Comments on: One Idea about Narrative

By: Brandon

Brandon — Tue, 01 Feb 2005 15:16:49 +0000

If procedural literacy is a skill, then I would be hesitant to say something is good for or bad for acquisition of that skill. Most likely it simply requires a more advanced literacy to be able to appreciate the role of cutscenes in a game. Literacy is not a tool for criticism, it is a tool for understanding and appreciating the operations of a process.
As far as the cutscenes in GTA: San Andreas go, I don’t have an opinion, if they merely establish mood and setting (which may be cause for complaint), or do they provide exposition and clues related to the player’s task? Either way, the ability to sit through and decipher a cutscene is what procedural literacy enables you to do.

By: andrew

andrew — Mon, 31 Jan 2005 21:02:31 +0000

Actually I was thinking more of the idea of cutscenes in games might interrupt / disrupt the acquistion of procedural literacy. Cutscenes certainly corrupt the overall interactive experience, IMO, and could taint a player’s understanding of what a “good” interactive experience could / should be.

By: Brandon

Brandon — Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:51:02 +0000

It does and it doesn’t. Part of the cutscenes debate is the opposition of active/passive, and then considerations of the role of narrative and the role of interaction. If games were to provide narrative on par with a scripted drama then I think it would be easy to show the value of uninterrupted game narrative. But I don’t see games doing much in the way of character development, or themes, or tropes, the things which would connect an appreciation of narrative to reading literacy.

By: andrew

andrew — Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:04:47 +0000

Hmm, this jibes pretty well with the argument against cutscenes in games (an obvious argument I think, but worth saying nonetheless).