<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Responsive Narratives</title>
	<atom:link href="http://grandtextauto.org/2003/07/11/responsive-narratives/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://grandtextauto.org/2003/07/11/responsive-narratives/</link>
	<description>A group blog about computer narrative, games, poetry, and art.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:43:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Crawford</title>
		<link>http://grandtextauto.org/2003/07/11/responsive-narratives/comment-page-1/#comment-212</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Crawford</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=42#comment-212</guid>
		<description>Boy, I can certainly agree with your comments on how difficult it is to build real interactive narrative stuff. One of the problems holding back the field is the widespread feeling that good interactive storytelling will require no more effort than a computer game requires. It turns out that a great deal more effort than that will be required.



I too am looking forward to this book, especially because I have begun work on my own book on interactive storytelling.



Chris</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Boy, I can certainly agree with your comments on how difficult it is to build real interactive narrative stuff. One of the problems holding back the field is the widespread feeling that good interactive storytelling will require no more effort than a computer game requires. It turns out that a great deal more effort than that will be required.</p>
<p>I too am looking forward to this book, especially because I have begun work on my own book on interactive storytelling.</p>
<p>Chris</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Doherty</title>
		<link>http://grandtextauto.org/2003/07/11/responsive-narratives/comment-page-1/#comment-213</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Doherty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=42#comment-213</guid>
		<description>More effort than a staff of 20 - 30 (artists, programmers, writers, composers, management) working for two or three years and spending a seven figure budget? What kind of effort do you have in mind?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More effort than a staff of 20 &#8211; 30 (artists, programmers, writers, composers, management) working for two or three years and spending a seven figure budget? What kind of effort do you have in mind?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: andrew</title>
		<link>http://grandtextauto.org/2003/07/11/responsive-narratives/comment-page-1/#comment-214</link>
		<dc:creator>andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=42#comment-214</guid>
		<description>Responding to Chris D.&#039;s question to Chris C. ...  Naturally, this depends on what you mean by &quot;interactive story&quot; &#8212; a term almost as open-ended as &quot;computer game&quot;.  I used to think that no one had yet built a &quot;real&quot; interactive story; I&#039;ve come to realize that I have a certain set of criteria for what &quot;interactive story&quot; means,  that not everyone else shares :-) , and that of course plenty of things have been built to date that can be called interactive stories.  



(As a point of reference, Michael and I briefly list our design criteria for our current project &lt;a href=&quot;http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~michaelm/publications/SIA2000.pdf&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.  To our knowledge, nothing has been built to date that satisfy even these minimal criteria.)



The bigger vision some of us have for what a interactive story would be, would require a much larger database of content &#8212; dialog, behavior, character animation, etc. etc. &#8212; than what we see in today&#039;s games.  Today&#039;s games have relatively huge amounts of content compared to older games, but it seems that an decent interactive story will require even more.  



It&#039;s probably not possible to build that much content in a brute-force way.  We&#039;re going to have to make systems that have some ability to generate dialog and behavior, in collaboration with human authors.  My guess is that without that kind of assistance from the system, the bigger vision is probably not achievable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Responding to Chris D.&#8217;s question to Chris C. &#8230;  Naturally, this depends on what you mean by &#8220;interactive story&#8221; &mdash; a term almost as open-ended as &#8220;computer game&#8221;.  I used to think that no one had yet built a &#8220;real&#8221; interactive story; I&#8217;ve come to realize that I have a certain set of criteria for what &#8220;interactive story&#8221; means,  that not everyone else shares :-) , and that of course plenty of things have been built to date that can be called interactive stories.  </p>
<p>(As a point of reference, Michael and I briefly list our design criteria for our current project <a href="http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~michaelm/publications/SIA2000.pdf">here</a>.  To our knowledge, nothing has been built to date that satisfy even these minimal criteria.)</p>
<p>The bigger vision some of us have for what a interactive story would be, would require a much larger database of content &mdash; dialog, behavior, character animation, etc. etc. &mdash; than what we see in today&#8217;s games.  Today&#8217;s games have relatively huge amounts of content compared to older games, but it seems that an decent interactive story will require even more.  </p>
<p>It&#8217;s probably not possible to build that much content in a brute-force way.  We&#8217;re going to have to make systems that have some ability to generate dialog and behavior, in collaboration with human authors.  My guess is that without that kind of assistance from the system, the bigger vision is probably not achievable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Doherty</title>
		<link>http://grandtextauto.org/2003/07/11/responsive-narratives/comment-page-1/#comment-215</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Doherty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=42#comment-215</guid>
		<description>OK, read your criteria and it sounds doable, provided you start with good natural language interpretation and an AI that can pass a general Turing test. To get there from the current state of the art will, I fear, require more than time and money. It will require a major breakthrough. Because it seems to me that your goal with this program requires the program to genuinely understand the player&#039;s input, rather then just create the illusion of understanding (like, say, ELIZA) or understand only in a very rigid Blocks-world like context (like expert systems). 

I think you&#039;re right that you&#039;ll never brute force this. Take your example where the player becomes uncomfortable and asks for a drink to change the subject. Now imagine the number of other ways the player might try to change the subject &#8211; He might ask for a cigarette, comment on some object in the environment, mention the weather, mention some current event (there&#039;s a whole other bag of worms), talk about his medical problems or any number of things. You could spend months trying to anticipate the player&#039;s response for this single beat. Now, the standard approach to this is to have some sort of stock reply to non-revelent input but really this is not good enough. No matter how many variations on the stock phrase you use it ends up sounding like &quot;I am not programmed to respond in that area&quot;.

What really interests me about your ideas is your approach to the protagonist. In drama or fiction a story happens to a set of characters who behave, ultimately, as they must given who they are and our experience is of coming to understand the characters through seeing what they do and say in a series of events designed to display those very qualities. What you seem to be getting at is injecting the player, in his proper person (i.e. not &quot;Role-playing&quot; as someone else) into a story with other, program controlled, people and the experience is to find out how YOU would respond to a given series of events designed to get at some aspect or aspects of qualities you may possess. This seems like an important difference to me, a genuinely new thing arising organically out of the nature of the medium. Very interesting.

Alas, I suspect we are in the position of Charles Babbage in respect to this sort of fiction, able to see how it could and should work, but lacking the basic technology to make it happen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, read your criteria and it sounds doable, provided you start with good natural language interpretation and an AI that can pass a general Turing test. To get there from the current state of the art will, I fear, require more than time and money. It will require a major breakthrough. Because it seems to me that your goal with this program requires the program to genuinely understand the player&#8217;s input, rather then just create the illusion of understanding (like, say, ELIZA) or understand only in a very rigid Blocks-world like context (like expert systems). </p>
<p>I think you&#8217;re right that you&#8217;ll never brute force this. Take your example where the player becomes uncomfortable and asks for a drink to change the subject. Now imagine the number of other ways the player might try to change the subject &ndash; He might ask for a cigarette, comment on some object in the environment, mention the weather, mention some current event (there&#8217;s a whole other bag of worms), talk about his medical problems or any number of things. You could spend months trying to anticipate the player&#8217;s response for this single beat. Now, the standard approach to this is to have some sort of stock reply to non-revelent input but really this is not good enough. No matter how many variations on the stock phrase you use it ends up sounding like &#8220;I am not programmed to respond in that area&#8221;.</p>
<p>What really interests me about your ideas is your approach to the protagonist. In drama or fiction a story happens to a set of characters who behave, ultimately, as they must given who they are and our experience is of coming to understand the characters through seeing what they do and say in a series of events designed to display those very qualities. What you seem to be getting at is injecting the player, in his proper person (i.e. not &#8220;Role-playing&#8221; as someone else) into a story with other, program controlled, people and the experience is to find out how YOU would respond to a given series of events designed to get at some aspect or aspects of qualities you may possess. This seems like an important difference to me, a genuinely new thing arising organically out of the nature of the medium. Very interesting.</p>
<p>Alas, I suspect we are in the position of Charles Babbage in respect to this sort of fiction, able to see how it could and should work, but lacking the basic technology to make it happen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: andrew</title>
		<link>http://grandtextauto.org/2003/07/11/responsive-narratives/comment-page-1/#comment-216</link>
		<dc:creator>andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=42#comment-216</guid>
		<description>A question / challenge we&#039;ve put to ourselves is, once you open the can of worms of offering players open-ended language input in interactive stories, can you build artistically interesting experiences that don&#039;t require you to solve the Turing test?  



Our answer to that question is yes, by developing some better-than-Eliza natural language processing and decision making technology, and a story design that works within the still severe limitations of that technology.  As stated before, we&#039;d love to see future research on more generative architectures, to reduce those limitations from &quot;severe&quot; to &quot;less severe&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A question / challenge we&#8217;ve put to ourselves is, once you open the can of worms of offering players open-ended language input in interactive stories, can you build artistically interesting experiences that don&#8217;t require you to solve the Turing test?  </p>
<p>Our answer to that question is yes, by developing some better-than-Eliza natural language processing and decision making technology, and a story design that works within the still severe limitations of that technology.  As stated before, we&#8217;d love to see future research on more generative architectures, to reduce those limitations from &#8220;severe&#8221; to &#8220;less severe&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: drew</title>
		<link>http://grandtextauto.org/2003/07/11/responsive-narratives/comment-page-1/#comment-217</link>
		<dc:creator>drew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=42#comment-217</guid>
		<description>makes me wonder if &lt;a href=&quot;http://lsa.colorado.edu/&quot;&gt;latent semantic analysis&lt;/a&gt; could be useful in the context of interactive narrative to help meet andrew&#039;s and michael&#039;s criteria...
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>makes me wonder if <a href="http://lsa.colorado.edu/">latent semantic analysis</a> could be useful in the context of interactive narrative to help meet andrew&#8217;s and michael&#8217;s criteria&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

