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 Mon Nov 11, 2024 9:27 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
A rant about ARG and TINAG
Moderators: imbri, ndemeter
View previous topicView next topic
Page 1 of 1 [8 Posts]  
Author Message
WhiteKnight
Guest


 		A rant about ARG and TINAG
Ok I haven't been in the community very long but here is how i see it here is my 1/50th of a greenback. I am by no means an expert, but have had years of experiance in other forms or roleplay (which is what I think ARG's are) so if you disagree and i know there are those that do go for it....but please read carefuly my OPINIONS first.

PS. Please, excuse the spelling mistakes.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I have participated (at least in part) in and monitored 3 ARG's so far - MU, Archeron and Aware - so will make referance to those as I continue this essey.

I belive that ARG's are a constantly evolving game type based in our world and Players, Guere and PM's have to change as our world does. ARG's are a Game type that evolves, but the TINAG philosiphy seems to have remained stagnant in some peoples minds over the years. And in my veiw is starting to fall down.

As interaction with the game characters increases the need for the distinction of a game seems to become more necesery, as with interaction we move from being spectators (as in MU) to actual characters within the games story tapastry that effect the outcome (as in Archeron and Aware). The characters we become have to be seperated from who we are, as we KNOW this is a game but the characters we play can not know this as it would color there actions. So we must suspend disbeleif and become these characters and play THEM, not our selves how ever close they may be to how we realy are. But characters need justification for being involved, we know why they are involved (We're Bored or we signed up on a site) and therefore the events of them being involved also need to be 'Fudged' to something more acceptable IE. they got mysterious email or found a link on a site. Also the fact that we have been involved in previous ARG's must also be forgotten by our characters.

So now that we've fudged their understanding of the game, the reason for their involvment and their past they are no longer truely US. They may be a version of us but not actualy US. So it seems we need to understand that this is a Game so that we may remove that side of us and act as though TINAG. So why not remove more....why not remove it all and start fresh. Yes I'm talking about Persona. I know some scoff at the idea as the use of persona denotes the fact that you know its a game, Sure you'll know but you've already fudged the characters mind so why not have the character forget its actualy your persona too, is easy enough to do.

The very name ARG implies the acceptance of an Alternate Reality. So why not accept one?

Imbri once said:
Quote:
"We didn't play [the PM's] world, we experienced it and we experienced it as ourselves."

Well that may have previously been the case as in MU, But the interaction side of the ARG seems to be expanding and therefor we now not only Experiance it but Participate in it and shape the world as characters our selves. Imbri also said in the same post:
Quote:
"Several games, including the current AWARE, require that you enter the world as a character. You are no longer experiencing the world, you are playing a role that you create and you are forced to play that role in order to play that world. It is something that your character is experiencing and that the real you is playing. It is a game."

Which once again I must partly agree and disagree with. Yes it is a game you are correct, but once again the term ARG denotes that it is infact a Game. But the opinion that you no longer experiance the world that the PM creates if you play a character is a complete falacy in my veiw. You experiance it through the eyes of your character, living vicariously through them.

So the TINAG is a mindset that one must adopt not a truth to be acted on to the extream. Like playing when people are doing coyboy style shooting "you are a coyboy" is a mindset that should be got into, and they adopt a persona to get more into that mindset.

To sum it up....TINAG is a misunderstood concept, that we older players should take time to better explained to the new players.

PostPosted: Sat May 29, 2004 3:09 am
 Back to top 
WhiteKnight
Guest


 		PS. The post I mentioned by Imbri is here:

http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4373

PostPosted: Sat May 29, 2004 3:13 am
 Back to top 
White Knight
Guest


 		Oh....I just read something and I got more....

Ok Imbri I may disagree with you on some things....and that may be because were both colored by indervidual experiances....but there is one thing we can agree on:
Quote:
When it comes down to it, we're all here because we enjoy interesting experiences. So I say, let's get back to enjoying things.....[edit]....Life's too short to waste your time not enjoying stuff

DAMN STRAIGHT! Thats the best thing I've heard in the recent threads about the nature of ARGs.

Also characters as I said can closely resemble you so closely that they effectivly ARE you but in the situation that is presented. As shown by rose:
Quote:
At a fundamental level my identity as a player reflects who I am and what I believe. I chose the side I am representing -- alone so far-- based on what I would choose if faced with such a choice in real life

Anyway, People should play (or experiance) how they want.....as long as it doesn't detract from anothers enjoyment of the ARG. Its the whole 'Burning Man'/Free love/Hippy philosophy

"If it brings you enjoyment and doesn't infringe on others....do it"

PostPosted: Sat May 29, 2004 3:31 am
 Back to top 
bill
Unfettered


Joined: 25 Sep 2002
Posts: 614
Location: Tampa

 		wk, personally, I believe if you want to play the game as a role playing game, that would be your decision and it's just as valid as playing as yourself.

I definitely agree that when interacting with characters, you have to set aside knowledge that you otherwise wouldn't know and it is certainly helpful to behave in a rational fashion based on your history with the character in question. In essence, this is role playing.

I don't agree that you need to assume an alternate persona in accomplishing this.

Particularly with games involving heavy character interaction, suspension of knowledge is paramount. For example, you have to get in the mind that UF does not exist in AWARE world. This means the characters inside this reality don't know that everyone at UF communicate regardless of ingame affiliations - even though your friends might be trying to influence the storyline differently than you.

A corollary within the context of AWARE is if UF doesn't exist, you don't have this meta-relationship. Therefore you wouldn't feel bad about doing something like telling another player you like on UF to "bug off."

By interacting on UF, which is the META, you acknowledge AWARE is a game.

When you stay in the game you make decisions based on what you would do - not what you want to do based on your broader understanding and knowledge.

I think, continuing with AWARE as an example, the PMs created IU to allow team collaboration within the context of the game. By segregating players into their ingame affiliations, it is easier to compartmentalize your knowledge and play without making as many egregious mistakes when interacting with characters.

With that said, nothing in what I've suggested precludes you from playing as yourself instead of some constructed personality to fit the game.

However, assuming players stick with the construct of IU and that UF remains out of game, I think the net result will be that IU will be a bit more current and only the important details will float up to UF. This could be bad or good depending on a couple of factors.

First, if something overlooked or deemed unimportant doesn't make it to UF, the lurkers following the game will, at some point, become utterly and totally lost. The plus side though, is that, for those casually following along, they'll have much less information to sift through. This also helps newbies get up to speed quicker, although nothing works better than the AWARE wiki Guide </shameless plug> Laughing for getting newbies into the game.

I see this as one more genre-bending twist on the parts of the AWARE PM team. I'll follow along with great interest to see how it works out.
_________________
Bill
http://deaddrop.us/
Dedicated to Alternate Reality Gaming

PostPosted: Sat May 29, 2004 8:43 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
 Back to top 
imbriModerator
Entrenched


Joined: 21 Sep 2002
Posts: 1182
Location: wonderland

 		Re: A rant about ARG and TINAG
WhiteKnight wrote:
I belive that ARG's are a constantly evolving game type based in our world and Players, Guere and PM's have to change as our world does. ARG's are a Game type that evolves, but the TINAG philosiphy seems to have remained stagnant in some peoples minds over the years. And in my veiw is starting to fall down.


I agree that it's an evolving genre and I honestly, despite the apparent stagnant nature of my mind, believe that is great and is great for the genre. And yes, I stick by the TINAG philosophy and believe that it creates great experiences, experiences that I prefer. They are not for everyone and I have not said that they should be or that they should be the only types of experiences out there.

I do not think that TINAG is crumbling. I think that some games are picking apart at it, but that is those games and not the games in general. I'm currently in the process of launching a great experience that sticks with the TINAG philosophy and as required by the client contains a lot of interaction. Yes, the participants know that it is a game. That is obvious. They even recieve a whole packet about the game containing training materials (it's a corporate training and teambuilding experience). Now, as with everything, they may twist it beyond it's intended purpose. However, as it stands they will have no need to create characters or peak behind the curtain or define their gamespace. They will interact with each other and with characters as themselves.

WhiteKnight wrote:
As interaction with the game characters increases the need for the distinction of a game seems to become more necesery, as with interaction we move from being spectators (as in MU) to actual characters within the games story tapastry that effect the outcome (as in Archeron and Aware).


I agree and that is, frankly, one of the problems that I have with vast amounts of interaction. It forces players to continuously define the gamespace and step out of themselves. If not done in moderation or with care, it makes it harder for those that are not around to catch up and for those that have just stumbled upon the experience to catch up and become involved. For example, I occasionally go to the AWARE forums to attempt to understand what is going on and by the 3rd posted log of conversation that seems meaningless, but likely isn't, my eyes glaze over and I give up.

I would also argue about the great differences in affect the players of Acheron or Aware have over the players of other, less conversational, experiences. The illusion may be greater, but I wonder how much it goes beyond that.

WhiteKnight wrote:
The characters we become have to be seperated from who we are, as we KNOW this is a game but the characters we play can not know this as it would color there actions. So we must suspend disbeleif and become these characters and play THEM, not our selves how ever close they may be to how we realy are. But characters need justification for being involved, we know why they are involved (We're Bored or we signed up on a site) and therefore the events of them being involved also need to be 'Fudged' to something more acceptable IE. they got mysterious email or found a link on a site. Also the fact that we have been involved in previous ARG's must also be forgotten by our characters.

So now that we've fudged their understanding of the game, the reason for their involvment and their past they are no longer truely US. They may be a version of us but not actualy US. So it seems we need to understand that this is a Game so that we may remove that side of us and act as though TINAG. So why not remove more....why not remove it all and start fresh. Yes I'm talking about Persona. I know some scoff at the idea as the use of persona denotes the fact that you know its a game, Sure you'll know but you've already fudged the characters mind so why not have the character forget its actualy your persona too, is easy enough to do.


I don't understand why someone has to become a character to play a game. I don't want to become a character. I want to explore as myself. I want to interact as myself. I don't want to have to put in the effort to work through an experience in addition to having to create a character and then attempt to remain true to that character throughout the experience. I don't believe that is a necessary quality of ARG and that is why I created the post about AWARE and whether or not it was an ARG. You seem to be saying that it is a modern, more evolved ARG and in order to get to the true state of awareness ARG you have to let go of TINAG completely. To that end, we disagree and I do not believe that eliminating TINAG creates a better ARG. It may create a better experience, there are a lot of great games out there in all varieties, but I do not believe that it will make it a better ARG.

WhiteKnight wrote:
The very name ARG implies the acceptance of an Alternate Reality. So why not accept one?

But why must the only Alternate Reality that I can accept be one that I have to play in character in a well-defined gamespace? Why can't I accept an Alternate Reality that *I* have entered and one that hasn't designated itself and everything about it as a game? Why can't I just accept one as myself? Was it that impossible to accept the world in MU?

WhiteKnight wrote:
Imbri once said:
Quote:
"We didn't play [the PM's] world, we experienced it and we experienced it as ourselves."

Well that may have previously been the case as in MU, But the interaction side of the ARG seems to be expanding and therefor we now not only Experiance it but Participate in it and shape the world as characters our selves.


Again, I do not understand why you must become or create a character in order to participate in an ARG and if you have to create a character, it seems to me that is more of an RPG than an ARG. There have been experiences which have had more communication based interaction that did not require players to assume character roles and I assume that there will continue to be so in the future.


WhiteKnight wrote:
Imbri also said in the same post:
Quote:
"Several games, including the current AWARE, require that you enter the world as a character. You are no longer experiencing the world, you are playing a role that you create and you are forced to play that role in order to play that world. It is something that your character is experiencing and that the real you is playing. It is a game."


Which once again I must partly agree and disagree with. Yes it is a game you are correct, but once again the term ARG denotes that it is infact a Game. But the opinion that you no longer experiance the world that the PM creates if you play a character is a complete falacy in my veiw. You experiance it through the eyes of your character, living vicariously through them.


Yes, you experience anything that you are playing. The point is that your character is the one that is actually doing the experience and, you're right, you are experiencing it indirectly. Which was my point.

WhiteKnight wrote:
So the TINAG is a mindset that one must adopt not a truth to be acted on to the extream. Like playing when people are doing coyboy style shooting "you are a coyboy" is a mindset that should be got into, and they adopt a persona to get more into that mindset.

To sum it up....TINAG is a misunderstood concept, that we older players should take time to better explained to the new players.


There are three simple rules taken from Elan Lee's GDC "This is not a game" lecture (more or less the origin of the TINAG philosophy): don't tell anyone you're creating a game, don't define the game space, and, most importantly, don't build a game.

I think that we all agree that it is obvious and to be expected that the players will attempt to define the game space and will refer to it as a game. However, when the game space and experience is heavily defined a line is drawn between reality and the alternate reality. It is that line and where it is drawn, imo, that distinguishes an ARG from other genres of gaming and is the heart of the TINAG principle.

-imbri

PostPosted: Sat May 29, 2004 9:36 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
Varin
I Have No Life


Joined: 02 Dec 2002
Posts: 2456
Location: South of where I used to be

 		Wow, much too much to like about on a Saturday morning. After reading all of the comments above I only really have a few short comments to make.

Some people enjoy roleplaying and others do not. Not all ARGs have required that you pick one play type or another. In CTW, many of us played as ourselves and many picked personas that they used to interact with characters. I don't think that roleplaying in a game is a more advanced form of ARG, I think it is just another form of ARG. For me, the experience isn't more enjoyable if I have to create an in game persona and roleplay. It's just different.

When I'm playing MMORPG's sometimes I roleplay my ingame character and sometimes I don't. Both ways of playing are enjoyable to me. There are the same discussions on MMORPG boards about whether roleplaying or non-roleplaying is the "elite" form of gaming. For me, again, it's just different. Different Strokes for Different Folks.
_________________
"I still miss him to this day and probably always will." - Todd Keeler, Chasing the Wish

"meta meta meta, I made you out of play..." ~ j5

PostPosted: Sat May 29, 2004 12:10 pm
Last edited by Varin on Sat May 29, 2004 2:27 pm; edited 1 time in total
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
catherwood
I Have 100 Cats and Smell of Wee

Joined: 25 Sep 2002
Posts: 4109
Location: Silicon Valley, CA

 		Re: A rant about ARG and TINAG
imbri wrote:
There are three simple rules taken from Elan Lee's GDC "This is not a game" lecture (more or less the origin of the TINAG philosophy): don’t tell anyone you're creating a game, don’t define the game space, and, most importantly, don’t build a game.


Don't build a game, build an alternate reality. Build a world, then let people explore it. It doesn't need puzzles, it just needs to be a complex space. It doesn't need real-time action, if the characters have left behind evidence of their lives. The "story" unfolds as clues are found and interpreted, much the way an archaeologist peels back the layers of history. In such a world, I can be my own curious self, sharing my discoveries with other explorers.

That describes my ideal ARG. I personally dislike the games with real-time interaction. Come up with a good rating system -- letter codes for the type of play -- we could all pick and choose which games to explore.

PostPosted: Sat May 29, 2004 12:57 pm
 View user's profile AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
 Back to top 
WhiteKnight
Guest


 		I'm reading over the posts and it doesn't seem like it like imbri and I are agreeing.....But You want to know the weird thing.....On the whole I think we are.....I think Imbri and I are actualy agreeing with each other on the overall picture, which is enjoyment is the aim of ARG's, it's just the principles we base our opinions on are differant.....which is cool. Differant mindsets are what makes the experiance an REAL experiance.....if everyone involved was the same we may as well be playing diablo or some computer based restrictive game.

Imbri I get what your saying and even respect the veiw....its just not how I choose to veiw it..... Infact differant veiws are what cause thing to develop for the best.....otherwise one gets railroaded into on set way of thinking and things never change, Each side needs the other to make the subject. It reminds me of the whole D20 debate (a roleplaying debate we WONT get into).... Each to their own is all I'm saying.....that and respect the others and take care not to dismiss how others wish to play the game.

In the case of the spy in 'AWARE' I think that what they did infringed on rose's enjoyment and they should have asked before ousting rose, Common cuortisy people....its like breaking someone else's sand castle....not cool dude (you know who you are).

What it need to be seen as is a sort of shrodinger's cat theory (I like philosiphy, can anyone tell Smile ).....its not a game and at the same time a game....Untill one analyses it. I think that ARGs are a very vauge discription of experiance that encompises many sorts of activity. I think that RPGs is ONE sort of ARG, just as LARPs are one sort of RPG. Hell if you strech the definition the 'game of life' could be an ARG. I think personaly that the definition of an ARG needs to evolve, The same way the definition of roleplaying game evolved in the 1980's. In the 1980's the nature of roleplay games went through a redefinition with the advent of LARP (or live action role play) and totaly redefined the meaning of roleplay game.

As said by....some guy....from that movie 'Blade':

"The times are changing and so is the world. We need to change with it or one day we'll find our selves extinct."

PostPosted: Sat May 29, 2004 10:28 pm
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 1 [8 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