Re: Interactive storytelling and me; and a challenge

[thom@indiana.edu]

Quoting "Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery@indiegamedesign.com>:

> I think I'd rather have my AIs generate art assets, ala procedural 
> modeling.  If an AI could do it decently, then the results are "known to 
> be saleable."  Seems like visual art generation would be a lot easier 
> than story generation.  Crap just has to look interesting.

This is a pretty silly statement since the quest for automated art is about as 
long and successful as the quest for automated story or the quest for automated 
music.

Glassner in his Interactive Storytelling book points out the responsibilities 
of the author and reader and points out that interactive storytelling violates 
these responsibilities by asking people without real training as writers and 
storytellers to take on the roles of writers and storytellers. You can 
substitute artist and viewer above and apply this thought to visual art or 
musician and listener for music as well.

Art of any sort is difficult and often takes decades to master before one can 
actually create 'art' of any sort. Machines will never 'create' art or story or 
music of any significance because humans create significant art and story and 
music for human needs. Heck, the visual aspect of visual art barely exists 
these days simply because of the function of 'art' these days. Art isn't 
something which matches the couch any more.

-Thom