Defining IF

In response to Michael Berlyn and Marc Blank's "Interactive Fiction and the Future of the Novel," I think the two authors' definition of IF is (for the most part) similar to my own. IF is more than just a game that can be played. Like a short story or novel, IF is comprised of some kind of story line represented through prose. However, what makes the IF different from "traditional" writing formats is that "you don't watch or read about someone doing something" (par. 6); you create a story as you go. The article also points out that IF goes one step further than adventure games with its use of "a time stream and autonomous characters" (16).

To define IF solely as gaming I think is a little narrow-minded. Yes--certain games can be considered IF, but not all games are interactive fiction. Some video games incorporate role-playing, but others lack characters and a progression of time that effects those characters (eg. Some car racing games only require a player to go around a track. There is a sense of time, as in "timed trials," but it is static. One timed trial does not effect another trial if the player decides to repeat a driving course). Though both types are forms of gaming, only the former could possibly pass for IF.

I believe that because IF ultimately requires a computer to be fully understood/enjoyed/read/played, its definition will probably change when technology does. The article makes reference to "decision novels," which during its heyday, could have been considered interactive fiction (and should still be, however "primitive"). With mystic talk of future virtual reality spaces, IF could be brought to yet another level. From page-turning commands to parser controls to hyperlinks, this kind of literature is engaged by simply reading, giving inputs and outputs and long-stream clicking. By bringing a VR environment to the format, perhaps now a "reader" can fully interact with a work of fiction by "physically" being it.