TIGSource Forums

This topic isn't necessarily related to game writing, but it is game theory, that I have written about. This seems to be the most appropriate place to discuss it...? (Correct me if I'm wrong)

I come from a performance background myself. I am a classically trained theatre actor and musician, so I have a pretty good grasp of what it means to be a performer. I've been playing games my whole life, as well, and recently I've started thinking about 1 player games as being a form of self-expression akin to acting and playing music.

I wrote a little article about it; it's on GamaSutra. If you're interested, check it out (http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/TravisMartin/20130522/192776/1P_the_P_is_for_Performer.php). I'd really like to know what you guys think!

Expressive gaming has been an interest of mine for a long time, hence my involvement in Infinite Blank and SoundSelf.  I certainly think the Writing forum is an appropriate place for a discussion like this.

A way I've been thinking about it recently is that my job is to make a piece of software such that when a person interacts with it, a game (or something else) arises.  Our creation is an incomplete machine, whose centerpiece is an exquisite and unknowable mechanism.  Our art is in understanding how the two play together.

It's interesting how the "performance piece" created by a player can have different audiences, and how that affects the nature of the performance.  Solitary storytelling experiences are an opportunity for us to make an honest exploration of ourselves in addition to the world we're presented.  More strategic or action-driven games can be an intriguing spectator sport, and being watched or broadcasting our efforts changes how we think.  Multiplayer games that allow limited means of expression give rise to intricate idioms and player-created languages.

My fixation has always been the first case, though.  When I'm playing a single-player game, and I make a choice unencumbered by strategical underpinnings, it's a communication from me, to the game, back to me.  It's a process of reaffirming or experimenting with my own philosophies within the created world.  And the glimmer of humanity that is seen there -- an alien reflection of me, created by me -- is a really special thing.

It is really special! I feel the same way, and that's why I decided to write about it. I believe in the future, some people will be single-player gamers professionally, and be considered great artists of their own merit. Sometimes we'll pay to see performances of games - games that were, perhaps, designed with this kind of performance in mind. This would be interesting, as most video games are not designed with the idea of having people watch the action as a third party. It would introduce / necessitate a shift of design paradigms.

I also see a future in a serious study of games therapy. Just as there are music therapy exists as its own thing, there will be Games Therapists who will listen to you, and have you play video games that will get you to express your troubles in a personal way.

(Yes, there are 'therapeutic' games or 'therapy games' or whatever already, but I'm talking about someone suggesting any game, not just games that are 'designed to be therapeutic.')

All this will require / incite developers to consider their players' involvement more. There's already a considerable amount of self-expression possible, but when developers start making their games for 1P artists, it will be a glorious and fantastic thing.

Take a look at some shmup superplays.  It's been going on for years ..

There's even live performances! :O

http://www.youtube.com/user/TeamSuperPlayLive/videos?view=0

Teacher mode:

A composer writes; musicians interpret the pockets and freedoms provided from that with which they're give and express what is shared or should be shared.

I might share more, but I was trying to cut all of this down to size before timezone differences forced me to sleep:

@Udderdude: Ha, I didn't know this was a thing! Live Shmup shows... that's really something. This is only the beginning! It will evolve into more than just an impress fest (not to say that those are bad). Going to see someone game will be like going to the theatre, or seeing the local symphony orchestra  :gentleman:

@ithamore: Nice definition - though what I was going for was to show the similarity between gaming and music, on a purely lexical level. They both use the word 'play' as their action verb. Let's say yours is a definition for 'playing' in the context of an artistic performance:

Teacher Mode II (grab your notation materials; because the ESL teacher is laying down some creds):

My favorite demonstration of gaming with class was a DDR-pro in Japan. The gent (nearly a decade ago) danced with a cane, hat, and a respect for style. I believe it was slashdot that directed me to it at the time.

Lexicography: I had favorite dictionaries when you were my non-peer.

Current teaching theory: play is the best way to learn; especially when wanting to push oneself to make or break games. I also need to start to write down all the games I've invented to teach, so I don't have to reinvent them.

Art: do you lay on the artist or artifact side?

However, back to A composer writes; a musician plays. A playwright writes; an actor plays. A programmer writes; a gamer plays. I see no difference. (http://A composer writes; a musician plays. A playwright writes; an actor plays. A programmer writes; a gamer plays. I see no difference.) Verily, I want to deconstruct and then re-construct your use of the word "play" to find stronger words for you through reader response theory and psychoanalysis approaches to literary analysis when I was learning during my midwestern BA.

But also don't get me wrong: I'm not flaming or a fire eating bridge dweller: I just like helping my fellow Earthlings (and I'm on a good up swing of my bi-polar-ism).

Edit: Rough drafts:  :droop:

There's also speedrunners which there have been several live stream charity things ..

http://www.twitch.tv/team/sda

I was having a discussion about SoundSelf today and made an interesting articulation about expressive gameplay --

There is no line between participation in the game and subversion of the game.  Which is to say, there's no invalid way to play within the set of interactions available to the player.

I think games are awesome. Also, so are we.

Games need to be better. I like them. I like Mario because it is expressive, right down to the micro-second. Mario is a 2 second express fest, just re-oriented in a million random environments that don't really fit together.

Look at Minecraft. Minecraft tells a story of the player through the state of its world after that player is done, and thus people like to watch Minecraft because there is a strong relationship between the uneducated observer's interpretation of a play session, and a player's mental state during that same session.

Soccer is popular because it is intensely expressive. All the training and humanity in the development of an athlete's career, and his teammates, is all there on display, under the wrench of spectator expectations and emotions, and the pull of money, class, fame and so on.

There are two problems games face:
  1. They don't let you express enough.
  2. That expression is hidden behind a thick language.

Language is a lovely term.  Vocabulary is another I've used...  I like to think of the set of inputs the game takes as the "language" the player speaks.  Working on SoundSelf is really neat because the language that game accepts -- the unformed voice -- is a very personal one.

Connecting the high concept to the implementation, we can impose an engineer's metrics on this "language", as an aid to a designer's analysis.  Bandwidth and frequency.  An analog control like a mouse is potentially more expressive than a digital one, because it delivers greater bandwidth.  The amount of data the machine can meaningfully interpret should be measured against the amount which the human player can meaningfully produce, and the signal-to-noise ratio quantified.

Our goal with this data is to manifest the player's intentions within the perceptual space of the game.  Whether that manifestation takes place through a single object (such as a player character) or more abstractly, it is a prominent concept in the mind of both the designer and the player.  Giving that avatar freedom and deftness of action expands the connection, and permits greater expressiveness in play.

The signal we detect is the echo of a thought, given noise as it travels through nerve and muscle and skin and plastic and switch and wire and driver and operating system to us.  We define the protocol for this data through contracts and tutorials and diagrams in the hopes of receiving it intact.  Never before have I considered game controls to be a perceptual algorithm, but now it makes perfect sense...

I hope you'll pardon a late-night ramble.

Interesting comment about the mouse. The mouse is a more diverse control input for shooters because you can swap between high-precision movement and broad ones in an instant. On consoles you are geared more towards one or the other, have to switch views, or just settle for an unhealthy compromise - always a bit of this.

Though even given that - the mouse and its general superiority - we still don't track everything. We really only care about two things: where the mouse ended up, and how long it took to get there. We don't do anything with the path - and that's interesting - largely because it is too hard to interpret meaningfully. Mhmm....

Notice two qualities of performance art:
  1. The piece itself is a creative constructions.
  2. The performance of the piece is a honed skill, around a comprehension of the creative construction.

Minecraft has #1 but not #2. Shmup replays - or that one of that guy who beat Mega Man X 1 and 2 at the same time (with the same controller) - get number 2 but not really number 1. We need _both_. Boom.

I think the closest you'd get is someone designing, creating and then playing a game at a high level of skill ..

Not exactly within easy reach of your average gamer.

I'm not going to pretend this took as much skill as a shmup superplay or double game TAS, but it wasn't exactly easy to make this level or execute it perfectly .. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwljzxUnpcc

Well, I think Minecraft is pretty expressive already. You make it real-time, and shove in some action skill, you've got what we are looking for.

"Perfection" isn't necessary, just talent.

I think you're wrong there, you don't see sold out concert halls for "Some skill", you see them for "A fucking assload of skill".

Your average Minecraft LPer dicking around with some action stuff would not be up to par.

hunh? who said that they didn't need to have a ton of skill _too_? where are you?

I dunno, you seem to be under the impression any old schlub can just walk up to a shmup like DDP DOJ and beat the crap out of it.

I come from a theater background myself and the similarities are probably the reason I got a job in the first place.

Theater is a multi-media just like video games. All of the lessons I learned about merging disparate elements can be transferred to games.

The only problem with games is that improv is not nearly as good.

Is that true with all the sandbox games today? A always thought that games like minecraft are great to improvise (with the given world of course).

For the player, games are great for improv! For the developer, not so much.

It would be interesting to see a program that allows developers to quickly improvise. Something like Game Maker, or Unity, but faster to draft and easier to edit the engine itself.

That's true. Wouldn't be script languages the ideal thing here? For someone you likes coding at least. Well I guess for someone you likes coding, improvising is something they can do because of the knowledge they have.
But if you more of a designer... I guess that is a problem. I'm glad that we have Engine like Unity3D or Game Maker at least. So people can create games without being "too much" of a programmer.

late, to the party, but since we are here... I just meant expressive + skill is the magic formula. obviously any hard game is excellent only in the hands of a master, and mastery does not come cheap. we're both gamers here. respect.