Chris Crawford compares interactivity to two people holding a conversation, where each listens and responds, and that back and forth creates something dynamic. Before reading this, I hadn’t really thought deeply about what makes a system truly interactive, and Crawford’s explanation really clarified it for me. I agree with him because a strongly interactive system is one where the user’s input can meaningfully change the outcome, rather than just triggering a predictable or surface-level reaction. That’s when interaction feels real.
For my own p5 sketches, I’ve thought about ways I could improve the interactivity in them. Instead of just clicking to trigger something to happen, the sketch could react differently depending on the type of input, like how long you hold a key or how fast your mouse is moving. This would make the artwork/program feel less like a machine following certain orders and more like an actual conversation between the user and the program.