What is the difference between an algorithm that operates on geometric
objects and attributes? Both are limited to the interpretation of
the designer as to what can be done.
Perhaps my choice of words was misleading. When I said attributes, I
meant a hierarchical system, where all 'plot devices' would share a
common base set of possible effects (alogorithms) that could be applied
to them.
The only way that either system (although I believe we mean the same
thing), could be truly "freeform" would be if the system could apply
its own interpretation of what a given requirement meant. This could
quite easily lead to chaos, with the users' requests becoming quite
meaningless.
Then maybe that is surreal?
>It seems like many such algorithms are quite obvious, and extend
>directly from computer graphics modelling and database technology
>iteself. Stretching, shrinking, object substitution, inheritance,
>joining, splitting, coloration, materials change, motional path, etc.
>So it's probably not worth discussing the possible algorithms a user
>could employ - that's more in the realm of technical practice.
It was the technical issues I was trying to avoid.
>For instance, I have occasionally played a game of "free association"
>with people at a local coffee house. Each person says a word, one
>person after the other. There are no particular rules for what word
>will be said. I find that when you get a random mix of personalities
>together to play this game, you tend to get a "least common
>denominator" string of word associations. People invariably get stuck
>on talking about sex. In the limited time they are alotted to come up
>with a word, they most often cannot come up with anything else.
Perhaps a similar approach could be adopted when the user selects their
plot devices - this has an air of "automatic writing or painting?"
>The environment, as both a physical machine and a conceptual machine,
>heavily influences the kinds of dialogs that will take place within it.
>Beyond the basic recipe for Surrealist experience that we have
>established so far, it is worth investigating how the VR environment
>can manipulate the users' experiences.
This will be the most difficult part as far as I can see. The selection
of plot devices, and defining the "world" should be fairly straight forward.
How this world functions is issue that will be difficult to resolve.
In a way this brings me back to the "attribute" issue I spoke of earlier.
If the user could define objects to "act" in certain ways, then the
interaction within the world is taken care of automatically. Potentially
there is no need for the reality engine to even try to resolve conflicts.
Lee.
lee@giaeb.cc.monash.edu.au