Re: What IS Interactive Fiction? (in short?)


Wed, 25 Oct 1995 23:48:54 +0100

Jim Newland <76461.2144@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
> >What exactly is Int Fiction?
>
> Oh, geez. Here we go again. Well, I'll sum up what we've learned so far: it
> is fiction and it's interactive and it may be art, but then again it may
> not be. Or, more accurately, it can be art but it doesn't have to be
> because it can still be a game, although it doesn't have to be a game since
> there's nothing to prevent it having a serious purpose or even just being a
> book. Well, not a book really, since it's not on paper, but you could print
> it out and then it would be a book--but it wouldn't be interactive then,
> would it? On the other hand, it could be both a game and serious and still
> fall short of being art, but not necessarily, just as not every artful book
> is a game and likewise the other way around.

Ignore this person, he's silly. 8)

Thomas Nilsson (thoni@softlab.se) wrote:
> I'll print this out and make it into a large poster over my bed. I hope
> this classic-to-be definition goes into the FAQ ;-)

Doh! Maybe then (if Jim doesn't mind). Actually I've been thinking of
rewriting the "what is IF?" section of the FAQ on account of the recent
discussions. This is not easy! As Jim has amusingly pointed out either (a)
no-one really knows or (b) everyone knows, but no-one agrees. I hope to
steer away from the confusing and ill-defined term "art", excepting the fact
that IF authorship is surely an artistic pursuit, and concetrate on the
potential of IF as pure entertainment and/or a viable medium for the
expression/communication of "serious" ideas and concepts (and yes, this is
probably as ambiguous as "Is IF art?", but there you go). I would also
emphasise that while, as someone pointed out a while ago, the passive,
non-interactive nature of, say, traditional fiction may allow the author more
direct, personal, and undiluted expression, the interactivity of IF should
allow, theoretically at least, for a more rewarding and personalized
experience for the player, due to the (limited) communication possible
between player and author. IMO IF is not inherently limited as either a
serious or apurely entertainment medium; the major obstacle is the technology
which we currently have. For instance, realistic characters, who act in an
intelligent manner to any give situation, are of course a snip in static F,
as the author knows exactly what is going to happen, or be said to, or asked
of any character at any time -- the author has 1000x4010050lanned and written the
story, what he says goes, and there is no technological difference between
writing about a blob of ice-cream and Captain Ahab; if you have a pencil and
a reasonable combination of knowledge and imagination you can do either. IF
authors, however, don't know the exact course of events that will take place
every time their game is played, they cannot be absolutely sure of what the
player will input, but rather must try to guess every possibility, or at
least the most likely ones, and then try to paint over the cracks (with lame
cop-outs, such as the blanket statement "Ahab doesn't know anything about
that." or "Ahab doesn't seem interested."); the writing of a work of IF is
more of a collaboration between author and player, but the two parties never
actually need have any direct contact with each other. So, while we can code
Ahab to, say, give a decent response to the input "AHAB, TELL ME ABOUT MOBY
DICK" a truly interactive two-way conversation (which is simple in passive F)
is out of the question; current parsers can't do it.

And here I'm going to stop. I seem to have blithered a bit, and I'm probably
becoming irrelevant/indecipherable/wrong. I promise I'll think before I
write for the FAQ. I must just be bored tonight.

-- 
Jools Arnold                                          jools@arnod.demon.co.uk