RE: Backstory (was RE: [MUD-Dev] New poll)

["Lee Sheldon" <linearno#gte,net>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mud-dev-admin#kanga,nu
> [mailto:mud-dev-admin#kanga,nu]On Behalf Of
> Angela Ferraiolo
> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 5:13 PM
> To: mud-dev#kanga,nu
> Subject: Re: Backstory (was RE: [MUD-Dev] New poll)

> my experience was, well, if you've ever had to go from
> playing classical
> music to playing jazz improvisation? writing a game was a lot
> like that.
> actually, writing the game was just like writing anything else, but
> structuring the game & beginning to understand the uses of
> story within a
> game, was a lot like that musical experience.

That's a very nice analogy in a number of ways.  The differences in the ways
they are structured.  The approach to each.  The relative newness of one
compared to the other...

>some people
> will make the
> jump. some don't want to.

Yes, fear of the new thing.  Or total non-interested in interactive, or its
audience.  And many are basically just lazy.

> now, saying you want to, how much
> of a traditional
> writing background will apply? as in music, many of the
> traditions and known
> rules were really useful and very powerful when writing a
> game. other so
> called rules of writing and structure were best forgotten
> entirely. they
> were restrictive and irrelevant. --- angela

Exactly, what I try to do when I teach is give examples of traditional
narrative tools (from fiction, drama, film, whatever) that seem to work
quite well in games and MUDs.  And by no means do I think we've used all
that are possible.  New connections are waiting to be discovered.

Other than a couple obvious ones like linearity, though, I haven't found
many rules that can just be thrown out.  What are some that you think simply
don't work?

Lee




_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev#kanga,nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev