Wednesday, August 30, 2006

On Narrative: story and discourse

  1. In the Introduction to Story and Discourse, Chatman quotes Claude Bremond, who says: “Any sort of narrative message… may be transposed from one to another medium without losing its essential properties: the subject of a story may serve as argument for a ballet, that of a novel, can be transposed to stage or screen, one can recount in words a film to someone who has not seen it.” Chatman goes on to suggest that “transposability of the story is the strongest reason for arguing that narratives are indeed structures independent of any medium”.

    Choose a narrative that has been expressed in both an interactive and a non-interactive medium, for example the game Tomb Raider and the movie Lara Croft: Tomb Raider. Discuss how the transposition to/from interactive media has changed the narrative. Has the structure of the narrative remained intact?

In most movie-turned games, most narrative is conserved insofar as certain kernel events, settings and existents are maintained. However, the user is inserted in particular points of the narrative structure that allows for some freedom of play. This “freedom” is also restricted by the rules of the game. In this, there is some element of self-regulation. The user is not allowed to make decisions that will drastically change the course of the narrative.

When I was thinking of an example to cite, many of the typical movie-turned-games came to mind. But as we were in lecture on Tuesday I was reminded of Indiana Jones when we were talking about “different stories, same plot”.

Then the “primitive” Atari/LucasArt era came to mind and I remembered the really prehistoric arcade games made during the 80s of the Indian Jones movies. The one I most recall has to be Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Most of you would probably remember that one because of that scene with the live throbbing heart.

Anyway, in that game, developed by Atari in 1985, the general plot is the same as the movie. The mission for Indy remains the same. But while the game tries to preserve the settings and some characters, the theme of the game, being one of those old scrolling adventures, fails to capture much of the movie’s original narrative. Indy does still carry that whip, fears bats and snakes, and his ultimate goal is still to stop Mola Ram (harharhar!).

Like most arcade games of the time, they were not so interested in preserving the narrative as they were in providing some short-lived entertainment. Thus narrative structure was not very much preserved, save for the characters and some settings.

  1. Chatman observes that “whether… the author elects to order the reporting of events according to their causal sequence or to reverse them in a flashback effect – only certain possibilities can occur… Of course certain events or existents that are not immediately relevant maybe brought in. But at some point their relevance must emerge, otherwise we object that the narrative is ‘ill-formed.’” This is the notion of self-regulation.

    Interactive media allows for choice and control on the part of the reader/user. What problem does this raise for self-regulation? What, if anything, does this suggest about designing interactive narrative?

Let’s think about the piece of “interactive narrative” as a game, to make this easier. A large part of game design in my opinion is really in predicting what the user would do when playing the game. In order to maintain some integrity of the narrative I think, would require a complex of rules and boundaries in which the user can move freely within and play, yet control the ultimate outcome. (or, produce a number of outcomes)

For example, in the example cited in class – text-based H2G2 by infocom – largely follows the narrative of the book closely, yet allows the user to freely attempt to play around at commands. Yet, while the user can make all kinds of demands of the system, the structure of the narrative is preserved in that settings, kernels and existents are all maintained. Choices made by Arthur Dent thus help propel the story forward but does not change the main bits of it. This is probably my rudimentary example of how a piece of interactive media is somewhat self-regulatory. The game designers left a certain amount of leeway for the user to play with, but set down many rules that help restrict the amount of choice the user has.

  1. Discussing the concept of interpretation, or "filling in the gaps", in narrative, Chatman states that “there is… a class of indeterminacies… that arise from the peculiar nature of the medium. The medium may specialize in certain narrative effects and not others. For instance, the cinema may easily – and does routinely – present characters without expressing the contents of their minds… verbal narrative, on the other hand, finds such restrictions difficult… Conversely, verbal narrative may elect not to present some visual aspect… The cinema, however, cannot avoid a rather precise representation of visual detail.”

    Think of an example of the use of narrative in interactive media. With reference to your example, suggest what the “peculiar nature” of interactive media may be, and which narrative effects it may specialize in.

I’m not really sure since everyone seems to think of this proverbial “peculiar nature” differently. Anyway.

So I was saying I used to play a lot of Resident Evil (the original main series) growing up and sure, it freaked the hell out of a wee girl of a tender young age of 10 thereabouts (blame the brother), but the point I’m making is that, there is a fixed narrative and the plot unfolds as you play the game. But if you can’t get past a particular corridor with that particularly tough zombie dog, you really can’t get anywhere and the story is suspended there until you manage to kill it or run past it really quickly. This I think is one example of a peculiar nature of interactive media.

Saturday, August 19, 2006

On New Media and Interactivity

  1. In “What is New Media?” Lev Manovich proposes 5 principles of new media: numerical representation, modularity, automation, variability, and transcoding. Choose an example that you consider to be “new media”, and describe it in terms of these principles. What implications do these principles have for narrative and play within interactive media?
  2. Manovich questions the usefulness of the term interactivity, suggesting that “once an object is represented in a computer, it automatically becomes interactive. Therefore, to call computer media ‘interactive’ is meaningless – it simply means stating the most basic fact about computers.” In contrast, in “What exactly is Interactivity?” Chris Crawford proposes a much stricter definition of interactivity. Compare these differing views, with reference to your own experience of interactive media systems.
  3. Narrative, interactivity and play – how does Run Lola Run reflect these concerns? How does this relate to Manovich’s concept of transcoding?
Whoot. Long questions. :D My brief responses:

On question 1,

According in Manovich, all media that is computerised is new media. The properties of new media include numerical representation, modularity, automation, variability and transcoding.

A quick read of this chapter on "what is new media" brings upon the obvious example of a digital video (like Run Lola Run). Very easily, it fulfils the 5 principles of new media in that the data is digital (numerical representation), consists of different "layers" i.e. audio, subtitles (modularity), programmed to assemble into a complete piece of media (automated), is scalable/customisable (variability) and can be converted from one readable format to another (transcoding).

In his definition of interactivity, a piece of new media like a digital video is considered "interactive" as a user is able to view the video at time marks specified by the user himself. However, Manovich is quick to qualify that in examples such as digital video, "interactivity" with the user is bound by the aforementioned ideas only, i.e. "menu-based interactivity" that is restricted.

In terms of playing within new media therefore, the very open-minded would say that "play" is thus possible insofar as manipulation of the piece of media is allowed. However, "play" in the orthodox sense, which involves a certain degree of enjoyment as many of us would agree, would not be easily acheived with just Manovich's definition of "interactivity".

However, DVDs for example, usually include special features that the user can choose to view. Sometimes, for example, a user can choose to switch on recorded commentary to the video, changing the experience from just admiring the artistic narrative, to the discourse provided from the perspective of the producer or director, depending on the nature of the commentary. Some cartoon DVDs may also allow viewing of storyboards and raw animations instead of the finished piece, giving some insight into the production of the film, instead of merely appreciating the finished narrative.

In this sense, narrative in new media according to Manovich can be manipulated and "played" with as well.

At the end of it all, how new media affects the user experience really depends on the confines of the media that the user can move around in.

On question 2,

On reading Manovich after reading Crawford's critique of popular commercial loose usage of the word "interactivity", the differences in philosophies become very stark.

In short, it is almost as if Manovich endorses the usage of the word in the light of the refrigerator that swtiches on upon opening the door, the popular anti-thesis example used by Crawford to illustrate what is not interactivity. In his short comments on new media as interactive, Manovich refers to the existence of a user interface that provides the possibility of interactivity. Thus, since in all computerised media there exists a user interface, therefore all computerised media is interactive. He is careful to note though, that psychological interaction is an important element in interactive media.

Simply put, Crawford defines something as interactive if active communication occurs back and forth. In other words, there must be a response, listening, thinking, reacting and thus invoking another response as so on.

However, at the end of Manovich's chapter on "What is new media?", he describes interactive media as having been in existence in paintings, theatre and sculpture in olden days. In this sense, interactivity was used to describe how the work invoked emotions and reactions on the part of the viewer.

Ultimately, my take on this is that what is "interactive" cannot simply be qualified by a number of principles and definitions alone. Just like how our discussions on "what is a narrative" got a mite fuzzy before we distinguished that "discourse" and the "story" were two different elements of narrative.

What is interactive, therefore, should not be limited to definitions set in stone, but should be flexible in its reference.

For example, going by Crawford's definition of interactivity, the article in question must be able to listen, think and respond to elicit a response and so on. Doesn't this then make websites, clickable flash animations and digital videos non-interactive? As well as the "choose your own adventure" books?

Depending on the confines of the definition, the aforementioned media may be difficult to classify.

However, if like in "playing", defining the word "interactivity" is a movement within the boundaries of a number of principles, then as long as one is open-minded enough, many media can in fact be interactive, right?

Say, when you click on a hyperlink, the mechanisms connecting the browser to the new page is considered as "thinking", and the subsequent navigation to other pages constitute "communication".

I think this could go on and on.

On question 3,

Run Lola Run was really entertaining. I like how the opening credits mimicked a game, showing Lola running along some obscure hallway, making deliberate turns at sharp corners.

Even though it was not explicit in its presentation, Run Lola Run was really a big game. Wherein the player (=Lola) makes different decisions to accomplish a certain task.

A fixed narrative ran throughout the movie, in that there was a mission at hand, and it must be accomplished by a certain time.

The decisions made by Lola were confined to the fixed resources that were available to her, and each decision had different consequences. The "game" thus had different reactions to different decisions. Sometimes however, circumstances where variables appeared to be variable always showed a fixed consequence. Say for example, no matter what happened, in the 3 attempts, Mr. Meyer always ended up hitting the white BMW. In other instances, without any change in treatment, variables always changed. For example, the fate of the woman pushing the baby carriage was different each time Lola ran past her.

Wednesday, August 16, 2006

So here's something incredibly inane to think about

Alright alright, I suppose I will give in and write something proper after all. Nyeh.

Hokay. So I don't think I'll get away with just posting up a random comic of mine for the first post since all it really says is that
  1. Liana has too much time on her hands so she spends it doodling on the computer and fooling around with Photoshop,
  2. Liana has a savage sense of humour (and not in the hot British way),
  3. Liana likes bunnies (even if the one Eddy (that's the dog) just met got its head lopped off),
  4. Liana likes to make people (herself) laugh.
So there. But aside from that inane stuff, I'm really a sensible, grounded, insanely logical Biology major entering my honours year. I've barely begun to comprehend this crazy adventure that is the Honours Project I've yet to embark on, but I am somewhat looking forward to the coming year in the Spider Lab and am hoping for the best ("best" being my spiders don't die before I get any results, and "best" also being I survive certain doom that is the thesis.).

Some would say that this pioneer module, Narrative and Play in Interactive Media, ala UAR2205, ala somebody-heard-the-instructor-purchased-several-copies-of-netherwinter-nights-"OMG! I MUST TAKE THIS MODULE!!!", would be wasted on a person like me since I'm not a hard core gamer.

Aside from being forced into appreciating a lot of cartoons like X-men and Transformers, movies like Star Trek (yes, I am a geek so sue me.) and crazy comics like Chaos! Lady Death and the like due to the influence of My Older Brother, as well as playing some Heroes of Might and Magic, Phantasmagoria, Command & Conquer, Resident Evil (damned those zombie dogs) and Metal Gear Solid... I'm pretty much a non-gamer. XD

So yay! That's a succinct introduction of myself (read: that's all you're gonna know *bleah.).

Here's to a great semester ahead in this module :D

Tuesday, August 15, 2006

Test Post