
Twine, the Video-Game Technology for All - siavosh
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/23/magazine/twine-the-video-game-technology-for-all.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
======
chrismealy
If these aren't "games" then that's gaming's loss.

~~~
A_COMPUTER
Is it gaming's loss if great literature aren't games? The majority of Twine
games have no interactivity at all, which pretty much removes a fundamental
thing that defines a game. Same with most visual novels, they are called games
too but really aren't. I know I am in a shrinking minority here, but I don't
mind if things can be good but not be called games. Some Twine games have
interactivity and some don't. Most are bad because it doesn't matter how
simple the tool is to use, it still takes work and skill to write something
entertaining. I have played some pretty fun Twine games but they really are
just like reading a book with punctuated pacing. The reality is that you can
do this with plain old books too (you can for instance break a sentence from
one page to the next, surprising the reader with a twist, or just a surprise
ending, period) but nobody calls them games. Choose your own adventure books
are called choose your own adventure books. They all have more interactivity
than most Twine games.

What I find really interesting is that so many of the same people that want
games and interactive media criticism to be taken seriously get so massively
bent out of shape when you actually, you know, participate in that and
criticize what they're asserting (I am talking about critics and game
journalists here, there are ludic studies that are academically sound and
subject themselves to confrontational challenge.) If you push the issue it
turns into a meta argument about who gets to call what a game, which is a
legitimate question but at the end of the day a bunch of serious game
journalists and game forum moderators call Depression Quest a game and I get
shunned for disagreeing so I don't totally take their underdog posturing
seriously and consider its invocation to usually be dishonest. Part of being
taken seriously is being able to defend claims rather than just attacking the
person contradicting you.

Anyway, here is a Twine game that I really enjoyed, it even has an anti-
gamergate story: [http://storycade.com/twine-quings-quest-vii-death-
videogames...](http://storycade.com/twine-quings-quest-vii-death-videogames/)
It was part of "Ruin Jam 2014", a game jam whose name plays on the claim that
"SJWs are trying to ruin gaming."

~~~
chipsy
Your premise requires an invalidation of modes of interactivity as meaningful.
To transpose Twine works into a book is actually a considerable adaptation in
many cases, because the form of discovery in Twine requires clicking
hyperlinks and watching text appear or disappear - not turning pages!

What the critical majority is going for in their understanding of "game" is
this idea of "novel interactivity" \- that the author is primarily interested
in the mode of interactivity, vs. communicating through an established mode
like a book or song. The status quo that you're pointing to is "systemic
interactivity" \- the part of "game" that employs rules, player agency, and
simulation. The issue with upholding systemic interactivity is that then you
can reason your way into a situation where many video games are not games
because on a broad level, they reach predetermined outcomes in the service of
a designed story. And then you will say that adventure games are not games,
puzzle games are not games, etc. There are some designers who take this kind
of stance[0], but as you acknowledge, they're in the minority.

[0] [http://keithburgun.net/are-games-a-storytelling-medium-
guest...](http://keithburgun.net/are-games-a-storytelling-medium-guest-
article-by-fabian-fischer/)

~~~
A_COMPUTER
>Your premise requires an invalidation of modes of interactivity as
meaningful.

I feel this is worded a little strongly. I alluded to the fact that even just
books can have modes of interactivity, but we don't consider them games.

>then you will say that adventure games are not games, puzzle games are not
games, etc.

I believe that this is where some people's intuitive sense that something
isn't a game comes from.

Thanks for the link, I liked it a lot. I bob in and out of this stuff but I'm
inspired to take it more seriously again.

------
Shinkei
_The claim, though false, set off a wave of outrage that eventually escalated
into a campaign against all the designers and critics who have argued for
making gaming culture more inclusive. At their most articulate, the GamerGate
crusaders denounce progressive voices in games (whom they derisively call
“S.J.W.s,” or “social justice warriors”), claiming that they have needlessly
politicized what should be mere entertainment. At their least articulate, they
have carried out sustained and vicious harassment of critics, prompting at
least three women to flee their homes in the wake of rape and death threats._

I liked the ability of the writer to paint a picture of the games mentioned in
a way that evoked at least a bit of the emotions they are intending to
stimualte. However, this pargraph should've been left out. I am no expert on
this "Gamegate" stuff and I can only rely on what I've read casually, but the
media is not a court of law. The journalist does not know whether the
allegations are true or not and the second part really lets her bias shine
through. The actions of a few should not condemn the entire group and it's
unfortunate that some people are being uncivil in their attacks.

I have gamed from childhood through adulthood and never ONCE have I seen a
woman be excluded from our groups or treated as inferior. In fact, when the
Wii came out, most of the 'Party-style' group games had a lot of couples
playing. When I've been to the Final Fantasy Music concerts, I would say it's
at least 30-40% women. These are only my anecdotes and I don't work in the
gaming industry.

IMHO, a vocal minority is forming the debate and although this article should
be informative, I think the journalist loses some moral authority when she
reveals her bias in that paragraph.

~~~
daviross
What sense of moral authority does a journalist need when describing Twine and
its influence on game development? Plus, even in what you've quoted, is there
anything you can cite as faulty/wrong? The media doesn't have to be a court of
law, and I really don't see anything controversial in what was stated there.

Your anecdotes don't really have any relevance when speaking to documented
issues within the video game industry (and the broader tech community).

Back to the main article, I don't know that there's really any way to address
what's been happening with Twine _without_ covering the controversial buzz
around it. (Not to say that the tool itself is controversial, in fact, it's
rather mild, but it's become a symbol of larger things) It's become a powerful
tool for expression and community creation in ways which have allowed voices
and perspectives which previously haven't had much attention in the medium to
flourish. By its nature that brings complexity and controversy in, especially
at a time when questions of medium-as-identity are stuck between ideals of
calcification and expansion.

So to leave it out would be to do a disservice to the topic. But reporting on
it blandly in a "Side A says X, side B says Y" manner also does a disservice
to the topic, much as that manner of reporting has been criticized when
applied to topics such as anthropogenic climate change and evolution. So in
the end, I think this article went about the topic in a wise and sensitive
manner, shining a bit of sunlight on the fascinating intersection of
technology and humanity.

~~~
Shinkei
_Plus, even in what you 've quoted, is there anything you can cite as
faulty/wrong? The media doesn't have to be a court of law, and I really don't
see anything controversial in what was stated there._

The entire first sentence I quoted is indefensible.

 _The claim, though false, set off a wave of outrage that eventually escalated
into a campaign against all the designers and critics who have argued for
making gaming culture more inclusive._

Link to proof that the claim is false? The fact that the journalist has
assumed it is false means they have critically appraised some amount of
evidence. For a parallel, imagine if the recent coverage of the Bill Cosby
allegations was mentioned as "These claims, though false..." Yeah, it would
reveal a bias.

As for the second part of that sentence and rest of the paragraph, the
journalist admits they have aligned themselves on the side of the alleged
victim but then goes on to state the position of the 'other side' in an
unflattering light. This is a 'strawman' debate tactic.

I don't disagree with the ideas stated in the article... again, I really don't
understand the controversy because these games sound great and I would love to
try them out.

I wish someone from the 'other side of this' could come in here and provide
some rationale for why they think inclusivity threatens their gaming culture.
If I'm in a group of only men, we all act very differently than at the office.
Social interactions are 'normal' only in a given context.

In first-person shooters over network, guys are pretty foul-mouthed
(understatement of the century) and yet we might not even know each other's
names. Do you believe they should be censored? Or do you think you should just
not play those games? Because if you believe they should be censored, you've
answered the question as to why they are scared. If you would rather play
another game, then there is no controversy.

------
brymaster
Nope, nope, nope.

This is a thinly veiled attempt to rope the reader into a one-sided narrative
about GamerGate. The author, Laura Hudson, has a history of this already. You
can google her and find the Wired article or tweets.

If you really want to learn about Twine, just go here:
[http://twinery.org](http://twinery.org)

