Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
 
The time now is Fri Nov 15, 2024 4:26 pm
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)
View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Meta » General META Discussion
Interaction
Moderators: imbri, ndemeter
View previous topicView next topic
Page 1 of 1 [7 Posts]  
Author Message
imbriModerator
Entrenched


Joined: 21 Sep 2002
Posts: 1182
Location: wonderland

Interaction

Now, I think we can all say that there is no "true" definition of an ARG. We all have our own opinions on what that might be and that's great. But, lately, I've felt very alone in my thoughts on interaction and ARGs.

If they included any between you and a character I would say it is an ARG in the true sense.

[S]ome form of interaction, even just one of the characters asking us to find something out would elevate this to 'game' status for me, rather than just 'complicated reading'.

Since there is no character interaction where what we tell them and what we do can be part of the story, I see this as an "Experience".

It had an excellent plot and great puzzles but it lacked the interaction and I'm pretty sure it's the interaction that makes an ARG different from other types of games.

Increasingly, it seems that people think that there needs to be some direct interaction between the players and the character. That there has to be a call for help. That the characters have to need the players. That the characters need to approach the players directly or need the players in order for anything to happen. "Oh playerperson! help me solve this terribly difficult riddle!/find the killer/solve the mystery" It's all so direct, so purposeful.

Do you need to feel that call for action? Do you need to feel a personalized connection to the universe?

I don't and, really, I think I prefer to not have it - at least not as a focus for change in the universe. I know that I don't like character interaction. It makes me self-conscious. I never know what to say and I always know that I'm just chatting with some PM who is probably cracking up or, worse, annoyed that s/he's stuck talking to someone that doesn't know what to say. Too much pressure.

I love discovering this entirely fictional but oh so real world that I can explore and that by just being a part of that world, I've suddenly had an effect on it. Going all the way back to the Beast, I think we can say that by today's standards there was little to no interaction. Sure, there was the Mike Royal call, but that's really the only example of direct one on one communication. Everything else was rather impersonal and to the community - the emails and phone calls were sent to any & all on the list. Even so, I'd be surprised if any of the players felt that they didn't have an impact on the story or the universe. Our presence on the universe was definitely felt. Not only were we able to vote on the issue of emancipation, but we changed the way things acted and reacted in the world. Heck, we made Loki explode with our nightmares and we did it without emailing him or calling him or chatting with him. It was rather simple, actually. Once players figured out that he fed on nightmares, they created a database and filled it with their on nightmares. When Loki stumbled upon it, he shattered and pieces of him landed on various in-game sites. We blew up an AI by just filling a database with a bunch of nightmares. I still get excited by that.

What sort of interaction do you prefer? Individual or group? Direct or indirect? Blantant or subtle? Character or universe? Or do you just want it all Smile

It should go without saying, but... there's no right or wrong here. I'm looking for opinions and discussion and memorable moments. Let's share!

PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 12:51 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
Phaedra
Lurker v2.0


Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 4033
Location: Here, obviously

Personalized interaction with individual characters, no, I don't think is necessary for it to be an ARG. But as part of that whole "email addresses should be real" and "phone numbers should work" element of TINAG, I do think that there should be some way that if you poke the game, it pokes back.

And as far as being able to interact with the game itself, I believe it's necessary that players be able to affect it. The Beast may have presented itself as largely impersonal (and lacked a "cry for help," yes? Instead it had a few popups telling you that if you knew what was good for you, you'd stay the hell away from the whole thing, didn't it?), but as you note, players' presence was definitely felt. Something that runs its course whether anyone is watching or not, I think, is not an ARG.

Blowing Loki up, to me, was still a form of character interaction. It just wasn't personalized or direct.

So, I'd say that interaction is a necessary component of an ARG, but I think I define it very differently than you do. I don't necessarily need the characters to talk to me (although for me the most thrilling part of ILB was unexpectedly talking to Melissa), but I do want to be able to affect them somehow and have them respond to my actions within their world.
_________________
Voted Most Likely to Thread-Jack and Most Patient Explainer in the ILoveBees Awards.

World Champion: Cruel 2B Kind


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:31 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
imbriModerator
Entrenched


Joined: 21 Sep 2002
Posts: 1182
Location: wonderland

Phaedra wrote:
So, I'd say that interaction is a necessary component of an ARG, but I think I define it very differently than you do.


I don't know if you define it "very differently." I do consider the Loki incident a type of character interaction. I should have been more clear in my dislike of direct character interaction. Though, I thought my examples made that clear. Unless that's not the very differently you mean. But the only other difference that I could see was your thrill at getting a live Melissa on the other end. Had that happened to me, I'd probably have panicked and hung up, heh.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:59 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
Phaedra
Lurker v2.0


Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 4033
Location: Here, obviously

Well, you said you didn't like "character interaction" so I assumed you weren't considering group interaction, like the Loki incident, to be interaction with characters rather than just with the game. Smile

And I think maybe you sell yourself short on what would have happened with you and Melissa -- I was terrified and shaking at the time, but I felt like the friends I'd made playing on the game were counting on me to do my best at it, and afterward I was like "HOLY CRAP THAT WAS AWESOME!"

When she first spoke, though, I did have a second or two where I contemplated just handing the phone off to someone else. Wink

(Of course, learning later that Kristen was nervous to be talking to me makes the whole thing really amusing.)

Anyway, point being, the adrenaline is part of what makes the experience memorable.
_________________
Voted Most Likely to Thread-Jack and Most Patient Explainer in the ILoveBees Awards.

World Champion: Cruel 2B Kind


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:05 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
thebruce
Dances With Wikis


Joined: 16 Aug 2004
Posts: 6899
Location: Kitchener, Ontario

I think this deals with the idea that every ARG has different 'roles' players can take... some don't like interaction, some thrive on it. I think a good ARG definitely requires the flexibility to have players affect the plot, but whether it includes direct interaction or general interaction I think is hit or miss. I think either can be greatly accepted depending on the makeup of the player-base, but generally I think you can assume that a small fraction of players desire direct personal interaction over having at least a general influence... and again, an ARG will only attract people who can connect with the style of gameplay it offers. If it's too heavy on personal interaction, or too heavy on sitting back and watching it play out, it'll naturally shrink the player base. Of course there are always exceptions.

Personally I'm not all that excited about personal direct interaction, though having an indirect effect on the story is huge. But I do like it when there is a bit of direct interaction by someone of the players, so it adds a bit more to the reality and connection, but again it depends on the story then, as to whether it's realistic interaction or not. I loved in ILB that there were people who hunted the phones, that some were the ones who became 'friends' with the princess or melissa and whatnot. The variety of interaction there is what made that ARG so memorable, even though I never interacted myself.

I guess my conclusion would be that I personally feel that it's a balance of numerous interaction methods, where some are weighted more than others -- not a lot of direct interaction, but some, by a few people, with lots of room for anyone to potentially indirectly influence the plot by how they take part in the ARG.
-Too much direct interaction personalizes it for a minute few and locks people out of the experience.
-Too little direct interaction may distance the ARG from reality (depending on its plot, of course).
But general flexibility is essential to let non-interacting players still have a sense of belonging and connection, rather than just watching things unfold on their own.

For me, the ARG experience is less of what I do directly (that's more of a bonus to the experience), and more of what everyone else does within the context of the plot, and its believability, knowing that there are many 'roles' to play in the experience.
_________________
@4DFiction/@Wikibruce/Contact
ARGFest 2013 - Seattle! ARGFest.com


PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:17 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
imbriModerator
Entrenched


Joined: 21 Sep 2002
Posts: 1182
Location: wonderland

Phaedra wrote:
And I think maybe you sell yourself short on what would have happened with you and Melissa...


I dunno. Now if it was an in-person thing, I wouldn't run away. But phone? Ack. I think I'd gasp, hang up the phone, and then realize I just upset hundreds of thousands of players and OMG! WTF DID I JUST DO?!


Phaedra wrote:
Anyway, point being, the adrenaline is part of what makes the experience memorable.


So, here's another question (more for those that enjoy the direct one on one communication with characters)... Is it the adrenaline? Do you still get excited after the second, third, tenth email? What about later games? I think it would wane after awhile and become more commonplace. Does it then change its meaning for you?

(so very many questions in this thread, I know... I'm just curious as to how different people view interaction and what they find exciting and why they find it exciting. I can't be the only one! I'm also super curious as to big ARG moments - hmmmm maybe that's another post....)

PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:37 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
jwiv
Decorated


Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 175
Location: Baltimore, MD

imbri wrote:
Phaedra wrote:
And I think maybe you sell yourself short on what would have happened with you and Melissa...


I dunno. Now if it was an in-person thing, I wouldn't run away. But phone? Ack. I think I'd gasp, hang up the phone, and then realize I just upset hundreds of thousands of players and OMG! WTF DID I JUST DO?!


Phaedra wrote:
Anyway, point being, the adrenaline is part of what makes the experience memorable.


So, here's another question (more for those that enjoy the direct one on one communication with characters)... Is it the adrenaline? Do you still get excited after the second, third, tenth email? What about later games? I think it would wane after awhile and become more commonplace. Does it then change its meaning for you?

(so very many questions in this thread, I know... I'm just curious as to how different people view interaction and what they find exciting and why they find it exciting. I can't be the only one! I'm also super curious as to big ARG moments - hmmmm maybe that's another post....)


I've had two phone calls and a few emails/forums posts. The first time I got a phone call, I'm not sure I managed to get more than a few croaks out of my throat - thankfully, all I had to really do is listen. Since then,they're still exciting, but thankfully less scary.
_________________
While the Law of Fives is never wrong, I often am.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:54 pm
 View user's profile AIM Address
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 1 [7 Posts]  
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Meta » General META Discussion
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group