From: Whitten@Fwva.Saic.Com (David Whitten)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Subject: Plot Vs. Interactivity
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 21:27:43 GMT
	<C152v6.L99@rice.edu> <cfLp=_600iV089AONk@andrew.cmu.edu>
Organization: Science Applications Int'l, Corp. - Computer systems operation

Paul Christopher Workman <pw0l+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>Has there ever been a good analysis of what plot is under interactivity?
>[snip]
>but in general the plot, or any
>literary element, from fiction should allow the author to communicate
>an idea or effect that's greater than just the sum of its (the element's)
>parts.  Interactivity, one would think, abandons that since it abandons
>the author's control over the plot; and the traditional IF-game
>approach mentioned above, although it does allow tight control over
>the progression of the plot (since the user can't, usually, go to
>the next step until the puzzle preceeding it is completed), reduces
>the plot *too* far, I think -- the plot is interactive only to the
>extent that the user can solve puzzles.  That's not really what
>your average fiction writer thinks of when you say "plot." 
>[snip]
>Multi-user IF seems integral to the idea of IF, implicitly if not
>explicitly.  (If an IF plot consists of the interplay between A, B, and C,
>it shouldn't be a big difference if only A is human or if both A and B are.)
>I would expect that if the true-plot-in-IF problem is solved, then
>the multi-user IF problem would be solved immediately, as a result.
>
>--paul
>
>
I think Paul is right.  IF seems to be tied to the idea of interacting
characters, but I think the problem is that we have no way of specifying the
limitations on character's actions. (except keeping the parser from 
recognizing the words)
 
This is a pretty poor method of limitation.
 
IMAO, I feel we should have ways of specifying what kinds of actions are
'in character' and which ones aren't.
This means we can allow more than one story character to be played by a real
person.  I think this means that when we have people in the stories, we need
to specifically consider what roles the people play (and probably have a
library of roles to make writing IF easier)
 
What I mean is that if I write a story with a taxi, I have a person in the
story who drives the taxi.  Now, the taxi may only be an insignificant part
of my story, suitable primarily to transport my primary character from one
part of the city to another.
It is concievable that a real person could play the part of the taxicab
driver. This would be interesting from a development point of view since
it is easier to get the text a program-emulated-person in a role says by
having a real person play the role for a while, and just to record what they
said.  Then go back and incorporate the kinds of things they say into the
game...
Anyway (I digressed), If I let a real person play the taxicab driver, I want
to put severe limits on their actions, since I need a taxicab several times in
the story.  I might let them talk, and to drive forward, but I probably
wouldn't want them to leave the taxi, nor would I want to let them take the
taxi on a scenic tour of the nation, since I as Author, need the taxi to be
available for my primary character when they need it.
 
In the same way, if my primary character is supposed to fall in love or deal
with the relationship with some secondary character, I as Author have limited
what kinds of relations are reasonable.  The player can't just try to deal
with anyone who just happened to walk by.
 
I know it is a big project to talk about all the roles a person may play,
but that is the essense of writing fiction rather than just providing an
interactive chat board.
 
I think that some of the most interesting fiction is that which is written
with some pretty severe restrictions, and still manages to come to a satisfying
conclusion. 
 (I guess that is the difference between the generic plot:
	1) "boy meets girl"
	2) "boy loses girl"
	3) "boy regains girl"
 
and a real work of fiction based on that plot.
 
David (whitten@fwva.saic.com) US:(619)535-7764 [I don't speak as a company rep.]