Starting week four in Thinking In Fragments, we discussed Manovich’s principles of new media. I enjoyed this section of chapter one of The Language of New Media more than I did the first section. Of course, these principles can be seen in most if not all of the online media we consume, so it was consequently much easier content to get through than the history of media and media types. I say this with a great understanding that we must be familiar with the history of media as it has lead us to where we are today- everything in our lives (including media platforms and artifacts) is a product of what has come before.
The principles that I find to be most explicit in our consumption of new media are the qualities of Modular and Variable. These can be easily seen in most media content- we consume separate pieces of online media such as website pages, YouTube videos, Facebook photos, that exist both as individual items but also within a greater spectrum of content- a single recipe on a cooking blog, one YouTube video that is part of a series, and a Facebook photo that is in an album. But what pieces we consume are entirely different to others- everyone’s online experience is subjective and individual. I really like the idea that movement online is often multi-linear- there is not necessarily a beginning/middle/end, that people are just navigating their own unique path through the internet. To bring it back to the metaphor that we used in week one, of a massive web or tangled ball of string (something I mentioned briefly in my blog post, although I considered it more of an abyss)- it is like each individual web user is tugging at a loose end of the string, constantly pulling, and grasping new strings through knots and tangles.
Another conclusion that we came to in class is that for content to have the ability to be variable, it must first be modular. Modular content is the predecessor to variable experiences.
So, how do these principles relate to our current project?
As it is a ‘new media’ project, it is inherently numerical. It is modular in the sense that there are separate videos, pages, pictures and so on that can exist separately to the greater project. However, I question if we have somewhat failed on modularity as not each component of our project could be consumed as it’s own entity- some only make sense in the scheme of the project, but they are all accessible without experiencing the whole project. It is certainly variable, after all, it is not a linear/one-route-for-all project. It is not so variable that there are endless journeys through the project- there is only eight final destinations, but it is variable enough that people are having a unique experience.
In terms of content for our choose your own adventure, we have decided to go for somewhere between fiction and non-fiction. It is going to be an adventure around RMIT- giving the user the option of studying, meeting a friend, going to the library, going to a class etc, and showing them where to go and giving them extra information on services and areas. There won’t be infinite continuations but there will be enough that it’s worthwhile making it interactive.
In terms of deciding on content, I found this quote on the Future of New Media blog very interesting- “I wouldn’t take a regular, normal linear story and try to “interactivize” it. That won’t work.” This is to say, content needs to be specifically made for being interactive. We can’t make something interactive just for the sake of it, nor can we force interaction where it doesn’t belong.
Finally, I have been thinking more about the different styles of interaction within online content. This is something I touched on at the end of my first development post. I have deciphered in my mind two (of many, I’m sure) main categories of interaction. There is interaction without limits, and there is interaction with limits. Or more realistically, there is a spectrum, ranging between no limits and almost entirely limited. For example, Deprogrammed lies closer to the almost entirely limited end of the spectrum. You can only move forward and look around. You have barely any options. Our project will be somewhat less limited- there are options (but not that many) but you can also leave a comment on the blog and interact with the project that way if you wish. Projects that have no limit on interaction are definitely harder to think of because they’re harder to make. Something like The Sims lies on the open world, no limit to interaction end of the spectrum.
Anyway, we’re at the tail end of our project now. It seems thinking of the concept was one of the more difficult parts of completing the project, should be simple from here on out.