Thijshijsijsjss: Add some examples

2025-01-16T16:02:45Z

Add some examples

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:02, 16 January 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	So far, I have thought about my thesis as a subset of the game manual that is meant to accompany the Human Parser game (see [[User:Thijshijsijsjss/Human_Parser/Thesis_Outline\|thesis outline]]). However, the deeper I get into writing and designing the game, the more this feels like a slightly awkward, needlessly challenging format. Instead, I've started to explore a very similar format: the thesis as an annotation of the manual. I see some clear advantages:		So far, I have thought about my thesis as a subset of the game manual that is meant to accompany the Human Parser game (see [[User:Thijshijsijsjss/Human_Parser/Thesis_Outline\|thesis outline]]). However, the deeper I get into writing and designing the game, the more this feels like a slightly awkward, needlessly challenging format. Instead, I've started to explore a very similar format: the thesis as an annotation of the manual. I see some clear advantages:

	* While designing, I'm starting to lean more and more towards a diegetic manual. That is, a manual that is acknowledged by the narrative of the game, and is explicitly used in the gameplay. I'm growing attached to doing this, because of the mode of address it allows for (mimicking communication styles within mental healthcare). By annotating instead of blending entries,		* While designing, I'm starting to lean more and more towards a diegetic manual. That is, a manual that is acknowledged by the narrative of the game, and is explicitly used in the gameplay. I'm growing attached to doing this, because of the mode of address it allows for (mimicking communication styles within mental healthcare). By annotating instead of blending entries, I feel it will be easier for me to 'just write'.

	* Just like before, the writing meant for the thesis can still be varied. It allows for anything the previous format allowed for. However, also more. By not needing to blend into the diegetic texts, I can be more free in the connections that I make. I can be shorter or lengthier without interrupting the flow of the information necessary for the game.		* Just like before, the writing meant for the thesis can still be varied. It allows for anything the previous format allowed for. However, also more. By not needing to blend into the diegetic texts, I can be more free in the connections that I make. I can be shorter or lengthier without interrupting the flow of the information necessary for the game. I can produce more asynchronously.

	* By itself, it is a comment on the 'grain of salt' nature of manuals. If even a manual needs a manual to be read, it's turtles all the way down. Considering the question 'what does it mean to "come with a manual" as a person?', I think this is an apt thing to comment on.		* By itself, it is a comment on the 'grain of salt' nature of manuals. If even a manual needs a manual to be read, it's turtles all the way down. Considering the question 'what does it mean to "come with a manual" as a person?', I think this is an apt thing to comment on.
Line 10:		Line 10:

	* It provides for an opportunity for a non-linear thesis. As one will play the game differently, or read the manual differently, or browse the annotations differently, the thesis will come to a person at a different time / pace / order. This was also true for the previous format, but it's more clear for me now. As the starting point of much of my research was non-linear writing, I find this a nice thing.		* It provides for an opportunity for a non-linear thesis. As one will play the game differently, or read the manual differently, or browse the annotations differently, the thesis will come to a person at a different time / pace / order. This was also true for the previous format, but it's more clear for me now. As the starting point of much of my research was non-linear writing, I find this a nice thing.

			====Examples====
			* Currently, the manual starts with an email from The Facility you are working for. This can be annotated with a discussion on this type of language being used
			* The player will be invited to perform some tests in-game. This can be a segue to talking about playtesting in the annotations
			* I am considering some visuals like in [[User:Thijshijsijsjss/Gossamery/The_Hobbit_(1982)\|The Hobbit (1982)]], that might be featured at the start. This can be an opportunity to briefly talk about the history of text-adventures.

Thijshijsijsjss: Create page with motivation for a manual annotation

2025-01-16T15:33:39Z

Create page with motivation for a manual annotation

New page

So far, I have thought about my thesis as a subset of the game manual that is meant to accompany the Human Parser game (see [[User:Thijshijsijsjss/Human_Parser/Thesis_Outline|thesis outline]]). However, the deeper I get into writing and designing the game, the more this feels like a slightly awkward, needlessly challenging format. Instead, I've started to explore a very similar format: the thesis as an annotation of the manual. I see some clear advantages:

* While designing, I'm starting to lean more and more towards a diegetic manual. That is, a manual that is acknowledged by the narrative of the game, and is explicitly used in the gameplay. I'm growing attached to doing this, because of the mode of address it allows for (mimicking communication styles within mental healthcare). By annotating instead of blending entries,

* Just like before, the writing meant for the thesis can still be varied. It allows for anything the previous format allowed for. However, also more. By not needing to blend into the diegetic texts, I can be more free in the connections that I make. I can be shorter or lengthier without interrupting the flow of the information necessary for the game.

* By itself, it is a comment on the 'grain of salt' nature of manuals. If even a manual needs a manual to be read, it's turtles all the way down. Considering the question 'what does it mean to "come with a manual" as a person?', I think this is an apt thing to comment on.

* When writing [[User:Thijshijsijsjss/Human_Parser/About_Playtesting|about playtesting]] and designing sessions, I started to find similarities to feminist methodologies. Similarly, I think the process of annotation shows a seamful approach to both the writing and gamemaking process, which I deem valuable in an industry that tends to value unachievable AAA polish.

* It provides for an opportunity for a non-linear thesis. As one will play the game differently, or read the manual differently, or browse the annotations differently, the thesis will come to a person at a different time / pace / order. This was also true for the previous format, but it's more clear for me now. As the starting point of much of my research was non-linear writing, I find this a nice thing.

User:Thijshijsijsjss/Human Parser/Manually Annotated - Revision history

Thijshijsijsjss: Add some examples

Thijshijsijsjss: Create page with motivation for a manual annotation