unforum

[RatherNotSay]

Too much line-blurring?

[Nightmare Tony]

Would it be a person using their real name or a hired actor type that may be someone recognizable or a known celebrity type?
Referring to the movie The Game, they used a bit actor for the part which proved to help lead Van Orten to find him at a zoo. that part shows the dangers of that particular bit. Unless you get a REALLY obscure actor, but come to think of it, that was the role a really obscure actor

One other example seen was in players finding a game character with the exact same name as a real world person. The PMs had to caution against contacting the real person as they were definitely out of game.

It all depends on the situation and circumstances. I do think that the ARG community has enough respect for real life people involved with the games that I dont personally see a stalking aspect. I do see them trying to communicate in any way possible, but I just dont see stalking there. I think that is a note of comfort for future pms and btses...

[imbri]

[Phaedra]

Imbri's said most of what I wanted to say regarding the "like hell you can just trust that there wouldn't be any stalkers" aspect, but I also want to add that even with the creepy emails, most people can distinguish between, for example, Kristen Rutherford and Melissa/Durga/The Sleeping Princess. Ergo, when the game's over, it's clear that she's Kristen and not the character.

The character that we had become so attached to is gone because the game is over.

If the ARG is centered around a real-life person, I don't think the distinction would be as clear. When the game's over, that person still exists. Even if what was present in the game was a sort of fictionalized version of them (and to a certain extent, I think, any online persona is always going to be a slightly fictionalized version of yourself), they're still around and going on with their lives.

So I think that exacerbates the likelihood of both stalking, and just an uncomfortable "where do we draw the line" situation for particularly attached or sociable players.

It just strikes me as inviting bad juju all around.

That said, I think there's the potential for a safe "cameo" in an ARG by a real person. But having them be a major character gives me the gollywoggles.

[thebruce]

I'll chime in as well.
There's a perfect example, I believe, of an ARG that does a good job of maintaining that fact vs fiction line, with real people being used in the game. The Ocular Effect ARG for Fallen already has at least 2 significant real life people/characters in the storyline. At first it was odd, to find that DVJ Charles Kriel was a real person, as well as Steph Waller, but the way it was handled was that pretty much anything that was intended for in-game purposes was labelled by an in-game symbol. Kind of like following the bread crumbs. If you find something about the 'character' that has no symbol associated with it, then you could assume it's no longer 'ingame'.

Looking at www.kriel.tv, you'll find emblazened on his front page, the cover of a book he wrote, with the prominent 'F' rune by his name. Clicking on it takes you to one page with a video and MP3 download, both used in-game. Any page on the site with that symbol would link to that page. In doing more research about this 'Charles Kriel', we find a rich history, biography, real world interactions, partnerships, events, spanning his lifetime. Kriel is indeed a real person. We also find other references to his book that don't have the rune, and that was our indication that while we may interact with real-life characters, we only should be following the crumbs, as it were.

Granted, there are numerous other difficulties that arise with that type of line-blurring, but at that point it's a matter of how much time and effort the PMs want to put into the ARG, and how much (well, whether or not) the 'actors' are willing to open up their personal lives to potential scrutiny, and who knows, maybe some stalking issues in the future. Then it's also a matter of how well the PMs deal with it that determine the immersiveness and enjoyment of the players. Obviously if it's too easy for the player to go off the path, then it could ruin the experience; or if too much time is taken by some players bringing others back onto the path... in that case, the quality of the ARG really is subjective, by how much the players want to put up with.

Personally, I think whether real people are used in-game is entirely a decision for the actors and PMs to make. I don't think it hurts the ARG genre itself, but the results of an ARG that do that really become a matter of player opinion based on how well it's all handled to keep the game a game, yet immersive.

[RatherNotSay]

To answer the first question asked of my original post, the idea we had in mind would involve a person playing his or herself. He or she is aware of the "dangers" involved, and we would never put someone unaware into that situation.

That being said, very interesting thoughts by everyone. Thank you!

I knew I should have been following Ocular Effect more closely. The idea of "marking" the in-game parts of the person's life is a great one.

I believe we have an intelligent way to handle the situation, but I thought it best to hear someone else's feedback in case there was something we were missing.

I hope others will chime in as well.

[RatherNotSay]

Oops, one more question. In Ocular Effect, were the players told that in-game areas were marked with a symbol, or were they left to figure that out on their own?

[thebruce]

That was a matter of deduction. The more experienced ARG players had a better idea of what to 'believe' or not. So yes, that is an assumption that the PMs made. Who would guarantee that there would be any veteran argers? If there weren't, then what would have happened? Like people running amok until the PMs somehow nudged them to stay on track. So that's one of the drawbacks. But again, the detrement is to the real-life characters and their privacy, which we can likely assume they agreed to legally before they dedicated themselves to the story.
Are there difficulties involved with real people playing themselves (with slightly fictional elements) in an ARG? Definitely. Yet the potential harm essentially only comes to those who agree to the task.

[imbri]

[RatherNotSay]

[thebruce]

[Phaedra]

1) As far as it being a "TOS nightmare," not at all.

The player who was also a character, like any other individual involved BTS with a game, could continue to post in any forum or thread unrelated to the game.

2) There's also the worry about other people getting drawn in without full consent. Characters have relatives, friends, roommates, etc. So do real people. Since one of the things we do in ARGs is try to get information, I also worry about real people being contacted by players asking about the real person-character.

[RatherNotSay]

Phaedra, true and double-true.

To be honest, it hadn't occured to us (okay, to me at least) that players might try to contact relatives & friends. A stupid thing not to think of, but then that is exactly why I started this thread. While we had found a way to temporarily cover-up the primary person's contact information, the same method won't work for this person's acquaintances.

That in itself may be enough reason to go another route. That and now wondering what other simple consequences had not occured to us.

Going another way is actually not an issue at all, we were just hoping to make this experience more real.

[Phaedra]

[imbri]