Researcher: So, to start with, did you guys know that was a multiplayer story? Given it was in the participant information?
Participant 2: ^ Yes
Participant 1: Kind of, the other player was mentioned but I didn't really feel like I was, my interactions were, I didn't really get that I was interacting with another person other than, that, err, that another player has made a, there's a message that says another player has made a decision.
Researcher: Interesting, okay, did you feel the..
Participant 2: Yeah, I felt the same way, obviously going into the study I knew it was a multiplayer thing, erm, the structure of it definitely felt that was it was designed that, such that, that given there are no more story nodes to read, waiting for another person. But, there were definitely points that I felt it did have that multiplayer aspect, sort of, in that, when it came to the end, it felt that the story so far had been left in a way that could go multiple ways, and it was, fed, I felt that it probably would have gone another way if it was a single-player story, at least.
Researcher: Okay
Participant 1: I didn't have a clear sense that I was Todd, I mean, I think that I was meant to have been Todd
Researcher: Yes
Participant 2: But I didn't really get a clear sense that I was Todd, it felt very much like, it was told in the, what is it? Second person, er Todd, rather than it being 'I do such and such' it talks about 'Todd doing this' and, er, that kind of takes away from the sense that you are Todd interacting with Sarah, although I realise I was, I didn't really.
Participant 1: I felt quite a bit like Sarah, but I think that might be, but it felt to me like the first half of the story was very much focused on Sarah and the second half was focused on Todd, so it led in to me, it was talking Sarah, doing all these things, I felt more like Sarah there.
Participant 2: Well, you kind of, I felt like I was interacting with Sarah, I mean I had a, I was given choices to shoot Sarah or let her go. Which then said, well, right, I must be Todd. But I didn't have a very clear sense I was playing the character of Todd.
Researcher: Okay, okay. So, to go back a bit [P2], you mentioned there were bits where, you kind of, got the sense it was multiplayer. Which bits of the narrative particularly conveyed that for you?
Participant 2: Erm, definitely the sort of end confrontation bit, erm, In the alley after stealing the money, interacting with Todd there. That did feel, it did feel a lot like a back and forth.
Researcher: Okay
Participant 2: It did feel like my past actions affected what the other player was, what Todd was doing.
Researcher: And how would you comapre that with the earlier memories that you were exploring?
Participant 2: The earlier memories felt more like I was reading a story, and it felt more like here is a fair bit of a story, would you like to do thing A or thing B. Whereas the final bit felt more like here is some things going on, what would you like to do? Here are some more things, what would you like to do. So that one felt more like my choices were, interweaved with the story whereas before it was, here is a story, do you think this is good or bad, basically?
Researcher: Okay. Did you get that impression from the finale, or did you get a different impression from the end of the story?
Participant 1: Erm. I'm not sure really, erm. yeah, Iwas kind of, I spent quite a lot of it trying to piece together story, because it kind of moved in the narrative, err. I, yeah, I struggled with trying to work out what had happened and trying to make sense of it through quite a lot of it.
Researcher: Okay, so, in the last bit of the story [P2], you mentioned that, you know, you did feel like your choices were at least somewhat affecting the other player. Erm, when you were making those choices, did you think much about how it might impact the other player?
Participant 2: Erm, do you mean, as a person in real life?
Researcher: Erm. As a person in real life.
Participant 2: No, not really.
Researcher: Huh, okay.
Participant 2: I mean, I guess when I was playing Sarah, I felt some kind of.. friendliness towards Todd, that's why I chose the actions I did and that did play through, erm, I felt something of a connection to the character by the end, because that affected my choices and I'd thought about the character themselves, I wasn't thinking about the other player, sorry!
Researcher: Hrm, interesting.
Participant 1: So yeah, I mean, I was aware towards the end of the story that I was, my part in the story was affecting Sarah and I was given the option to shoot her or let her go. And in real life I would always choose letting someone go over shooting them, unless they were trying to shoot me I suppose! But in any normal situation in which, I don't have to defend myself I would opt for, kind of, for none-violence and just letting other people get on with their lives. So I kind of, so I would opt for the decision I consider ethical, i.e, let the person go. Let them take as much as they can from the situation and not cheat them.
Researcher: Okay, so, when you erm, when you were going through that last section, what sort of, gave away that the other player was making choices?
Participant 2: Erm. Hrm. It felt.. hrm. That's an odd question.
Participant 1: For me, it was the blue thing saying 'The other player made this decision', sort of, the little blue message, that was my main cue and also erm, the other, wait until Sarah has decided what to say. So that, those two things were what gave me the cue that.
Researcher: Before you had that cue, did you... realise you were interacting with another player at all?
Participant 1: Well, I know that it was a multiplayer game, and that I was in a separate room from someone, so I figured from that, but not really from the story. If you hadn't have told me there that there are two participants, that we're looking at multiplayer narratives. Err, you go on this computer, and [P1] you go on this computer, that to me says 'Ah, yes, we're doing a multiplayer game', but, that's how I got my cue, not from what was happening in the actual story, really.
Researcher: Okay. Would you say the same thing was true during the final sequence?
Participant 1: Err, I would, yeah, it didn't feel like a multiplayer, it felt like one of those.. erm... branching novels.
Participant 2: Choose your own adventure novels?
Participant 1: Yeah, go to page 10 if..
Participant 2: Oh, yeah.
Participant 1: It felt more like that really, than a multiplayer.
Participant 2: yeah, I can definitely agree with that. Coming back to the question of the final sequence, I mean, yes, to some degree the UI definitely informed me that, but I think a lot to me was, given I knew the nature of the experiment, it felt very much like the end of the story, here, we're going to bring the two players together and they're going to look through what has happened, both players sort of, finally converge to a point
Researcher: Interesting. Errrm. So, how do you think during that final sequence then, the other player affected your story? That question is to both of you.
Participant 1: I don't really know, actually, I mean, I presume, I feel more clear about how I affected the other player in that if I'd have shot the other player, that would presumably have had quite a profound effect, erm. But I don't really know how they affected me. I mean, because I wasn't aware at any point that, assuming that I'm playing the part of Todd, err, I'm not aware of having a gun pointed at me at any point. The other player being given an option to shoot or not shoot me.
Researcher: interesting, okay. So, would you.
Participant 2: Sorry, what was the question again?
Researcher: So, how do you feel the other player affected the story during the finale.
Participant 2: Well, I felt like, if, I had chosen other options in the earlier parts of the story, if I had been mean to Todd, basically, I feel I probably would have been shot in the end.
Participant 1: You're wrong..
Participant 2: I mean, yeah, I mean, I guess it depends a lot on the person themselves. I know that a lot of people would very much feed into the character and they would let their own personal ethics and inhibitions completely out of the window and play entirely the character.
Participant 1: I mean I, I kind of er, I like to think I had goodwill. I at one point had a choice of confronting the other player or just saying, there there, and I went for the confrontational bit.
Researcher: Why did you choose that?
Participant 1: Err, because I thought actually, in the longer term, that's probably kinder, to say "What the hell are you playing that, you're not being straight with me.", is the more honest and probably... more ethical way to behave than to just go 'there, there, it's alright, I'm your best mate'. Sometimes, being a best mate, being a friend someone, involves being a nuisance.
Researcher: Okay, bit of a hypothetical, do you think if you'd known that the story was actually singleplayer, for example, then you'd have made the same choice?
Participant 1: Yes.
Researcher: Okay.
Participant 1: I would have then probably done the story again and made a different choice, and then, with a single one, I would probably make all the choices, it's like with computer games where you can play it once, repeat and go the other way. I mean, I've played Grand Theft Auto where I've tried to stick to all of the rules and err, yeah, well, it ends up, yeah. Then there are the other ones where you just become a raging psychopath and, just try to... which I probably wouldn't, I mean, I wouldn't, certainly in MMORPGs, I tend not to well, no, actually, tell a lie, there are some MMORPGs, EVE, as an RPG, tell me if I'm getting off topic here.
Researcher: I think we might be getting off topic here.
Participant 1: Well just, very quickly, there is the kind of ethics towards other people you are in a game with. On the whole, if I know there is another human being, I will tend to be less willing to explore unethical, whereas if it's a multiplayer, er, singleplayer - I might just for the hell of it be completely evil, just to see how the story unfolds, whereas I'd be less likely to do that if I know there's another human.
Researcher: Interesting, okay. So you do you think that played into how you acted during the finale at all?
Participant 2: I feel the same way about interacting with other people, when you're in a multiplayer setting it's.. I act towards others as I would like to be acted to and everyone should be having the best time they can, people, going, killing them or whatever is just not fun. I think that factored into the finale, because when I was making the decisions on the finale I was doing that in character and I felt it would be odd to make decisions that completely counteracted how I acted earlier, because then it just feels like I'm basically ignoring, if I'd chosen to shoot Todd in the end after being nice to him for all the other acts, it just feels like I'm ignoring everything that happened in the story and I'm just choosing arbitrary choices, basically.
Participant 1: Ah, so you did have the option to shoot me?
Participant 2: Yeah, I had the option of shooting you, staying in the organisation or.. erm, letting you talk it through
Participant 1: Yeah
Participant 2: I wanted to see what you would say
Participant 1: Erm, so, and I think the other thing where you behave, well where for me, I would behave differently in a multiplayer as opposed to a branching player once is because in the multiplayer you only get one shot, you can't replay, so you have one option and then it's game over and, unless you can talk to that person and say 'Right, let's play this differently, you generally you only play it once, whereas with a a branching novel where you have options, you can do it one way then do it another way for a change then do it until you've exhausted all the possibilities. Which you can't do in a multiplayer.
Researcher: Interesting, okay. Alright, so let's think about the flashbacks, the memory points. When you were making those choices, during those memory sequences. What do you think the other player saw?
Participant 2: I presumed they saw very similar things, I don't remember seeing much 'Sarah though' such and such, it was mostly just descriptions of what was happening, dialog, etc. So minor differences in terms of setting out how the characters were feeling at the time, but otherwise I felt they were probably very similar, if not the same.
Researcher: Ah, okay. And when do you think the other player would have noticed that?
Participant 2: Noticed that there...
Researcher: So when you'd made a choice in the flashbacks, when do you think the other player would have noticed that you'd made that choice?
Participant 2: Erm. Probably straight awa.. eer, at the same point in the story. For instance, when I was talking about the cement mixer, erm, thing, after I said to tell the truth I figured when that dialog came up in their part of the story, they would see that as well, I guess.
Researcher: Mmhm.
Participant 1: yeah, I didn't really quite understand what was going on at the flash point, I was more thinking, this is... I didn't understand we were talking about memory flashbacks, so I was kind of trying to work out what the story was and why it all seemed to be in the wrong order. Bearing in mind that I'm autistic and dyslexic as well, that kind of does affect how I read and construct narrative, and erm, I have to work quite hard to get things into sequence. Quite a lot of things I read normally that are in sequence, I will struggle to understand them in a sequence, and have to work quite hard, so when it's not in sequence I think it's normal and I try to get into sequen.. oh, no, I think I'm confusing myself now. But yeah, I was a bit confused as to what was going on at that point.
Researcher: That's possible an unfortunate side effect of how the story was structured then, rather than anything.. erm. Okay, so, during the third round of flashbacks, you had a little message that would appear saying 'the other person has read this page of the story'. Do you remember that?
Participant 1: Mmm. [Yes?]
Participant 2: I don't.
Participant 1: yes, I remember that. I don't really, I didn't really understand what the signifiance of it was, other than they read it. In terms of what that would entails.
Researcher: Ah, okay.
Participant 1: They can remember, I can remember... at the time, the problem was I wasn't aware I was reading memory flashbacks, and that this was something that was.. I hadn't got that bit.
Participant 2: I mean, I remember something saying "the other person's choice".. erm, "the other person made this part happen", but erm, I don't remember anything saying they had read the page, but that might be because I'm a fast reader.
Researcher: That's fine. Okay, what else have we got. So, let's go with some more general questions. So, just for the record, before this experiment ran, how well did you know the other person?
Participant 1: Never met them before
Participant 2: No
Participant 1: Nothing.
Participant 2: I've seen you around, that's about it, I don't think we've ever spoken.
Researcher: Excellent, I just needed that on the record. So, when you were playing and just going through this in general, how often did you think about the other player?
Participant 1: Erm, I was wondering whether or not I was interacting with them, and I knew there was another player, when it said "The other player has read this", this has to do with the other player's decision. I think I was trying to work out how my actions were affecting them. Because I wasn't getting cues about that, I was wondering.
Researcher: Interesting, okay.
Participant 2: I think until the final sequence, I wasn't really. Because the options were basically "Say this thing to that character" or "Say that thing to that character", neither of them really, obviously there's a different tone to each of them, whether to be nice or not. But neither of them seems like they would be negatively impacting the other player in real life, in terms of their experience. But in the final sequence, then I felt like I was this back and forht with the other person, I didn't want to just rush ahead and click one of the options and basically end it now.
Participant 1: I also, when you mentioned that you're a fast reader, I'm quite a slow reader. I mean, I can skim thing, but I tend, because I'm dyslexic, I lose track of what line I'm on and I find myself reading the next paragraph and finding out I missed a chunk out of this one and then I have to, er, and I thought "Is this going to be holding up the game" because I'm having to re-read this, and I think I hit the back button at one point, because... I didn't, I hadn't, I thought I'd read it but I hadn't it hadn't gone in and I needed to read it again, erm, and then I was thinking right, is the other person sitting there twiddling their thumbs, waiting for me to click something?
Researcher: Interesting. So, when you were thinking about the other person, on the occasional opportunities you did, did you.. if you reflect for a second, did you think about them as just 'A person somewhere' or 'That person I met earlier'.
Participant 2: probably 'That person I met earlier', but given I dont know you at all, erm, the... yeah, I had a face to put to this person in my mind but that was pretty much it.
Participant 1: I mean, yeah, I visualised you as that person I met earlier but we don't know each other so. And I mean, even if I did know someone, the awareness that it's a game, erm, you know, I mean, I have shot my childen, I have hacked them up with swords, I have had them leap out of the shadows at me and stab me to death in various computer games. But obviously, I would never dream of doing that in real life, as in, you know, so I've kind of... and, you know, friends as well, you're in a story with them and you can, in the game, do something that spoils their day, because the game requires it but that's part of the game, in that you, in that the game is not enjoyable unless you risk having your day spoiled.
Researcher: So, let's say you're playing through this with your children. Do you think you'd have acted differently?
Participant 1: Erm. No. Erm. I mean, it depends what age they were.
Researcher: Now?
Participant 1: Well, now my children are both adults, so no, not at all. But, err, If they were much younger. Well, I still, I wouldn't have, yeah. When you're children are very young you do act differently, because when they're 5 and 6, you have to be.. quite circumspect and, erm, I'm not sure I'd be playing games with, 5 and 6 year olds that involved possibly shooting each other.
Researcher: What about you [P2]? Say you were playing this with someone you'd known for a long time?
Participant 2: I don't think I'd have acted differently, as I've said before, this type of thing is most enjoyable when both people are having, fun, and if you act in a way that causes the other person to not have fun then it's just not as much fun for both of you. I guess I play a lot of DnD [Dungeons and Dragons] for instance and I guess it's about making sure everyone's having a good time.
Participant 1: yeah, although, there are some games that are better if you deliberately go out to ruin someone's day. And they're going out to ruin your day.
Participant 2: Oh, for sure.
Participant 1: A lot of people don't get, back to EVE, which is a game where you do actually, you do things where someone spends weeks and weeks and weeks, months, years sometimes, creating this amazing ship and you will, if you can, just destroy it. And they, and I've had it and you see these things in the chat logs where people have a virtual nervous breakdowns, and get really upset and if you're one of those persons that don't like, I mean I say, is not prepared to have your day completed ruined by someone who is deliberately trying to ruin it, you probably shouldn't play EVE, because part of the fun of EVE is that you have a lot to lose, you go into a dangerous part of space with all of your stealth on and your heart pounding because some jerk could be waiting behind that asteroid waiting to spoil your day. And you try to get some friends with you, and erm, yeah. That's the fun of it, and if everyone were really nice and said
Participant 2: Oh, absolutely, yeah.
Participant 1: That would make the whole game a bit, pointless.
Participant 2: I guess, for this kind of story thing, where you're pretty much just exploring a story, with other people and erm, and that kind of thing. Going out of your way to do it... but I guess in something like EVE, where the point is about that kind of spaceship combat...
Researcher: Alright, last couple of questions. Thinking over the story as, sort of, as a whole, how do you think the, having the other player there affected your story as a whole? If you compare it to... say, if it was in your mind, a singleplayer story.
Participant 1: You only get one go at the story, so erm, the decisions you make are more important because you're not going to do that again, on the whole, with that person. Well, you're significantly less likely. Well, I suppose you could go 'Well, we've done it that way, so let's try it a different way', but if you don't have the opportunity to communicate with that person, that story was a one off, so the decision they make is... the decision. Whereas in a singleplayer, you could make that decision and decide you didn't want to, so you could go back and do it again a different way. So you can reverse decisions in a not multiplayer story.
Participant 2: I think, I probably wouldn't have acted any differently if it had been a singleplayer story, but I think if it was a singleplayer story, there would be a slightly higher chance of me choosing the mean route as it were, ignoring todd, possibly shooting at the end, etc. But I think the reason I'd be less likely to do that in a multiplayer setting is that, I was worried there was a chance of it being, well, Act 1, you shoot Todd, the game ends. Whereas obviously, in a singleplayer game, I can do 'Well, I've tried that, I'll try the other route now'.
Researcher: Huh. That's very interesting. Alright, the last question, which is another 'For the record' one. Have you experienced many interactive narratives before?
Participant 2: Erm. Yes? I've played D and D weekly, I've played quite a lot of choose your own adventure type stories, played a lot of narrative video game type of experiences. Yeah, that kind of thing.
Participant 1: I've played D and D, though many many years ago, and there's other, similar, such as Call of Cthulu and runequest and.. years ago. And I've also played a lot of MMORPGS, EVE, Warcraft. Elder Scrolls [Online] and various narrative computer games.
Researcher: Such as...?
Participant 1: Oh god.
Researcher: Just give a brief description of them.
Participant 1: I've played the Witcher, started that, and Grand Theft Auto, I'm ashamed to say, given the grimness of it. But unfortunately, it is actually as well as being the ethical element, the ethical problems with it, it is actually a very well designed open world game. Sadly, I just wish they would sort... some of their values out.
Researcher: Last question, how did some of your experiences with this story differ with some of your past experiences... for example in Mark's case with DnD, for example. Or with any other interactive narrative.
Participant 2: I think, given the layout of the story, in that it was very much a 'Here is some things, you have a choice between A and B' whereas for instance, in D and D, here is a lot of things, what do you want to do? You can choose anything you like, erm, and that was just a limitation of the system I suppose. It did feel more railroady in that sense, erm.
Researcher: Oh, okay.
Participant 2: I've forgetton what your question was now.
Researcher: Just how did your experience differ with those?
Participant 2: Yeah, I guess my experience here felt more like, here is a path, it felt like I was moving along one of a few paths, whereas with D and D it feels more like I'm choosing to act as a person, completely unfettered by this kind of limitation.
Participant 1: mm, I think, with DnD you can put more of yourself into the character, whereas you have a set of predefined actions, and it is, you are just clicking from one of two or three options whereas you can kind of, you are much... The persona is more or less written for you, you might have, whereas with DnD you can, you have a whole backstory that guides how you acted, any one of potentially thousands of options.
Researcher: What about with something like the Witcher, or...?
Participant 1: The witcher, well, that's far more prescriptive. You know. It's much more similar to this in that you'd get 4 or 5 options and then you'd pick one and you might decide you didn't like that and go back to your last save point and pick another one.
Researcher: Intersting.
Participant 1: I mean, that, for me, is the crucial difference. Whereas the eldar scrolls, you don't have the option. That's your choice, that's your lot, there's no save point, there's other players in the game and time starts at the time you log on, and the game carries on with other people in it, and what you do is what you have to live with. you can't undo it, because it's a world with other people.
Researcher: Alright, well, thanks very much both of you.