"no genre or form can be outside the narrative."
I think this is because we use narrative to rationalise a lot of life. one example could be how we use narrative to explain a concept through analogy or anecdotes.
" So the title suggests a simple structure with a positive state broken by an external evil force. It is the role of the player to recreate this original positive state. This is, of course, a sequence often found in folk tales: An initial state, an overturning of this state, and a restoration of the state."
" narratives can be split into a level of discourse (the telling of the story) and the story (the story told). The story-part can then be split into two parts, existents (actors and settings) and events (actions and happenings). (Chatman p.19)"
" Cut-scenes typically come in the form of introductions and scenes when the player has completed part of the game."
" that are commonplace in narratives (three years of the hero's life summed up in two sentences of a novel or in a few shots of a "frequentative" montage in film, etc.). More basically, it invites us to consider that one of the functions of narrative is to invent one time scheme in terms of another time scheme. (Christian Metz, quoted from Genette 1980, p.33)"
" In this way, the game constructs the story time as synchronous with narrative time and reading/viewing time: the story time is now. Now, not just in the sense that the viewer witnesses events now, but in the sense that the events are happening now, and that what comes next is not yet determined."
I think that this is one of the reasons that games are so exciting. the power to steer the narrative as you wish means that no two players narrative experiences of the same game will be exactly the same. They will most definitely be similar but not same.
" games almost never perform basic narrative operations like flashback and flash forward.[6] Games are almost always chronological."
I find this comment a little outdated. As game development has advanced, many games use flash backs extensively such as CoD Black Ops.
" But how can computer games be abstract and without points of identification, and yet be interesting? - No matter how variable or even absent the protagonist in computer games, the player is always constant. The reader/viewer need an emotional motivation for investing energy in the movie or book; we need a human actant to identify with. This is probably also true for the computer game, only this actant is always present - it is the player. The player is motivated to invest energy in the game because the game evaluates the player's performance. And this is why a game can be much more abstract than a movie or a novel, because games involve the player in a direct way."
This is an interesting question and point. When a suitable anthropomorphic avatar is not available we categorise ourselves and said avatar. This is how abstract games like 'flow' or 'tetris' can be vastly popular and yet have no 'protagonist'. This time investment point also references how players psychologically rationalise their in-game spending in many mobile games; "I have spent extended amounts of time playing this game, therefore this game is worth my time, therefore it is worth my money also." [ idea from Ted talk by ..............]
" The idea of using experimental narratives to answer the opening question suffers from the problem that the very emphasis on interpretation and ontological instability that would make the narrative more immediate and thus closer to the game, in itself would make a game unplayable.[10]"
"1) Games and stories actually do not translate to each other in the way that novels and movies do. 2) There is an inherent conflict between the now of the interaction and the past or "prior" of the narrative. You can't have narration and interactivity at the same time; there is no such thing as a continuously interactive story. 3) The relations between reader/story and player/game are completely different - the player inhabits a twilight zone where he/she is both an empirical subject outside the game and undertakes a role inside the game."
I think this is because we use narrative to rationalise a lot of life. one example could be how we use narrative to explain a concept through analogy or anecdotes.
" So the title suggests a simple structure with a positive state broken by an external evil force. It is the role of the player to recreate this original positive state. This is, of course, a sequence often found in folk tales: An initial state, an overturning of this state, and a restoration of the state."
" narratives can be split into a level of discourse (the telling of the story) and the story (the story told). The story-part can then be split into two parts, existents (actors and settings) and events (actions and happenings). (Chatman p.19)"
" Cut-scenes typically come in the form of introductions and scenes when the player has completed part of the game."
" that are commonplace in narratives (three years of the hero's life summed up in two sentences of a novel or in a few shots of a "frequentative" montage in film, etc.). More basically, it invites us to consider that one of the functions of narrative is to invent one time scheme in terms of another time scheme. (Christian Metz, quoted from Genette 1980, p.33)"
" In this way, the game constructs the story time as synchronous with narrative time and reading/viewing time: the story time is now. Now, not just in the sense that the viewer witnesses events now, but in the sense that the events are happening now, and that what comes next is not yet determined."
I think that this is one of the reasons that games are so exciting. the power to steer the narrative as you wish means that no two players narrative experiences of the same game will be exactly the same. They will most definitely be similar but not same.
" games almost never perform basic narrative operations like flashback and flash forward.[6] Games are almost always chronological."
I find this comment a little outdated. As game development has advanced, many games use flash backs extensively such as CoD Black Ops.
" But how can computer games be abstract and without points of identification, and yet be interesting? - No matter how variable or even absent the protagonist in computer games, the player is always constant. The reader/viewer need an emotional motivation for investing energy in the movie or book; we need a human actant to identify with. This is probably also true for the computer game, only this actant is always present - it is the player. The player is motivated to invest energy in the game because the game evaluates the player's performance. And this is why a game can be much more abstract than a movie or a novel, because games involve the player in a direct way."
This is an interesting question and point. When a suitable anthropomorphic avatar is not available we categorise ourselves and said avatar. This is how abstract games like 'flow' or 'tetris' can be vastly popular and yet have no 'protagonist'. This time investment point also references how players psychologically rationalise their in-game spending in many mobile games; "I have spent extended amounts of time playing this game, therefore this game is worth my time, therefore it is worth my money also." [ idea from Ted talk by ..............]
" The idea of using experimental narratives to answer the opening question suffers from the problem that the very emphasis on interpretation and ontological instability that would make the narrative more immediate and thus closer to the game, in itself would make a game unplayable.[10]"
"1) Games and stories actually do not translate to each other in the way that novels and movies do. 2) There is an inherent conflict between the now of the interaction and the past or "prior" of the narrative. You can't have narration and interactivity at the same time; there is no such thing as a continuously interactive story. 3) The relations between reader/story and player/game are completely different - the player inhabits a twilight zone where he/she is both an empirical subject outside the game and undertakes a role inside the game."
No comments:
Post a Comment