quote:

---

Original post by Oluseyi
And now, I'll go set an example by deleting all my outbursts.

---

    // FlagSet struct is just a large binary stringstruct FlagSet{/*Implementation specific, but this should take the form of event scripts in binary, or referencesto files that contain them.*/};// StoryNode class defines a location and settings which are linked to it (flags and the like)class StoryNode{private:  StoryLink linkages[3]; // explained later  FlagSet NodeState;/* OTHER STUFF, implementation specific */};  

  // StoryLink class has a list of information to travel to the StoryNode it points toclass StoryLink{private:  StoryNode * Target;  FlagSet Contents;/* implementation specific */};    

quote:

---

Original post by Symphonic
Your outbursts are quite plentiful

---

quote:

---

On a more related note, I have been doing extensive work on graph structures lately (in computer science), and I really think that the process of narative interpolation could be implemented quite smoothly using graphs. The trick lies in storing information in the Links .

---

quote:

---

The difference between fighting someone in a boxing match and fighting someone who doesn''t expect or "deserve" it is that the second action is cruel. Boxing is violent; bullying is cruel.

Basically, I feel that the idea has to come across that when you''re killing or causing harm to something in a game, that it''s for a justifiable reason (i.e. the person/creature has done something to deserve it). This is how most people define the difference between a police officer or a soldier killing someone and a regular civilian doing the same thing.

Another aspect is the amount of force used. Example: killing someone who attacks you is justifiable; capturing them and torturing them is cruel. I think a lot of people would consider it inappropriate for the second to appear in a game.

---

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original post by Oluseyi
What is a plot? A sequence of occurences with some form of correlation, and preferrably some dramatic drive.
...
If we can create environments that supply the first, and the user supplies the second, then why can''t we develop coherent and powerful plots from that? That''s the objective here.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I used to think this was the case. Apparently many logic oriented people think that is the correct definition (MIT computer dept, etc).

But this Xmas I changed my tune. I started reading some books by writers, and by those who teach writing, and they disagree. According to them, writing a story requires, *and is defined by* a meta-structure.

It''s not a series of events that happen to be related, it''s a larger picture where the events just flesh out the skeleton of the story. The events *necessarily* move towards an ending.

---

1. The grand objective is to create a theoretically sound and complete system whereby plot elements and choices can be coherently presented to the player/user so as to form a consistent and entertaining narrative. Other than the overarching use of directing the user''s experience in the virtual world, this could find application in spreading the user''s fame within the world, in conveying information (with appropriate hyperbole, exaggeration and inaccuracies) from one part of the virtual world to another, or from one character/group of characters to another.



2. There are the two approaches of "aggressive" and "passive" furtherance of the user narrative. The aggressive school of thought contends that the story should be "brought to" the user if the user does not seek out the story. In the context of games this is highly logical because story-driven games usually have some form of definite objective. The passive camp holds the alternative opinion that the users should be free to simply explore vast vistas and the environmental interactivity, and ignore the "quest" if they so desired. Both approaches are valid, and I borrow from both in constructing my viewpoint.

Assuming the oh-too-familiar medieval setting, our hero is a rustic woodsman. There is a broad threat of impending doom, hereinafter referred to as the Menace. By some "twist of fate" (aka designer technique to draw user into quest), the user is given motivation to pursue a course of events that will lead, eventually, to the Menace, with the obvious objective being to destroy said Menace. A nice, familiar example is the brutal butchering of the hero''s family and a desire to see justice done (not revenge!)

3. Event nodes signify what happened, when, where and who was involved. The reasoning was that, and I quote
   

   A level is a geographical location, and is unimportant in and of itself; it is what transpires at that location that creates story/drama/tension/etc. Locations could (should!) be dynamic, responding to events. By this I mean, the installment of a despotic tyrant would probably lead to widespread poverty, so buildings would begin to fall into disrepair and people would look more gaunt, etc. See Black & White''s implementation of responsive environment wrt how you rule/reign/govern your world.

4. Relationships between two entities are defined as a pair of "links" where each link has properties that represent level of friendliness, respect, trust and other such qualities. Note that the values are not bi-directional! Peter liking Jane does not mean Jane doesn''t think Peter is a slut! Placing these paired links as edges in a directed graph (in which the entities are the nodes) allows secondary knowledge (Jane will talk to Billy because he is Peter''s friend, but since she doesn''t trust Peter she is also careful with Billy). A further emergent property is that the lowest-cost edge is the determinant of behavior (such that even though we would assume Jane wouldn''t like John because he''s friends with Peter and Billy, he and Jane know each other directly and independently of Peter and Billy, and as such have a great relationship). This would allow for the modeling of complex relationships and behaviors at no additional overhead. An example behavior would be hearing bad things about a close friend, and taking them with doubt since the relationship link between the primary and friend is stronger than the primary and the news source. If, however, the news turned out to be true, the loss of trust would be more severe...

quote:

---

Original post by Anonymous Poster
But this Xmas I changed my tune. I started reading some books by writers, and by those who teach writing, and they disagree. According to them, writing a story requires, *and is defined by* a meta-structure.

---