Scott Fisher

Good backchannel(s) activity at this talk. Nice to have one of the speakers in there. Log available here:
Download file

You know Scott, you're right. The backchannel was really good the other night. In retrospect, I think the reason it worked so well is that the speakers were so engaging that the backchannel (for once) did not distract from the presentation, but rather (as was intended all along) enhanced the presentation. Way to bring in some great speakers!

I think the idea of Facade and everything that it attempts is extremely interesting, but I still couldn't help but feel like I hadn't seen the definitive demo that really sold me on the hype surrounding it. The demo we were given at ICT this summer was disasterous (they wouldn't respond to a single thing we said or did while the predetermined story marched onward.) This one was better, but even with the creators demoing it, Trip would just blatantly ignore what was being said about half the time - which really frustrates me about Facade. It plays out like a play where you can sometimes throw the actors off on a tangent but by and large they do the same play every night. I wonder how effective a simulator it would really be if Facade was modeling personalities that were not totally self-absorbed, since at least I'm kind of able to say "well they're just self-absorbed and that's why they ignore me."

This talk was quite a treat! I finally got to hear about how Facade's AI was conceptualized.

With that said, I found Facade to be both an innovative piece of software on a technicall level and an extremely annoying drama on a personal level.

I enjoyed how the AI was able to change depending on your input. I was also impressed by the "beat" system- mainly that you were challenged to keep up with the conversation otherwise your silence would be consititued as a reaction. On the same token, I was annoyed that I had to type so fast- almost to the point that I wasn't listening to the character's words.

Which leads me to talk about the two characters who were quite pretentious. In all honesty, if I had to have a real conversation with two whiney people like that- it'd be less polite.

But I suppose that was the point, eh? To either make you side with one of the characters or both, or neither.

Well after they kicked me out of their house, I was reminded why I didn't go further in clinical psychology studies.

I agree with Jesse -

..and I agree with paul

I think the idea of provoking a fight between virtual lovers sounds like it would be great fun :) for a little while, that is.

I haven't played it yet, but from what they said during the talk it it sounded like the game was pretty good at figuring out what you are saying to them in a natural way, or acting like normal, self-involved people when it doesn't get you. As the AI continues to advance, it could be quite amusing to see what you can do with them.

I'd like to see Facade's conversation building system applied to an entire game world. Their conversation was built by having the program pick bits and pieces of responses, based on analyzing the user's action. Conceptually, an entire game world could do the same. If, instead of building the NPC's verbal response, the system was building, on the fly, a puzzle based on the player's actions, you'd have a game that would change with every play through.

The Facade AI works because of the great consideration the authors gave to the interactive narrative structure. Also they create an interesting game based on the potential of the dramatic beats.
I am interested in research about the right relationships between open rules of games and multimedia storytelling to increase the interactivity, the entertainment and the learning procceses. I believe open structures and multimedia databases are the way to go.

On one of the late work night this summer before Nightlife went beta, a few of us demoed Facade. Myself and another watched as one of the OEs played through the game. The three of us always wanted the game to do different things, meaning, there was no moment/scenerio that ever happened, which was compelling enough so all of us wanted to progress through the game on the same path.

The Sims is a God game; the player controls their Sims AND controls the NPCs (for the most part). This allows the player to experience the game the way they please, which in turn makes the players believe that they are playing through their unique story. Facade does not allow the players to control the AI. This resuls in player making logical moves which they believe will result in a certain outcome. Except the outcome is not always what the player desires. For a one player game, the scripted and uncontrolable AI is a fundamental flaw, leaving this game as a lesser knock off of a popular existing franchise. This game needs an upgrade if it is going to contend in the market.

I played Facade sometime ago, and while the the NPC's interpretation of the player's input is rough and a bit unintiutive, the premise of the work astounded me. I truely believe that Facade is the direction that the game industry should be taking games. I believe that this would be a new genre of games where the player no longer reduce other characters in a game into spacial objects that can be shot at, jumped on, punched, kicked, dragged, pushed, and/or rolled on (damn that katamari.) Rather NPCs can be thought of as people. People with their own agendas. People with complicated thoughts and emotions. People who would not react predictably.

What separates Facade from the Sims is the fact that the player cannot directly control the NPC's mind and the NPC's reactions are not simple. In that sense Facade is more realitic and more intriguing than the Sims. Because NPC interaction in the Sims are so linear, the gameplay can easily be reduced to a strategy game. While in Facade the player must first explore the psychological space of the NPC before they can predict how the NPC would react.

What intrigues me the most about Facade is that it's a game that exercises the player's ability to empathize rather than their skill in hand-eye coordination or logical problem solving. It's a game that exercises social skills, something that is sorely lacking in modern single player and even some multiplayer games.

For a long time the game industry has always been secrectly envious of the Hollywood for their ability to produce drama on the screen. Maybe with facade the industry may finally get what it wants. "A game that makes you cry."

I'd have to agree with Jesse here... (Foghorn sound!)
I wasn't quite as impressed by Facade. I felt it lived up to it's name and was just another way around the whole issue of complex AI.
Their work in this area is a good step along the lines of AI that has more human thought patterns but it is far from the giant leap it is meant out to be.
The ICT has a few prototypes that seem to work much more effeciently.

Michael and Andrew's view where games are currently at, seemed quite narrowminded. I felt that they had a need to put down other games to feel theirs was that much more special.

During their discussion Mateas and Stern referred to the Facade project as a serious game, a term developed for all non-conventional games based on something other than mere competition. Not a gamer, a number of serious art-games _have_ piqued my interest over the past few years, namely: "Escape From Woomera", and Peter Brinson's "Waco Resurection". Interestingly, however, Mateas and Stern suggested that most of these examples of serious games are really no more than skins on shooters and therefor are dramatically limited in terms of the forms of interactivity they offer. Using AI to create processual narrativesis a subject about which I was woefully under-informed, these, so Mateas and Stern's presentation was amongst the most compelling of the 511 series. They claimed that Facade's ability to responding-to and integrating an agents real-time interaction in order to construct a compelling story demonstrated that games can a truly recombinant form. Surely this work will have lasting relevance.

When I was little I always would pick up my Nintendo controller and want to control the actions of TV show I was watching. Sadly I don’t think Façade is quite there yet. At this point to me interactive drama is kind of like switching all cinema to 3d…yeas we can do it but, does it add all that much to the story. Would people rather experience media this way then the traditional way? I am not sure what the answers are but, the process is very interesting.

This was one of the few talks that I didn't really get much out of. It was hard for me to see the greatness of Facade, perhaps when the interactive narrative becomes a bit more polished, I can better comprehend the awesomeness of their acheivments.