Interactive closure in games?

[axcho]

Now, the next step is to allow "state B" to be many different things. In our Drama Princess project, we even experimented with randomness. Instead of making sense "on purpose", we rely on the imagination of the player to make sense of the connection between "state A" and "state B". I think a certain artistic sensitivity during creation can prevent this from feeling completely random. When the connection feels right, even if you don't have a rational explanation for them.

Yes, this is totally what interactive closure is about, as I understand it so far. B can be many different things. And I really like how your Drama Princess project uses the player's ability to "close the gap" with imagination instead of trying to force a certain predetermined relationship.

[JordanMagnuson]

Good thoughts. To me, the difference between closure in videogames vs. closure in, say, comic books, is that in videogames the player is constantly in the process of determining what "frame B" might be, as well as then attempting to fill in the gutter between frames A and B.

Comic book:

1. "Oh, there's a dude with an axe chasing another dude in frame A"

2. "Okay, in frame B somebody that I can't see is yelling out"

3. "What happened between the frames?" [filling in the gutter]


Videogame (or notgame):

1. "Okay, here's a dude in a virtual space-time continuum (frame A)"

2. "What do I want to do with this dude? What can I do with this dude? Where is this dude going? What's his motivation? What's my motivation? How are we connected?" etc. Player takes all this into account, and imagines some kind of frame B in their mind (whether that's destroying a castle, or jumping over a chasm, or whatever).

3. "Now, how do I bring about this idea for frame B?" Player comes up with some sort of plan, whether that's "build tanks" or "press space bar to jump." [filling in the gutter]

4. Player tries to carry out plan. It will most likely succeed in some regards, and fail in some regards--both from the standpoint of "I jumped to soon" and also from the standpoint of "hm... it appears that you can't jump in this game."

5. Player then returns to the start of the loop, with new information to help them continue their journey.


Point to note: there is certainly no less imagination going on (inherently) in videogame closure than in comic book closure... in fact, I think there's room for a great deal more.

The fact that this dynamic closing process is so incredibly intricate and rich when it comes to interactive art is basically what makes me so excited about it.




P.S. Would it be possible to get html lists working on these forums? Currently the css is not very useful there... not a big deal.

[axcho]

Thank you for illustrating the details of closure in comics versus games! I think it will really help. I probably should have done that earlier, but I was too lazy.

I agree with you about games having lots of room for imagination. It is true that some games try to squeeze out this imagination and leave the player with no opportunity to have a different experience than that intended by the designer, but not all games have to be this way.

[Thomas]

This article touch the subject a bit.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4412/persuasive_games_the_picnic_.php

His well-known "Kuleshov Effect" seemed to prove the point: in the experiment, Kuleshov cut between the expressionless shot of a famous Russian silent film actor (Ivan Mozzhukhin) and a variety of other shots: a young woman reposed on a chaise, a child in a coffin, a bowl of soup.

Even though the shot of Mozzhukhin's face remained identical with each cut, the audience made different assumptions about the meaning of his expression.

[God at play]

Yeah, nice link.  I just wrote a post inspired by that article: http://www.godatplay.com/2010/05/on-what-makes-videogames-distinct/

I don't think there's any inherent limitation with breaking up continuity for videogames, although because the medium uses computers and computers are good at simulation, videogames naturally tend toward that and therefore tend more toward continuity.  In the same way, film tends toward the breaking up of continuity because film is composed of sequences of images cut and assembled.

Ian is suggesting that because film is about editing, it is about fast editing.  I think that's going too far.  With videogames, the parallel would be simulation (or procedure to put it in another way).  That only suggests continuity, and in the case of a simulation, the continuity doesn't even have to be visual.  It could be continuity of input.

[Michaël Samyn]

What I got out of Ian's article was that the interactive medium could explore the mundane much better than film could. Film is about seeing, videogames can be about being. Though my favourite films (Parajanov, Godard, Bergman, etc) are much closer to being and the mundane than most videogames (which are mostly just spectacles of the extraordinary)...

Maybe the difference is that videogames can deal with the mundane and still be entertaining, while such films are often hard to stay awake on (which I have defined as a norm for me: if I fall asleep on a film, it must be good! ; come to think of it, I do a similar thing with games: I scan for the word "boring" in reviews, when I find it, I buy the game instantly -but that probably says more about game journalists than anything else).

In videogames, I think it's the exploration that makes the difference. Which I guess is served by continuity better than editing.

[God at play]

Haha, that's great Michaël.  If you fall asleep, you know it's good.  I guess I'm more of an active film watcher; I have this ability to very intensely focus on watching a film.

I really like how you explain this, though.  Very articulate.

[JordanMagnuson]

What I got out of Ian's article was that the interactive medium could explore the mundane much better than film could. Film is about seeing, videogames can be about being. Though my favourite films (Parajanov, Godard, Bergman, etc) are much closer to being and the mundane than most videogames (which are mostly just spectacles of the extraordinary)...

Maybe the difference is that videogames can deal with the mundane and still be entertaining, while such films are often hard to stay awake on (which I have defined as a norm for me: if I fall asleep on a film, it must be good! ; come to think of it, I do a similar thing with games: I scan for the word "boring" in reviews, when I find it, I buy the game instantly -but that probably says more about game journalists than anything else).

In videogames, I think it's the exploration that makes the difference. Which I guess is served by continuity better than editing.

I love those directors as well, and I'm very interested with the idea of exploring the "mundane" with videogames/notgames.

Film is about seeing, videogames can be about being.

This quote really jumps out at me. I'm quite fond of the existential philosophers, and this idea excites me, I guess.

[Michaël Samyn]

We often think of the games we make as a kind of landscape paintings that you can step into. Being another person in another situation. There's no other medium that can do this so well. Many videogames already offer this. But most of them disrupt the experience by demanding that you play their game. Sometimes this play supports that experience of being in a world. But often it doesn't. And even when it does, it's usually because this world was created to fit the game format and so it's a world riddled with conflict and challenge and often violence and war. Not exactly the most pleasant of situations to be in, or the most inspiring.

[JordanMagnuson]

Yes, I very much agree. Especially with:

Many videogames already offer this. But most of them disrupt the experience by demanding that you play their game.

I'm trying to think of a commercial game that I've played for which this has not been true, and I'm pretty much coming up blank. The forced gameplay always interferes with the experience at some point.

[JordanMagnuson]

Just watched Once, another great film about "being." Damn, I wish I could make a game that would convey something of what comes through in that movie.

[axcho]

Just watched Once, another great film about "being." Damn, I wish I could make a game that would convey something of what comes through in that movie.

Just saw Once yesterday, as per your implicit recommendation.

I can see how that could be a good source of inspiration for an interactive (not)game - especially the music sections, just replace those with interactive segments. Plus the character interaction and plot and all that could be an emergent story rather than something predetermined.

Did you have any further thoughts about it?