Comments on: (Sharing) Control http://grandtextauto.org/2003/05/31/sharing-control/ A group blog about computer narrative, games, poetry, and art. Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:43:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: chrisf http://grandtextauto.org/2003/05/31/sharing-control/comment-page-1/#comment-10428 chrisf Thu, 09 Dec 2004 23:43:17 +0000 /?p=22#comment-10428 This is an old post, but it's been referenced by <a href="http://grandtextauto.org/2004/12/08/head-games/#more-598">this one</a>, and addresses a point that is more relevant to what I'm interested in. The idea of 'sharing control with an AI' loses its weight if an author has control over the functioning of the AI. An understanding of AI methods, and how to manipulate their inner workings would be a valuable tool for authors of interactive narratives. Interactive narrative tools should thus include a simplified interface into an AI drama manager so that the rules that dictate the AI are open for manipulation. The AI is a tool just as any other programming tool. Most AI algorithms are pretty simple at their core, and work through a set of simple rules that work together to create a complex system. The basic rules of simulation systems (like in SimCity) work in much the same way. If an author creates an AI avatar for their own authorial wishes, the control is not so much shared with the AI than it is shared with the player of the interactive system. This is an old post, but it’s been referenced by this one, and addresses a point that is more relevant to what I’m interested in.

The idea of ‘sharing control with an AI’ loses its weight if an author has control over the functioning of the AI. An understanding of AI methods, and how to manipulate their inner workings would be a valuable tool for authors of interactive narratives.

Interactive narrative tools should thus include a simplified interface into an AI drama manager so that the rules that dictate the AI are open for manipulation. The AI is a tool just as any other programming tool.

Most AI algorithms are pretty simple at their core, and work through a set of simple rules that work together to create a complex system. The basic rules of simulation systems (like in SimCity) work in much the same way.

If an author creates an AI avatar for their own authorial wishes, the control is not so much shared with the AI than it is shared with the player of the interactive system.

]]> By: nick http://grandtextauto.org/2003/05/31/sharing-control/comment-page-1/#comment-125 nick Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=22#comment-125 This sort of comment sounds to me like a painter or photographer complaining about an architect designing a building. The former sort of person is used to presenting a single two-dimensional perspective; the architect creates a structure and a space or spaces that someone can inhabit, spaces people can wander through and see from many different perspectives. Why would someone want to give control of the perspective to a three-dimensional structure and to another person who can do this sort of wandering? Well, because buildings can be nice to inhabit and to walk through. That doesn't mean that paintings and photographs aren't also nice. They're different. This sort of comment sounds to me like a painter or photographer complaining about an architect designing a building. The former sort of person is used to presenting a single two-dimensional perspective; the architect creates a structure and a space or spaces that someone can inhabit, spaces people can wander through and see from many different perspectives. Why would someone want to give control of the perspective to a three-dimensional structure and to another person who can do this sort of wandering? Well, because buildings can be nice to inhabit and to walk through. That doesn’t mean that paintings and photographs aren’t also nice. They’re different.

]]> By: andrew http://grandtextauto.org/2003/05/31/sharing-control/comment-page-1/#comment-126 andrew Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=22#comment-126 <img src="http://grandtextauto.org/archives//aljaffee.jpg" align="right">Yeah, good point, that analogy has truth to it... But the "difference" in this case is of a different nature than, say, 2D vs. 3D. I can see why it would seem especially unsettling for an artist to feel like he or she may lose authorial control to "some AI". Artists, particularly those who make pieces that get "used" by the audience - eg, architects, new media artists - have always had to "share control" of the art experience with the audience, and to some extent, with the artifact (eg, the artifact may break down). Now, with AI-based artifacts, the artifact itself is very autonomous and able to assert control more than ever before... yet another cook in the kitchen... Yeah, good point, that analogy has truth to it… But the “difference” in this case is of a different nature than, say, 2D vs. 3D. I can see why it would seem especially unsettling for an artist to feel like he or she may lose authorial control to “some AI”. Artists, particularly those who make pieces that get “used” by the audience – eg, architects, new media artists – have always had to “share control” of the art experience with the audience, and to some extent, with the artifact (eg, the artifact may break down). Now, with AI-based artifacts, the artifact itself is very autonomous and able to assert control more than ever before… yet another cook in the kitchen…

]]>