Structure...

I have drawn up a structure of my multi-linear narrative based on 3 little pigs. This is how it works:

A black square represent a snippet of the story.
The red lines is what link up the black squares therefore they link the story up.
The time line goes from left to right.
The longest straight line of black squares is the main story.
Anything else are events that never happens in the real story.
They give choice to the user/ player to see other circumstances that could happen.
This gives the story a multi-linear structure.
Any black squares above or below the main time line which is the same level vertically takes place before the main story.
All the events that are not real will eventually link back to the main story.

Masses of thought...

Masses of thought so far...

(Propp, Barths)
Narrative is unpredictable
That's what makes narrative engaging
Although not the only factor of engagement
As there are many
This is one of them
Sometimes it is predictable
Which also makes it engaging
Because people want to see what happens


(M L Ryan: Narrative as virtual reality and Game studies, A Cameron, Stellabrass)
Fairy tale has options
To make it more interactive with user/ player
Options are not told to user
Thus still giving an engaging narrative
As it is unknown
Like film
Although user/ player might have a slight idea on what film is about
Overall the narrative is not completely known
But with many paths
Replayablity lasts long than one time unlike most games
As there are many options to choose
User/ player wants to find out what happens in other options


(A Cameron, M L Ryan)
Is it game?
Is it story?
Story is told in the past
Game is always present
User/ Player is choosing options in real time for outcomes of unknown narrative
Is it not even a game?
As there isn't enough interactivity for it to become a game
Unless there is an objective
Creating an objective for user/ player
Makes the interaction of this more like a game
Because player has to work for the objective
Whether its actual controlling character (real game)
Or choosing options
Thus choosing options the user/ player will affect the future outcomes of the narrative
Which may all lead back to a single ending
Or it could lead to multiple endings

Reading online or on paper: which is faster?...

Reading online or on paper: which is faster? : H. Kurniawan, P Zaphiris

This paper is about the study of reading, how fast does people read and is there a difference between reading online and reading on paper.

"The result of this study suggest that designers of online information should consider that reading online is slower than on paper, and they should take steps (using bigger font sizes, high contrast between text and background) to enhance online reading speed. Further research on this topic is necessary in order to identify and quantify the different parameters that Mutter and Maurutto (1991) pointed out as possible reasons for differences in online and paper reading speed."

After reading this paper, I have to think about how much text I could use to narrate the story and also what other options are there to bypass this disadvantage of slowness in online reading, voice over, less text, a different medium to which I could put text on (paper) and so forth.

Narrative as virtual reality...

Narrative as virtual reality: Marie-Laure Ryan

She talks about narrative with multi-linear paths, this gives the illusion of freedom to the user because of the different choices but in the end they all end up at the same ending, this is to create a reasonably dramatic narrative with some degree of interactivity.

"The merging of narratives keep[s] the story on a single track while offering [the user] an illusion of choice"

This type of system of decision making by the user in the past will affect their choice in the future.

Dissimulations: the illusion of interactivity...

Dissimulations: the illusion of interactivity: Andrew Cameron

Cameron questions interactive story, how much interactivity does it take to make a story interactive? He argues that if a person is more involved with the interaction then it cuts down the story significantly.

"The moment the reader intervenes to change the story (at the nodes of multi-linear narrative, or at any moment in a spatio-temporal simulator) is the moment when the story changes from being an account of events which have already taken place, to the experience of events which are taking place in the present. Perfective becomes imperfective, story time becomes real time. An account becomes an experience, the spectator or reader becomes a participant or player, and the narrative begins to resemble a game."

This is interesting as it makes you wonder where the user or player draw the line to distinguish an actual story from a game? This comes into use for my idea of an 'interactive story' where it plays between the boundaries of a story and a game. Cameron also argues that as quoted,

"Just as theory is not praxis, interpretation is not interaction"

So if my 'interactive story' is interaction for the user or player to show their interpretation of the story, is the quote applicable for my situation in the sense that it agrees to it making my 'interactive story' not really interactive at all as it is only an interpretation or does it go against it and makes interpretation interactive? This is something that comes to mind.

Flip page...

I found an interesting Flash based book that could be used as part of my interactive story. I thought it would fit perfectly with what I am doing as this book is interactive. Users can turn pages by using the cursor and dragging the corner of the page and turn it like in a real book. The book is very customisable and can have a hard or soft back, its important to have these features because it all builds the effect of a real book feel. It is not just the content that is important but also the build up towards the content that will enhance the experience of something.

The myth of interactivity...

The myth of interactivity, Lev Manovich:

Lev talks about different levels of interactivity because the word is just too broadly used. An example of different levels of this would be open and closed interactivity, open meaning more than one way of interacting with it and closed meaning only one way of interacting with it. He talks about how old media is also interactive, detail of visual art, architectures that you have to walk around to experience the whole structure.

"Now interactive media asks us to click on a highlighted setence to go to another sentence. In short, we are asked to follow pre-programmed, objectively existing associations."

"Interactive media ask us to identify with someone else's mental structure. If the cinema viewer, male or female, lusted after and tried to emulate the body of the movie star, the computer user is asked to follow the mental trajectory of the media designer."

It is interesting that the design of the interactive media is the mental trajectory of the designer as I have never thought about it like that. This gives me a few ideas on how I can incorporate this into an idea.

Words that come into mind:

brain, in, out, thought, mental, conscious, programmed, rules, walls, identify, someone else

Interactivity...

Interactivity, Stallabrass:

"it should empower users, encourage cultral activity, rather than mere spectating, and make art more responsive to its audience."

Stallabrass is saying all this 'interactivity' that is happening now is not interactivity at all but just an interactive style activity. He says 'interactivity' is too limiting, the freedom for the user is an illusion.

"This is not interactivity. It is an 'interactive-style' activity."

I think he is too specific when he defines what interactivity means, he says it should be completely free of bounds to the user but I think there will always be a limitation for everything but it is how you play with those limits that achieve the sense of freedom and I think whether you do something in real-time or not affects the outcome of how you see the limit.

This is interesting as for my design I could think about how I can make the user feel empowered by something but is merely spectating in the end e.g. the user builds a train track, the train then moves along the track as a result but the actual empowerment is lost already as soon as the user creates the tracks, the experience of controlling the train in not in real-time so they are only spectating.

Words that come into mind:

restriction, limits, illusion, boundaries, web, art, book, online gaming, WOW, counterstrike, call of duty, experience, empowering, real, fake freedom, invisible, trapped, specific, style, spectate, hands-on, real-time

Remediation...

Remediation, Bolter and Grusin:

"As in a real plane, the simulated cockpit is full of dials to read and switches to flip. As in a real plane, immediacy of this experience is pure hypermediacy"

Bolter and Grusin talks about how new media is trying to acheive immediacy and hypermediacy but it is not only new media that does it, old media can also achieve immediacy e.g a painting that ignores the medium. News websites try to put the same effect of being "live" like news channels by adopting similar styles on the site to hypermediate it.

"Our culture wants to multiply its media and to erase all traces of mediation: ideally, it wants to erase its media in the very act of multiplying them."

Trying to create more media but with a hidden medium, this has got me thinking about how I can create something (on screen?) that interacts with people but the interaction would feel more like direct involvement with the content instead. I think this connects strongly to what Turkle talks about, how people live on the screen or in the screen.

Words that come to mind:

involvement, virtual reality, direct, seamless, interaction, interface-less, technology, content, media, website, old media, new media, surround, immediate, fake, drawn into

Life on the screen...

Life on the screen, Sherry Turkle:

"The traditional distance between people and machines has become harder to maintain"

Turkle talks about how people use technology as a medium to communicate with one another, they forget they are interacting with the medium for the communication.

"Are we living life on the screen or life in the screen?"

This is interesting as it shows interactivity can not only be empowering to the user it can also give a sense of immediacy to the users too. An interface or interaction so smooth and discreet that it's not thought about because you are so focused on content or the interface/ interaction blends into what the content is so well. I think a good example of this is the Nintendo Wii, the controller is designed to give you immediacy like you are actually in a sword fight, driving in a race or playing golf.

Words that come into mind:

digital painting, no mouse, no cursor, no paintbrush, sensors, monitor, flash, hands, immediate, live, real-time, no medium, free, no limit, no computer, projector only, hidden, touch screen, ds, sensitivity, hidden restriction, no moving, eye sensor, driving, natural, no steering wheel

Finished evaluation of 3 idents...

I chose the Foursight channel to base my idents on.

Ident 1: Natural Science

I was quite pleased with the outcome of this ident, I thought the idea basing the animation on a volcano to match the theme of natural science was nice and the items/ objects exploding out of the logo was effective and also entertaining to watch. I also think the animation was executed to a good standard, enough to make it look like what I was achieving.

Ident 2: Technology space

I personally am not fond of the outcome of this ident, I think what I had in mind did not make it to the animation. The reason I am not so satisfied with the outcome is because my original thought was to have all the items hover around the logo all moving in 3d space but I ended up having to do all of them except the earth in 2d space, reason why I did everything else in 2d was after when I had finished animating the earth I found I had so much hassle making the earth go where I wanted smoothly, everytime I wanted an item to fly a bend or behind to in front of the logo it would animate with jolts and jerks which didn't seem convincing enough for me to use. I am however pleased that I managed to solve this with 2d animation that was convincing enough to my standard.

Ident 3: Tetris

I am so much more pleased with the result of this animation after reworking some of it after the crit. I have improved the whole animation because of experimenting with the ending of my animation, I have worked into the ending of this ident to a high standard now and I think I have brought more life to the beginning of the animation by making it slight 3d. The beginning of my animation was executed nicely but I thought it was missing something, it looked too dull and after experimenting with some effects I have created a slightly 3d look to it. I am pleased with the overall outcome of this.