The narrative plane of interactive games
I wonder, what is the shape of the narrative plane as experienced in an interactive game? Do players perceive some kind of 3-Act structure with set-up, confrontation, and climax? Surely this is true of cinema and, with different narrative boundaries, television. But what about interactive works and in particular, games? I ask this in reaction to a statement by Merce Cunningham (1952):
"Now I can't see that crisis any longer means a climax, unless we are willing to grant that every breath of wind has a climax (which I am), but then that obliterates climax being a surfeit of such. And since our lives, both by nature and by newspapers, are so full of crisis that one is no longer aware of it, then it is clear that life goes on regardless, and further that each thing can be and is separate from each and every other, viz: the continuity of the newspaper headlines."
Cunningham asserts that contemporary experience has been flattened out. There are no longer peaks and valleys due to the noisy wave of constant crisis—contrasts in ones' plane of experience have been obliterated. Given this idea I would like to raise the following questions:
In a movie's conventional narrative structure (3-Act), an audience will experience the story within that framework. In what framework do they experience an interactive story or game?
If an interactive game is meant to be immersive, and the player's experience should be interpreted as "real," will constant crisis (need to defeat enemies, need to maintain health, need to solve puzzles, etc.) lead to a flattened-out experience as described by Cunningham?
If there is a flattening-out effect, what are the implications for music and sound in the game world?
Conventional wisdom in the game audio world suggests that interactive audio should function like a film soundtrack. It should provide interpretative direction within the game/story and do this with flexibility to accommodate the choices of the player within the interactive structure. However this model is based on the notion of peaks and valleys of emotional contrast. The alternation of conflict and resolution in a traditional cinematic narrative structure demands that a film score follow the hilly, sine-like contours of the plot [FIGURE 1]. This is incongruous with a flattened-out narrative where tension is near some constant. If this is the case it is important that the music of the interactive work recognize this new dynamic. There is still validity in the idea of interpretation. Certainly music will not stop to function in this way. But what it could do is follow a different compositional path, one that is more in line with the flattened-out nature of the game experience.
Changes in a game are often like changes in real life: they happen right before us and often without ceremony. Yes there are BIG changes on occasion, but in most cases something becomes different and we must adapt—no big deal. I'm not saying that there aren't high and low points within a game (or life). Rather, I'm saying that the difference between these, in most instances, is less apparent. Consequently music that is meant to guide an audience's interpretation of their experience should do a better job of bringing out the nuance and subtlety of a situation.
All of this questioning is in response to two recent readings. First is "Towards (a Definition of) Experimental Music" by Michael Nyman, from the opening chapter of "Experimental Music: Cage and Beyond." The second is the article "Streaming By Design" by Alexander Brandon (Game Developer, Dec. 2004). Brandon argues that interactive music must be more obvious; that changes in the music should be more apparent to the player in order to fully enjoy the experience via the music. Nyman questions this from a minimalist perspective, and notes how experimental music embraces the beauty and value of subtle change.
I suppose it was really a matter of timing that allowed for these to come together in my mind. Had I not read one within a few days of the other the connection may not have been made. But it strikes me as interesting. Consider the following statement:
A few rules are set and the player is allowed is proceed at will.
What does this describe—rules in an interactive game, or performance directions to a work of experimental music? Arguably it is both. There is an enormous overlap between the compositional processes of experimental music and interactive games. Unfortunately, few composers in the game audio world use this approach in their work. In most cases they follow the film model and make necessary provisions for interactivity. This is most evident in the use of multiple tracks for multiple game states, cross-fading, real-time composition with Adaptive audio, and so on. However, these are technical conventions that are used to solve musical "problems." I advocate an alternate approach; one that places music at the forefront and looks into the nature of the role of the composition. What is its contextual purpose? By taking note of the contour of the narrative plane in an interactive experience, and using this as a guide for the composition of music, game composers will be able to produce music that is truly a reflection of the changes they so desperately yearn to emphasize.
"Now I can't see that crisis any longer means a climax, unless we are willing to grant that every breath of wind has a climax (which I am), but then that obliterates climax being a surfeit of such. And since our lives, both by nature and by newspapers, are so full of crisis that one is no longer aware of it, then it is clear that life goes on regardless, and further that each thing can be and is separate from each and every other, viz: the continuity of the newspaper headlines."
Cunningham asserts that contemporary experience has been flattened out. There are no longer peaks and valleys due to the noisy wave of constant crisis—contrasts in ones' plane of experience have been obliterated. Given this idea I would like to raise the following questions:
In a movie's conventional narrative structure (3-Act), an audience will experience the story within that framework. In what framework do they experience an interactive story or game?
If an interactive game is meant to be immersive, and the player's experience should be interpreted as "real," will constant crisis (need to defeat enemies, need to maintain health, need to solve puzzles, etc.) lead to a flattened-out experience as described by Cunningham?
If there is a flattening-out effect, what are the implications for music and sound in the game world?
Conventional wisdom in the game audio world suggests that interactive audio should function like a film soundtrack. It should provide interpretative direction within the game/story and do this with flexibility to accommodate the choices of the player within the interactive structure. However this model is based on the notion of peaks and valleys of emotional contrast. The alternation of conflict and resolution in a traditional cinematic narrative structure demands that a film score follow the hilly, sine-like contours of the plot [FIGURE 1]. This is incongruous with a flattened-out narrative where tension is near some constant. If this is the case it is important that the music of the interactive work recognize this new dynamic. There is still validity in the idea of interpretation. Certainly music will not stop to function in this way. But what it could do is follow a different compositional path, one that is more in line with the flattened-out nature of the game experience.
Changes in a game are often like changes in real life: they happen right before us and often without ceremony. Yes there are BIG changes on occasion, but in most cases something becomes different and we must adapt—no big deal. I'm not saying that there aren't high and low points within a game (or life). Rather, I'm saying that the difference between these, in most instances, is less apparent. Consequently music that is meant to guide an audience's interpretation of their experience should do a better job of bringing out the nuance and subtlety of a situation.
All of this questioning is in response to two recent readings. First is "Towards (a Definition of) Experimental Music" by Michael Nyman, from the opening chapter of "Experimental Music: Cage and Beyond." The second is the article "Streaming By Design" by Alexander Brandon (Game Developer, Dec. 2004). Brandon argues that interactive music must be more obvious; that changes in the music should be more apparent to the player in order to fully enjoy the experience via the music. Nyman questions this from a minimalist perspective, and notes how experimental music embraces the beauty and value of subtle change.
I suppose it was really a matter of timing that allowed for these to come together in my mind. Had I not read one within a few days of the other the connection may not have been made. But it strikes me as interesting. Consider the following statement:
A few rules are set and the player is allowed is proceed at will.
What does this describe—rules in an interactive game, or performance directions to a work of experimental music? Arguably it is both. There is an enormous overlap between the compositional processes of experimental music and interactive games. Unfortunately, few composers in the game audio world use this approach in their work. In most cases they follow the film model and make necessary provisions for interactivity. This is most evident in the use of multiple tracks for multiple game states, cross-fading, real-time composition with Adaptive audio, and so on. However, these are technical conventions that are used to solve musical "problems." I advocate an alternate approach; one that places music at the forefront and looks into the nature of the role of the composition. What is its contextual purpose? By taking note of the contour of the narrative plane in an interactive experience, and using this as a guide for the composition of music, game composers will be able to produce music that is truly a reflection of the changes they so desperately yearn to emphasize.
