Category: Reading Response 3

This reading really helped me (re)orient agency in terms of creation. Much of my thinking currently revolves equally around our class projects, as much as my introspection into theatrical experiences as my Capstone becomes more of a real thing over time. The things that stood out to me firstly was how Murray spoke about the idea of a world, the role of the player, and comparing it to participatory theater. Looking at what the role of the world might be, and then transitioning into thinking about the world design in context of mazes. To think about how the context of a maze could change wildly based on things like the story, and playing/non playing characters inside said maze. The example I found very exciting was to think about say, in replacing a cloudy happy visual of a maza with “Kafkaesque” characters and wordplay, all of a sudden the “player” could be transported to questioning, and more importantly experiencing an elevated introspection of things they might be already experiencing in their day to day societies. 

Looking at the questioning of the story, it’s unfolding around the use was another aspect I want to take from this reading. Thinking of (under the pretext that gaming seems to be the most clear connection most of the reading takes to think of interaction with the user) how the question might arise as to who is the author, I particularly resonate with how Murray cautions us to not be carried away in thinking that this would make the user an author. That instead,  what might be misinterpreted as authorship is actually (name of the chapter!) agency! 

In the realm of agency the thing that I liked was also thinking of user interface modules. He speaks about how the object we hold in order to “play” the game also makes a difference. This also reminded me of the  Robin Hunicke  video we’d looked at w.r.t the difference of the body and it’s orientation. Murray spoke about how in playing the same fame with a different controller, the simplicity with which he felt connected to the world of the game immediately reduced. This also resulted in him feeling more disconnected, and having a lesser sense of agency. 

As I was reading this chapter, I kept drawing parallels with the discussions and questions I have had when taking an NYU Gallatin class called The Garden of Forking Paths last year. The class takes its name from Jorge Luis Borges’ short story that is referenced a few times in “Hamlet on the Holodeck” as well. Throughout the course, we have analyzed hypertext literature, non-linear narratives and gameplay which are central reference points in this reading as well. As I am not a gamer myself, I keep referencing the examples we have looked into in that class to apply the theory from Janet Murray’s work while also evaluating the discussion I’ve had in the past in other contexts about user agency and what interactivity really is.

For the sake of applying this reading to an example, I have chosen to revisit I a game called “Life Is Strange 2” I have played for the class I have mentioned before. Long story short, the game follows a story of two brothers (you play as the older teenage boy) who, after witnessing their father being killed by a police officer, set off to flee their hometown and escape the police investigation of the sudden explosion of their house in which they are the prime suspects. You become a juvenile fugitive who is now responsible of taking care of the younger brother with (spoiler alert!) supernatural abilities.

The story unfolds through exploring different environments, collecting objects (which enrich the background story and give a more detailed portrait of the characters) and it progresses through branching dialogues. The decisions you make in the latter determine the conclusion of the game and the relationship that you develop with the younger brother and how his personality is affected by the events that happen. Overall, it sounds like a game that provides so many opportunities for exercising user agency in order to unravel and impact the story on your own. However, from my experience, I was not satisfied because often the game provided only the illusion of choice. Some decisions that you make along the way do not make a significant impact and the gameplay is interrupted at certain points with linear cinematic breaks in which you only spectate the events. Although I understand that it is a method of making sure that the narrative progresses and does not get stuck, it felt like my user agency is being taking away or is not significant. Yet I was pleased with the ability to explore the environment and objects in it that had a clear connection to the story and thus could enrich it with more detail. At the same time, choosing not to interact with certain items did not make the experience less comprehensive or fulfilled.

My key takeaways from the chapter on agency, which I have also used to write my brief analysis of “Life Is Strange 2” above:

• Agency is often confused with the misused term of interactivity which relates to “the mere ability to move a joystick or click on mouse”
• Agency is about meaningful interactions that are pleasurable and help shape the overall narrative
• Navigating the digital space should be allowed to be flexible and pleasurable while user choices should be meaningful, engaging but not limited to the win/lose consequences
• Every object in the environment should have a direct connection to the narrative and enable a clear sense of user agency
• “The interaction is not the author of the digital narrative”, exercising power within the interactive experience “is not authorship but agency”.

I enjoyed Murray’s take on the importance and use of agency in games and how that makes them more interactive. A game that popped into my mind when reading is Final Fantasy XIV. FFXIV is an MMORPG that offers players various forms of Agency. One of which is after the game’s first DLC. There is a land called Ishgard that goes through restoration by the end of the DLC. Instead of the game being linear and fixing it up within patches the game developers created an area where players go to with their crafting and gathering classes in order to donate items and objects to fix up the city. There are multiple servers in the game and each one’s pacing of the development of Ishgard depends on the player base’s contributions to the area making the players feel like they had a lot of agency in restoring the area.

Another game that I think offers a player a lot of agency is Valheim. Valheim is an open-world sandbox adventure game where the player is free to do anything they want to do. The players choose what kind of game they want to play. Players can choose to turn the game into a building simulator (https://www.reddit.com/r/valheim/comments/lz4upv/cheats_wip_valheim_is_not_a_citybuilder_so/) focus on creating a house and base, gardening and cooking, beast taming and breeding, exploring and adventuring into tombs and dungeons, role-playing and turning the game into a PVP battle arena, etc. the possibilities are endless, the player’s imagination is the limit

These examples are of things that allow players to feel like they truly constructed their own world by strongly feeling their own presence and how that impacts their environment. You can view the difference in immersion when being compared to older more linear games like an extreme example, Super Mario Brothers where the player has no choice at all they just go forth on a linear one-way path.

It was interesting to me how the author approached the notion of agency in games or immersive environments; stating that the more realized these environments are, the “more active we want to be within [them]”. This made me think of the games I’ve played in my childhood vs. the games that I’ve played recently, and the ways in which they are different and similar. I remember that growing up, playing quest-oriented games such as Crash Bandicoot and fighting games such as Tekken, the purpose and orientation of these games were very clear – and although very enticing the games didn’t offer much agency beyond beating your opponent or moving on to the next level. However, as time passed and games became more active and immersive, the player could find themself situated in worlds where they are free to ignore the main quest for a while. This concept reminded me of the anime Sword Art Online; where players (after being trapped in a video game) decide to live exploring and settling in the territories within the environment. It’s fascinating to imagine that this (on some level) could be possible, and players can have completely different and lives and personas within these immersive environments.

The potential of the labyrinth as a participatory narrative form would seem to lie somewhere between the two, in stories that are goal driven enough to guide navigation but open-ended enough to allow free exploration and that display a satisfying dramatic structure no matter how the interactor chooses to traverse the space.

Janet Murray

Although most of immersive environments and games nowadays follow a linear trajectory, some give the player the impression that they have more agency in shaping their experience. Speaking to this, I found interesting points in Giving Shape to Anxiety, where Murray states that “The multithreaded web story achieves coherent dramatic form by shaping our terror into a pattern of exploration and discovery”. I feel like this is what attracts users to most modern RPGs and immersive environments – because beyond the main purpose of the narrative and what the player is meant to achieve, they are given the ability/agency to explore the terrain and immerse themselves further into the experience. This is seen in games like Legend of Zelda, Fallout and even Grand Theft Auto (GTA), where the player can walk around for as long as they want to just explore the environment. Notions of agency and ‘orienteering’ were definitely not on my mind when I would drive my car into the ocean in GTA, just to see if I would die.

I related a lot to some parts of Chapter 5, such as the agency associated with navigation in games. I play The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild on the nintendo switch and one of my favourite parts is the sheer amount of walking around and exploring you can do in the game. There’s always something to climb, or collect or look at, even if you’re not doing one of the main quests. In fact, the distribution of the shrines in the game ensures that you have to move around as much as possible and explore the landscape. It’s sort of like “orienteering” as mentioned in the chapter.

I also really liked the paragraph Giving Shape to Anxiety- Zelda does this partly through sound. There’s different sound tracks for peaceful walking, sneaking around and being near or under attack from monsters. As you play, you tend to recognise the sounds and you know from the tones what is happening around you.

In general, I really liked the ideas of agency brought up by the text- the sense of control felt by the participator is key. What I think is important to note, is the fact that agency might be real or imagined, but as long as it is felt by the person playing the game, it matters. What I particularly liked about this chapter was the fact that it says that agency is more than simply participation and action. It is the experience of feeling autonomous, and taking pleasure in just experiencing the circumstances of the game. It also mentions the challenges of moving narrative to computers; we have to find a balance between narrative and game structure, when they both complement each other rather than one being overshadowed by the other.

As I am formulating a response for this post, I could not help but wonder what is the current, most popular game genre. I googled and was not surprised that RPG games are ranked among the top three popular game genres. RPG games are becoming more and more popular because players are able to form their own narrative instead of blindly following set instructions to win or lose. Interestingly, winning or losing seems to becomes less important to users. For example, players choose the losing in the game Myst because “the winning ‘losing’ endings of the game are much more satisfying than the winning ending.”(175) Another example of how winning is not as important as it used to be: “instead of playing to increase their score, MUDders now indulged in more intense role-playing. And with the increase in immersive involvement came a desire to construct their own virtual worlds.”( 182-183)

Being immersive is an important part of RPG games because they allow players to feel their presence in the games. And because they feel their presence in the games, they have the desire to navigate and interact with the game’s environment. RPG games do not have very strict rules or instructions for players follow, so they are free to explore and interact. This freedom of navigation and interaction could a great sense of agency because players actually see the result of their free-will-decision-making actions.

Still, giving players too much freedom could also take a way a sense of agency away from a game. I remember playing a game where my character was stuck in a very large room and I had to figure a way out. There were so many objects in the room and the room itself was so large that just walked around, picked up random objects, and threw them away. It was fun at first but eventually I got a headache because I had no idea how to solve the puzzle to unlock the door. With this, I just want to remind that there’s always a slippery slope to look out for.

Post a brief response to the reading (1-2 paragraphs), and put it under the category Reading Response 3. You can respond by analyzing one game or experience you choose, with focus on agency/navigation/interactions.