[arg_discuss] You're so Emo!

[Brian Clark]

I think Mike hit the two tasks on the head, one being "is there an umbrella
term" and the other being "is there a useful enough definition of ARG to use
to determine if something is one." Not that Wiki is some authority, but as a
starting place its definition of ARG is:

     "An ARG, also known as an altered reality game (ARG), is an
   interactive narrative that uses the real world as a platform,
   often involving multiple media and game elements, to tell a
   story that may be affected by participants' ideas or actions."

I thought it was particularly interesting that somehow the wiki edits have
produced the phrase "altered reality game" (versus alternate) ... notice,
though, that it hedges its bets on other features by sliding "often
involving" and "that may be" modifiers in there. From a straight-forward
view, that definition seems to fit LARPing pretty well (which may not be the
intent), and I can think of examples that don't involve "multiple media and
game elements" (say, "Masquerade") or where the narrative isn't "affected by
participants ideas or actions" (say, The Watchman project that Fourth Wall
did.)

My gut suggests that a strong definition of ARG would leave LARPing just
barely outside of the ARG umbrella, but exceptionally closely related (I'd
argue the major difference is in LARPs people are "playing a character
persona" while in ARGs people tend to "play themselves or a heightened
version of themselves" -- ARGers are seldom roleplaying, LARPers are seldom
not roleplaying) Because of that, I imagine there is an umbrella term above
ARG (that, at the very least, includes both ARG and LARP.)

Mike also wrote: "That, to me, is what I mean by an umbrella term, and my
interest in one has absolutely nothing to do with needing to sell ARGs to
clients as characterized by the ARGNetcast."

Heh heh. Totally with you, Mike. After seeing words like "interactive" and
"viral" lose any useful distinctiveness as they gained more widespread use,
that's my main goal as well -- either making a proactive case that ARG isn't
just "viral and narrative" or arguing that "viral and narrative" and ARG
fall under some umbrella of forms that has far more potential than just
that.

-----Original Message-----
From: arg_discuss-bounces at igda.org [mailto:arg_discuss-bounces at igda.org] On
Behalf Of Michael Monello
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 9:26 PM
To: Discussion list of the IGDA ARG SIG
Subject: Re: [arg_discuss] You're so Emo!

I think there are two issues mashed up here. One about what to call the
thing that we are making/enjoying/ that is an umbrella term and can
accommodate many different shapes/styles/genres underneath it, and the other
is actually defining what an Alternate Reality Game is. I don't believe
there is consensus on either, but I may be mistaken -- is there a definition
of what an "Alternate Reality Game" is that I can use to measure whether
something is one?

As for the umbrella term, we all recognize what a book is. According to
Wikipedia:
"A book is a set or collection of written, printed, illustrated, or blank
sheets, made of paper, parchment, or other material, usually fastened
together to hinge at one side."

Now, a book may be a graphic novel or trade paperback or horror anthology or
poetry collection or romance, but there's no argument that it is a "book,"
and if I point to a car and say that it is a book, there is nothing to
discuss, as I would clearly be wrong under the definition of what a book is.

So, if "Alternate Reality Game" is the umbrella term, then are Eagle Eye,
SF0, Top Secret Dance Off, Eldritch Errors, and Blair Witch Project all
ARGs? I'm not looking for opinions, discussion, or debate on this, but
whether they pass or fail the definition of an ARG, much the same way that
we could all agree that The Bible, Women by Charles Bukowski, and Watchmen
by Alan Moore are all books. (BTW, I've always wanted a reason to put the
Bible and anything by Charles Bukowski on the same list) If there is a true
definition then we should be able to point to any project and say, as a
statement of fact, agree on whether they are ARGs or not. The discussions
about whether one or the other is a comedy or poetry might be fuzzier, but
there should be consensus on it being a "book." That, to me, is what I mean
by an umbrella term, and my interest in one has absolutely nothing to do
with needing to sell ARGs to clients as characterized by the ARGNetcast. I
don't have any problem selli
 
 ng what Campfire does to clients even in this down economy, so please don't
assume I'm acting out of self-interest. I believe that an umbrella term
would be helpful in capturing the full extent of what has been done in the
past, and (much) more importantly, what can be done in the future. "Book" is
not a restrictive term - it can have puzzles, it can be a game or treasure
hunt, like Masquerade, or it can be blank. Does "Alternate Reality Game"
pass that test?

Now, I get that this is the IGDA here, and I understand this could be read
as bristling against the term "game" but I'm not "anti-game," not even
close. I'm questioning whether the umbrella term we are looking for should
define it as a game or not, and the truth is, I go back and forth on it.
Maybe not all the projects I listed above should be contained under the
umbrella term, and maybe that would make settling on an umbrella term an
easier task. I do think that if our umbrella term requires that it be a
game, then we are talking about a genre and not an entirely new form of art
or entertainment (although of course it can be art and they are hopefully
all entertaining). And I also acknowledge that if the umbrella term does
embrace all these non-game forms that ultimately THIS group is about
discussing the "game" variety, but this is probably the largest list of
people working in the space and I think it is a fair discussion to have
here.

That being said, I also don't want to hold the list hostage to this
discussion. Truthfully, if no one on the list is interested in this topic
then I'd rather talk it over with Brian over drinks at the bar than in front
of disinterested spectators, so I won't engage in this discussion further
unless the other, silent members of the list take part and push it further,
one way or the other.

Whew. I really don't generally get tied up in semantic discussions, as I am
far from an academic, but I am interested in this for what it means to the
burgeoning form. If Brian is right, and ARGs are Emo (and I think he is
right), then ARGs are going to be marginalized like Emo, and all the other
great stuff that doesn't fit the definition of ARGs and all the things you
can do in the space will in the future will be seen as something else, not
ARGs, and then ARGs and the people who champion them and define their work
in that way will be marginalized into that genre ghetto. As the ARGNetcast
folks noted, almost every company associated with commercial ARGs has
already backed away from the term, and not because they don't like it but
because that marginalization is already happening.

Are we filmmakers or are we horror filmmakers? Are we storytellers or are we
romance writers? Are we game designers or are we alternate reality game
designers? What are we?

This existential crisis brought to you by:

Mike

On 4/10/09 6:19 PM, "Brooke Thompson" <brooke at mirlandano.com> wrote:

I've got to admit, that was one of the more enjoyable netcasts for me
and my minds been going since. The Emo analogy is interesting and ties
in with where my thoughts have been going... is ARG the umbrella term?

And, the more personal... am I finally becoming ok with the idea of
ARG being the umbrella? and, of course, the obsessive soul searching
concerns of why I feel such a strong need to control this term when I
usually prefer more fluid, dynamic, and organic things... is it a
question of my identity, which I alluded to in the podcast by saying
that I just want to know what it is that I do. So, perhaps Emo is the
*perfect* analogy :)



On Apr 10, 2009, at 2:15 PM, Brian Clark wrote:


> So our discussions here boiled over into the ARGNetcast broadcast:

>

> http://www.argnetcast.com/2009/04/arg-netcast-episode-84-two-queens/

>

> And from there culminated into a declaration of my peevedness for baby

> carrots:

>

> http://brianclarkslatestpeeve.com/

>

> It is a really smart discussion by some really smart people (the

> netcast,

> not the peeves), which makes me ask myself whether I'm sometimes

> opaque

> about the arguments I'm making (BABY CARROTS!) So inspired by ARGN,

> I'd like

> to offer up a more affirmative definition of what ARG is from my

> point of

> view.

>

> ARG is so Emo.

>

> A community of fans essentially labeled the work of a few bands Emo.

> Then

> they started pointing to new bands appearing and going, "Yup, that's

> Emo."

> Other bands were influenced by that, and proudly declared themselves

> Emo.

> Some of the artists labeled as Emo think the whole concept is complete

> bullshit, many others identified with other musical influences than

> Emo.

> Each new artist in the general neighborhood influences the overall

> dimensions of the definition, and each new work of those artists

> revives the

> debate. The longer time went, the more impossible it became to

> define Emo at

> all, as it fractured into personal definitions of "I like X. X is

> Emo. I

> like Y, therefore Y is Emo or Emoish".

>

> ARG is almost exactly like that.

>

> That's fine: that's the argument that ARG is a genre. Genres are

> almost

> always named after the fact by the community of fans.

>

> Some of us wish ARG was so indie, which is essentially a hope that

> the label

> (or replacement) was a movement instead of a genre. In the indie

> film world,

> there is a diversity of genres but a shared perspective and similar

> methodology among filmmakers. Indie is how you get it done, not what

> you get

> done. Indie teaches each other, and supports a broad diversity of

> equally

> valid reasons for making work.

>

> One of the features of a movement is constant reinvention. The

> debate, "What

> is indie?" is a constant feature of that film community, "What is

> ARG?" is a

> constant debate here. That's a desired feature in a movement, versus

> a genre

> (where the question is "Is that an ARG?"), and the community of

> people who

> practice will always desire some "terms of art" to help us

> communicate (so

> labels and the debate about them are good.)

>

> During the netcast, they were critiqued by their IRC chat room that

> they

> were trying to find a term that would include "SF0, Top Secret Dance

> Off and

> Eldritch Errors." Or maybe it was Eagle Eye packed in there too. I

> actually

> think that is exactly the goal: as a practitioner I see more things in

> common than different between them, even though Spacebass argued

> only EE was

> "technically an ARG" in that set. That works for me too ... I always

> had to

> accept the word of others which works in my portfolio were

> "technically an

> ARG" and rarely designed for it. So what is that broader category?

>

> Or maybe it's just Emo ... stretch the definition of ARG as genre

> expectation changes?

>

> Maybe now they'll change my latest peeve to "Emo Finger Monkey"

> (http://www.sonnyradio.com/fingermonkey1.jpg) instead of "Baby

> Carrots"?

>

>

>

>

> Brian

>

> _______________________________________________

> 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



---
Mike Monello
Partner, Campfire
http://www.campfirenyc.com
_______________________________________________
ARG_Discuss mailing list
ARG_Discuss at igda.org
http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss