Tuesday, March 31, 2015

Review performing interactivity

This chapter defines 4 levels of interactivity in artworks and performances.
It seems that most of my recent experience on interactivity stays at the first three levels,
including pressing a remote control while watching TV and clicking a mouse while playing videogames.
Just like it is written in the book, some of those categories such as participation and conversation are too similar to differentiate. However, the author uses the example of solo game-playing and multiplayer gaming to identify those two categories. He points out that solo game-playing is a typical participatory interaction -- Although some games may contain highly complex contents, they are still settled parameters which are not flexible enough for an open communicating. On the contrary, multi-player gaming is a more conversational interactivity. Especially in some lager-scaled online games, a more opened activity may occur when players work together or play against each other in a virtual environment.
Turning to collaborational interactivity, it seems that the artificial intelligence is not a must. However, it requires the interactive forms can not only response and communicate but also has the capability to analyze the input info at a certain level.

Monday, March 30, 2015

Thoughts on Chapter 23

In this chapter, Dixon introduced his classification of the levels of interactivity, which are navigation, participation, conversation and collaboration. There are a series of examples he used to discuss those similar and slippery concepts, from Stelarc's Prosthetic Head to Luc Courchesne's Landscape one, and finally he concluded all of his points to  PLAY.

-----Interactivity in digital arts and performance is at its best a marvel of discovery, rekindling childhood feelings of intimate connection to a vast, inexplicable, and beautiful world.

Living in a digital world, every year there are a lot of new original creative installations, machines, and applications have been designed and presented in our lives. No matter how fast, how technological, and how elaborated-packaged in an interactive product's processing, the key is always ought to be playable, enjoyable, and user-centered.Before a real interaction, we need an interest in that interaction. After that interaction, we need an interest in maintaining the initial interest for the further interaction and further thoughts. How could an interaction make itself be a real interaction not just a reaction? The design of the interaction should focus on the emotional part of human, the psychological part of human, and the behavior part of human. Just like kids are always looking forward to seeing the magic elf because they purely harbor the best wish toward the real world. We, adults,  as long as we truly want to explore the multiple interactive possibilities in the future, are ought to learn from a kid and think like a kid as well.

It's time to bring magic back into the world!