I am reminded of Blinx. Disjunctive time is a feature of that game.

Diodor, this post and the other post about fragment concepts are interesting. They are sort of an exploration of the interaction between four entities which each have their own dichotomies and relations to the world: self, computer, film and audience. In the midst of this exploration you evoke dreams, tangents and games but no counterpart to the audience.

Its interesting. We approach the computer with our dreams and it simulates them. The computer approaches life and simulates that. The notion of a predetermined path lends itself to film. The potential of directing film, in turn, inspires dreams in us. Its like a closed creative loop.

In reverse, the loop reads like a grammatical map: I have an idea that leads to a sentence which requires a structure that evokes a meaning. It could just as easily be historical. Or musical! The question is, how do we orientate ourselves with respect to form (?), how does this inform the content (?), where do we address that content (?) and whom/what is responsible for it once we have? In other words, are there important psychological laws being lived out by the development of computer games (?) and can we identify whether they are in healthy operation or not, as a result (the way psychology attempts to identify healthy personalities)?

The answer would be, in a sense, the beginning of a science of game design... that houses itself (hypocritically) outside any game in particular. I for one would rather see a working science and am currently learning C++ to that end (if not others).

Does any of this resonate with your own thoughts?

quote: Original post by Diodor

There is one Japanese mystery short-novel like that. The author is Mikihiko Renjo. I still don''t know who is the real murderer in that story because there is two believable explanation from two guy who accuse each other for being the murderer. However, all unrelated seemingly absurb events in the start of the story are clearly explained later in the story. These events seems unrelated but actually all these events are connected to a murder.

Diodor, check out Vanilla Sky if you haven''t already.

Diodor I think the answer to your question "can a game use similar techniques as the previous films to blur the line between reality and fantasy, past and future, to hopelessly confuse the player while not blowing the rest of the game away?" is a definite yes. Check out the game Shrapnel at this page. It''s a fairly well-known Interactive Fiction game that does exactly what you ask. I definitely recommend everyone here give it a shot.

quote: Original post by mumboi
Diodor, check out Vanilla Sky if you haven''t already.

If you can, check out the Spanish movie that Vanilla Sky was based on "Abre Los Ojos" ("Open Your Eyes").

Another book that comes to mind is "Hopscotch" by Julio Cortazar.

quote:
Original post by LessBread

The choppiness of "Memento" evokes saving a game at key points and returning to play later - however - starting at the end of a game and working towards the beginning seems rather awkward.

Actually, Memento''s scenes look rather like independent levels or missions. All the information for solving the level is given at the level start. Translating this into a game seems very straight-forward. The gameplay is untouched, and the larger game story slowly emerges, just like in the movie.

quote:
Imagine jumping into Quake at the final level and working backwards? Perhaps it''s just as simple as incorporating a "random level" option for more advanced players.

And why not? Some gameplay rules must be respected (simpler, easier play near game start, greater difficulty later on), but other than that I see no problem with reversing the time order of the missions (or switching characters or even realities - what''s it to the player if the RTS mission he plays happens in a dream or inside an artifact or in a different realm - he has his fun nonetheless).

quote:
Original post by Impossible

I think it opens up a lot of possiblities. You could design a bunch of semi-unrelated levels, have to player go through them in a non-linear order (something like Megaman except a lot more complex than "choose the next level") and then tie everything up (based on what the player did in the isolated levels) at the end. It seems like a good way to give the game continuity without having to worry about a complex branching story.

quote:
Original post by MauserT

Impossible, exactly, it brings in a whole different way of telling a story in a game. Instead of the player following the story in a linear fashion. the story still unravels but now the levels are mixed around, and the interest level to the player will be heightened cause now they are trying to figure out the story as well as what is going on in the game. and how it all goes together.

Yes. There''s even no need to tie everything up. Just add clues here and there (maybe similar to the old secret areas).

Hmm, I''ve never looked at the lack of importance of a game''s story as a good thing. In fact, it seem to offer a lot of freedom.

quote:
Original post by deClavier

Its interesting. We approach the computer with our dreams and it simulates them. The computer approaches life and simulates that. The notion of a predetermined path lends itself to film. The potential of directing film, in turn, inspires dreams in us. Its like a closed creative loop.

The player thinks he can make the choices (direct the film), when in fact his path through the game world has been carefully considered by the game designer. This illusion can be played upon. Who''s directing the movie and who is just an actor? Who''s dreaming and who''s just dreamed? Who''s playing and who''s just a scripted NPC? I think games offer many chances for asking such questions.

quote:
In reverse, the loop reads like a grammatical map: I have an idea that leads to a sentence which requires a structure that evokes a meaning. It could just as easily be historical. Or musical! The question is, how do we orientate ourselves with respect to form (?), how does this inform the content (?), where do we address that content (?) and whom/what is responsible for it once we have? In other words, are there important psychological laws being lived out by the development of computer games (?) and can we identify whether they are in healthy operation or not, as a result (the way psychology attempts to identify healthy personalities)?

Now I’m confused. This is a bit too abstract for me. Can you give an example?

Another idea: dream within dream, game inside game. That amazing scene in MH with the singers from the fifties. As the camera zooms out, we see they are inside an old sound studio, as it zooms out even more we see the whole sound studio is part of a modern movie set. Seconds later we learn their weren't even playing the song in the first place, it was all playback. The movie eXistenZ. Entering and exiting virtual reality layers until there's no telling what is real anymore. Also the movie The Game. Interesting enough, it's often hard to distinguish between "waking up" (realizing what was an illusion) and entering a dream (being caught in an illusion).

I'd really like a game that casts doubt over the very reality of the player (just like the Matrix movie does). For instance, a game (FPS probably) where every level ends with the same NEW GAME /OPTIONS / EXIT menu the game starts with, but drawn over the last game image (like the Quake1 menu). Selecting EXIT zooms out of that image revealing a computer screen, then a character just getting up from the computer desk - the new avatar for the new level. Funny feeling pressing escape (menu appears), selecting exit and getting up from the computer in real life Or a game ending like the Ubik book ("I'm alive, you are dead.").

[edited by - Diodor on July 21, 2002 10:21:06 AM]

An extension to this idea is games that "mess with the players mind." Sure, games show you shocking and disturbing violence and stuff, but there aren''t many games that actually disturb or confuse you beyond visuals. The interactive aspect of a game makes center situations that you see in movies potentially a lot more powerful. There aren''t many games that make you question reality (perhaps the "game within a game theme mentioned before") or that pose interesting moral situations. Game players, for the most part, are extremely power hungry. They do anything to win and max the game out. I''ve always had an idea of starting a game (fps\action type thing) with you about to kill someone and them begging for their life, maybe slowly given you hints at why you shouldn''t kill them, but you''d have to make the decision quickly. Sure, players could read some faq online and find the "optimal" path, or even just save and reload if they don''t like the outcome, but I think you could pull of situations like this if their is no optimal path, just a different ones with different advantages and disadvantages.

Wouldnt it be nice to have a game where you fight against dark forches, in a simple city scenario... and people are taken controle of, by tha dark forces... (no sombies, just sofisticated killers and so on..) you could be a detective.
Then slovly trough the game the story you begin to want to kill a special person, then the last sceen is that you kill this person, BUT the person is you!(the detective!!!!)
It should be easy to make a couple of smal steps, making the main caracter change looks, and maybe you have a part, where you are inside a dream, then when you wake up, the dream did not fully end and the worlds are blended, more and more to the climax where you kill yourselfe....