July 2012
25 posts
Really interesting to see how progressive enhancement can be used in game development and design, and not something I’ve thought about before. I wonder, in the way we also employ responsive design, how games could drastically change experiences between devices?
- Woman: Can I have birth control?
- Government: No.
- Woman: I got pregnant because I didn't have birth control and I don't want the fetus. Can I have an abortion?
- Government: No.
- Woman: I gave birth to my child but since I wasn't expecting it, I can't afford daycare. Can I have help paying for it?
- Government: No.
- Woman: My boyfriend isn't excited about sex anymore, because I lost my figure due to pregnancy. Will you pay for his erectile dysfunction pills?
- Government: Yes.
In the West, plot is commonly thought to revolve around conflict: a confrontation between two or more elements, in which one ultimately dominates the other. The standard three- and five-act plot structures—which permeate Western media—have conflict written into their very foundations. A “problem” appears near the end of the first act; and, in the second act, the conflict generated by this problem takes center stage. Conflict is used to create reader involvement even by many post-modern writers, whose work otherwise defies traditional structure.
The necessity of conflict is preached as a kind of dogma by contemporary writers’ workshops and Internet “guides” to writing. A plot without conflict is considered dull; some even go so far as to call it impossible. This has influenced not only fiction, but writing in general—arguably even philosophy. Yet, is there any truth to this belief? Does plot necessarily hinge on conflict? No. Such claims are a product of the West’s insularity. For countless centuries, Chinese and Japanese writers have used a plot structure that does not have conflict “built in”, so to speak. Rather, it relies on exposition and contrast to generate interest. This structure is known as kishōtenketsu.
