Yes absolutly the question is and always has been
"What do you have to say?"
this is what I take as the essence of the tired phrase
"Content is King".
The key differentiator between for example, IrishSpace, and most other whiz
bang
3D story demos is that IS had something to say.
Sandy
At 06:14 PM 1/28/2001 -0600, you wrote:
After looking at the worlds on a hotter platform
this weekend, seeing real time motion, fast good
sound, and so on, I am of the opinion that we
no longer have the platform barriers we had
three years ago to building very compelling
vrml-lit.
Nope. The
Feedback into discoverability. We have
agents for that, what I might like to call,
Golem worlds. At the point at which the
Golem is entertaining, it is effective
because it is affective. A shoot-em-up
in a maze is surprising but not astonishing.
A monster that makes you answer its
Not oddly, we find that in almost all worlds,
the relationships of simplicity to beauty
holds. That which is attractive is also
subjectively simple.
http://personal.centric.net/natasha/locoface/
I am sitting here working on a paper on
ontologies and find myself repeating the
phrase, a
Sophistication and value: this would indicate
to me that the value of the story, subjectively,
would be in the cost to recreate the experience.
If we create a story that is not "superficial"
then we have introduced algorithms that will
make the experience highly and subjectively
unique.
The notion is compressability or the Kolmogorov
complexity: the information measure is the
length of the generative program. Chase that
thread. For sure, we have a cultural or
hermeneutic interpretation, but essentially
the theme determined the overall product.
It is the experience that
