Final Project: CCA Extension

April 11, 2012 By Leave a Comment

For my final project, I hope to continue work on Colossal Campus Adventure. Aside from extending the story and mechanics further (e.g. new rooms, new inventory system, added syntax, etc) I intend to blend the current platform with features from other Electronic Literature genres. More specifically, I’d like to add hypertext and hyperlinks to support the game structure. The idea here is to allow players to interact with the world via either the command-line parser or through hyperlinked objects which have a default action when clicked or, upon being right clicked, produce a list of other available actions which can be performed.

A key issue with many Interactive Fiction platforms today is building a robust base of acceptable commands / syntax. And even with a perfect platform, some trial and error will still occur as the user attempts to progress through the story. Adding objects to the command prompt as hyperlinks will allow the user to (if he or she so choses) progress through the story by clicking on notable objects listed in the text area of the console. By right clicking these links, a drop-down of some available commands will appear which will be sent to the parser if selected. It should be noted that not all options will be listed. Within the source code for the game, an option to set a command as visible or invisible will allow you to have hidden commands – ensuring your IF maintains its explorative nature.

The question will ultimately be how much content can I add while still providing the above mentioned mechanics. The complexity of making objects hypertext-able (yes… hypertext-able) is fairly complex. It will require a standard syntax structure that the parser can easily recognize. Furthermore, it will require me to make the original source code a little bit more elegant. Either way, if I can accomplish this? Well, it’d be pretty sweet.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , ,

The Face Behind the Façade

March 27, 2012 By 3 Comments

We’ve recently been discussing Façade’s unique meta-media approach to Electronic Literature (as well as its very…  permutable platform).  Yet, to be quite honest, I feel very underwhelmed by our conversations thus far.  Perhaps it’s just me, but I feel there is still so much to say with regard to Façade’s brilliant execution.

To use an old cliché, Façade is nothing if not ambitious. But there is even more to Façade than is immediately apparent.

Whether or not you define Façade as an Interactive Story, a game, or both, one cannot ignore its use of modern game mechanics.  The first person perspective, the tangible in-game items, and the interactive characters are common features in many of today’s more popular games.  What separates Façade from the pack, however, is more than just its inclusion of a parser and a colossal array of input values:  it’s Façade’s commitment to the complexities of virtual reality long since abandoned by the game industry.

I was not surprised to see this image at the bottom of Façade's homepage. In fact, I felt it entirely appropriate.

No, that was not a hasty generalization — there was indeed a time when many game developers shared Michael Mateas’ (co-author of Façade) focus on Immersion and Transformation.  Games like the Petz series of the early 90′s, which Mataes coincidentally promotes at the bottom of Façade’s homepage, strove to produce the same unscripted realism that we encounter in our everyday life.  More so than that, these developers sought to add the same subtle yet very distinct behavioral patterns and personalities now absent in most modern games.

It was unfortunate that the game industry’s rapid climb in commercial viability during the 90′s changed developer’s focus.  The little nuances such as facial expressions, music-accented mood changes, and involved character interaction have taken a back seat to more profitable mechanics like game content and…  well…  more game content.  Of course, the recent rise of game publishers certainly hasn’t helped matters either.

And this brings us to the question I’ve slowly been working to from the start:  is the New York Times correct then in their assertion that Façade is indeed the “future of video games“?  I typically try to open that question up to everyone else, but this time I’ll do that in conjunction with actually answering — and you’re damn right it is.  Façade argues with convincing sound and fury in favor of quality over quantity; it suggests a recognizable value in the culmination of these nuances, and proves that a one-room game with only two characters, no leveling system, no DLC or add-on packs, and no scale of benevolence can still be fun.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , , ,

Interactive Fiction: How Usable?

March 14, 2012 By 1 Comment

In a previous blog entry, I discussed the issue of canonizing Interactive Fiction.  Although we may never fully agree on what should be and what shouldn’t be considered Interactive Fiction, I had concluded at the time of my writing that a reasonable definition was any text-based game with a focus on writing over mechanics.

But as I began working on my creative project submission, the programmer in me noticed a fatal flaw in the design of many widely-accepted IFs:  they lack in what we software developers call usability.  Usability is itself hard to define as well, but you can think of usability as an application’s fluidity.  It asks the questions, “How easy is the application to use?”, “How many mistakes does the user make?”, “How easy is it for the user to remember how (s)he got here?”, and “How many steps does the user take to complete a simple process?”.

Certainly, because Interactive Fiction is explorative in nature, there are some parts of our usability doctrine that do not apply.  The user will make mistakes as he or she tests various input values and it’s hardly like the familiar DOS-style platform asserts a heavy learning curve.  Nevertheless, there are things we can add to our IFs which can improve the user’s experience.

Even Pedit5, one of the first text-based games, included a GUI of sorts.

Among all the mechanics I later considered for Colossal Campus Adventure was the addition of a mini-map.  I realize of course that this would add a very heavy graphical component to a text-strong game.  Still, my experience with Colossal Campus  Adventure taught me that most players can remember about 4-5 various paths at a time.  Beyond that, players will inevitably become lost and get frustrated as they test different direction-oriented inputs in hopes of finding their intended destination.  Although most IF platforms like Inform 7 do not include a map builder in the vanilla download, many plugins have been developed to ease integration of a mini-map into your game.

The monotony of plain white text can make it difficult to grasp the important components of each room's description.

The other primary issue I identified while testing Colossal Campus Adventure was connecting the player to the important descriptions, objects, connections, and so on found in each room.  Inform 7 handles this very well by giving the player one command to see all the intractable objects in plain sight.  Still, what if I wanted to do this within the description of the room?

The easiest solution this problem would be to highlight important parts of the text.  Although I didn’t do so at first, I later added text coloring mechanics to Colossal Campus Adventure in order to highlight the objects and room connections for each area.  Later, however, it occurred to me that I might also steal a mechanic from the Hypertext sub-genre.  Why not also make each highlighted room connection a hyperlink, thus allowing the player to either type “go [direction]” or click the provided link?

Of course, by implementing the aforementioned suggestion, I begin to haze the lines between Interaction Fiction and Hypertext.  The question then becomes:  is such a hybrid acceptable?  Suddenly I find myself running back to the issue I addressed beforehand on canonizing Interactive Fiction.

What are your thoughts here?  Certainly, there are many improvements one could make to his or her Interactive Fiction.  What ideas do you have?  And what impact do you think these ideas would have on the definition of Interactive Fiction, Hypertext, and the other forms of Electronic Literature we’ve discussed in class?  I feel this is an interesting issue that merits further discussion and I’m hoping you guys will provide me with your thoughts.

Filed Under: Blog

The “Colossal Campus Adventure”!

March 1, 2012 By 1 Comment

As many of you already know, I developed my own platform for the “Creative Project” assignment.  I realize it may seem like I’m trying to show off here, but it was quite honestly faster to use a programming language I already knew than to learn an entirely new platform.  In doing so, my hope was to have more time to build an awesome Interactive Fiction (which you can download here).

For the most part, my hopes were realized.  The game is quite big and has many, many interactions (“break[ing] a window” while in your room and “kick[ing] Alyssa” / “ask[ing] Megan out” in their room are among my favorites).  Unfortunately, the game too quickly spiraled out of hand and became more colossal than I had anticipated.  In order to complete a working demo, I was forced to cut back on a sizable number of rooms, interactions, and mechanics that were finished but were not…  well…  ”demo-able.”

Either way, I hope you enjoy the demo provided above however short it may seem.  I should note however that while there are many hidden interactions and things to do, the purpose of my Interactive Fiction is not entirely mechanical.  Colossal Campus Adventure is more than a game, it’s the story of me:  a sixth year senior who traded two extra years at his university to become a game developer.

The tone may at times be somewhat pessimistic and remorseful, but don’t let that fool you.  CCA is not meant to discourage you from achieving success.  Rather, I hope it shows you that UMW is more than an “academic institution” — it’s a place of personal growth, inter-personal development, and a storehouse for memories.  So be sure to use the time you have remaining wisely.  ((Besides, it gets really damn expensive to keep coming back…))

Filed Under: Blog

Canonizing Interactive Fiction…

February 22, 2012 By 3 Comments

Reading over some of our blog posts for this semester, I noticed a common struggle to define and label Electronic Literature.  More specifically, we’ve been delving into a great wealth of popular culture in an attempt to place our favorite media under the E-lit flag.

Now, there is certainly nothing with this.  In fact, it’s exciting to see people look at their every-day entertainment from a more literary perspective.  Nevertheless, I am left with numerous unanswered questions about what qualifies as “Elit” and what does not.  More specifically, I’ve been interested in what defines Interactive Fiction and what does not.  After all, video games are a common topic in this blog, and I was curious to see where they fell on the Elit spectrum.

So to answer this question, I went back to N. Katherine Hayles’ milestone essay Electronic Literature:  What is it? in hopes of gaining a clearer insight.   I was happy to see that she acknowledges the issue in question, noting that “ The demarcation between electronic literature and computer games is far from clear; many games have narrative components, while many works of electronic literature have game elements”.  Ultimate, however, she concludes that “we may say that with games the user interprets in order to configure, whereas in works whose primary interest is narrative, the user configures in order to interpret”.

An interesting thought.  The idea of control here is something we have also discussed as well.  What I believe Hayles is trying to suggest here is that, in most games, we are directed to perform a certain action.  For instance, in a game like Call of Duty, we are given some task or mission to perform and we direct ourselves according.  In Interactive Fiction, however, Hayles seems to suggest that we are the ones giving direction to the game (and not vice versa).

Certainly, this makes sense.  Red Riding Hood, Colossal Cave Adventure, and so on all relied on our input in order for the game to progress.  It is our directions that ultimately decide how the game is played and the order of events which occur.

The question still remains, though:  Where do games like Skyrim, The Sims, Tomb Raider, World of Warcraft, and the many other games we’ve discussed this year fit into the mix?  I would argue that a game like World of Warcraft does not fall into the line of Interactive Fiction.  While there may be a underlining story, its emphasis has always been on game mechanics and a player-directed orientation.

What are your thoughts though?  I know we’ve discussed this topic in class a bit, but I think it is something we should address again.  It’s certainly an interesting idea to consider…

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , ,

they are evil…

February 9, 2012 By 1 Comment

In our discussions in class on this blog, we have talked in some detail about the different perspectives Donna Leishman’s “Red Riding Hood”  presents.  More specifically, we have focused on the apparent feminist perspective that Leishman’s Interactive Fiction seems to take.  I will freely admit now that I continued to play through Red Riding Hood even after the assignment was due in hopes of gaining a clearer interpretation of Leishman’s embedded message.

After several play-through’s and infinite permutations of clicks, combinations, and mouse-overs, however, it finally occurred to me:  perhaps there is no single message.  Instead, perhaps there are many different messages here — all depending upon the way the game is played.  Each time I replayed the game, I was intentionally choosing a different set of actions than before in hopes of producing a new result.  As a result, each play-through yielded a new story altogether.  With that story came a new set of actions, a new set of themes, and a new embedded message that could be derived.

Choosing to wake her up in my first play-through considerably effected my interpretation of the story.

For example, during my first play-through I chose to wake Riding Hood up instead of letting her dream.  Without the dream sequence and the discovery of Red’s diary to cast doubt on her innocence, the message of the story seemed very clear-cut to me:  the wolf represented all men, and men were brutal stalkers, rapists, and murderers.  There were no if’s, and’s, or but’s about it, Leishman was saying that men are evil.

 

The later discovery of Red's diary significantly altered my interpretation of the story.

Yet as I played through the game more and more, my interpretation of the story began to change.  The discovery of her diary, the various images of her dream, and the different interact-able objects I came upon all altered my perspective of the game in some way.  Eventually I began to realize that there was no single perspective or interpretation at hand.  The bigger picture of “Red Riding Hood” could certainly be assigned a meaning, but it was the individual play-through’s themselves that made the difference.

In short, how you interact with the story will define the scope of the perspective.  While we ourselves may know or have memorized the contents of Red’s diary, by choosing not to read it during a play-through we sacrifice the information it provides.  Instead, we must rely on the other parts of the game we interact with to assist us with our interpretation.

Hopefully, this made sense to you and you can identify somewhat with my argument.  There is much that can be said about  Leishman’s piece here, and I encourage you to share your thoughts here as well.  I do, however, have one  request:  please do not reference the new Red Riding Hood movie.  That avenue has been pretty exhausted already….

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , , , , ,
February 3, 2012 By 1 Comment
YouTube Preview Image

Our conversation about Zork and Post-Ironic Beardcore lead me to consider posting this.  Let me forewarn you, this is the epitome of nerdy.  Only the most hardcore of hardcore nerds should consider watching this lest you suffer…  one of our…  nerd diseases?

Either way, I hope you enjoy.  Oh, and I would not advise watching this in the dark.  You will likely be eaten by a Grue.

Filed Under: Blog

E-Literature Gaming

January 25, 2012 By 1 Comment

For most people, reading a book and playing a video game are two very separate activities.  In fact, more often than not we are encouraged to do the former in lieu of the latter.  While there is certainly merit in reading more tangible literature, I cannot help but question the value of books within games.

Deus Ex: Human Revolution contains many such essays, stories, emails, news articles, etc.

Yes, that’s right, I said books within games.  As strange as it may sound, game developers have for years integrated various forms of literature into the games they develop.  Starting with the days of text-based role-playing games to Doom, Deus Ex, The Elder Scrolls, and even Bioshock, many of the games we play today have a very literature-richhistory and foundation.  Perhaps the most recent (and by far the most notable) example of this is the recently released The Elder Scrolls V:  Skyrim, which came with over one-hundred different stories, journals, et cetera planted throughout the game world.  A link to a master list of these texts can be found here.

One example of Skyrim's many novels.

Certainly, Skyrim contains no Pulitzer Prize-winning literature, and in fact most of it is very short (no more than a couple pages worth of text at best).  Nevertheless, I believe it has value in what we have been discussing in class.  On the first day we met, we defined Electronic Literature as something that is “digital born”; requires the use of a computer or other digital reader in order to access.  Literature such as the many texts in Skyrim require not only such an electronic device, but access to the game as well (at least in order to read them in their original setting).

Doom 3 was one of the original games to use email correspondences as a story device.

I will admit, however, that this practice has declined significantly over the years.  Creating in-game literature is not cheap — especially when producing it in high quality and volume.  In addition, advances in 3D technology have decreased the cost of producing digital animation, allowing many developers to tell their story through CGI instead of text.  The art itself has become more an externality now than an auxiliary mechanic.

But what do you think?  Do you believe this constitutes as Electronic Literature?  And what about its use as a game mechanic?  For those who consider themselves hardened “gamers”, do you read the literary material / texts you come across while playing these games?  These are the questions game developers tend to ask themselves before beginning a new project.  You never know when game developer might find him or herself reading the input you provide below…

Filed Under: Blog