LordTheNightKnight said:
Helios said:
Succinctly put, my friend. I would agree with just about everything you said. The act of playing a game is indeed a form of performance art where an emergent story (that is guided by the plot) is created based on player actions. "Did the player walk up the ridge? If so, what does that mean? Does it symbolize anything? Is an event-state changed as a result of this exercize of player agency? If so, what is changed? How will the player react to this? etc." Improvisional theater (and, to a degree, any kind of role-playing) similarly creates it's story through performances, often based around a central concept or theme.
I have not played Heavy Rain so I'm not a good judge if it qualifies as a game or not. If it is not a game, what is it then? Interactive fiction/drama? I think if the game has gameplay - that is, the game progresses as a result of the input of a player acting as an agent in a goal-oriented system - then I would consider it a game. The question is thus, does the 'ineractive events' of Heavy Rain count as gameplay?
|
The thing is that a game's story cannot change like AI to react to a player. It all has to be scripted and recorded beforehand, and the game merely triggers them. So regardless of the player's actions, the story will happen the way it was written and then programmed into the game. So you can judge the quality of a scene by watching it (best with knowing context, like many stories), since that scene will only change in a way that is also scripted and triggered.
|
If Heavy Rain is anything like Indigo Prophecy then the player affects many events int he story. The agency invested by the consequence of a player's actionsn would necessarily affect the perception and quality of a story, if only because everything happening or not happening is your fault.
