[arg_discuss] ARGs/Interactive Fiction

[Ian Millington]

Touche!

On 09/01/2008, Michael Monello <mmonello at campfirenyc.com> wrote:

> Well, the puzzles have always been the least interesting aspect of

> ARGs for me, since so few of them are truly integrated within the

> narrative. I think it's much more interesting to have the audience

> guide characters down different paths rather than solve puzzles to

> unlock another piece of story, so I do think the kinds of challenges

> we put into our narratives needs to be rethought -- regardless of

> everything else we are discussing here.

>

> But given that the tiniest sliver of the audience actually solves ARG

> puzzles and the vast majority of people get the answers from that

> group, if your ARG is boring because the audience is getting those

> answers then you have problems that go way deeper than how the

> audience is organized!

>

> Best,

>

> Mike

>

> On Jan 8, 2008, at 10:03 PM, Ian Millington wrote:

>

> > ARG-puzzle solutions tend to be liberally shared. Because once a

> > puzzle falls the whole world (clan in your case) rushes through to the

> > next state, what would stop the first team communicating the solution

> > to someone in the next team, and that second team then finding the

> > game boring? Most of team two wouldn't want to cheat - but the

> > communal nature of ARGs means that only one would have to.

> >

> > Having individual play trajectories seems to imply having individual

> > challenges. Which in turn suggests that the knowledge-based puzzles

> > that are the staple of ARGs would have to be minimized in favour of

> > skill-based challenges.

> >

> > Using TV metaphors another option would be the soap-opera - designed

> > to be very easy to drop into at any stage, with the corresponding

> > inability to build coherent dramatic story arcs.

> >

> > I dunno... even the clan idea feels a little too conservative to me...

> >

> > Ian.

> >

> >

> > On 08/01/2008, Michael Monello <mmonello at campfirenyc.com> wrote:

> >> I haven't thought this all the way through, I'm just spitballing with

> >> the group here, but I don't think it has to add that much staff if

> >> the

> >> game is structured from the ground up with this in mind. Everyone

> >> would be playing the game in real time, it's just that the community

> >> would be split into smaller groups, or clans, to allow for a wider

> >> variety of community cultures. Think of it in terms of Everquest --

> >> it's a big world and you can see what other clans are doing, but you

> >> are playing in your own group or clan with your own clan culture.

> >>

> >> You are aware of the other groups, especially when it comes to

> >> character interaction and live events, but you are really working

> >> closely in smaller clans which are not in competition with each

> >> other.

> >>

> >> Best,

> >>

> >> Michael Monello

> >> Partner, Campfire

> >> 62 White Street, 3W

> >> New York, NY 10013

> >> 212-612-9600

> >> http://www.campfirenyc.com

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> On Jan 7, 2008, at 5:52 PM, libfli at aol.com wrote:

> >>

> >>> i really like this idea.  my only concern would be dealing with

> >>> having enough manpower needed to run the game.  if it's staggered

> >>> like this and the ARG has an interactive storyline, depending on how

> >>> many "groups" you have involved, you would have to staff each

> >>> group's game.  and, depending on the choices of each group, i'm not

> >>> certain each group would end up in the same place.  (but that might

> >>> make it even more interesting) :)

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> happy happy new year!

> >>>

> >>> Jan Libby

> >>>

> >>> (labfly)

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> -----Original Message-----

> >>> From: Michael Monello <mmonello at campfirenyc.com>

> >>> To: Discussion list of the IGDA ARG SIG <arg_discuss at igda.org>

> >>> Sent: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 2:13 pm

> >>> Subject: Re: [arg_discuss] ARGs/Interactive Fiction

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> Perhaps there is a more organic way to do this. I'm thinking about

> >>> how time zones naturally divide up the television audience, yet by

> >>> the end of the day all the zones are caught up and everyone can chat

> >>> about the most recent episode.

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> In other words, you launch an ARG and the audience is divided up by

> >>> when they join in, yet you don't have to necessarily start at

> >>> episode 1.

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> A simple example: the first week, everyone who joins becomes "Group

> >>> A."

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> Week 2 starts a new episode, and Group A plays through it, but

> >>> everyone who joins in on it in week 2 becomes Group B. Group B has

> >>> all the community tools of group A, but they are not mixed in with

> >>> Group A in the game forums or the collaborative puzzles, which

> >>> forces that group to organically form it's own culture for the game,

> >>> independent of the culture developed by the more established Group

> >>> A.

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> Each week, a new group. At the end of an episode, all the groups can

> >>> discuss, because they are all at the same place in the story, but

> >>> those in the newest groups don't have to contend with the experts

> >>> who have been playing for a month when it comes to the actual game.

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> The groupings have to be completely organic and mostly behind the

> >>> scenes, as ultimately everyone is essentially playing "live", which

> >>> also allows you to have the events and non-repeatable elements that

> >>> are so important to these games.

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> Allowing new groups of players to form their own cultures would

> >>> eliminate many of the issues that ARG's face after launch, in my

> >>> opinion. It's not joining a narrative in progress that is difficult

> >>> -- TV viewers do that all the time and bringing people up to speed

> >>> on a narrative is easy -- it's trying to join a well-established and

> >>> dense community that is steeped in historical experience that

> >>> overwhelms and intimidates new people.

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> Best,

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> Michael Monello

> >>>

> >>> Partner, Campfire

> >>>

> >>> 62 White Street, 3W

> >>>

> >>> New York, NY 10013

> >>>

> >>> 212-612-9600

> >>>

> >>> http://www.campfirenyc.com

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> On Jan 2, 2008, at 4:31 PM, John Evans wrote:

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>> Nice analogy, Ian. And another pillar to support my argument that

> >>>

> >>>> finite automata should be taught in high school. ;)

> >>>

> >>>>

> >>>

> >>>> [snip]

> >>>

> >>>>> IMHO any solution would have to put people in their own rooms,

> >>>>> with

> >>>

> >>>>> their own challenges and individual agency, while keeping the

> >>>>> overall

> >>>

> >>>>> collaborative feeling of the ARG. As Michael wrote, that is a

> >>>>> radical

> >>>

> >>>>> restructure of the mechanism of the ARG.

> >>>

> >>>>

> >>>

> >>>> So you'd need some "rooms" that everyone had to go through on their

> >>>

> >>>> own. However, one of the great strengths of ARGs is the

> >>>> multiplayer/

> >>>

> >>>> collaboration aspect, so you'd also need "rooms" within which

> >>>> everyone

> >>>

> >>>> could congregate. Except that they're not really rooms, they're

> >>>

> >>>> "events" or "states".

> >>>

> >>>>

> >>>

> >>>>> Maybe it isn't a coincidence that interactive fiction is also a

> >>>>> genre

> >>>

> >>>>> that has almost no direct monetization. But then again, that

> >>>>> probably

> >>>

> >>>>> pushes the analogy too far.

> >>>

> >>>>

> >>>

> >>>> Well, IF used to be monetized. I remember owning Wishbringer for

> >>>> the

> >>>

> >>>> C128. Eventually it became "adventure games"...The point seems to

> >>>> be

> >>>

> >>>> that you can sell interactive fiction as long as it has game-style

> >>>

> >>>> graphics. I guess?

> >>>

> >>>>

> >>>

> >>>> http://www.steampowered.com/v/index.php?

> >>>> area=package&SubId=539&cc=US

> >>>

> >>>>

> >>>

> >>>> There's an interesting idea. What if an ARG had graphics the

> >>>> equal of

> >>>

> >>>> a "standard" computer game, but was organized like an ARG?...I

> >>>> guess

> >>>

> >>>> it would be Uru Live, I answered my own question.

> >>>

> >>>>

> >>>

> >>>> --John

> >>>

> >>>>

> >>>

> >>>> _______________________________________________

> >>>

> >>>> ARG_Discuss mailing list

> >>>

> >>>> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

> >>>

> >>>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> _______________________________________________

> >>>

> >>> ARG_Discuss mailing list

> >>>

> >>> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

> >>>

> >>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> ________________________________________________________________________

> >>> More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com

> >>> _______________________________________________

> >>> ARG_Discuss mailing list

> >>> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

> >>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss

> >>

> >> _______________________________________________

> >> ARG_Discuss mailing list

> >> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

> >> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss

> >>

> > _______________________________________________

> > ARG_Discuss mailing list

> > ARG_Discuss at igda.org

> > http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss

>

> _______________________________________________

> ARG_Discuss mailing list

> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss

>