continue to get more polygons in the faces and have them dance better and so forth. But
in terms of dramatic resolution, they haven’t even begun.
Maybe it would be good if they go down that path, leaving the real problem area free
for me and the other people who are serious about interactive storytelling. There are
indications of a hankering for dramatic content. For example, Sony calls the chip in the
PlayStation 2 “The Emotion Engine.” Well that’s bull, total bull. It’s a graphics proces-
sor and has nothing to do with emotional modeling. But it shows that they would sure
like to have some honest emotional content. They’re just not willing to make the prod-
uct-level commitment. Then there’s the twin factors of the Internet and Hollywood.
Between them, there’s a strong desire to establish an identity untainted by computer
games. So between the Internet and the Hollywood people I think that we really ought
to get interactive storytelling. There are lots of indications in that direction. Six years
ago, when I went hat in hand to almost all the majors in Hollywood trying to get them
interested, and I struck out, that was because they had all just recovered from the expe-
rience of getting burned by having their own games divisions. So nowadays they’re
starting over with web-based things that have a completely different outlook, and they
might be interested.
I wonder if you have an answer to the critics who say that telling a story inter-
actively is somehow at odds with the fundamental structure of storytelling.
Obviously, you don’t find this to be an issue.
Not at all, and in fact I’m surprised at the shallowness of that argument. The easy refu-
tation is the example of grandpa sitting down with his little granddaughter to tell her a
story: “Once upon a time, there was a girl who had a horse.” And the little girl says,
“Was it a white horse?” And grandpa does not say, “Shut up, kid, you are ruining my
carefully constructed plot!” He says, “Oh yes, it was very white, white as snow.” He
develops his story and the little girl interacts with him. He embraces her participation
and incorporates it into the story, which makes the story that much better. This kind of
storytelling has been around since the dawn of human existence. We’ve long since
proven that, yes, you can have the audience intervene in the story without damaging it.
In your games work, you created both the content and the technology, whereas
with the Erasmatron you’re focusing on creating just the technology, which
will allow other people to create the content. Why did you shift your efforts in
that direction?
There are lots of people who could provide artistic content, but I’m the only person who
can provide the tool. I therefore have a moral obligation to concentrate on the talent
that is unique to me. However, there are still some other things I want to do. There’s so
much going on, I have to very carefully allocate my time, and a lot of good projects are
sitting on the back burner.
So as a result you don’t get much chance to work onLe Morte D’Arthur.
Right, I have to just let it burble around in my subconscious for a while longer. And it
may never come out, I don’t know.
Chapter 14: Interview: Chris Crawford 279