Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen
I agree with the author that artists should not ‘pre-script’ what will happen and offer interpretations in the notes beside their interactive artwork. I believe that the beauty of interactive artwork lies in the freedom for the audience to contemplate, suggest the artists’ intentions beyond the project, and formulate their own interpretations of the artwork. Honestly, I think that the interactive artwork is not truly ‘interactive’ anymore if the audience must follow and do whatever is pre-scripted by the artist, as it is no longer a ‘conversation’ with the project. As how the author of today’s reading and Crawford in our previous reading (‘The Art of Interactive Design’) mention, interactivity is like a two-way conversation in which two actors alternately listen, think, and speak. I believe that if the audience has to follow what the artists have pre-scripted, then the ‘think’ process of interactivity is gone, and it would no longer be interactive. As the author of today’s reading suggests, it is fine to lead the audience to do certain things using the interactive artwork by making some aspects not approachable and giving hints through the artwork itself; however, we should not remove the freedom of the audience to take the form of actions they want to interact through the interactive artwork. Also, upon reading the article, I thought that well-made interactive artwork is like a well-made movie. A well-made movie makes the audience eager to share their feelings after watching it and the intentions of the director they perceived. This sharing of different perspectives on one movie is what lots of movie lovers love to do after watching the movie. I believe that well-made interactive artwork also enables such joy of sharing. And this is the beauty of interactive artwork as well.
Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits (and misses)
Among the reviews of the project themes that the author frequently sees, I found ‘Things You Yell At’ very familiar. The project with this theme involves reacting to a yell. This reminded me of ‘Space Navigator,’ my midterm project for Introduction to Interactive Media. My midterm project involved a voice mode, which enabled the player to control his or her rocket using his or her voice volume. I agree with the author that the interaction in this kind of project is very simple but very satisfying. My project just involved moving the rocket up and down with the voice volume, which is quite straightforward, but that was the main point of my game. Many who played my midterm project found the voice mode fun and satisfying as it allowed them to ‘yell’. I think that the act of yelling as a method of interaction gives people pleasure because it is intuitive, physically engaging, and offers an immediate effect on the game. Also, from my midterm project and part of today’s reading talking about this project theme, I realized that complexity in the project or game does not always equate to deeper or more satisfying player engagement. Sometimes, it’s the straightforwardness, such as yelling to control a game, that enables an enjoyable and satisfying experience for the audience.