I’m not sure if this is the end of the Façade material or not, but I find myself wishing for a more critical treatment of the work. There are many challenges to issue against it, and I’d guess that most of them have been said only online, strewn all over the web. They deserve condensation and discussion in print. I’m thinking of things like accusations that the natural language interface is an affectation, or Mateas and Stern’s insistence on recreating actors in the black box theater rather than abstracting as games like SimCity do, or the fact that Façade was born partly out of a sort of “dare” to do “real” interactive drama, or the very obsession with Aristotelian drama, possibly started but assuredly egged on by Murray, despite the 20th century’s innovation in a multitude of different storytelling techniques, or the apparent mismatch between AI innovation and user experience, both in terms of the public’s and critical reception of the work.
(sidenote: an interesting challenge for this peer review project is the reader’s inability to “look ahead” to see if topics that come to mind are coming up later. The surprise of serialization works for fiction, but I’m scratching my head about whether or not it does for nonfiction, at least nonfiction of this sort).



Comments on specific paragraphs:
Click the
icon to the right of a paragraph
Comments on the page as a whole:
Click the
icon to the right of the page title (works the same as paragraphs)