contact.<br /> <br />The usual control schemes in games are too simple, to be able to control such details. The player's character might be able to move in different directions, look in different directions, jump, and crouch. Those options pale in comparison to the sort of control an actor has in their performance. So the player's character can only have a 'passive' role in D-G cutscenes, that does not include those specific performance details.<br /><br />As a different way of seeing this point, consider that in D-G cutscenes, the player could only communicate to other characters via moving forwards, backwards, left and right, turning to the side, and, by what direction they're looking in. The reader can imagine if they, themselves, were in a situation with other people and these were the <b>only</b> ways they could communicate to others. Or imagine if they were controlling a robot with such a control scheme, that was amongst those people, and the robot had zero ability to express facial expressions or body language, just those kinds of movement.</p><p>There's a fundamental difficulty here, in that the game can't know the player's intentions. The player may want to be friendly, or dismissive, towards another character. But the game can't infer those intentions from the player's control over their character. There's a paucity of information about the player's intentions, and only so much that can be inferred. This couldn't be overcome by having AI to have NPCs react more realistically.<br /><br />To accommodate these control limitations, the player might be seeing some event taking place on the other side of a chain link fence. Or seeing large alien machines moving around in the distance. In such cases the player is distanced from the action, and are more like spectators.<br /><br />There could be D-G cutscenes where player's character can choose where to stand amongst a number of people, as a conversation plays out. In such situations, it doesn't matter where the player character is standing in the scene, because all that matters is that they hear the dialog. In such cases the player is more of a passive spectator of what's going on.</p><p>That the player tends to be relegated to a passive spectator is why D-G cutscenes are so often focused on auditory details, like conversations between characters, or messages over loudspeakers. The player can be a passive participant in these, because audio is (somewhat) omni-directional, it doesn't matter exactly where the player character is facing and positioned at anytime during the D-G cutscene -- they'll still be able to hear the details.<br /><br />Imagine a D-G cutscene where the player <i>was</i> an active participant in it. E.g. if player is up close to another character, in defiance of them, gets shoved back, and then darts back towards them, looks quickly to the sides at the other people there, and then turns to one of them, puts a hand on their shoulder, and whispers something to them. That would have to be done with a normal cutscene (which could possibly include QTEs).<br /><br />Or imagine game developers trying to make a D-G cutscene where the player is showing another around their study, pointing out different objects to them. Where the player picks up a rare bottle of whiskey and shows that to the other character, handing the bottle to them. This couldn't be done either, if the player character is being controlled in the usual fashion.</p><p>One possible way of making the player character's performance include what was required for such scenes would be forcing them to do exactly what is required (and thus give up freedom of control).<br /><br />A control scheme that would give the player control over all those nuances would have to be very complex. Perhaps it could be done with a mouse and keyboard, using all the keys on the keyboard, and use of those keys in combination with modifier keys. But then it'd be too complex for any normal person to use. VR with facial and body tracking could be a more realistic option.<br /><br />Or something like QTEs could be used, though this wouldn't really give the player control over the character, it would be more just the player entering in the correct inputs to satisfy each of the QTEs.</p><p>A potential option would be to give the player the freedom, and have the other characters respond to the player's actions in a realistic way. The problem with this is that it'd be too complex to script in the different branching possibilities, and we don't have the means to simulate the responses of the other characters. And even if we could simulate them, we'd also have to also simulate the plot implications of some of the possibilities. And even if we could do that, many of those other possibilities would result in weaker storytelling (because strong stories <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2022/08/interactive-storytelling-choice.html" target="_blank">don't lie near to each other in story space</a>).<br /><br />The player's character having to play a fairly passive role in D-G cutscenes means that such cutscenes could not be used for the storytelling of most scenes from movies/TV -- scenes that don't usually contain a passive role. Given that, it's fair to say that D-G cutscenes generally contain weaker storytelling than can be present in non-interactive cutscenes.</p><p>To me, the way the D-G cutscene details are always happening at a distance from the player character makes them feel a bit like a theme park attraction. As if the player is moving along through a set path, and there's scenery/sets and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animatronics" target="_blank">animatronics</a> on either side of the path. The start of Half-Life 2, and the metro stations where the people live, in the Metro games, have this feel to me. I feel there's an uncanny valley feeling to the <i>interactions</i> with NPCs in during-gameplay cutscenes.</p><p> </p><p>In conclusion, non-interactive cutscenes enable strong visual-action storytelling, but are at odds with gameplay. Interaction allows QTE & Choice cutscenes, and During-Gameplay cutscenes. QTE & Choice cutscenes involve weak gameplay as part of strong visual-action storytelling. During-Gameplay cutscenes enable stronger gameplay, at the expense of weaker and more-constrained visual-action storytelling. </p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-73259936658631298942024-01-21T02:21:00.003+10:002024-01-21T09:38:20.888+10:00Interactive storytelling: Activity-and-Choice Story-Games<p>In this post I'll define a genre of video games that I'll call 'Activity-and-Choice Story-Games'. These are exemplified by games like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit:_Become_Human" target="_blank">Detroit: Become Human</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_Is_Strange:_True_Colors" target="_blank">Life is Strange: True Colors</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wolf_Among_Us" target="_blank">The Wolf Among Us</a>, and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_(video_game)" target="_blank">Florence</a>.<br /><br />These games can be seen as an evolution[1] of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adventure_game" target="_blank">Point-and-Click Adventure Games</a>, in which the puzzles of those games are replaced by 'activities' the player undertakes and choices they have to make. We'll get to what activities and choices are in a moment. These changes have been made to make this genre more story-focused.</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[1] that B evolved from A doesn't automatically make B superior to A. Bs could be simpler than As, not necessarily more complex. Evolution does not have a direction. So we're not saying this genre is superior to Point-and-Click Adventure Games.<br /></span></p><p style="text-align: left;">Here are some other prominent examples of 'Activity and Choice Story-Games' (A&C Story-Games): <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_Is_Strange_2" target="_blank">Life is Strange 2</a>, Telltale's <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Walking_Dead_(video_game)" target="_blank">The Walking Dead</a>[2], and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tales_from_the_Borderlands" target="_blank">Tales from the Borderlands</a>. </p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[2] The first season of Telltale's The Walking Dead is a transitional form, that still involved some puzzles. The subsequent seasons of it became more pure A&C Story-Games.</span><br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">Traditional Point-and-Click (P&C) Adventure Games are puzzle-focused. The player solves puzzles to progress through the game and its story. The player can pick up objects, look at objects, use objects (e.g. turn on a light switch), or use one object on another (e.g. putting a key in a lock, to open the lock). These actions are primarily means for the player to solve the puzzles.</p><p style="text-align: left;"></p><p style="text-align: left;"></p><p style="text-align: left;"></p><p style="text-align: left;"></p><p style="text-align: left;"></p><p style="text-align: left;">This affects the kinds of stories that can be told in P&C Adventure Games. One, what the player is primarily doing is solving puzzles, and thus that is the main thing the player's character is doing in the game's story -- going about, solving puzzles. And two, the story can only[3] progress after a puzzle is solved. This second effect slows down the pacing of the story. It might take the player quite some time to solve a puzzle. All of these things restrict the kinds of stories that can be told in P&C Adventure Games.</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">[3] This isn't strictly true, some story events can happen while the player is going about trying to solve a puzzle. However, that can't be a story event that would change the game world in any way that would prevent the player from solving the current puzzle. Such story events are uncommon.</span><br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">The story has to be one in which the main character is going around solving puzzles, where it still has to make at least some sense if the story is put on hold for potentially a fair while, till the player has solved the puzzle. The focus on puzzles thus detracts from the ability of these games to tell a story.<br /><br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">Activities<br /><br />In Activity-and-Choice Story-Games, one of the elements that replaces puzzles are 'Activities'. An 'activity' is some simple task that the player needs to undertake, where there is minimal challenge for completing the task. An activity there is to provide the player with ways to interact with the game, and they tend to be story-focused. <br /><br />Activities are usually straightforward tasks, and present either no or minimal challenge. In many of the games, the player will be told what the current activity is (perhaps in the form of the activity's goal or as an item in a to-do list).<br /><br />Here are some examples of activities, from the early parts of Life is Strange 2, in which you play as a teenager, Sean:</p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>After coming back home from school, and chatting with a friend on a deck outside the house, you go inside. Your dad and little brother are there, you have a conversation with them, and your dad says that you have to decide whether your little brother or him gets the last chocolate bar. You get to be the judge making the decision of who gets to have it (you can also choose to have it yourself).</li><li>That night you're going to go to a party with some classmates, and before heading out, you need to grab some stuff to take over: drinks, snacks, a blanket, and some money for supplies. You have to walk around the house, and get the items. And you have options for what to choose as the drinks to bring, and what to choose as the snack. You have the option to take some of your dad's beer, and some money from your dad's wallet, or not.</li><li>Later you and your brother are on the run, and need to find some place to stay overnight. You come across a national park area, and the activity is going down the paths from the entrance to where the campsite areas are. During this there's conversations and some things you can look at. And after you've found some shelter, there's the activity of collecting some firewood for a fire. That's just a matter of exploring around and finding pieces of suitable wood.</li><li>Then there's lighting the fire, then sitting there engaging in conversation with each other.</li><li>Later on in the game, you stop at a roadside gas station and store, and get some supplies for the trip there. There's various options for what to buy, and you've got limited cash, so you have to think about what are the priorities.</li><li>Sometimes an activity can be as simple as walking from location A to location B. Along the way there may things the player can look at, and people they can talk to.</li></ul><p style="text-align: left;"><br />Activities are usually something relevant to the story, and they're more like scenes in a movie than any interactive parts of P&C Adventure Games are. Often they're 'slice of life' kinds of details.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Another example of an activity, from the start of Life is Strange: True Colors, is unpacking your bag when you arrive from out-of-town to the place you're staying at. You unpack the bag item by item, and for some items she might reflect on the role it had in her life, or some other items are textual (like some letters), which also provide a bit of a window into her life. Thus it provides some backstory. At the end of the process she goes to put her bag under her bed, and in doing so finds the guitar that her brother had gotten her as a present, which leads to a cutscene of her taking it out, commenting on it, and playing a bit of it.<br /><br />While undertaking an activity the player may be able to look at things in their surrounds (including other characters), and the player character may comment on them in a way that reveals their thoughts on what is happening at the current point in the story. The player may also be able to talk to characters in their surrounds, about things relevant to what's currently happening in the story.<br /><br />Activities may be very basic, easy-to-solve puzzles. That is, puzzles that can be quickly solved, and which present very little challenge to the player. Because A&C Story-Games de-emphasise puzzles, if they do contain some puzzles, they will (in addition to being easy) contain much fewer of them, compared to the number in a P&C adventure game.<br /><br />Activities may also involve <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quick_time_event" target="_blank">Quick-time Events</a> (QTEs), to add small moments of interactivity and/or challenge in cutscenes. Successfully completing a QTE is usually easier than solving a puzzle (and of course it is a quite different <i>kind</i> of difficulty), and QTEs are compatible with a story-focus, because they can be embedded in cutscenes.</p><p style="text-align: left;"><br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">Choice<br /><br />The second component of A&C Story-Games are choices. <br /><br />We've already mentioned how choice can play a role in Activities. For example, in Life is Strange 2, when Sean and his brother are on the run, they come to a gas station and store, and with their limited money they have to choose which supplies will buy (if I recall correctly, there is also an option to steal some items). The player may also have choices in what to say to other characters, when they're talking to them.<br /><br />These games may also have more explicit choices. Where the game presents the player with between 2-4 options for what to do, in the vein of the "Choose Your Own Adventure" books. For example, there may be an argument going on between person A and person B. Should your character</p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Take person A's side</li><li>Take person B's side</li><li>Stay out of it</li></ul><p style="text-align: left;"><br />The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Walking_Dead_(video_game)" target="_blank">first season of Telltale's The Walking Dead</a> (2012) innovated on this formula in a way that proved to be very successful, and which also helped to popularise the use of choice in games. The main part of this innovation was to make the choices <i>timed</i>.<br /><br />They applied this formula to both "Choose Your Own Adventure"-style choices and dialogue choices. The player would only have to a very limited amount of time to make a decision. If they failed to make a choice in this time, it'd either result in inaction from their character, or them choosing a default action.<br /><br />Second, they made the choices very difficult -- where there were pros and cons to all the options.<br /><br />Having to make a quick decision about a difficult choice turned out to be quite immersive. It forces the player to put themselves in their character's shoes.</p><p style="text-align: left;"><br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">Since that first season of TellTale's The Walking Dead, the use of choice in story-focused games has become quite popular. Interestingly, though, the use of <i>timed</i> choices hasn't been widely taken up. For example, the Life is Strange games have choices, but they're not timed.<br /><br />Sometimes the choices are about personal expression rather than being difficult choices. For example, early in Life is Strange: True Colors, your character can choose which of two potential bad-guy characters will be the villain for the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_action_role-playing_game" target="_blank">LARP</a> another character is setting up.<br /><br /><br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">A&C story-games replaced puzzles with activities and choice to make the games more story-focused games. Lets look at the consequences of this for the storytelling in these games.<br /><br />Because the focus in P&C is on puzzles, the interactable objects in the environment, the descriptions, and character conversations, are all <i>primarily</i> oriented towards solving puzzles. That is, to give the player clues for solving puzzles, and the means to solve puzzles. That is not to say that there's no story focus regarding these things. Only that such has to be secondary.<br /><br />If puzzle-solving isn't put first, then the details presented to the player could hinder their ability to solve the puzzles. E.g. providing details that don't at all help with the puzzles may mislead the player about the solutions to the puzzles.<br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">Whereas in A&C Story-Games, the objects in the environment, looking at them, and talking to characters, can all have a story-focus.<br /><br />When the player looks at an object, their response may reflect their state of mind at this point in the story. It may also involve their thoughts about a character who has some connection to that object (maybe it's something they own). When the player talks to other characters, it is more about story-relevant details, than to get information for solving puzzles.<br /><br />We could, if we wish, consider the acts of talking to other characters, and looking at objects, in A&C Story-Games, to be kinds of activity.</p><p style="text-align: left;"><br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">What we're calling "Activity-and-Choice Story-Games" would most often be called "Narrative Adventure Games". However, that latter term is often used to refer to a much broader set of games than A&C Story-Games. Some of the kinds of games that "Narrative Adventure Games" gets used to describe include P&C Adventure Games that have a more of a focus on story than the typical P&C Adventure Game, like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathy_Rain" target="_blank">Kathy Rain</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walking_simulator" target="_blank">Walking Simulators</a>, like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gone_Home" target="_blank">Gone Home</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everybody%27s_Gone_to_the_Rapture" target="_blank">Everybody's Gone to the Rapture</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_novel" target="_blank">Visual Novels</a>, like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doki_Doki_Literature_Club!" target="_blank">Doki Doki Literature Club</a>, and film-like games that involve only choices, like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Stop_(video_game)" target="_blank">Last Stop</a>.<br /><br />(Why do we not consider Walking Simulators like Gone Home to be A&C Story-Games? That game doesn't have any choices, though there's no reason why a Walking Simulator couldn't have choices. It's that pure Walking Simulators, like those games, don't have anything like the Activities we have been talking about. In them, you walk around, perhaps look at objects, open drawers and doors, and perhaps find <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2022/08/interactive-storytelling-audio-and.html" target="_blank">audio-logs or audio-visual-logs</a>. In literal terms these are 'activities', but they are not activities where the player is given a particular goal, and where the activity(s) that satisfy that goal have a particular role within the game's story.)<br /><br />Note that there are also "Activity Story-Games", which only include activities, and don't involve any choices. These are much less common. The only example that comes to mind is <a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/772290/Rainswept/" target="_blank">Rainswept</a>.</p><p style="text-align: left;"><br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">Having easy/fewer (or no) puzzles, means that the narrative in A&C Story-Games is less constrained than they are in P&C Adventure Games.<br /></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>'Solving puzzles' will play little or no part in what the player's character is doing during the story.</li><li>There will be less "dead time" while the player is trying to figure out how to solve puzzles, so the story's pacing won't be slowed down as much. Which means the story isn't constrained to be one where it "makes sense" for there to potentially be large amounts of time between each story beat.</li></ul><p style="text-align: left;"><br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">The shift from puzzles, to activities and choices, means that each scene in the game can be a specific narrative situation. This is actually quite different to P&C Adventure Games. In them, there tend not to be specific scenes during gameplay segments, but rather a set of locations accessible to the player, for the current set of puzzles they can work on.<br /><br />Some examples of situations the player might find themselves in in a P&C adventure game. They've been locked inside an apartment, and have to figure out how to get out. Or they need to find a way to distract a guard, so they can go in and talk to the person in the office. In story-terms, these are fairly low-level kinds of details. They're not particularly meaningful.<br /><br />As we've mentioned before, with a puzzle-focus, the story has to be put on hold until the player has completed puzzles. And because the player usually has multiple puzzles open to them at any point in time, the story can't advance much until the current <i>set</i> of puzzles have all been solved. So there can't be much in the way of <i>story-relevant</i> happenings while the player is working on puzzles. There can't even be much that's strongly associated with the story, that happens within, or upon the completion of, most of the individual puzzles -- only on the completion of the set of puzzles after which the story can move forwards. The ability to work on multiple puzzles at once is good for <i>gameplay</i>, just not so great for <i>story</i>.<br /><br />And this gives a "genericness" to lots of the details in the game. The object descriptions and conversation choices need to be generic. The player's predicament, for each puzzle open to them at that time, has to be "weak", in that it will also let them work on other puzzles at the same time. If the player has multiple puzzles open to them at once, then when they're walking around in and between locations they're in the same generic holding pattern, until all of those puzzles required for advancing the story have been solved.<br /><br />With an activity-focus, each "scene" in the game can be about a certain story- event/situation, in a specific moment in time within the story. Within that scene the player is given one (or more, though it's usually one) activity to undertake (and potentially at some points will have to make some choices). That activity, and the player's interactions, have a stronger story-focus in A&C story-based games. So story occurrences can be happening <i>within</i> the scene.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;">Because of how activities and choices allow the games to be much more focused on story, A&C Story-Games are probably what most deserve to be called interactive movies. There are full-motion video (FMV) games that are often considered interactive movies, but these tend to focus only on choices, without any of the activities. As a result, they tend to be shallower experiences.<br /></p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-3495251250763420222024-01-20T15:15:00.003+10:002024-01-21T02:30:45.090+10:00Interactive storytelling: Action-mirroring control schemesA number of story-focused video games use what I'll call an "action-mirroring" control scheme.<p>When a player makes their game character walk or run in a particular direction by pushing the controller's left joystick in that direction, the action of <i>walking in the direction</i> is "mirrored" by an input of <i>pushing the joystick to that direction</i>.<br /><br />In first-person games, the player's character looking upwards (an action) is performed by pushing the controller's right joystick upwards. The action of <i>looking up</i> is "mirrored" by an input of <i>pushing the joystick upwards</i>.<br /><br />These are common examples of "action-mirroring" inputs. Such inputs try to embody something of the essential nature of the actions they're used to perform, like moving the joystick in the direction the character is to move in. <br /><br />Some games -- usually story-focused ones -- use action-mirroring for more than just movement and looking around. They have an "action-mirroring control scheme". For example, in such games a sliding door that may be slid open to the <i>left</i> may be opened by pushing in the joystick to the <i>left</i>.<br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Here are some prominent examples of games that use action-mirroring control schemes.<br /><br />The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantic_Dream" target="_blank">Quantic Dream</a> (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Cage">David Cage</a>) games <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_Rain" target="_blank">Heavy Rain</a> (2010) and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit:_Become_Human" target="_blank">Detroit: Become Human</a> (2018).<br /><br />The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telltale_Games" target="_blank">Telltale Games</a> games <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Walking_Dead_(video_game)" target="_blank">The Walking Dead</a> (2012), <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wolf_Among_Us" target="_blank">The Wolf Among Us</a> (2013), and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tales_from_the_Borderlands" target="_blank">Tales from the Borderlands</a> (2014).<br /><br />The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermassive_Games">Supermassive Games</a> games <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Until_Dawn" target="_blank">Until Dawn</a> (2015) and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Quarry_(video_game)" target="_blank">The Quarry</a> (2022). And games in their <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Pictures_Anthology" target="_blank">Dark Pictures Anthology</a>, such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Pictures_Anthology:_Man_of_Medan" target="_blank">Man of Medan</a> (2019) and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Pictures_Anthology:_Little_Hope" target="_blank">Little Hope</a> (2020).<br /><br />The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloober_Team" target="_blank">Bloober Team</a> game <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_(video_game)" target="_blank">Observer</a> (2017).<br /><br />The <a href="https://www.flavourworks.co.uk/" target="_blank">Flavourworks</a> games <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erica_(video_game)" target="_blank">Erica</a> (2019) and <a href="https://www.flavourworks.co.uk/hush-crane" target="_blank">HUSH - Crane</a> (2022).<br /><br />The <a href="http://mountains.studio/" target="_blank">Mountains</a> game <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_(video_game)" target="_blank">Florence</a> (2018).</p><p> </p><p>Some more examples of action-mirroring inputs. A cupboard door in real life may be opened by pulling its handle out and to the right or left. A kitchen cutlery drawer may be opened by pulling it towards oneself. Milk added to some coffee may be stirred by lowering a teaspoon into the coffee mug and moving it in a circular motion. In these cases, the action involves movement along a particular path. That path may be traced out with a joystick by movement in a single direction, like for a door that slides open to the left. Or it may be a more complex path, like the circular path traced out to stir some coffee. <br /><br />Typically, when the player needs to enter an action-mirroring input, the game will show the player a prompt, indicating what input they need to enter. And the player may need to first 'lock onto' an item before entering the input. E.g. they (while standing in front of the door, facing it), may need to then press a shoulder button on their controller to lock-onto the door, after which they can enter the action-mirroring input to open the door.<br /><br />The movement paths (like the circular one for stirring the coffee) can be traced out using a variety of input devices, meaning that action-mirroring control schemes are compatible not just with controllers with joysticks, but also a keyboard and mouse, and touch screens. With a keyboard and mouse, the player can, for example, slide the mouse to the left to slide the door open to the left. On a touch screen, the player can swipe left to slide the door open to the left.</p><p>When compared to the actions they perform, action-mirroring inputs are major simplification. Pressing left on a joystick is a major simplification of opening a cupboard door. But, the idea is that they approximate the core nature of an action, while still being a fairly simple and easy form of input.</p><p> </p><p>More examples of action-mirroring inputs.<br /><br />The input for opening a cupboard door could be pushing the joystick upwards and then tracing an arc down towards the right. The upwards movement represents pulling the door outwards, and the arc towards the right represents pulling the door to the right.<br /> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUBOc1qKe68PG22MDE0hWDvjvmIqETGfCmg-420Sy8X2fkQ62ooHNCLoxvFig80FgvEWPvzKgLLaIWWwxmGuejzfifM9RDidasqxzrxf4oiINuFSqO80I-zuV87CdEzKPUsb2mcka7kQAW-FehFUVJn7cLfBKeVvbjsUNgSmk_eftus-BL4M5zlA/s640/mirr-HR-open-wardrobe.GIF" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="360" data-original-width="640" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUBOc1qKe68PG22MDE0hWDvjvmIqETGfCmg-420Sy8X2fkQ62ooHNCLoxvFig80FgvEWPvzKgLLaIWWwxmGuejzfifM9RDidasqxzrxf4oiINuFSqO80I-zuV87CdEzKPUsb2mcka7kQAW-FehFUVJn7cLfBKeVvbjsUNgSmk_eftus-BL4M5zlA/s320/mirr-HR-open-wardrobe.GIF" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">(the action-mirroring input for opening a wardrobe, in Heavy Rain)</span><br /></div><div><p>For the side to side action of brushing teeth with a toothbrush, the player may need to input a repeated side-to-side motion (joystick repeatedly moved from side to side, like in Heavy Rain, or by sliding one's finger from side to side, like in the touch-screen version of Florence).<br /><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg1oAmaEM30hb_3zbPScKiddxxHXedmJB7hYFSgL7R53ikZmdBA0EgYFkH3GgEbMkhyphenhyphenoy__X6Afg7HSTwQW92KSjZ5bVd0F1oCNhpo3_nFGz6DvHWorB6GzkrZ7Z0R7Nr8fMEbBFUkkbh4Td43B0JKOYzcgS3w3WMZKefN42ac1IDUYfNwzwGhREg/s640/mirr-HR-brush-teeth.GIF" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="360" data-original-width="640" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg1oAmaEM30hb_3zbPScKiddxxHXedmJB7hYFSgL7R53ikZmdBA0EgYFkH3GgEbMkhyphenhyphenoy__X6Afg7HSTwQW92KSjZ5bVd0F1oCNhpo3_nFGz6DvHWorB6GzkrZ7Z0R7Nr8fMEbBFUkkbh4Td43B0JKOYzcgS3w3WMZKefN42ac1IDUYfNwzwGhREg/s320/mirr-HR-brush-teeth.GIF" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">(using the joystick to brush teeth in Heavy Rain)</span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEio2Jq_4kCgOnUt6tMJOEnEyRXH4vSXM4VB_aBDXvWnt3Ay_rMCsUgUuN4z5M4ogG_GcEE1SQ9QxvgF9fjFx82FsHa9aeJ0HndKeb5judidMRxtMK-1RgqRnCovOmbBUFU3CTHMhlUx0cPVHX2BOxMxosR2-euNg4zkItLh5Yww7icyAt_x26Ilsg/s640/mirr-Flor-brush-teeth.GIF" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="360" data-original-width="640" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEio2Jq_4kCgOnUt6tMJOEnEyRXH4vSXM4VB_aBDXvWnt3Ay_rMCsUgUuN4z5M4ogG_GcEE1SQ9QxvgF9fjFx82FsHa9aeJ0HndKeb5judidMRxtMK-1RgqRnCovOmbBUFU3CTHMhlUx0cPVHX2BOxMxosR2-euNg4zkItLh5Yww7icyAt_x26Ilsg/s320/mirr-Flor-brush-teeth.GIF" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">(using the mouse to brush teeth in Florence)</span><br /></div></div><div><p>For when your character is shaving their face in Heavy Rain, and carefully shaving some spots, the player might have to move the joystick in the direction the character is going to shave. And, to mirror the care that the character is taking (to slowly and carefully move the razor, so as to not cut themselves), the player might have to very gently push the joystick in that direction.<br /><br />To struggle, to get out of the grasp of a bad guy, might involve quickly tapping a button or, in touch-screen games, the screen. In this case, there's a more abstract relation between the action and the input. The input is intended to mirror the effort or struggle of getting out of the hold.<br /><br />In Supermassive Game's horror games, there are times where your character is in danger, and you need to hide and keep quiet, so that an enemy doesn't notice you.<br /><br />In Until Dawn (2015), the player needs to hold their controller completely still until the danger has passed (this makes use of the motion-sensors on modern controllers).<br /><br />Whereas in The Quarry (2022), the player simply has to hold down a certain button until the danger has passed. During this time their character is holding their breath. The player also needs to release the button as soon as the danger has passed, so they can take a breath. If they hold it too long, they'll gasp for breath and alert the enemy to their presence.<br /><br />They implemented such scenes in yet another way in their Dark Pictures Anthology games like Man of Medan (2019) and Little Hope (2020), where it's like a little rhythm game, where the player needs to tap a button in time with their character's heartbeats.<br /><br />With these inputs there's an abstract relation between the action and the input. The input is intended to mirror the task of trying to stay still and make no noise to avoid detection.<br /><br />In <a href="https://www.flavourworks.co.uk/hush-crane" target="_blank">HUSH - Crane</a> (2022) which is on touch-screen devices, there's a moment where your character is removing the camisole worn by another character (Note: this is safe for work, as there's no nudity involved). To slide the straps down, the player needs to put a finger on each of the tops of the camisole shoulder straps, and slide their fingers down from there, along the upper arms of the other character. This is an example of where more than one action-mirroring input may be entered at once. An analogous input could be achieved using a controller, where the player has to press a button to lock-onto the target object then press down on both joysticks at once (in this case, the joysticks effectively represent the player character's hands).<br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgS6W3lv5__V8tWFLA9pP3CO_dWpixBu9V2EnLv7MkchjVeT6rMmmBu5iEPehvDX350ydIk8ymtFhY6fTYiHmH8JONzxc7fTq9NrEqDkTbUHigZ8vZvvjHbt0aAxnjxDrVOWDTeW5ov7-7YP0buEc79hc3duzwg3bm7kbwQSu0eho3IqJVu-ZGW5w/s640/IMB_OlZVvn.GIF" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="360" data-original-width="640" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgS6W3lv5__V8tWFLA9pP3CO_dWpixBu9V2EnLv7MkchjVeT6rMmmBu5iEPehvDX350ydIk8ymtFhY6fTYiHmH8JONzxc7fTq9NrEqDkTbUHigZ8vZvvjHbt0aAxnjxDrVOWDTeW5ov7-7YP0buEc79hc3duzwg3bm7kbwQSu0eho3IqJVu-ZGW5w/s320/IMB_OlZVvn.GIF" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">(An action-mirroring input from HUSH - Crane, involving two simultaneous inputs)</span><br /></div></div><div><p><br /></p><p>Here we'll look more at how action-mirroring control schemes can differ between games.<br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Direct- and indirect- manipulation of inputs<br /><br />Say the player has to enter a 'left' input, to open a door that swings out to the left. In some games, the player enters that input, <i>after which</i> the door is opened. This is an indirect-manipulation input.<br /><br />In other games, the door will swing to the left <i>as</i> the player continues to hold the left input (and swing back to the right if they hold the right input). The player may need to hold the left input down for about a second in total for the door to become fully opened. If the player were to only hold left down for half that time, the door would only end up being opened half way. This is a direct-manipulation input.<br /><br />This latter form of input is more immersive. It feels more like directly manipulating the object (the door). At the same time, it is more involved for the player, which means that it can get tedious if the player ends up having to open many doors this way.<br /><br />Another example is, does the player rotate the joystick in a circular motion, after which the coffee gets stirred, or does the coffee get stirred as the player is entering the circular input?<br /><br /></p><p></p><p></p><p><br />Where on a touch-screen the player has to enter the input<br /><br />Consider the side-to-side motion the player may need to enter to brush their character's teeth. Can they place their finger anywhere on the screen to enter this input, or do they need to place their finger within a particular area of the screen? As an example of the latter option, in Florence there's a rectangular "zone" at the bottom of the screen for entering the side-to-side input.</p><p>Sometimes, the player may need to place their finger on the object they are to interact with. For example, to stir a cup of coffee, the player might be presented with a top-down view of the cup, and may have to trace circles around the circumference of its contents to do the stirring.<br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Challenge added to action-mirroring <br /><br />If the games wishes to make some action-mirroring more challenging to enter, such as during a fight scene, it might provide only a small time-window for entering each mirroring input. Or it could require an action-mirroring input, plus additional button presses. Heavy Rain is an example of a game that does this.<br /></p><p><br /><br /></p><p>How effective are action-mirroring control schemes?<br /><br />Addressing this question is the main purpose of this post.<br /><br />These control schemes are there to add immersion to the game experience. To make the player feel, to some extent, as if they are performing the actions themselves. Of course, no such control schemes can make the player feel like they're actually performing the actions. These control schemes aren't trying to do that. They're just trying to add a, perhaps small, feeling that the input is somewhat like the action.<br /><br />Action-mirroring control schemes seem promising, and the only way to see how effective they are was to implement them in games. Having played several of the games that use an action-mirroring control scheme, I've come to the view that they're, mostly, not that effective.<br /><br />Some cases of them can be fairly effective. Consider how in Observer the player opens doors. The player needs to be near the door and then press a shoulder button on their controller to 'lock onto' the door, then move the joystick to the left (or right, depending on which side the door opens to). As they continue to push the joystick to the side, the door continues to open, as opposed to the player entering the input to open the door, and then afterwards the door opening. This feels immersive. Locking onto the door feels like grabbing its handle, and it opening up more as you continue hold the joystick to the side makes it feel like you're directly manipulating the door.<br /><br />In Until Dawn, I found it immersive to have to hold the controller completely still, in order for your character to hide and not be noticed by an enemy.<br /><br />Action-mirroring inputs may add immersion, but this can come at the expense of it requiring more time and effort to perform interactions. In a game that does <i>not</i> have an action-mirroring control-scheme game, it may be a simple button-press to open a door. Whereas in a game with an action-mirroring control scheme, the player may have to lock-onto the door, then hold the joystick to the left until the door fully opens. If the player was only opening a door once, this wouldn't make any real difference, but if the player is repeatedly having to open doors like this throughout the game, then the extra time and effort adds up. Opening doors that way may end up getting a bit tedious.<br /><br />And though action-mirroring inputs may be immersive, the actions being mirrored tend to be fairly menial ones, of manipulating things in the physical environment. Like opening doors. So their immersion tends to be immersion in menial tasks. The immersion isn't particularly meaningful.<br /><br />Action-mirroring inputs mostly don't feel immersive. Tracing out certain patterns with the joystick or with your finger on a touch-screen, just doesn't feel that much like performing the action in the real world. And, to the extent that they are immersive, it's in menial tasks, so it isn't meaningful immersion.<br /><br />And, there's the added time and effort of entering those inputs, as compared to button presses, so they can get a bit tedious.<br /><br />One reason they're not terribly immersive, is that in reality we tend to do tasks, especially menial tasks like opening doors, on autopilot. We don't explicitly think "I'm going to do this action, and doing so requires using my hands in this way". We just do it. We operate more on the level of our intentions, than on level of the physical character of our actions. We know we want to stir the coffee, and just do it. We don't think about how we're going to do it with a circular motion. We don't think of the mechanics of how we're going to do it. Those details are mostly subconscious. Having to explicitly follow a procedure to stir the coffee doesn't feel realistic.<br /><br />Ideally, we'd like a control scheme that more closely matches how we perceive and undertake actions.<br /><br />Interestingly, Quantic Dream's <i>second-last</i> game, Beyond: Two Souls, did use a control scheme that I think more closely matches how we perceive and undertake actions. And I think it worked quite well, so it's surprising to me that they did not keep using it for their most recent game (Detroit: Become Human).<br /><br />In Beyond: Two Souls, interactable objects near the player are highlighted by a white dot. To interact with them, the player presses the right joystick in the direction of the white dot, relative to where the player character is. So if the object is to the left of the player character, the player presses left on the joystick to interact with it. Whereas if the player moves to the other side of the object, the player will need to press right on the joystick to interact with it. The reason it feels effective, to me, is that it feels more on the level of our intentions -- specifying which object to interact with. <br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHlOpkQLr4IgpIt84YFzlNf6H23XJz83X_KiNJP7CYsLxFYX7XDH7lDEs06bD4ItpTU4C3fHkh4rAwPoqPwPH9eqR-yYFQmhgE-Wlbq2EZS7W9cuUAgFNs2bIbfuM5iz2cJfNwFKF02iUoAe3QvmBUAquEK7sHKpAb4mlbs7uGK81Yf99rcVV8HA/s6528/BeyondTwoSouls-bag.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3658" data-original-width="6528" height="179" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHlOpkQLr4IgpIt84YFzlNf6H23XJz83X_KiNJP7CYsLxFYX7XDH7lDEs06bD4ItpTU4C3fHkh4rAwPoqPwPH9eqR-yYFQmhgE-Wlbq2EZS7W9cuUAgFNs2bIbfuM5iz2cJfNwFKF02iUoAe3QvmBUAquEK7sHKpAb4mlbs7uGK81Yf99rcVV8HA/s320/BeyondTwoSouls-bag.jpg" width="320" /></a> <br /></div><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">(Two screenshots from "Beyond: Two Souls". The player needs to move the joystick in the direction the white dot is, in relation to where the player character is. E.g. in the first screenshot, they'll need to move the joystick to the left, to pick up the bag)</span></p><p><br />But a full discussion of how we can have a control scheme that's
more inline with how we perceive the world and act on our intentions,
is a topic for another post.<br /></p><p> </p><p>Finally, there is virtual reality (VR). VR can provide immersive interactions with the game world, that very much mirror the nature of real-world actions. For example, a player can reach out to a kitchen drawer in the game world, grasp its handle and pull it towards themselves, to slide it open. This is a topic I can't speak about in depth, as I don't have a VR headset yet, and have very limited experience in using VR.<br /></p></div>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-33990902819664496782022-08-18T22:16:00.002+10:002023-12-19T21:05:54.445+10:00Interactive storytelling: audio and audiovisual logs<p>In <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2022/08/interactive-storytelling-containing.html" target="_blank">an earlier post</a>, I talked about how games are often divided between interactive gameplay segments and non-interactive storytelling segments like cutscenes.<br /><br />I want to look at other techniques that are used to add storytelling elements into games. In this post I'll talk about audio logs, and what I'll call 'audiovisual logs'.<br /><br />The first-person shooter <b>BioShock</b> (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BioShock" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a> | <a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/7670/BioShock/" target="_blank">Steam</a>) popularised audio logs. In BioShock the player starts out by entering an underwater city built to a utopian vision, whose society has -- for reasons unknown -- broken down and most of its inhabitants have either been killed or are scattered. <br /><br />As they traverse through the city, they may find objects that look like old-fashioned tape recorders. If the player picks one of these up, they can listen to the sound recorded on it, which is usually like a diary entry recorded by a character who was an inhabitant of the city (often they are one of the major figures who lived in the city).<br /><br />Here's a short video of <a href="https://youtu.be/wdWxOOSNNLI" target="_blank">finding and playing an audio log</a> from early on in the game. </p><p>The audio logs the player finds are the main means by which the player learns about the city's backstory. <br /><br />Audio logs are sound recordings that the player can come across, that are usually related in some way to the location they're found at. E.g. the player might find an audio log recorded by a character in that character's private quarters. They tend to be fairly brief (I would imagine that most of them are well under a minute long), and while listening to them the player can still move their character around and shoot or whatever.<br /><br />I'm using the term 'audio log' in a broad way. Instead of them being objects that the character finds and can pick up, they can also be recordings that are automatically triggered when the player does something, such as entering a certain room for the first time, or looking at a certain object (like opening up a locker and looking inside). The game <b>Gone Home</b> (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gone_Home" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a> | <a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/232430/Gone_Home/" target="_blank">Steam</a>) has audio logs of this nature.<br /><br />In Gone Home, the character comes back from an overseas trip, to the house that her parents and sister had moved to while she was away. For some mysterious reason, when she arrives no-one appears to be home. The audio logs that the player hears as they progress through the game are what primarily informs them about what has actually happened. (These audio logs are like journal entries that you sister wrote to explain the situation to you. During the game it is not explained why it is that you're hearing these journal entries as if they were read by your sister. It's only at the very end of the game that the player gets a kind of explanation of it).<br /><br />Terminology note: "audio log" is the most common name for these kinds of things, but they actually go by different names in different games. For example, in BioShock they're called "audio diaries", and in Bioshock Infinite (the third Bioshock game. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BioShock_Infinite" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a> | <a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/8870/BioShock_Infinite/" target="_blank">Steam</a>) they're called "Voxophones". And these are just some prominent examples of games that use audio logs.<br /></p><p><br />There's also what I'll call "audiovisual logs", where the player will not only hear the other character(s) talk, but see a visual representation of them and what they were doing at the time.<br /><br />Here's what an audiovisual log <i>could</i> be like: where a character had recorded a front-facing video on their smart phone, that the player watches that as if they were watching a video. I'm not sure if that sort of audiovisual log has been implemented in any game or not. I haven't come across them.<br /><br />But the kind of audiovisual log I'm talking about are a bit different. Say that the log is of several characters having a conversation around the dinner table in the dining room of a house. In these audiovisual logs, the player would see that audiovisual log when they're actually in that dining room. They'd see the characters sitting on the chairs around the table, that's right in front of them. So these are an 'in situ' visual representation of the characters.<br /><br />In <b>Everybody's Gone to the Rapture</b> (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everybody%27s_Gone_to_the_Rapture" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a> | <a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/417880/Everybodys_Gone_to_the_Rapture/" target="_blank">Steam</a>), the player is investigating what happened in a town where something strange has happened and all the people have gone missing. As you explore the town you'll come across audiovisual logs here and there, which show conversations between town inhabitants that were happening as the strange occurrences were happening.<br /><br />The audiovisual logs are like 'traces' of the past, whose presence is somehow connected to the strange happenings. In them, the people are visually represented by golden glowing blobs of light that roughly represent the shape of their body and which follow their movements. Here's a <a href="https://youtu.be/jvfmmD-EaiQ" target="_blank">short example</a> from early in the game.</p><p>In the sci-fi game <b>Tacoma</b> (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_(video_game)" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a> | <a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/343860/Tacoma/" target="_blank">Steam</a>), you're investigating what happened in the space station Tacoma and why all the crew are missing. As you explore the space station you'll come across scattered audiovisual logs. These were recordings made by the space station's computer, and they show events that happened in the lead up to the crew going missing.<br /><br />These are presented slightly different, in that the player can control the playback, by pausing and scrubbing back and forth through the conversation - in order to better be able to catch all of its details. An example from early in the game can be found about <a href="https://youtu.be/7QrjsQaKG3c" target="_blank">15 seconds into this trailer</a> for the game.<br /><br />With most audio and audiovisual logs, the player is free to move about while the log is playing.</p><p><br /></p><p>How can we understand these audio and audiovisual logs from a storytelling point of view?<br /><br />They provide backstory, and function somewhat like a flash-back in a movie. The audio logs that are like diary or journal entries serve basically the same function as finding a diary or journal entry written on paper, that the player can look at and read the text of.<br /><br />They may also provide some world- or character-building.</p><p>In some of the games, it feels fairly unrealistic for there to be all these audio logs scattered around the place. And it sometimes feels unrealistic that the recording was made in the first place. E.g. an audio log recording of a doctor doing some surgery where they suddenly decide to do something horrific, and the nurse is horrified. Who decided to record audio of what was happening during that part of the surgery? These sorts of contrivances can detract a bit from the storytelling.<br /></p><p></p><p>(From a <i>gameplay</i> perspective, that your character can be still moving around and doing things while you're listening to an audio log, makes a bit of a difference. Compared to you having no control while listening to the audio log. It means the storytelling details of the log are integrated a bit more smoothly with the gameplay).<br /><br />In the four games that we've looked at -- BioShock, Gone Home, Everybody's Gone to the Rapture, and Tacoma -- there is a mystery as to what happened <i>prior to the events in the game</i>, and the logs are the primary way that the player can piece together a picture of that.<br /><br />There is a kind of puzzle element to it. The player hears the pieces (individual logs), and those pieces may not explicitly spell out the overall picture of what has happened. The player may need to themselves connect the dots to figure out the overall picture.<br /><br />This isn't to say that that's the only way these logs could be used in a game. However, what does seem to be pretty inherent to such logs is that they provide backstory.<br /><br />There can be a gameplay challenge, of finding the logs. BioShock is like this. If a player doesn't search thoroughly enough, they might miss several of the audio logs. That's some interactivity that's associated with the logs (in finding them). And the game might require user input to play a log (more interactivity). But the recordings in the logs are non-interactive. In this sense they are a bit like a cutscene.<br /><br />What I said in an earlier <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2022/08/interactive-storytelling-containing.html" target="_blank">post about cutscenes</a> also applies to these logs. The logs may together form a <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2022/08/strong-vs-loose-narratives.html" target="_blank">strong narrative</a>, but the player's experience of that strong narrative is diluted by the very loose narrative of the gameplay segments between each log that the player finds. Also, because the logs are fairly short and are scattered about, it is more difficult to use them to form a strong narrative. The logs tend to work better as more stand-alone pieces, that don't have the strong connective-tissue between them that's required for a strong narrative.<br /><br />But while cutscenes can be used for flashbacks, flashforwards, or what is happening in the present, the logs only seem usable for (what are effectively) flashbacks. So they can only contribute to strong narrative for the backstory, not the story that the player experiences first-hand.<br /></p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-18680631678541632802022-08-14T19:37:00.006+10:002023-07-04T15:49:54.472+10:00Interactive storytelling: control over a character means an abstracted existence in the game world, which makes storytelling difficult<p>Here's a reason it's difficult to have strong storytelling when the player has control over a character in a game. <br /></p><p>Consider the way the player character may move about in the game world. In a typical 3D game, the player can control the direction the character moves in, and often the speed that they're moving at. In some games, they can make the character crouch down, jump, or climb.<br /><br />In most games, the movement is always exactly the same. There's the same running animations that are always used. If the player walks into a part of the environment that blocks their movement, such as a kitchen table, they'll have to change direction to move around the table. And the whole time the same movement animations will be used.<br /><br />In the real world, there are a lot of details to <i>how</i> a person moves through their environment. The kinds of steps they take, their posture, how they may put their hand on objects that they pass by. Those details are affected by the person's nature, their state of mind at the time, and also their intentions. While they are in the kitchen cooking something, their steps may be quite different to when they're on their way through their kitchen to go outside.<br /><br />Some games, such as in the Uncharted series, do try to capture some of the actual ways characters move through an environment, while that character is under the player's control. But even in these cases, they only capture a small part of what actual movement is like.<br /><br />So in general, the player character's movement is fairly abstracted and generic, compared to people's movement in real life. The player can make the character do things like walk in a particular direction, but they can't control the nature of that walking. This is not the criticise the games or the game developers. There's all sorts of good reasons why it is like that.<br /><br />I am focusing on the player's control over the character. In non-interactive cutscenes, the character will act in this more natural way. And in gameplay segments, there will be elements of that, such as in the "bad ass" way your character in a third-person game might hold a big gun while they're firing it, or in the "tough" way they reload the gun. But the player has no control over those sorts of details.<br /><br />The same abstraction is there in the other ways the player character exists in and interacts with the game world. It's common in games for characters to be able to look at, and interact with, objects in the game environment. Looking at the object might bring up a description, or a 3D model of it that can be rotated around. Interacting with an object will trigger the character to perform some sort of action, such as toggling a light switch, opening a cupboard, or talking to a person.<br /><br />These things are handled in a very abstracted way. The player tells the character to interact with the object, but has no further control over how that interaction happens.<br /><br />To illustrate why that's very abstracted, consider how, in real life, someone might make and eat their breakfast. They might be still quite sleepy, and slowly shuffle about, assembling the ingredients. They might absent-mindedly prepare it, like putting bread in the toaster, chucking the toasted bread on a plate, and spreading a bit of butter on it. Then taking that and the coffee they prepared out to the back steps and sitting down to have them. They might place the mug and plate to the side, and alternate between sips of coffee, bits of bread, and taking in their surrounds. They might give a small sigh as they finish, dust off their hands, grab the mug and plate, and head back inside.<br /><br />It's not possible in a game to have the sort of nuanced control that would be required for the player to have control over those details of what that character did. The player has essentially zero control over such details.<br /><br />This isn't to criticise the games or game developers, as there are good reasons why games are like that. It's just to note that the character exists in the game world in a pretty abstracted fashion.<br /><br />Here's some other ways that the character exists in an abstracted way. Consider a JRPG where the party of characters is going on an adventure through some lands towards a far-off place. In real life, such journeying would affect their physical and mental state. They would get tired and sore. At times they might feel despondent at how much of the journey they have left. They would need to sleep. In most games these sorts of details are abstracted away (during the gameplay segments, at least).<br /><br />And that's because abstracting away those sorts of details is better for the gameplay.<br /><br />I want to have a name for the kinds of details that are abstracted away. We can think of acting. A good actor has nuanced control over their entire body, in terms of posture, movement, body language, vocal control, facial expressions, etc -- at every moment in time. The timing of these details is important. There is how they go about moving through and interacting with details in their environment. All of these details reflect the character's emotional state and their intentions. <br /><br />Are their movements languorous, or skittish? How do they sit in a chair? What is their body language, and where are they facing, when they're talking to different people?<br /><br />We can call all these details the "performance". The performance details are abstracted away when the player has control over a character.<br /><br />These performance details are very important to the storytelling in movies, TV, etc. Their absence, while the player has control over a character, is a reason why it's difficult to have strong storytelling within the gameplay.<br /></p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-52182003772072239002022-08-11T23:25:00.002+10:002023-07-04T13:41:39.089+10:00Interactive storytelling containing interactive gameplay segments and separate non-interactive, story-focused segments<p style="text-align: left;">A game might consist of sequence like:</p><p style="text-align: left;"> 1) cutscene, 2) gameplay, 3) cutscene, 4) gameplay, ...</p><p style="text-align: left;">We can call each of the elements in the sequence a 'segment'.</p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Story-focused segments</b> like cutscenes are <i>non-interactive</i>, and they can contribute to a <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2022/08/strong-vs-loose-narratives.html" target="_blank"><i>strong narrative</i></a>. Cutscenes are like a short animation or movie that plays.</p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Gameplay segments</b> are <i>interaction-focused</i> and they have a <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2022/08/strong-vs-loose-narratives.html" target="_blank"><i>loose narrative</i></a>.</p><p style="text-align: left;">This basic structure, of some segments focused on gameplay, and others focused on non-interactive storytelling, is found in many different genres of game, such as point-and-click adventure games, JRPGs, Western RPGs, platform games, and first-person shooters.</p><p style="text-align: left;">In different game genres, the nature of the gameplay segments differ. In classic point-and-click games, they're primarily about looking at and manipulating objects, and talking to characters, to solve puzzles. In classic JRPGs or Western RPGs, the gameplay segments primarily involve exploring around and fighting monsters. In a classic platform game, they involve running and jumping, to avoid or take out enemies, and to traverse different platforms and gaps. In a classic first-person shooter, it's traversing through an environment, shooting enemies and trying to avoid getting shot.</p><p style="text-align: left;">In all these genres, a gameplay segment ends when the player does some particular thing, like solve a puzzle, defeat a boss enemy, or get to the end of a level. When the gameplay segment ends, a story segment starts. </p><p style="text-align: left;">Let's consider all this in the context of classic point-and-click adventure games.</p><p style="text-align: left;">In gameplay segments, the player can move their character around within their current location, and move to other locations. They can choose to look at different objects in the surrounds. They can interact with objects (e.g. turn on a tap), to use an object they have on another object (e.g. use a lighter on a pile of sticks, to create a fire). They may be able to talk to other characters and choose between a few different dialog options. They do these things to try to solve puzzles, and by doing so, advance the narrative.</p><p style="text-align: left;">The gameplay segments tend to have a very loose narrative. Under the player's control, their character walks about, looks at and interacts with various objects. They may go back and forth between locations, and repeatedly interact with the same objects, as the player tries to figure out a puzzle solution. The player may get stuck for tens of minutes or even hours, before they figure out how to solve a puzzle.</p><p style="text-align: left;">The sequence of all these events within a gameplay segment will likely form a very loose narrative. If these gameplay segments were made into a movie, they'd be very dull movies to watch (imagine the UI elements were removed, and the footage was given to someone to watch and they weren't told it was from a game).</p><p style="text-align: left;">(The gameplay segments in the other genres we've talked about -- JRPGs, Western RPGs, platform games, and first-person shooters -- all have very loose narratives, too. This isn't to say gameplay segments can't contribute anything to the storytelling. They can, for example, do a lot of world building or character building. In a future post, I'd like to look at some of the ways the gameplay segments can contribute to the storytelling. Still, I'd maintain that these gameplay segments have a loose <i>narrative</i>.)</p><p style="text-align: left;">While the non-interactive, story-focused segments can together form a strong narrative, that narrative gets "diluted" by the loose narrative in the gameplay segments that sit in between them. If the entire experience was just the story-focused segments, it could have a strong narrative. But because the entire experience also includes the gameplay segments, the narrative of the entire experience is loosened. And since the gameplay segments tend to comprise the majority of the time the player spends with the game, there's substantial loosening of the narrative.</p><p style="text-align: left;">There are other ways that the gameplay segments affect the narrative of the non-interactive, story-focused segments. The gameplay segments constrain the types of narratives that can work in the story-focused segments.</p><p style="text-align: left;">One, the overall plot has to be compatible with being repeatedly put on hold, for long periods of time, during the gameplay segments.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Consider point-and-click adventures again. In these, the reason the plot has to be put on hold during the gameplay segments is the following. In a gameplay segment, the player will usually need to complete one or more puzzles before the next story-focused segment (cutscene) is triggered. The player is usually given as much time as they need to finish those puzzle(s), and the state of the game world (and thus the story) needs to basically be put on hold until the player solves the puzzle(s). If it wasn't put on hold, it'd interfere with the player's ability to complete the puzzles.</p><p style="text-align: left;">A second way that gameplay segments constrain the overall plot is that the plot has to be compatible with the sorts of activities the player character undertakes during them. In a point-and-click adventure game, the character will usually be walking around, examining objects, using objects and combining objects together.</p><p style="text-align: left;">In principle, any sort of plot could be used in the story-focused segments. But, a lot of them wouldn't "work" very well with being put on hold for extended periods of time, or with the kinds of activities the player character is undertaking during the gameplay segments.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Think of it this way: the plot of many novels or movies wouldn't really work if they contained extended sections where the main character went about like a player character does a point-and-click adventure game.</p><p style="text-align: left;">And again, the same applies to all those other genres where you have gameplay segments sandwiched between non-interactive story-focused segments. Many stories wouldn't work very well if the majority of the time in the game is spent in gameplay segments where a character is running and jumping, like in a classic platform game, or if the character is shooting down hordes of bad guys like in a classic first-person shooter.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> </p><p style="text-align: left;">To summarise, the gameplay segments loosen the overall narrative of such games, and they won't be compatible with various kinds of plots. </p><p style="text-align: left;">I think the best way to think of those games, from a storytelling perspective, is that the gameplay is the main focus, and the storytelling is used to enhance the experience of the gameplay. That is, as opposed to if the storytelling was the main focus, and the gameplay was used to enhance the storytelling.</p><p style="text-align: left;">And, if we're interested in interactive storytelling, that raises the question of, what ways can the gameplay enhance the experience of the storytelling? </p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-67432157827717907642022-08-04T00:12:00.006+10:002022-08-04T14:54:16.966+10:00Interactive storytelling: choice & narratives, and separating narratives from interaction<p id="docs-internal-guid-f41f7b0d-7fff-ae8e-ed34-4bc1aea8eeb3" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">There's a curious phenomenon, regarding different people's views of interactive storytelling. There's quite a few works whose storytelling gets high praise from gamers. Yet it seems common, when non-gamers try some interactive storytelling, for them to be not very impressed with the storytelling, and to consider it to be lesser than what they’d find in a good movie or novel.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">What's the explanation of these contrary views?</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Here's some potential explanations. Maybe non-gamers are just not familiar-enough with interactive storytelling. Maybe they're biased against interactive storytelling because it's less familiar to them.</span></span></span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Or perhaps games are (in general) targeting younger audiences, who aren’t as interested in mature storytelling. Or maybe gamers are used to a lower-quality of storytelling in games, so have lower expectations for them.</span></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span><br /><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">I think there's at least a small element of truth in all of these, but I think the main explanation is something else.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">To help explain, I'll introduce the notions of 'strong' and 'loose' narratives. That was the topic of my <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2022/08/strong-vs-loose-narratives.html" target="_blank">last post</a>. Since the distinction is central to this post, I'll quote the entire contents of that previous post here:</span></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: small;">In a strong narrative, everything that happens in the sequence of
events have a purpose that contributes to the overall details of the
story. The overall story is there to create a satisfying experience for
the viewer, reader, or game player (from here on I'll just use
'viewer').<br /><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span><p>The overall story details will involve elements like
the following. There will be challenges put in front of the
protagonists, that they will overcome. The tension may ratchet up, until
the climax of the story, and there will be a resolution. The
protagonist will likely experience some growth. There may be certain
themes. The overall story may present unexpected surprises. There will
likely be mysteries that are raised earlier in the story, that get
answered later on, which serve draw the viewer (etc) through the story.<br /></p><span></span>I'm
not saying that all of these have to be present for the narrative to be
strong. I'm saying that a strong narrative supports the overall story
details, whatever they are for a particular story. <br /><p>A strong
narrative is a set of events, put in a deliberate sequence, in order to
produce a strong set of the overall story details (a strong climax, a
satisfying resolution, etc). Events that occur build on what came
earlier. A strong narrative won't include superfluous events, that don't
help contribute to the overall story details.<br /><br />A problem for the
protagonist may arise in one scene, and the events in the next scene may
exacerbate those problems. Earlier scenes may have painted a certain
picture of the protagonist's predicament, and a later scene may turn
those appearances on their head. The sequence of events will be
constructed to make the story's mysteries compelling.<br /><br />In strong
narratives, "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts", because
the parts are designed to contribute to the overall details of the
story.<br /><br />In loose narratives, on the other hand, there may be
little or no overall story details for the sequence of events to
contribute to. It's just: this happened, then this other thing happened,
then something else, and so on.<br /><br />The events will likely be
connected -- perhaps by occurring in temporal sequence, following what
happens to a protagonist, like what they did and where they went. But
there won't be much to the overall story details, and thus not much for
the sequence of events to contribute towards.</p><p>Everyday life is
like a loose narrative. A sequence of stuff happens, but there's not the
dramatic arc and so forth found in a strong narrative.<br /></p><br />Of
course, this isn't really a binary of only "very strong" narratives and
"very loose" narratives. It's a spectrum, with stronger narratives at
one end and looser narratives at the other end.<br /><br />I believe that,
generally speaking, people tend to prefer stronger narratives. There's
always exceptions of course, but I think that in the majority of cases,
if all else is equal, people will find a stronger narrative more
compelling than a looser narrative. And if people find strong narratives
more compelling, then in that sense I think it is fair to say that,
generally speaking, a stronger narrative is a better narrative.<br /><br />And
this doesn't seem to be merely a matter of people's personal
preferences or opinions. Evolution seems to have given us brains that
desire and enjoy strong narratives. Brains that are suited to consuming
information in the form of strong narratives.</span></blockquote><p></p><p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></span></p><p id="docs-internal-guid-f2c6b819-7fff-7db2-a291-98ab3bdf323d" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">With this distinction between strong and loose narratives, I think I can explain what’s going on with the divergent views about how good the narratives are in interactive storytelling.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">To help illustrate, I’ll focus on Inkle’s “<a href="https://www.inklestudios.com/80days/" target="_blank">80 Days</a>” (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/80_Days_(2014_video_game)" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a> | <a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/381780/80_Days/" target="_blank">Steam</a>). It’s a souped-up “choose your own adventure”, that re-imagines Jules Vern’s “Around the World in Eighty Days”. The player's goal is to get around the world in 80 days.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It's a highly-rated story-based game. Its writing has been praised, and its storytelling has been lauded. The Guardian said it was "Interactive storytelling as its best". The game won the Independent Games Festival’s "Excellence in Narrative" award.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It’s worth noting that the game provides the player with a lot of choice. When the player has stopped at a destination, they have several choices for what to do while they are there. This might include buying items available there, or selling (hopefully at a profit) items they had previously bought elsewhere. They can talk to other characters, and make choices at various stages in the conversation.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">When they are ready to leave, they have several transport options, to different destinations. And some will be faster than others, but might be more expensive. So the player needs to manage their funds, to ensure they get around the world in time but also don’t run out of money.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">(Disclaimer: it has been several years since I have played it, so I apologise for any inaccuracies in my description of how it works).</span></span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p id="docs-internal-guid-2a931707-7fff-0df3-50dc-a00bfd53e535" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">To get a sense of the degree of choice, “The developers estimate that on one complete circumnavigation of the globe players will see approximately 2% of the game's 750,000 words of textual content” (from the game’s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/80_Days_(2014_video_game)" target="_blank">Wikipedia entry</a>).</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">80 Days has a fairly loose narrative. There are some overall details to the story, that are contributed to by events that happen. But a lot of what you’ll encounter in a playthrough is more just: this happened, then this other thing happened, then something else happened.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This is not because the developers and writer are unable to write a strong narrative! It’s because of all the choice and freedom the player has. I would guess that there are thousands of different (but interrelated) possible playthroughs. Some of these would only vary from each other in fairly minor ways, but other ones would vary from each other in fairly major ways. So lets imagine that there are a couple of hundred possible different playthroughs (that vary in non-trivial ways from each other). It’s just not feasible to write hundreds of different strong narratives for a single game.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It’s not simply that it’s difficult to construct that many different strong narratives. The fact that all of those different playthroughs are related to each other, and overlap to some extent, actually makes it even more challenging. It would be harder to construct X number of inter-related strong narratives than to simply write X completely-distinct strong narratives. This is because strong narratives don't "live close together" in "narrative space".</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So I think this is the explanation for why non-gamers who might try out a game like 80 Days may come away not terribly impressed by the storytelling.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But then, why is it that a game like this is lauded by gamers? I think the distinction between strong and loose narratives can help us here.</span></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Gamers like 80 Days as <i>a combination of</i> that storytelling with the interactivity.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">What interactivity brings is that the player gets to feel, to some extent, like <i>they</i> have been on an adventure, with ups and downs, and some interesting happenings along the way. They might feel good about having made some good choices along the way. Since there is so much choice, they can feel that they truly shaped what happened in their adventure. There is also the puzzle-like element to the game of trying to find good routes while also managing your finances well, which some people will enjoy.</span></span></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">And while the narrative is fairly loose, that doesn’t mean it’s bad, nor does that mean it can't contain small pockets of stronger narrative scattered through it. Also, narrative is separate from the writing in the story. The writing in a story with a loose narrative can obviously still be good.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"></span></span></span><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It’s the overall package that the gamers like.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But there’s a lack of precision in how they evaluate the work. They don’t distinguish precisely enough between the qualities of the overall package and the storytelling component of that.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">If the overall package is great, and that overall package is “interactive storytelling”, then it seems that the storytelling must be great. But just because someone finds the overall package great, that doesn’t mean that all the components of that package are great, in absolute terms. If a person really likes interactivity and choice and freedom, they may still really like the overall package, even if the narrative isn’t terribly strong. In absolute terms, you have to compare the narrative to those in other media, such as the strong narratives such as in movies and novels.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Can you actually separate the storytelling from the interactivity? Not totally. But, in general, I think you can to a large extent. It depends on the nature of the interaction in the particular work. You can definitely separate out </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">narrative</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> from the interactivity. The interaction determines what happens, and thus what specific narrative the player experiences. The narrative is the result of the interactions, which aren't part of it.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Any </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">particular</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> screen of text that you see in the game will seem like what could appear in a novel with a strong narrative. So the lack of a strong narrative is far from obvious. A strong narrative is more “abstract”. It concerns much larger-scale details in the story than any individual passage of text. And unless you already have an appreciation of the distinction between strong and loose narratives, you won’t be well equipped to be aware of that component of the story. I would imagine that the majority of people playing games don’t have a clear idea of that distinction. This isn’t a criticism of them, just what I think is the case, without making any judgements of the people.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So I think the non-gamers are right about the storytelling in a lot of the interactive storytelling. The interactivity is used to give the player freedom and choice, which necessitates a looser narrative. And this is the case even in beloved interactive storytelling works, that are widely lauded for their storytelling.</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></p><p style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">A question raised by this is, is </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">all</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> interactivity at odds with having a strong narrative? That’s something I’d like to write about more in the future.</span></span></span></p><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-41916689234255215822022-08-03T00:23:00.003+10:002022-10-17T22:08:34.787+10:00"Strong" vs "loose" narratives<p>In this post I want to sketch out the distinction between "strong" and "loose" narratives. It's a pretty simple distinction, but one that is often overlooked. In later posts, I'll make use of this distinction to make some points about interactive storytelling.</p><p>In a strong narrative, everything that happens in the sequence of events have a purpose that contributes to the overall details of the story. The overall story is there to create a satisfying experience for the viewer, reader, or game player (from here on I'll just use 'viewer').<br /><br />The overall story details will involve elements like the following. There will be challenges put in front of the protagonists, that they will overcome. The tension may ratchet up, until the climax of the story, and there will be a resolution. The protagonist will likely experience some growth. There may be certain themes. The overall story may present unexpected surprises. There will likely be mysteries that are raised earlier in the story, that get answered later on, which serve draw the viewer (etc) through the story.<br /></p><span></span>I'm not saying that all of these have to be present for the narrative to be strong. I'm saying that a strong narrative supports the overall story details, whatever they are for a particular story. <br /><p>A strong narrative is a set of events, put in a deliberate sequence, in order to produce a strong set of the overall story details (a strong climax, a satisfying resolution, etc). Events that occur build on what came earlier. A strong narrative won't include superfluous events, that don't help contribute to the overall story details.</p><p>[EDIT, Oct 2022: to expand on it not including superfluous events, part of a strong narrative is what details are <i>left out</i>. The narrative might include the protagonist getting some groceries at the shop, and then arriving home with their shopping, to find a stranger in their house. The narrative doesn't include them waiting for the bus with their groceries, getting on the bus, riding along in the bus, then getting off the bus at their stop, then walking home. Because, for this particular story, such details are not relevant to the narrative, and they're sorts of details that the viewer/reader can infer have happened.</p><p>So it's common for there to be spatiotemporal gaps between segments of the narrative. In a movie, when a scene ends and there's a cut, it's common for there to be spatial and temporal gap between that scene and the events of the next one.]<br /><br />A problem for the protagonist may arise in one scene, and the events in the next scene may exacerbate those problems. Earlier scenes may have painted a certain picture of the protagonist's predicament, and a later scene may turn those appearances on their head. The sequence of events will be constructed to make the story's mysteries compelling.<br /><br />In strong narratives, "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts", because the parts are designed to contribute to the overall details of the story.<br /><br />In loose narratives, on the other hand, there may be little or no overall story details for the sequence of events to contribute to. It's just: this happened, then this other thing happened, then something else, and so on.<br /><br />The events will likely be connected -- perhaps by occurring in temporal sequence, following what happens to a protagonist, like what they did and where they went. But there won't be much to the overall story details, and thus not much for the sequence of events to contribute towards.</p><p>Everyday life is like a loose narrative. A sequence of stuff happens, but there's not the dramatic arc and so forth found in a strong narrative.<br /></p><p><br />Of course, this isn't really a binary of only "very strong" narratives and "very loose" narratives. It's a spectrum, with stronger narratives at one end and looser narratives at the other end.<br /><br />I believe that, generally speaking, people tend to prefer stronger narratives. There's always exceptions of course, but I think that in the majority of cases, if all else is equal, people will find a stronger narrative more compelling than a looser narrative. And if people find strong narratives more compelling, then in that sense I think it is fair to say that, generally speaking, a stronger narrative is a better narrative.<br /><br />And this doesn't seem to be merely a matter of people's personal preferences or opinions. Evolution seems to have given us brains that desire and enjoy strong narratives. Brains that are suited to consuming information in the form of strong narratives.<span></span></p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-86533773015410883522022-01-25T20:31:00.006+10:002022-01-25T23:25:02.453+10:00Burger with a pork and Chinese-sausage patty and a wombok slaw<p>I've always liked the taste of Chinese sausage (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_sausage">lup cheong</a>), which I grew up knowing as 'wind-dried sausage'. I thought I'd try to make a pork burger with finely-chopped Chinese sausage mixed in with the pork mince. I've experimented with it a bit, and this version is quite tasty.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhaPUjxCpPPtUEwIPTH0Y6qUQcPfAj6ZPT7rn_h5eTpzm3sqMPGKFD0utnVNRVq16fjopEGy-1cBQh0HYqPitmlEZUc_TtHr9iTB8-JPYUclQdj7zAcVBcpv1X3BDRRfalqCJkuoZEq_b9Vwse31MfHm8VpRdNq1LfiLTu6xtK8-34flJGHTKc=s1200" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1200" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhaPUjxCpPPtUEwIPTH0Y6qUQcPfAj6ZPT7rn_h5eTpzm3sqMPGKFD0utnVNRVq16fjopEGy-1cBQh0HYqPitmlEZUc_TtHr9iTB8-JPYUclQdj7zAcVBcpv1X3BDRRfalqCJkuoZEq_b9Vwse31MfHm8VpRdNq1LfiLTu6xtK8-34flJGHTKc=s320" width="320" /></a></div><p></p><p>The following quantities are for making 1 burger.</p><p>Ingredients</p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><b>Patty</b></li><ul><li><b>Chinese sausage</b>, 1</li><li><b>Pork mince</b>, approx 1/4 of a 500g pack (can use a bit more for larger patty)</li><li><b>Toasted sesame oil</b>, about 1 tsp</li><li><b>Five-spice powder</b>, about 1/2 tsp</li></ul><li><b>Wombok slaw</b></li><ul><li><b>Wombok</b> (aka Chinese Cabbage)<b><br /></b></li><ul><li>if you halve it lengthways, then cut about a 4cm-wide crosswise strip, that's about enough. It'd be preferable to cut this strip out part way down from the top end of the wombok, so you get some of the crunchy hard parts of it in the slaw.</li></ul><li><b>Red onion</b>, a wedge approx 1cm wide at thickest part</li><li><b>Mayonnaise</b>, 2 tbsp</li><li><b>Soy sauce</b>, 2 tsp</li><li><b>Brown sugar</b>, 2 tsp</li><li><b>Rice vinegar</b>, 1/2 tsp</li></ul><li><b>Hamburger bun</b>, 1<b></b></li><li><b>Additional</b></li><ul><li><b>Salt</b></li><li><b>Aluminium foil</b>, for resting the burger patty after cooking</li><ul><li>Alternatives: baking paper; or a bowl that can be placed top down over a plate, with the patty sitting underneath it<br /></li></ul></ul></ul><p> </p><p>I use the one chopping board for both the slaw and preparing the patty, so I first cut up the vegetables for the slaw.</p><p>First, use the knife the cut the hamburger bun in half, then put it aside.<br /></p><div><p>Cut the wombok crossways into fairly thin strips (maybe 3mm wide).</p><p>Thinly slice the red onion lengthways.</p><p>Combine the vegetables in a bowl.</p><p> </p><p>Make the patty.</p><p>Finely chop the Chinese sausage. I slice it lengthways, then lie each half flat on the chopping board and slice the top half of them. Then I cut all these long strips into thinner strips, then dice them up.</p><p>Spread out the diced sausage, and break up (sprinkle) the pork mince over the top of it.</p><p>Sprinkle the sesame oil then five-spice powder over the meat.</p><p>Gently mix it all together, then form into a patty about 2cm (or, if you want, a little less) thick. It's important for it not to be too thin, as that will cause it to dry out during cooking. If the cooked patty is dry, it's much less tasty.</p><p><br /></p><p>Cook the patty and prepare the rest of the slaw.</p><p>Preheat a frying pan on a medium temperature (you want the patty to sizzle and fry while cooking, but fairly gently).</p><p>Add the patty. Sprinkle a bit of salt on its top side. Cook that side for approximately 7 minutes, and while doing so prepare the slaw, as per the following instructions.<br /></p><p>Add the ingredients for the slaw sauce (mayo, soy sauce, sugar, vinegar) to a small bowl and whisk together. Taste, and add additional quantities of any of the ingredients if necessary. For my taste, you want it to taste like a mayonaise with a subtle soy-sauce flavour, that is sweeter than normal mayonnaise, and a bit tangier than normal mayonnaise.</p><p>Mix the sauce in with the wombok and red onion. </p><p>Once the patty has cooked for approximately 7 minutes on that side, flip it over, and sprinkle some salt on its top side. Cook this side for a further ~7 minutes.</p><p>While it's cooking, get ~40cm of aluminium foil, and fold it in half.</p><p>When the burger patty has cooked for 7 minutes on its second side, take it out of the pan and put it between the folded up faces of the foil, and then close up the open sides of it, to form a pocket, in order to rest the meat.</p><p><br /></p><p>Lightly toast the buns</p><p>Turn the heat on the stove down a little bit. Use some paper towels to wipe out the oil and burnt bits from the frying pan, and place the halves of the buns cut-side down in the pan. Rotate the buns a bit every ~30 seconds. You want to very lightly toast them, so they have a slight firmness, and maybe a very light brownness.</p><p>(If the pan's not large enough to fit both bun halves at once, just do them one at a time. As an alternative to toasting them in the pan, you can toast them in an oven, at around 150 degrees C, or slightly higher).</p><p><br /></p><p>Assemble the burger.</p><p>The time it takes to toast the buns will have given the patty time to rest. Place the patty on the bottom half of the bun, and then the slaw on top of that, followed by the top half of the bun.</p></div>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-44626785890968753252021-05-16T03:40:00.006+10:002021-05-17T14:02:19.090+10:00Lamb curry with yoghurt recipe<p>You can make this into a complete, one pot meal, by adding some chickpeas and some vegetables (in this recipe I've used cauliflower, but you could potentially use other vegetables, like eggplant or green beans).</p><p><b>Ingredients</b></p><p>All quantities are approximate. It shouldn't matter if you have a bit more or less of any.</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>ghee, 6 tbsp (this will give it a richer flavour than using oil)</li><li>onions, 2 large</li><li>garlic, 6 cloves</li><li>ginger, 1 inch piece</li><li>lamb chops containing bones, 1kg</li><li>curry powder, 5 tbsp</li><li>cardamon pods, 6 (not essential)</li><li>cinnamon, 1 stick (not essential)</li><li>greek yoghurt, 1 cup</li><li>chopped tomatoes, half a 400g can</li><li>fresh coriander, handful of</li><li>garam masala, 1 tbsp</li><li>lemon juice, 1 tbsp</li><li>to make it into a complete, one pot meal</li><ul><li>chickpeas, 2 cans, drained</li><li>cauliflower, 1 small-med</li></ul></ul><p></p><div><b>Directions</b></div><div><br /></div><div>I've made these directions fairly detailed, to show which bits you can prep while other bits are cooking, and to explain the rationale for the steps.</div><div><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>finely chop the onion (that will give you a smoother curry sauce) and fry it in the ghee at a medium temperature (you don't want the temperature to be too high, as you want to soften and evenly brown them, not make them crispy).</li><ul><li>they'll take a fair while to brown, so you can do a lot of the other prep while they're browning.</li><li>you want to get them to a bit past golden, into browning. You'll probably want to lower the temp a bit once they start getting golden, so they don't burn. Browning the onions is pretty important for the flavour.</li><li>stir the onion mixture from time to time (every couple of minutes, I'd say) to stop it from burning.</li></ul><li>meanwhile, prep the garlic and ginger by peeling them. I add them to the onion once the onion is golden. I don't add them earlier so as to not burn them. When the onion is approaching golden, finely grate (or finely chop and add) the onion and ginger into the pan.</li><li>prep the meat by cutting out the bone pieces (and saving them - we want to add them to the curry for flavour) and then chopping the meat into approx 1 inch lengths... doesn't matter how wide they are. Doesn't matter that much as to how the meat is cut up.</li><li>if the onions aren't yet past golden and a bit browned, you can do more of the prep described further below.</li><li>once the onions are past golden and a bit browned, add the meat (and bones). You probably want to lightly brown it. Turn up the heat a bit to help this along. Stir every minute or two to prevent any burning (you don't need to worry about this as much while there's meat juices in the pan).</li><li>prep the yoghurt by adding it to a bowl along with (roughly) 1 cup of water (the amount shouldn't matter much). Use a fork or spoon to mix it into a smooth liquid.</li><li>once the meat looks lightly browned, push the meat and onions etc to the side a bit and add the curry powder (and cardamon and cinnamon, if using) to the freed-up space in the pan. Mix the curry powder around in the ghee a bit, and fry it for a minute or two, then mix everything together. </li><li>add (in any order) the optional (drained) chickpeas, the half a can of tomatoes, and the yoghurt mixture. You want all the ingredients to be just covered by the liquid, so add some extra water if necessary.</li><li>cover and simmer - so turn the heat down to a suitable level for simmering.</li><li>you want to do this first step of simmering for probably 45 mins to an hour. I'm not sure exactly how long is necessary.</li><li>while it's simmering, prep the cauliflower by washing and chopping it. I'd cut it into roughly 1 inch pieces, though I don't think the size matters that much.</li><li>you can also wash the coriander (I wouldn't chop it up till near when you're going to add it, to keep it fresh).</li><li>after simmering the meat for 45mins to an hour, add the optional cauliflower. I'd say simmer that for about 15 mins. You want it to be softened. You can test it after 15 mins to see if it's soft enough, and if it isn't, simmer it some more.</li><ul><li>Note: if you were to use eggplant instead of cauliflower, you'd probably need to cook it for longer. Just keep cooking it and check it periodically to see if it's soft enough.</li></ul><li>add salt to taste</li><li>roughly chop the coriander leaves.</li><li>add about 1 tbsp of garam masala, the coriander leaves, and optionally maybe 1 tbsp lemon juice.</li><li>simmer for a couple of minutes.</li></ul></div></div>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-91122674633582416272020-12-10T02:48:00.001+10:002020-12-10T02:48:50.039+10:00Crispy oven-baked chicken wings<p></p><div>This is a very simple recipe for oven-baked chicken wings with very crispy skin. It uses baking soda (or baking powder) to help dry the skin out, to help make it crispy. And it cooks them first at a lower temperature, and then at a higher-temperature, which also helps make them crispy.</div><div><br /></div><div>Ingredients</div><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><b>chicken wings</b> or <b>chicken wing nibbles</b>, 1kg</li><ul><li>the recipe can easily be adjusted for different quantities - you just need to modify the amount of baking soda used (and you don't need to be too precise)</li><li>I prefer to use packaged chicken wing 'nibbles' (where the wings have been segmented into three parts, and it includes the two main segments but not the tips). If whole wings are being used, I prefer to slice through the 'webbing' connecting the segments, so the wings sit flatter during cooking.</li></ul><li><b>baking soda</b> (or <b>baking powder</b>), ~2 tsp</li><ul><li>use a bit more if using baking powder, which also has something like rice flour mixed in with the baking soda</li></ul><li><b>salt</b></li></ul></div><p></p><p>Preheat oven to 120 C.</p><p>Pat the wing pieces dry with paper towels.</p><p>For each segment, cut two slices across the top side, and one across the bottom side. (This is because the skin becomes quite crispy after cooking, and if you don't cut those slices across it, then when eating the wings it's easy to bite off the entire piece of skin on one side in one go).</p><p>Put the pieces in a bowl large enough to fit them. </p><p>Sprinkle 2 tsp baking soda and some salt on chicken, and mix it up to evenly coat the pieces.</p><p>Ideally, put the pieces on a wire rack (to get airflow underneath them), and sit that on a tray lined with baking paper or aluminium foil (fat will drip from the chicken). If you don't have a rack, just put the pieces on a lined tray.</p><p>Cook chicken for 30 mins at 120 C.</p><p>Turn the heat up to 220 C (or 210 C fan forced), and cook the chicken for a further 45 mins.</p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-10754107645304549422020-11-30T16:19:00.005+10:002020-11-30T16:19:59.411+10:00Acknowledging that the available evidence may be limited and not representative of the complete evidence<p>It's good to use evidence to make judgments, but there's a common mistake in the way this is done. This is to assume that the available evidence is sufficient for making a judgment. It may well be sufficient, but the mistake is to <b>assume</b> that it is.</p><p>The limitations of the available evidence need to be assessed. Until relatively-recently, we didn't have telescopes capable of detecting <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exoplanet">exoplanets</a> (planets orbiting other stars). Then we started to get that ability but initially could only detect very large exoplanets. Back then, it would have have been a mistake to look at the available evidence and make the judgment that no exoplanets exist, or that only very large exoplanets do.</p><p>We can ask questions like: what are the limitations of our ability to gather the relevant evidence? Has all the relevant evidence been collected, keeping in mind that resources are required to gather evidence (time and money, and people who have prioritised gathering it)? Is it possible that we could obtain more evidence in the future that could support a different judgment? Do we have good reason to believe that the evidence we have gathered so far is representative of all the possible cases?</p><p>The mistake is in assuming that a judgment being consistent with the available evidence is evidence that the judgment is correct.</p><p>So not only do we need to do more than just consider the nature of the available evidence (like its limitations). We need to consider what different judgments could be consistent with the available evidence. And we need to consider what the different possibilities could be for the missing evidence, and what judgments could be consistent with each of those different possibilities. </p><p>In the exoplanet example, back when we didn't have the technology for detecting them, we needed to consider that the missing evidence could include exoplanets. And, obviously, that the judgment "exoplanets exist" is consistent with that possibility.</p><p>We need to be honest with ourselves if this consideration of different possibilities for the missing evidence (and the judgments they would support) shows that that are multiple different (and incompatible) judgments that could be made, like both "exoplanets don't exist" and "exoplanets exist". Being honest with ourselves means admitting it when we don't currently know the answer, and holding an agnostic attitude on this matter. It means not jumping to conclusions.</p><p>It can be difficult to do this. Having an agnostic attitude to something doesn't tend to be encouraged in our society. And we tend to have a bias towards information that we have, and against potential information that we don't yet have. We tend to privilege the information we have. It's tangible, whereas the other possibilities are not.</p><p>This bias can be subtle, such as if we take the available evidence -- from which we are prematurely forming judgments -- as evidence against possibilities that are incompatible with those judgments. If the available evidence does not include exoplanets, we may take this as evidence against the possibility that further evidence will include exoplanets.</p><p>We can't use the available evidence in this fashion. The fact that certain information is available, while certain other information is not currently available, (in general) tells us nothing of how representative the available information is of the unavailable information. What information is currently available is simply an artifact of our current abilities to gather relevant information.</p><p><br /></p><p>When I talk of 'judgments' in the above, these are often judgments about what explains some evidence. There is one type of explanation that is routinely overlooked. When there is some apparent phenomenon in the outside world, we tend to assume that the explanation of it simply exists in the outside world. But a component of the explanation may be due to the nature of ourselves and our perception.</p><p>For example, the coloured bow-shape that we see (and the position we see it at) when we perceive a rainbow is due to the character of the light that reaches the position where we are. The actual explanation has to do with light rays interacting with water droplets over a larger area than where we see the rainbow, and the light there being scattered in a large range of directions -- and thus there is light reaching many different positions, at which different rainbows would be perceived.</p><p>There can be details that we think exist in the world but which are in fact phenomena that our brains have subconsciously invented to explain other phenomena in the world. Belief in ghosts, for example. The point is that we may think we have evidence for them, we may think that we can perceive them, and not realise that actually they're kinds of explanations for other details that our brains came up with, without us clearly understanding that this is what has happened.</p><p>I would argue (and will argue, in my PhD) that belief in an <i>intangible</i> 'information' is an example of such a phenomena, where part of the explanation is to do with an explanation our brains construct.</p><p>When we consider what judgments (including explanations) are supported by some evidence, we need to also consider that the apparent evidence and explanation of it may have to do with the character of ourselves (such as our perception). Doing so may expand the set of possible explanations that could be consistent with the evidence.</p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-14477234824524462392020-11-24T05:45:00.003+10:002020-11-24T05:46:23.571+10:00Having power means having influence on a complex system, not having control<p>Are there theories of power in society that look at it from a systemic, complex-systems viewpoint? It's something I'd be interested to read about. I assume that works in political science at least implicitly address such details, though I don't know if any of them explicitly look at things from that viewpoint.</p><p>There's a lot of misunderstanding about power, that come from not appreciating a systemic, complex-systems viewpoint.</p><p>The basic misunderstanding is thinking that having power means having control. But this notion of control is an abstraction. There's never unalloyed control. Usually, the reality is far from that.</p><p>Rather than <i>control</i>, there is <i>influence</i> upon a complex system.</p><p>People and organisations usually can't just want a particular result and make that happen. They can only introduce an influence into a complex system. The result that will occur depends on how that and all the other influences and factors come out in the wash.</p><p>There will be a number of different influences, on different levels, and the result will be result of the interaction of these things, and feedback, and so on.</p><p><br /></p><p>There is a common (implicit) belief that the higher the position of power, the greater the ability the person/organisation has to control what happens.</p><p>But that's not how things are.</p><p>In reality there are many competing influences and issues, and there's a need to satisfy differing people and groups, and compromises that need to be made.</p><p>There is structure in situations, through which influence plays out. The structure plays an important role in how that influence will play out. It determines what options are available. So in a government, it may be necessary to secure the support of a minor political party in order to push through a particular measure. So in this particular circumstance, the less powerful party may actually have greater influence than the more powerful party.</p><p>The power is predicated upon the existence of these structures, and those structures can break down. So again, the power is not absolute control. E.g. governments have power, but if the population gets pissed off enough and revolt then that power structure can break down.</p><p>Too often people think of policies and laws as forms of control. They think that if politicians/parties want certain outcomes then they just need to set up policies/laws that will produce that outcome. And if some desirable outcome didn't come about, that's because the politician/party didn't actually want to make it happen (to be explained by them being greedy, or evil, etc). But there's no such means of directly controlling what happens and making an outcome happen. Policies and laws are only instruments of influence, and there is usually a lot of limitations on the influence that they can exert (as well as unintended consequences of them).</p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-69060565670023817622020-11-24T04:37:00.000+10:002020-11-24T04:37:14.971+10:00A more trustworthy way of asserting which claims are supported by the evidence<p><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "Trebuchet MS", Trebuchet, Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4px;">This post is a preliminary attempt to express the following ideas.</span></p><p>We need evidence to determine whether a claim is true or not.</p><p>But in our society, claims are judged mostly not on evidence, but by who is making the claim.</p><p>Is the claim being made by an expert in the field? By a scientist? Or by some random person on the internet? Is the claim being made by a journalist? How experienced is this person? Are they a junior person, or a senior person, in their area? What is their reputation? Are they a nobel prize winner? Is the claim coming from a recognised organisation within that area (e.g. a nutritional claim from "The National Nutritional Board").</p><p>In principle, judging a claim based on the characteristics of who is making the claim (like whether they are a recognised expert on the topic) is using those characteristics as a proxy for the evidence for or against that claim. We assume that, for example, an expert knows the relevant evidence, and is able to form sound judgments on the basis of it.</p><p>However, judging claims based on who made them can be fairly unreliable.</p><p>Someone's status is not necessarily a good indicator of their knowledge or capability. One reason for this is that status tends to have a political element to it. And having more experience doesn't necessarily make someone a better judge of a topic. It might mean they are stuck in old ways of thinking, and unable or unwilling to see new ideas that challenge those ways.</p><p>What people or organisations claim is often influenced by political concerns. They aren't necessarily putting truth first.</p><p>If the science on the topic isn't settled, then different experts will have differing opinions, and it won't be reasonable to justify any <b>particular</b> claim based on the fact that a particular expert believes it's true. In such cases, there won't be evidence showing that a claim is true, so the 'who' (the expert) isn't a proxy for the evidence, but really a proxy for their opinion.</p><p>There can be mature fields containing beliefs that are agreed by pretty much everyone in that field, but where there isn't actually good evidence for the belief. It's just that everyone in the field is taking it for granted. (I believe that, historically, this has not been uncommon).</p><p><br /></p><p>We may recognise the limitations of judging claims by who made them, but at the same time believe that doing so is our only practical option. No one has the time or ability to learn about every field and evaluate the evidence in it. We must defer to the experts.</p><p>While there is a lot of truth to that, there is more nuance to the matter than this. </p><p>As explained above, there are many situations where there is no good evidence, so we can't really judge claims about them based on who made them.</p><p>Instead of feeling compelled to make a judgment in such cases, we should recognise that we usually do not need to make one. The only time we actually need to make a judgment is when we need to make some decision that requires making a judgment. If we're not in such a situation, we can remain agnostic about the issue.</p><p>And, I believe there's a better option that just deferring to what an expert claims.</p><p><br /></p><p>The problems that 'judging claims by who made them' addresses is our lack of time and knowledge for evaluating claims. I want to suggest there is another way to address those problems.</p><p>Instead of just saying "an authority claims X", we can try to make the evidence and reasoning involved transparent, and in a fashion that opens-up the hierarchical structure of the evidence and reasoning behind the claims. We can include information about the vetting of the claims alongside the claims themselves. I'll get into the reason why I think this is a better approach.</p><p><br /></p><p>Granted, it won't always be possible to articulate the evidence and reasoning, such as for knowledge that is based on experience. But there are plenty of areas where the evidence and reasoning can be made explicit, such as in science.</p><p>Isn't what I'm talking about already to be found in academic papers? No, I'm thinking about a very different way of presenting the information.</p><p>Central to what I'm thinking of is that the information should be organised around claims, and their hierarchical structure should be made explicit. The hierarchy of a claim's sub-claims is shown. Each sub-claim is itself treated like a claim in that it has its own page and we can see its hierarchy of sub-claims, as well as the reasoning and evidence supporting it, and information about its vetting by experts (such as pointing out problems with the evidence).</p><p>I am <b>not</b> talking about formalising knowledge, like using some sort of formal language/notation to specify the knowledge. I'm not talking about using some sort of mathematical means to evaluate the correctness of claims. I don't think that's possible (maybe one day, but not now). I am talking about expressing them in ordinary language. But, structuring it in a way that makes explicit the hierarchy of claims and sub-claims, and which makes explicit what are the sources of evidence for each.</p><p>These claim hierarchies should be made available in a publicly-accessible location, perhaps a website akin to Wikipedia but for claims.</p><p>Academic papers don't make the claim hierarchies explicit, and usually the evidence and reasoning for a particular claim will be distributed across several papers. And when viewing a paper you can't see a particular sub-claim and, alongside that, see information about the vetting of that claim.</p><p><br /></p><p>By making the claim structure explicit like this, it "opens up" the elements of the justification in a way that facilitates more systematic vetting of claim structure, and providing information about its vetting.</p><p>Each claim/sub-claim is a thing that can be referenced. It has a name and a URL. It's not just something implicit within some paragraphs of text. It is a thing that can be drawn out and considered just on its own. That facilitates vetting each individual claim/sub-claim, and provides a place where information about its vetting (e.g. which experts have vetted it) can be stored. This information could also include details of any disagreements with those details.</p><p>Having the structure of the claim hierarchy being opened up like this would facilitate a more distributed process of vetting its details. It could be examined in a more piecemeal fashion. Someone could examine just a particular sub-claim. Different people could look at different sub-claims. Anyone could examine any sub-claim.</p><p><br /></p><p>The problems that 'judging claims by who made them' addresses are the lack of time and knowledge for evaluating claims. </p><p>I think the design I've laid out would have superior properties for this. Non-experts could look at just the top-level claim (without having to look into the details about the sub-claims), and see that has been vetted, and see any mention about issues within the sub-claim hierarchy. This information would be more trustworthy than the information that an expert has made the claim -- it would be a more reliable indicator of the truth.</p><p>Why would it be more trustworthy? Here are some reasons.</p><p>The details are more out in the open, presented in a way that's more suited for vetting, and the details of that vetting are out in the open, alongside the claims.</p><p>Because information about vetting (including any disagreements) is there as part of the claim hierarchy, there is better communication of this vetting information. It will ensure it can get more eyeballs.</p><p>Information about issues with any sub-claim can be propagated up the hierarchy of claims. So that, for example, if it's a major issue, it can be seen when viewing the top-level claim.</p><p>We can trust that the judgments reached on it (that are included along with the claim hierarchy) will be based more on the evidence and reasoning about the evidence. By having to explicitly break down a claim into a hierarchy of sub-claims, it forces more of a focus on evidence and reasoning about that evidence. And when the vetting that is made explicit is similarly broken down (addressing specific sub-claims independently of the other details), it again forces more of a focus upon the evidence and reasoning about that evidence. It will be more difficult to 'get away with' making claims that aren't grounded in evidence.</p><p><br /></p><p>The above is just the basic picture of this idea. There would be many details to work out in practice. And though, for the reasons given above, I think such a system would likely be superior overall, that's not to say it wouldn't introduce its own kinds of issues. One last caveat is that I'm not trying to suggest that such a system would magically fix all issues to do with judging claims, I'm only suggesting that it would be an improvement over what we currently have.</p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-66860966353190389752020-11-23T10:57:00.001+10:002020-11-23T10:57:09.696+10:00Blaspheming is about challenging the suppressive nature of blasphemy codes<p>Blasphemy often gets framed as causing offence and hurting people's feelings. Seen in these terms, things like drawing certain cartoons seems to be going out of one's way to cause harm. Defending such acts seems to be defending something that's intentionally causing offence and hurting people's feelings.</p><p>But blasphemy codes are means of maintaining power and control within a society. They're a way of suppressing alternative and dissenting viewpoints.</p><p>Whenever religions have had the power to do so within a society, they've always (or nearly always) tried to suppress alternative and dissenting viewpoints. Blasphemy codes are a major part of how they have done this.</p><p>In some societies, the religions have lost a lot of their power and are no longer able to suppress viewpoints like they used to. In other societies, they still wield this sort of power.</p><p>The ruling powers in the society can wield blasphemy codes to suppress. Also, the people in the society can wield those powers, against minority groups, such as people of other religions or atheists. Blasphemy codes also provide a convenient excuse for punishing people, by making trumped-up charges of blasphemy.</p><p>People get brought up to believe that utterances outside of certain bounds should make them feel deeply offended and angry, and that if someone says such utterances this means they should be severely punished. These people have been brainwashed into responding this way.</p><p>It is a great thing when a society has moved beyond blasphemy codes, and where its citizens are afforded greater freedom of thought and speech. Yet certain religions wish to impose their blasphemy codes upon <b>all</b> societies -- with the threat of violent reprisal for any violation of those codes.</p><p>This creates a conflict. Which is more important? Freedom of thought and speech, or the power of blasphemy codes? For the reasons given above, I think that blasphemy codes are morally bad things, and freedom of thought and speech are morally good things. I think it is a bad thing to tacitly validate and condone blasphemy codes, by accepting that everyone should be beholden to them. Thus, when religion has made the opening move of saying "you must follow our blasphemy code", we should support people's freedom to respond with a violation of that code.</p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-7318605921149020902020-11-23T09:50:00.005+10:002020-11-23T09:50:59.738+10:00Online moderation should be logged for transparency<p>There's no transparency in online moderation. On discussion sites like Reddit and Hacker News, in online discussion forums, and things like Facebook groups, moderators can delete comments and remove users without any transparency. There's no way to see who/what was removed, or why that action was taken.</p><p>No transparency means no accountability for the moderators. Moderators are just ordinary people, with all the usual biases, pettiness, ideological zeal, and other flaws. There's no accountability that stops them from removing content and users for reasons other than them violating the group's rules. E.g. because it disagrees with their political views.</p><p>This is not good. I think moderation should be logged. The logging should record the specific comments that led to the content/user being removed, and perhaps an indication of which rule(s) were violated. It should be possible for anyone to view the record of moderation. That record should probably be read-only -- as in, users shouldn't be able to comment on the logs, as that would probably (I think) lead to endless cycles of disputes. </p><p>I think this is more important than it seems. I suspect that more and more of our social and civil lives will end up being conducted online through things like these forums. If that happens, a lack of moderation transparency will become a larger problem, and could have serious consequences for people's lives.</p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-5726613339309187632020-11-23T09:17:00.000+10:002020-11-23T09:17:16.433+10:00Collaborative 'summary of useful points' for Reddit/Hacker News kinds of posts<p>Sites like Reddit and Hacker news are made up of posts, and each post is about some topic and contains a discussion thread about that topic.</p><p>The idea I want to talk about would probably be most suited to certain types of posts, not all posts. It'd be suited to posts like those about news stories, where the discussion threads usually contain a lot of interesting information that fleshes out the picture of the story.</p><p>That interesting information tends to be lost amongst a lot of "noise". It'd be quite useful to have a condensed summary of all the useful information dispersed throughout the thread. I could imagine the post having two tabs. A 'thread' tab (shown by default) and a 'summary of useful points' tab.</p><p>Is there a way we can incentivise the collaborative work of constructing this "summary of useful points"? And have a sufficiently simple design?</p><p><br /></p><p>The following are two ideas for how it could be done. These may not be suitable, but they're at least starting points for thinking about the problem.</p><p>The first idea is to allow users to add bullet points, where each one contains a 'useful point' summary, and for these to be voted on, where their number of votes controls whether they're shown as part of the summary of useful points.</p><p>Notes</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>limit on the size of the bullet points. Perhaps 280 characters, like tweets.</li><li>if a bullet point has had more than, say, 20 votes, and is in the negative, then it will be hidden (though there's a link to view the hidden items).</li><li>let the users link a bullet point to the bits of text in the discussion thread that originally made the point. The UI details of this are beyond the scope of this post.</li></ul><p></p><p><br /></p><p>The other idea is that the summary of useful points is updated via a 30 minute cycle that involves a number of phases:</p><p></p><ol style="text-align: left;"><li>10 minute phase where anyone can suggest changes to the current summary. Each is limited to 280 characters. People can vote on these suggestions.</li><li>10 minute phase where anyone can write a new summary. They can use the pool of suggestions to help them decide what changes they want to make to the current summary.</li><li>10 minute phase where the new summaries are anonymously shown for voting. When viewing a new summary, users can see a diff of it compared to the current summary.</li><li>The top voted summary (if it passes a critical threshold of votes) becomes the new summary, and the cycle repeats.</li></ol><p></p><p>Notes</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>users can have the thread highlight new comments added since last time the summary was updated. There could be buttons to navigate to next/prev new comment. </li><li>users can view history of changes to the summary.</li><li>the summary tab would show a representation of the update cycle and indicate where it currently is in the cycle. </li></ul><p></p><p><br /></p><p>Could there be other possibilities? Could there be something that doesn't involve any threaded discussion at all?</p><p>Perhaps you could have a system that cycles between two phases. One is where there's a discussion thread. The next is where that content is condensed into a summary. Then this is summary is a seed for further discussion, and then the current summary plus the new discussion is condensed to form the new summary, and so on. At the end of each cycle only the summary is kept (the comments are effectively discarded -- though perhaps a read-only view of them can be accessed).</p><p>.</p><p>Related</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>I believe Stack Overflow originally wanted to have a feature a bit like this, but that doesn't seem to have panned out. Would be worth investigating.</li><li>Are there any other systems or designs doing something similar to these ideas?</li><li>Back in 2005 I wrote <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2005/03/slasdot-article-summaries.html">Slashdot Article Summaries?</a>, which was a more basic take on the ideas outlined in the present post.</li></ul><p></p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-92032319584556574952020-11-22T04:11:00.003+10:002020-11-30T12:27:15.017+10:00How to help learners develop the subconscious knowledge that is the substance of our understanding<p>This post is a preliminary attempt to express some ideas about how to teach knowledge.</p><p>I imagine these ideas wouldn't always be applicable. To apply them you'd probably need to have a very good grasp on the material you want to teach, and you don't always have that (especially for difficult topics). It also seems like it'd be much more difficult to apply for more abstract knowledge.</p><p>Even though this post is itself an attempt to convey some knowledge, it doesn't follow its own dictates, for the two reasons given above.</p><p><br /></p><p>We can distinguish between subconscious and conscious parts of our knowledge. The conscious parts of our knowledge are the parts you can consciously access. You can interrogate them with introspection, and they're what you can verbalise. There's also the subconscious knowledge that underlies those consciously-accessible details.</p><p>Think about what that knowledge enables a person to do. It may let them think about certain topics, draw certain conclusions, solve certain problems and so on. What we can verbally articulate of that knowledge is likely to be a pale shadow what is actually there in our brains that enable us to do all those things. There's a lot of subconscious knowledge that we can't consciously interrogate or articulate.</p><p>This subconscious knowledge is a big part of why AI and robotics is so difficult. Sophisticated AI or robotic systems would need to embody such knowledge, but we don't have a good enough grasp on such knowledge to be able to embody it (or much of it) in such systems.</p><p>The conscious knowledge, which we can verbalise, seems to "sit on top of" the subconscious knowledge, which is the foundation and main substance of our knowledge.</p><p>The subconscious knowledge seems to be what we primarily use when we actually apply the knowledge. When we're applying knowledge we're usually not explicitly thinking it through in verbal terms, and we couldn't verbalise those details if we wanted to.</p><p>Our understanding of the conscious knowledge (the knowledge we can verbalise) is grounded in the subconscious knowledge. We can create verbal definitions of concepts that are in our conscious knowledge, but our understanding of those concepts is primarily a matter of our subconscious knowledge. It is notoriously difficult to articulate your understanding of the meaning of concepts.</p><p><br /></p><p>Despite this, it's easy to think that our knowledge equates to our conscious knowledge. For that's the knowledge that we can access. When we consider our conscious knowledge (for something we understand well), there's no obvious deficits to it. We can define the concepts that form it in terms of other concepts, and these in terms of other concepts, and so on. In this way, we can break down verbal descriptions of the knowledge into simpler and simpler elements. Once we've described the simplest concepts related to the top-level concepts for this bit of knowledge, we seem to have completed the task. Those simplest concepts seem to ground that task of describing the concepts.</p><p>But actually, as described above, there is subconscious knowledge underlying our understanding of all of those concepts in that hierarchy. It is <b>because</b> we have that subconscious knowledge that we can look at that description of the hierarchy of concepts in conscious knowledge and understand them. It's because of that subconscious knowledge that there doesn't appear to be anything missing when we describe the conscious knowledge.</p><p><br /></p><p>Typically, when knowledge is presented in material like lectures, lecture notes, and textbooks, the focus is on communicating the conscious (verbalisable) knowledge. The overarching structure is to define the concepts. Within this structure there may be illustrations (examples) and exercises.</p><p>This is a problem because the subconscious knowledge is the substance of understanding. That's what we really want people to learn. Teaching them in a way that's focused around defining concepts is not a good way to get them to develop that subconscious knowledge.</p><p>While the person doing the teaching will already have the subconscious knowledge to understand those definitions, the learners will not. That makes it difficult for the learners to learn the conscious knowledge. And it's not what they should be learning in the first place -- the learning should be focused on them developing the subconscious knowledge.</p><p>This limitation of the teaching material won't be apparent to the teacher, because they already have the subconscious knowledge that makes the definitions understandable to them. (The distinction between conscious and subconscious knowledge, by the way, explains a lot of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge">"the curse of knowledge"</a>, in which someone who understands some material is poor at communicating it because they can't see what it's like for someone who doesn't already understand the material).</p><p><br /></p><p>But there's an obvious question here. What other option do we have but to try to communicate our conscious knowledge as best we can? By definition, we can't access our subconscious knowledge.</p><p>(We can't access it via introspection, nor do have knowledge of it from fields like neuroscience. We don't understand enough about how our brains work. If we were to eventually obtain such knowledge in an area like neuroscience, that might help in developing learning strategies, but it's not like if we could give someone a description of the subconscious knowledge they could learn it by reading that description.)</p><p>What I'm suggesting is not that we could or should try to directly communicate the subconscious knowledge. It is that the aim of the teaching should be, first and foremost, to present material to the learners that will best help them <b>develop</b> the subconscious knowledge. And this is not to present them the verbalisable conscious knowledge (definitions of concepts).</p><p><br /></p><p>Here's how I think we can help people develop the subconscious knowledge.</p><p>The key is to recognise that knowledge is a problem-solving tool.</p><p>I mean "problem" and "problem solving" in very broad terms. I don't mean just things we'd usually label as problems or problem-solving. I mean that knowledge is there to help us do things. To figure things out, to achieve goals, to understand some issue, to draw conclusions, and so on.</p><p>Under the view that knowledge is a problem-solving tool, the bulk of our knowledge, which is the subconscious knowledge, is there for solving problems.</p><p>That means, to help learners develop the subconscious knowledge, we need to convey to them what the problems being solved are, and how the knowledge solves those problems.</p><p>The problem provides the motivation for the particular bit of knowledge. It lets the learner understand what that knowledge is there to enable. And we can show them <b>how</b> that knowledge solves the problem.</p><p>So we should always start with a motivating problem, and then present the relevant concept(s) for solving that problem. We should never introduce a concept without having first presented a motivating problem.</p><p><br /></p><p>We should start with the most core of the problems and concepts. To do this, we can examine dependencies between the problems (and thus between their corresponding concepts). Those that don't depend on others are core ones. Ones that depend on others are not core ones. There may be multiple levels of non-core concepts.</p><p>And, we want to start with the simplest version of each problem/concept, and then progressively add wrinkles (special cases, or exception to the general rules) to those.</p><p>We should convey those details through concrete example scenarios that <b>demonstrate</b> the relevant issues we want to communicate (the problem and the means to solve it). And we should use a use a variety of situations to flesh out the learner's picture of them.</p><p>After we've demonstrated the problem and solution to the learner, such they have a concrete understanding, we can provide the <b>names</b> for the relevant concepts in that understanding. We should not provide their names until this point. </p><p>It's less of a mental burden on the learner to do it this way. If you present the concept names up-front, the learners need to remember a name for something they don't yet understand.</p><p><br /></p><p>The goal is to help the learner develop an understanding of the material. Teaching that's focused on concept definitions isn't communicating the bulk of an understanding (the subconscious knowledge). That sort of teaching puts more of a burden on the students' memories. The 'learning' becomes more of a matter of memorising and regurgitating information. The more extreme version of this is the "information dump". And not only is this the way students are taught material, but this broken picture of learning is built-into how students tend to be assessed, as well. So much assessment is oriented around recall of the conscious (verbal) knowledge. Like being able to remember facts and definitions.</p><p>If you can teach in a way that focuses on developing the student's understanding, it should put much less of a burden on their memory. Understanding will fix the relevant subconscious details in their heads.</p><p><br /></p><p>The approach just outlined may seem inferior to the usual approach of describing the verbalisable knowledge (defining concepts).</p><p>Compared to presenting concrete problem scenarios first, as motivations for concepts, the usual approach of defining concepts may feel far more orderly, pure, objective and precise. Our approach may seem messier, less objective, and getting less at the heart of the knowledge.</p><p>I believe this is an illusion, that primarily comes from equating knowledge with the consciously-accessible, verbalisable knowledge. If you think knowledge equates to defining concepts, then defining concepts will appear to be how we should teach knowledge. But if you think that knowledge is primarily the subconscious knowledge, then we see the task differently.</p><div><br /></div><p>Here's a brief example outlining how these ideas could be applied. It's not an example of the actual teaching material we'd present, but a high-level description of what such teaching material would contain.</p><p>This example concerns teaching people about relational databases. Unfortunately, if you're not familiar with relational databases, the following might not make a lot of sense. I chose them as a topic because they're something I have a bit of familiarity with, with respect to teaching about them.</p><p>The first thing we'd do is determine how 'core' each of the problems (and associated concepts) are. We'll use this information to determine what order to introduce them to the learners. We want to start first with the most core of the problems.</p><p>The most core problem that databases address is storing information. There's retrieving information, but first of all you need to store the information. And the most core problem to do with storing information that relational databases are designed to address is to do with unambiguous identification of information and the associated issue of redundancy of information. </p><p>So we would start with some example scenarios that concretely demonstrate these problems. I'll go into some details of this in a moment.</p><p>After those problems associated with storing information, the next most core problem is that of retrieving information. Like of wanting to get different sorts of 'answers' about what is there in the stored information.</p><div><div>Retrieving information is less core than the first problem of dealing with redundancy, as the first problem has to do with storing the information, which needs to be done before we can retrieve information.</div><div><br /></div><div>Perhaps the next most central problem is the need to be able to design a database to fit some situation. The sorts of situations we might face, and how we want to develop a design that avoids the redundancy potentially present in the information there.</div><div><br /></div><div>Then there are many less core problems, associated with various more advanced or specific details that could be gone into after those.</div><div><br /></div><div>(As an example of more specific details, in relation to database design there is the point that the abundance of Nulls in a table often indicates poor design. For the motivation for this we would provide an example demonstrating the issue. There's also issues like efficiency, accessing database information from within programs, security, and so on).</div><div><br /></div><div>Now that we've determined how core each of the problems (and their associated concepts are), we know what order to present them to the learners, and we can figure out the details of how to present them. In the following, I'll go into more detail about how we could teach the knowledge associated with that first set of core problems, to do with storing the information. I won't go into similar detail for the other problems.</div></div><p><br /></p><p>We could start by giving some example scenarios of information that may be stored. I.e. we would write down some of the information that might be stored. One of these might be information that a shop keeps about customers' purchase histories.</p><p>Then we would introduce the relevant concept names, like 'entity', 'field', 'table', and 'columns'.</p><p>We could give a couple more illustrations to help reinforce the concept names.</p><p><br /></p><p>Then we could give some example scenarios that demonstrate the problem of being able to determine which real-world entity some information is about.</p><p>There could be an example of where there's customer information and where there's issues of determining which actual person the customer information is about.</p><p>For example, there are entries about customers and their purchases, which have the following customer names:</p><p>- Edward Henderson</p><p>- Ed Henderson</p><p>- E Henderson</p><p>it could be that the one employee added all of these bits of information, and they remember who these entries refer to (perhaps they all refer to the same person). But maybe they will forget these details in a few months. Or maybe a different employee is looking at the data and trying to figure out who each of those entries refers to. Is it the same person, or different people?</p><div>Being able to determine which person the information is about is important for being able to find all the information about a particular person. That may be just to see that information, or it may be for if we need to change that information (e.g. if that person decides to change their name, and we want to change all occurrences of their name that we've stored) or something associated with it.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Then we can give example scenarios demonstrating that, by ensuring that all entities have a unique identity, these problems are avoided. We can illustrate some of the different ways entities can have unique identity (e.g. a combination of existing fields they might have, or giving them a new field like an identification number).</div><p><br /></p><p>Then we can illustrate why it is that information about the same entity may occur multiple times in the information we've stored.</p><p>In our example we can see it's because the one customer may make multiple purchases (on different days). So we record information about that customer for each of those purchases.</p><p>We can give other examples to show that each time an entity occurs multiple times, it's because it is related in some way to multiple instances of some other kind of entity (e.g. if a library tracks all the book borrowings of a person, that person will occur once for each borrowing).</p><p>After having illustrated this concept, we can introduce the name 'one-to-many relationship' for it.</p><p><br /></p><p>We can present scenarios that demonstrate that where there's one-to-many relationships and there's duplication of data (like if for each purchase we stored the customers first and last names and postcode) we run into problems similar to the ones we mentioned at the start where the person's name was entered multiple times and potentially spelled in multiple different ways. Difficulties in finding all the cases you want, and in updating them, and where errors can be introduced.</p><p>Then we can show examples illustrating how this problem can be addressed by having a separate table for the 'one' entities (like customer), where all the information about the 'one' entities is stored. We've established that each entity should have unique identifier (say that each customer is given a 5 digit identifier). Thus we can just include this identifier in the 'many' table (purchases) and not have to include any other information about the customer in the purchases table.</p><p>So the only customer information that gets duplicated is its identity. The identity is something that shouldn't change, so we don't have the issues of needing to make changes to all occurrences of that same information (but even still, since it is unique, we can have the software easily find all instances of it and thus change them if we needed to).</p><p><br /></p><p>Once we have a table that's just for the 'one' entities (in one-to-many relationships), the computer software can do things automatically for us</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>check that each entity has a unique identity (and not let us add one that doesn't have a unique identity)</li><li>check that a reference to an identity (in a 'many' table) is to one that actually exists (actually, and also that it's of the right type of entity, as we'll get to).</li><li>we can also set up the software to automatically create a unique identity (like an ID number) for new entities </li></ul><p></p><div>(Having a separate table for the 'one' entity in a 'one-to-many relationship' creates issue of having to cross reference the customer table if we're looking at a purchase and want to find out details about the customer (like their postcode), which adds some complexity, but later we'll see how the software can automate this).</div><div><br /></div><div><div><br /></div><div>After having illustrated these details about identities, and referencing identities where there's one-to-many relationships, we can introduce the following names for the concepts</div><div>- primary keys (what uniquely identities entities)</div><div>- foreign keys (the references to these entities)</div></div><div><br /></div><div><div>To reinforce the understanding of these concepts we've just named, we would then further illustrate them with examples.</div></div><p>.</p><p>Related: <a href="http://explorerstreet.blogspot.com/2008/05/being-able-to-explicitly-reason-about.html">Being able to explicitly reason about a concept is a skill</a>. That post argues that learning how to reason about a concept is learning a skill, which means it requires practice. That relates to the present post in that when you provide the concrete scenarios presenting the problems and how the concepts can be used to solve them, you want to present multiple varied scenarios such that the learner can practice seeing things in these terms. And you'd want to give them exercises to do along the way, and feedback, as well.</p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-5472046802597277092020-11-18T04:27:00.002+10:002020-11-18T04:29:38.473+10:00News media present a misleading view of what arguments and knowledge are<p>An argument is meant to be a way to arrive as close to the truth as we can. It's a way of arriving at knowledge.</p><p>If parties disagree on some topic, and we want to evaluate their arguments, we need to consider questions like:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>for this topic, what are the relevant considerations for evaluating an argument?</li><li>what is the evidence at hand?</li><li>how do each of the parties' claims stand up to reason and evidence?</li></ul><p></p><p>But when media outlets present disagreements, they generally do so in a "he said, she said" fashion. They just present the claims, without evaluating them. They don't ask questions to dig deeper, to try to get at the truth.</p><p>This lets parties game the system. If a politician knows that their arguments will be uncritically presented, then they won't treat the disagreement as an argument, but as a PR game.</p><p>The way the media presents arguments involves an implicitly <b>relativist</b> view of arguments and knowledge. In this view, there isn't objective truth or knowledge. The most fundamental details presented are just what different people say. There is no evaluating those claims, because there's no notion of truth implicit in this view of arguments.</p><p>The media is a major source of the arguments that people see. The view of arguments and knowledge that it presents informs people's model of the nature of arguments and knowledge.</p><p>The "he said, she said" view makes arguments and knowledge appear relativist, and as things that don't involve reason and evidence.</p>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-4826420204279599662020-11-18T03:01:00.002+10:002020-11-18T03:02:12.494+10:00"Be kind because you never know what someone is going through" is a nice sentiment but fairly useless advice<p>You might have heard the advice "Be kind, because you never know what someone is going through". I think that's a nice sentiment, but at the same time I think that, as advice, it's pretty useless.</p><p>This advice is meant to apply to situations where you might negatively judge someone. Perhaps they seem grumpy, or scruffy, or vague, or are exhibiting some other negative behavior or trait.</p><p>The advice sounds good -- instead of jumping to conclusions about that person, acknowledge that they might have some hidden struggles that are causing them to be that way. By following this advice you can be more compassionate.</p><p>But I think the advice is fairly useless in practice, in that it doesn't make people more compassionate.</p><div><div>It's predicated on the idea that people observe the behavior of the other person, and <b>then</b> formulate a negative judgment of the person. The advice is meant to short-circuit the second-step of that process.</div><div><br /></div><div>Forming that negative judgment is in effect developing an explanation of the reason for the person's behavior: they're acting that way because they're <i>a jerk</i>, or <i>a loser</i>. The explanation is usually that there's some defect in the person's character.</div><div><br /></div><div>But I don't think that two-step process (perceive, then draw conclusions) exists in reality. In reality, people's observations <b>are</b> the judgments. They perceive a person who is <i>a jerk</i>, <i>a lazy arsehole</i>, or <i>a grumpy mofo</i>. Their perception inherently contains the explanation. And that explanation appears to them to be an objective part of what they're observing.</div><div><br /></div><div>The advice to "Be kind, because you never know what someone is going through" requires you to think that you don't actually know what the cause of someone's behavior is. But in real life we tend to always think we do, objectively, know why the person is behaving in that way (<i>because they're a jerk</i>, and so on).</div></div><div><br /></div><div><div>We might appreciate the point about being kind <i>in the abstract</i>, but we're not likely to think it applies in the cases where it actually does.</div><div><br /></div><div>What would better advice look like? It would acknowledge that our perceptions inherently involve explanations of what is being perceived, and that doing this is the problem.</div><div><br /></div><div>It might look something like the following (but ideally more concise and punchy): Remember that, though your perceptions of people seem objective, your brain is subconsciously making assumptions about people's character in order to explain their behavior, and these assumptions can be wrong. Their behavior might not be because of their character, but because of what they're going through.</div></div>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5710137.post-35863593251173873732020-11-18T01:24:00.001+10:002020-11-18T01:24:25.521+10:00Example of a lightweight workflow that the OS would ideally support<p>Work at the computer often requires the user to undertake repetitive patterns of actions. So there's an implicit workflow to the user's activities. Ideally, the Operating System (OS) would support such workflows, to lessen the amount of repetitive busywork the user needs to do.</p><p>Here's an example of the kind of lightweight workflow I'd like an OS to be able to support. I'll leave questions of how such workflows could be supported to future posts.</p><p>This workflow is from a university tutoring job, where I was marking some assessments. (For my own reference, these were weekly labs in a database subject at JCU).</p><p>There was a spreadsheet with assessment-related information (like listings of each tutor's students), an online system (Blackboard) that students submitted their assessments to and to which their marks were added, and I kept a notes file where I kept a copy of my feedback on assessments before uploading them along with the marks.</p><p>For each of my students in the spreadsheet, I would</p><p></p><ol style="text-align: left;"><li>copy their name from the spreadsheet</li><li>paste their name as heading in my notes file</li><li>search for their name in Blackboard</li><li>click on the link for their submitted assessment</li><li>scroll down to the bottom of the page</li><li>click on the relevant items to download their assessment</li><li>open that assessment (e.g. in Microsoft Word)</li><li>check their assessment against the solution I'd printed out</li><li>write my feedback in the notes file</li><li>go back to the Blackboard page for the student's assessment, enter their mark, and copy and paste my feedback from my notes file.</li><li>click on the 'x's on that page multiple times to get back to the list of the student assessments</li><li>that listing will have scrolled back to the top of the list, so I'd have to find the student name's again</li><li>click on the link next to the student's name to post their mark, and click the confirmation</li><li>go back to the spreadsheet and note down that I've completed marking off this student.</li></ol><p></p><div>These tasks involved so much switching between applications. Many of the steps involved moving the mouse pointer to a particular place on the screen. So much of the activity was: switch to this app, for step X, move the mouse pointer to the place for step X, do one or more actions, switch to this other app, move the mouse pointer to the place for the next step (or the net part of the current step), and so on. There was much repetitive tedium. There has to be a better way.</div><div><div><br /></div><div>Of course, it would be possible to write a single application that encapsulates this entire process and which streamlines it all. But there is a general need to support workflows that involve multiple different applications, like in this case, and the question I have is, how can such workflows be best supported on the Operating System level?</div></div>Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13957835772322921101noreply@blogger.com0