User:Thijshijsijsjss/Human Parser/Forked Dialogues/Session 2

FORKED DIALOGUES #2
Exploring interactive fiction as a plurality

* Wednesday March 12th
* 12:00
* WH 4th floor
* Snacks and drinks provided :) 

Reading CYOA books alone in your room, playing a text adventure behind your computer screen... Often, interactive fiction can be an individual experience. Forked Dialogues explores ways to make interactive fiction a collaborative, performative and plural experience.

----

Hey! Next week I will be hosting another playtesting session: Forked Dialogues #2 

Are you seeing yourself in the third person? Do you sometimes notice your social battery depleting? Do you want another chance at that conversation? Managing (social) resources like time and energy and presence can be an abstract juggling game. In this session, we will do some game-adjacant activities in a small group in which such resources are limited: shared with, affected by, taken from or given to others. It's gonna be fun and conversational!

Plans and Preparations

In recent conversations, I have found a suppressed desire within me: to have a more prominent human / performative aspect to the game of Human Parser. I thought I had decided on a more traditional text-adventure, but have found myself stuck, not excited to work on that. Instead, the most exciting moments of the project so far (the public moment, first playtesting session and (mock) assessment) were all diversions from the traditional format to include more human / performative aspects. So for this second playtesting session, I want to give myself space for that. (Funnily enough, this is what I also wrote in the prep section of the first FD session).

In the last (first) Forked Dialogues session, this was explored through sharing agency (leading up to an asymmetric demo). This time, I hope to explore 'limited resources'. Similar to spoon theory -- an examplary allegory for the limited energy a chronically ill person has in a day -- I've been thinking about the limited energy to adapt I have, and the relation this has to disassociative experiences (e.g. limited energy to mask, or limited energy to manage a change of plans). In the Human Parser game, I'm playing around with a 'functionality score', to represent this limit mechanically. I think this might be an interesting focus for this second session.

I have several activities in mind that relate to this theme in various ways:

1. Playing Queers in Love at the End of the World -- a 10-second CYOA game. The limiting resource here is time. This can be a nice activity to warm-up. I wonder how it will feel to narrate the game while another person is choosing their path. I wonder what it will be like to 'pass the keyboard' and only be allowed one playthrough by yourself.
2. A conversation about spoon theory
3. Playing Minit -- a knowledge-based adventure game in which you restart every minute. Here, the limiting resource is both time and knowledge: with more knowledge of the environment, you can spend your minute differently. This by itself is an interesting inspiration for a TA, but I'm particularly interested in how this knowledge can be spread / shared when playing with multiple people. (Depending on the vibes, migth give part of the group access to a guide to see how the dynamic changes)
4. Playing a demo [~to be revealed~]

The Playtest

1. Playing Simon Says. We each had a name tag in front of us on the table. After some basic instructions 'Thijs says: clap', we started swapping the tags: 'Thijs says: Claudio is now Thijs, and Thijs is now Claudio. From now on, we listen to "Claudio says".' Then, we also started switching chairs. This was a confusing, hectic experience, but there was a lot of fun in that confusion. I do think this is a superficial way of playing with 'switchin identity and letting go of yours', but as an icebreaker activity it did not need to be more.
2. Playing Queers in Love at the End of the World. After every run, we switched seats. After one round (i.e. one run per person), we could all shout for what option to choose. Next round, different players controlled mouse and keyboard. Next round, different players controlled mouse and keyboard and keypad and touchscreen. Again, a hectic experience, but a nice segue into talking about resources in video games. First about explicit resources (like 'ammo' and 'money' and 'durable weapons'), then about implicit resources (like 'travel time' and '(lack of) access via invisible walls'). Ultimately, we talked about human resources (like 'patience' and 'being able to face your fears', and 'communication in a team').
3. Playing Minit. Again, after each reset we would switch chairs. This activity was very exciting. Switching every minute was a surprsingly good pace (i.e. playing for 1 minute out of every 5). The repeat mechanic was fun and seemed to work well for this group. We shared ideas on where to go next, reminded each other of information we obtained in earlier runs, had fun by not listening to each other, etc.
4. For a lack of time, I did not discuss spoon theory. I did mention it as an inspiration / resource to look into in the discussion afterwards.
5. Playing a demo I made. Contrary to last time, this was a paper-only demo, much like my recent panic prototype. There were three roles, each with their own manual: HUMAN, PARSER and CARETAKER. Their manual was like a script, running a simulation of a text adventure. In various ways, they could get 'stuck', which would trigger a reset just like in minit. This meant the players switched roles. Through seeing all manuals like this, and through exploring more of the adventure together, they were able to reach the end. In this case, the end was very simple to reach (just three actions), but was not made clear. Instead, all rooms were filled with activities that might seem important (getting a password to a computer, fixing a lamp, etc). This was done in an attempt to capture the feeling of wanting to head out (or just take action), but getting caught in loops of (involuntary) actions. It's always so much more simple than you imagine it to be.

Manual(s)

(click for the HUMAN manual)

(click for the PARSER manual)

(click for the CARETAKER manual)

Reflections

[Reflecting in progress...]

A far, far from exhaustive list of small thoughts.

• I quite like working with these scripts (as manuals?).
• I think a prototype with 2 people worked much better than with 3 in terms of intimacy. Also from the designer's POV, it's much easier to juggle info between 2 distinct parts of play, as opposed to 3.
• I think letting the players address themselves with 'you' instead of their own names took away from the power with which certain themes are conveyed. The confusion in the experience now seemed to stem more from wanting to figure out the 'escape room', and not so much from the friction of your identity being pushed and pulled.
• One tester asked if I am keen on having a goal in the experience, something to work towards. My answer was: not necessarily, but for the tests so far, I've been hoping to test certain mechanics and flows and interactions, and a goal can be very useful in wrapping that together (without having to Wizard of Oz too much). Also, tradiationally, text-adventures are very much mystery / escape room-y games. It was an interesting remark, and something to take with me into the next public moment.
• On a personal note, I wasn't as happy with my own ability to lead the session this time as opposed to last time. I hope this has to do with factors outside of the project, but some recent insecurities regarding where I want to take it surely are part of it.
• Last session's demo seemed a little more confident in what it wanted to do. That demo was more bounded to this environment, and this demo might be a good first step towards something more general. But it's indicative that not all puzzle pieces have fallen into place yet.
• (The 'product' being just some sheets of printed text would feel a little unsatisfying to me though.)