Prime Time Replay:

Chris Crawford
Game designer and creator of
the Erasmotron story-telling software engine


MsgId: *emedia(1)
Date: Mon Aug 4 19:34:54 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

The art of story telling has entered a new realm in the Cyberage. Join us tonight on E-Media as we interview long-time computer game designer Chris Crawford on his newest creation, an interactive story-telling program called the Erasmotron. Crawford has previously worked as a game designer for Atari, and is the creator of "Balance of Power" and "Patton Versus Rommel," among other electronic games. Tonight, he expounds on his brainchild -- the story-telling program called Erasmotron -- and on the power of computers to help us reinvent the storyteller's craft and render new literary forms.

The first thing I'd like to do is ask for a little context. How did a computer/video game designer like you become interested in the notion of interactive story telling?

MsgId: *emedia(8)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:01:31 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

I always had higher aspirations for computer games than could be reached in the medium. For some years I attempted to elevate the medium with products like "Balance of Power" and "Trust & Betrayal," but it didn't quite work. So it was time to go to something rather different.
MsgId: *emedia(7)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:00:50 EDT 1997
From: guest At: 207.116.216.109

Hello! Are guests allowed to ask questions as well?
MsgId: *emedia(9)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:01:54 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

Yes, guests are allowed, but only after we have created a context for those questions. Otherwise, some people might feel confused. Hold on for about 30 minutes, then pipe in.

Can you explain how computer games like "Balance of Power" and "Trust and Betrayal" approached the notion of interactive storytelling?

MsgId: *emedia(13)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:06:47 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

It's not that these games approached interactive storytelling, but rather that they addressed more serious issues than were commonly addressed in computer games. For a while there it looked as if the audience might respond, but in the end the more visceral stuff won out.
MsgId: *emedia(14)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:07:39 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

What were some of the issues these games dealt with that you found the gaming audience resistant to?
MsgId: *emedia(15)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:09:34 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

There were two fundamental "killer problems" for my work. The first was the emphasis on cosmetic demonstration. People who had just bought the latest, greatest video or audio card wanted games that fully utilized these capabilities. This biased game design toward the cosmetic.

The second killer problem was the testosterone-soaked nature of computer games. There is nothing intrinsic in the medium that demands this, but the audience drifted in this direction, and so character interaction got lost in the demand for louder booms and brighter explosions.

MsgId: *emedia(17)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:14:14 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

Yes, I guess the idea of true story-telling ran counter to the prevailing, violent, trend in computer games. Yet story-telling has a history that predates these games by millennia. Story-telling -- and probably interactive story-telling -- was one of the first forms of human entertainment. Can you address this, and explain how computers are helping you to reinvent and advance this ancient art?
MsgId: *emedia(18)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:16:53 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

No question but that story-telling is one of the original forms of human communication. And the most ancient forms of story-telling had to have a strongly interactive component to them. However, with the passage of time, humanity developed a variety of technological schemes for enhancing the efficiency of language as a tool of communication: the log/boulder (soapbox); the amphitheater; the printing press; radio; cinema; television.

As the efficiency of the media improved, more people could be reached by a single author, but each member of the audience was lowered in "interactive status". Nowadays, we can all watch some big shot on TV, who can reach millions, but each of us is reduced to couch potato status. Of course, if each big shot had to interact with every yahoo in the world, then nobody would want to be a big shot author, and we'd all lose. This is where the computer comes in.

The computer allows me to express my ideas in algorithmic form, and then I can turn the algorithms loose to interact with all sorts of people. It's a more indirect form of communication, a more abstruse form, but a vastly more powerful form, because people can interact with an algorithm, but not with data such as text, audio, or video. There, I'll stop for a question.

MsgId: *emedia(23)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:24:13 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

In the area of story-telling, as in many other realms, Cyberspace turns out to be the community builder that can help us return to its roots.

Of course, we want to go into your program in depth. But I'd be most interested in learning about the first, incipient forms of interactive story-telling now apparently ubiquitous on the Internet. The bulletin board could be the first and clunkiest facilitator, and it gets better from there.

In any event, tell us a bit about the interactive story-telling capabilities you found available when you decided to enter the fray.

MsgId: *emedia(24)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:27:01 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

There really wasn't much of interest when I started on this back in the 80's. The MUDs were getting off the ground, and there's something of merit there, but it's still a long ways from interactive story-telling. The fantasy role-playing people seemed to have the best handle on the problems, but they hadn't solved the problem yet, and they still haven't made much progress.
MsgId: *emedia(25)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:32:41 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

For those who haven't been involved in the world of role-playing on the Internet, the term MUD sounds like wet sand. Can you please explain the MUD - -hopefully in the context of some of the earliest fantasy games, like "Dungeons and Dragons" or "Adventure" -- that gave rise to them.

I still remember playing "Adventure" on the black and white monitor of my Osborne 1. Please take us back that far, in a brief guided tour, so the disenfranchised can grasp the history here.

MsgId: *emedia(26)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:34:54 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

You mention "Dungeons and Dragons" and "Adventure." These were initially two very different games, but during the 80s a number of games merged so many ideas of the two that they are now often used interchangeably. "Adventure" was a text program created in the 70s that allowed the player to "move" through an imaginery realm, picking things up. It emphasized puzzle-solving. "D & D," on the other hand, was a non-computer game, also from the 70s, that emphasized the growth of a single character's (the player's) powers through experience. It was "free kriegspiel" (a human-moderated game) and so it had a more human feel than any other game.

In the early 80's a number of games emerged that attempted to extend these concepts. On the computer, there were many renditions of adventure games, some of them quite good. That genre was killed off (commercially) by the cosmetics-craze that I mentioned earlier. Role-playing games (RPGs, as we now refer to games descended from "D&D") were more difficult to do well on the computer. The first decent one was called "Moria," I believe, and it was done on the Plato system. Somebody copied it onto the Apple, renamed it "Wizardry," and computer RPG was born. Since then, we've seen many embellishments on both systems, but the basic design remains unchanged: in an adventure you wander around a strange environment, collecting things and solving puzzles. In an RPG, you wander around a hostile environment, fighting antagonists, gathering experience and artifacts to further your career. Now, a MUD is an online version of these two things.

Initially, MUDs were "Multi-User Dungeons": fairly conventional RPGs with multiple players wandering about. Why kill dragons and orcs when you can kill real human opponents? However, MUDs quickly evolved with the ability to add more "rooms" to them; when the users could start making changes, things really took off. It was great fun to participate in the design -- but it still isn't interactive storytelling.

MsgId: *emedia(33)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:44:58 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

Okay, so now take us from these venues to your creation, the Erasmotron. What does your system do that these don't, and how does it enable true interactive storytelling in the Cyberage?
MsgId: *emedia(34)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:48:13 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

I suppose that the central difference between the Erasmatron system and the previous stuff is that, from the ground up, this thing was designed for interactive story-telling. It's not a puzzle-system that's been tweaked for something like story-telling, as adventures are, and it's not a combat system with story-telling overtones, as RPGs are. At it's core is story-telling.

For example, the basic data structure, the kernel of data that's used everywhere throughout the program, is called an "event" and it has a subject, a verb, and a direct object (as well as a lot of other details). Basically, the concept at the core of the program is something like "Character A did this to Character B". Thus, the emphasis is on character interaction right down at the core of the program. Everything revolves around these concepts. The design process is a matter of defining and selecting the options a character has in response to a given dramatic situation. This becomes both the input structure and the output structure. In essence, all that happens in the program is that character do things to each other.

MsgId: *emedia(37)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:53:01 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

So, does the program itself generate any of the story, or do we need at least two story-tellers to participate and generate the elements?
MsgId: *emedia(38)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:55:14 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

The storybuilder creates the storyworld in which the dramatic interactions take place, and the dramatic rules that govern that storyworld. The story player interacts with the storyworld in such a way as to create a story. That resultant story is unique to the player. Thus, it takes two to create a story: storybuilder and storyplayer.
MsgId: *emedia(39)
Date: Mon Aug 4 21:56:38 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

Can you give an example of a round of play in the storyworld?
MsgId: *emedia(40)
Date: Mon Aug 4 22:01:18 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

Sure: "Brett siezed Jessica's arm and pulled her toward him"
"Jessica resisted petulantly, but allowed herself to be pressed against his body."
"Brett stared deeply into Jessica's flashing eyes."
"Jessica's lips moved closer and closer to Brett's."
[I gently touch her lips with mine in a long, tender kiss.]
[I fiercely press my lips against hers.]
[I wait for her to take the next step.]
MsgId: *emedia(41)
Date: Mon Aug 4 22:02:44 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

Are the possibilities endless, or is the tree of events circumscribed?
MsgId: *emedia(44)
Date: Mon Aug 4 22:05:58 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

The big trick is to replace a tree with a network. Everybody else is trying to make trees work, and they can't. The trick is to fold back dramatic interaction so that it can be re-used. How many kisses are there in a good romantic story? Just one? Instead of a single "kiss-tree", what we build is a "kiss-web" in which characters can put many different spins on each kiss given the changing context.
MsgId: *emedia(42)
Date: Mon Aug 4 22:04:19 EDT 1997
From: guest At: 207.116.216.109

Pardon me, but I thought this "chat" itself was "interactive". I suppose I had the wrong impression.
MsgId: *emedia(43)
Date: Mon Aug 4 22:05:21 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

Guest: sorry your question was overlooked. Chris, here is the question we never answered:

Would any of these games you refer to as being "quite good" be Infocom games by any chance?

Chris, I hope you can go a few minutes more. I just want to communicate the essence of your program before we wrap. Also: please answer the question posed by our guest, reposted for you a few posts back.

MsgId: *emedia(46)
Date: Mon Aug 4 22:10:12 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

Yes, the Infocom games were very good. They put a lot of effort into the creative side rather than just the technical side.

As to the essence of my program. There are actually two programs: an editor and a player. The player (the Erasmaganza) is free; the editor costs money. Artistic people buy the editor to create storyworlds for the public, which they can give away, lease, or sell as they see fit.

MsgId: *emedia(48)
Date: Mon Aug 4 22:13:25 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

As to the public version, can this mode of interactive story-telling be as rich as the ancient form, in which we interacted with each other instead of a machine?

As to the professional version, why would a true writer need this aid? If someone told me they needed this to write a story, I might be tempted to suggest they try another career.

MsgId: *emedia(49)
Date: Mon Aug 4 22:15:41 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

No, these computerized interactive stories will never be as good as having a real human story-teller to interact with one-on-one. Of course, this allows millions of people to interact -- albeit indirectly -- with a great story-teller. So it's a tradeoff.

As to the second part of your question, you would never use the Erasmatron to write a story, because there are plenty of perfectly good technologies for that task: pen and paper, word processor, etc. However, if you want to create an interactive story, then you have two choices: sit down with your granddaughter at bedtime and tell it, or sit down with the Erasmatron. The interactivity is the difference.

MsgId: *emedia(51)
Date: Mon Aug 4 22:18:59 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

Okay, Chris, I'm going to let you off the hook -- but not before I find out how I can get my hands on this thing. Is there a website where I can pick up the public version? As for the professional version, I would love nothing more than to give it a spin right on the OMNI website and see the result. Is this possible?

Also, for your customers, when will this be on sale?

MsgId: *emedia(53)
Date: Mon Aug 4 22:21:42 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

Our website is at www.erasmatazz.com. There's a LOT of stuff there explaining what is after all a very large chunk of ideas. We're not releasing just yet. We were scheduled to release on August 1st, but when I looked at the quality of our work, it wasn't good enough, so I postponed the release date until September 1st. Vaporware egg on my face is not as bad as Garbageware egg on my face.

This release is only the Macintosh release; the Win95 release will come on Feb 1. And you won't be able to run it on a website; right now it's a standalone application. However, the program can readily be adapted to multiplayer use.

MsgId: *emedia(55)
Date: Mon Aug 4 22:23:51 EDT 1997
From: OMNI_Moderator At: 168.100.204.58

Chris Crawford, thanks for your time. What a fascinating application. Good luck!
MsgId: *emedia(56)
Date: Mon Aug 4 22:25:00 EDT 1997
From: Chris Crawford At: 152.163.213.155

Thanks. Goodbye.


Home || Prime Time || Live Science || Machine Dreams || Project Open Book || SF-Fantasy-Horror
Continuum || Antimatter || Mind-Brain Lab || Interactive IQ || Gallery || OMNI Toons

Questions, comments and suggestions can be mailed to the webmaster.


Copyright © 1998 by Omni Publications International, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.