unforum

[Almighty]

TINAG/TIAG a contradiction in terms ?

[European Chris]

Well if you did that you would proabably be done for fraud/wasting police time.

But I briefly wrote something simialr to your thoughts about the TIAG/TINAG contradiction here.

http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=214628&highlight=tiag+tinag#214628

[Almighty]

but are there PMs on here, or known games which pushed this limit ?

[colin]

For reference:
orginal discussion started here
Existing threads relating to TINAG:
A rant about ARG and TINAG
Community Support for Grassroots Games; TINAG
Where Reality Ends and That Other Reality Begins...
Plus one argn article:
This Is Not A Game...

As far as games that pushed the limit, look at ARGTalk. Here is one reaction to it: ARGTalk's Bait and Switch

If the 'players' don't know it's a game, it's real life.

[MageSteff]

Re: TINAG/TIAG a contradiction in terms ?

[Almighty]

OK, now i've got this clear in my head, what puzzles/challenges *could* one make available in the above example ? stripping out the PM -> player contact, and removing situations that *could* end up disastrously, where could you go with it, without the "nod & wink" ?

[Puppy_Zwolle]

Look who's become a specialist over night:----> me.
Just my thoughts on the subject.

[MageSteff]

[imbri]

In my opinion there is absolutely no contradiction here.

The problem is misunderstanding what "This Is Not A Game" actually means.

It is not about creating an experience that is so real that the players do not actually understand that they are playing a game. That is not an ARG, that is something as simple and innocent as a practical joke or as complex and malicious as fraud.

Alternate Reality Games are not frauds and they aren't hoaxes and they aren't practical jokes. They are games. And, as games, they have participants that are aware that they are playing, they have players.


This Is Not a Game is both a player mantra and a design statement.

As a player mantra, it helps them to reinforce the boundaries, to become more immersed in the world. They clearly and obviously know that it is a game, but they create this idea that it's more than just a game in order to have a better grasp of the game world which is rather undefined because it doesn't exist on a single platform or come in a box. If they had no understanding that it was a game, they wouldn't be able to make the claim that "this is not a game." Heck, in one of the most common analogies, people point to the movie "The Game." Yet, even in that movie, the character knew that he was playing a game.

As a design statement, it is not about creating an experience that leads players into not understanding that they are playing a game. It is not about tricking or fooling or hoaxing the players. It is about creating a very consistant experience that bleeds off of any particular platform as necessary. Clearly, when designing an alternate reality game, you know that you are creating a play experience. However, you aproach from a standpoint that is beyond the game. You approach it from within the game environment instead of standing outside of it. If there are phone numbers, you make them lead to a phone instead of just a 555 number. If there are emails, you make sure that they don't bounce (unless the bouncing is on purpose, of course). If there is an address, that address exists and players can find it if they so choose. While you are designing with that philosophy in mind, you are always standing above it, much like your players do when they are playing, aware of the fact that you are creating a game.

Steff said above that the reason that everyone needs to understand that it is a game is so that the PMs don't get in trouble with the law. And yes, perhaps that is a reason. However, I think that the real reason that everyone needs to understand that it is a game is because they are in fact games.

If you want to create a massive hoax or a practical joke, no matter how innocent or cruel, that is your decision. However, the participants in such activities are not aware that they are actually participating. Without that awareness, they are not playing - they are just doing what they would do in that situation. If they are not playing, then there is no game. If there is no game it is not, in any way, shape, or form, an Alternate Reality Game.

[QBKooky]

I don't have a link offhand, but I think Elan Lee (one of the main hoo-hah's behind the Beast) was quoted in one article or interview talking about this contradiction of TINAG/TIAG.

If I recall correctly, the gist of it was that even though it was utterly important that the players know that they are playing a game, the Game itself does not admit to being a game. Of course, this has to be handled somewhat peculiarly - because everyone knows it's a game BUT the game, and what's the best way to get players to understand that it's a game without being too overt.

This gets into the question of meta-sites: a website, off to the side, not in the game's world, that says "yeah, This is a game." Orbital Colony had one, the Beast and ILB did not. Insert your own examples here. I'm not sure how I feel about meta-sites, but I think that in the future (and even the present) PMs are going to be finding more and more creative ways to pitch their games to a non-ARGing audience, which means convincing the players that TIAG while maintaining TINAG is going to continue to be a concern.

[Puppy_Zwolle]

[European Chris]

And cruicially the game is not an alternative to reality.

[cabalagent23]

A Concrete Example?

[addlepated]

Re: A Concrete Example?

[Ciaran_H]

Re: A Concrete Example?