intfiction.org

Have you guys seen this piece on Salon? http://www.salon.com/2012/02/02/can_bel ... _the_book/ It's about interactive features in ebooks, but it has obvious implications for IF. Here's the quote with the most direct relevance:

It's a running gag among comics fans that, every few years, an article appears with the title "Pow! Bam! Comics aren't just for kids any more!" The article will mention whatever title is currently hot, and then go on to wonder if comics can really escape from its four-color superhero roots.

You have found the IF equivalent of that article.

Scenario transcends narrative; such is the joy of it.

_________________
Games, Fonts, and Font-Toys For Gamers - http://www.cumberlandgames.com

Although comics won't evade their four-colors roots, they haven't been for children anymore since when the Joker broke Gordon's daughter's back in the Eighties. Thanks Alan Moore.

I don't entirely disagree with this view ... it does seem to me that narrative in IF tends to operate at about a 90-degree angle to narrative in conventional fiction ... but you know, if anyone is looking for an idea for a mini-comp (or even a maxi-mini-comp, as the entries would need to have some heft), I think HamletComp would be a good one.

The idea being, in some way, shape, or form to draw upon as many of the major characters, themes, and events of Hamlet as possible, while turning it into a full-on IF game. Satire certainly allowed, but not encouraged. Iambic pentameter not required. Extra points for punctiliously correct usage of olde English.

A game that really is Hamlet, while taking the story in surprising and fresh interactive directions ... I've just finished reading Gregory Maguire's four-volume Oz series, so the possibilities of adaptation are much on my mind. But I think the best way to refute the negative view expressed in the quote might be to demonstrate in the most direct and concrete possible way (i.e., by doing Hamlet) that it's simply wrong.

Okay, wait, here's a straw man for you to practice on:

"Theater and narrative are in fundamental respects incompatible. A 'Macbeth' in which the director can decide to move the story to Depression-era New York, a 'Hamlet' in which the lead actor can decide to laugh at the ghost or marry Ophelia -- these are no longer Macbeth or Hamlet. The power of these stories come from their feeling of inevitability, so any changes the director makes will interfere with that power. The meaning of the play comes from the nature of the character, so whatever external ideas the actor brings to the role will blur and obstruct that meaning. The only valid experience is reading the plays while sitting in a dimly-lit -- hello? Hello? Where are you going?"

This seems apropos:

http://www.raphkoster.com/2012/01/20/na ... -mechanic/

I stopped reading at "save the book." Who says the book needs saving?

I watched "Get Lamp" yesterday and my favorite part was where they talk about how 90% of what people do on computers currently is read. Look, you're reading right now! Oh wait, I guess that doesn't count because you're here to talk about IF.

How does the author believe that this argument runs? "X would be a bad idea for an interactive story. Therefore interactive stories do not work." This is not just N=1 induction, it is N=1 induction where the one case is a hypothetical one and all the real cases are ignored.

Aren't you afraid you'll lose your progress if it crashes?