I’m still perservering with the Tulse Luper Journey. I’ve played 4 games through to completion and opened 4 suitcases to view the weirdness within. The little game-lets you play to open a suitcase are like very simple computer games but with very beautiful production values and pretty creepy subject matter. In one you have to guide little children through a maze filled with evil teddy bears; in another you examine frog specimens in an xray machine and in a third you are a WW2 border guard stamping passports and arresting anyone with forged papers. The effect is both bizarre and beautiful: think a remake of Picnic at Hanging Rock created using Pacman and directed by David Lynch and you’ll get the idea…
Not all the games are self explanatory. I find myself thinking I’ve completed a challenge but not getting the suitcase fragment I think I’ve earned so I’m spending more time on the forums to figure out what’s going on. They are full of earnest Dutch and Belgian guys who are keen to help out, so that’s useful.
I realise that just as the “Sopranos meet Everquest” paper in our reader describes Everquest as forcing social alliances, the Tulse Luper game is deliberately obscure and confusing, presumably to make players use the forum to find out what’s going on. From now on to save time I consult forum posts about each suitcase before attempting that level.
I also realise that this game is fundamentally unlike Graal and Everquest. Although there is space within the game to meet other users and swap suitcase fragments, Greenaway isn’t letting the user create the narrative in quite the same way that these games do.
There is some room to control how the game goes for me, such as when I meet other players to swap or trade items from the suitcases, but because the game is really about uncovering the secrets in a film, the film’s narrative in its entirity is there for me, or anyone else, to discover. I will of course discover it in the order that I choose, but it really reminds me more of Oulipo books than anything else.
With all this talk about whether games are narratives, I’m a bit confused that no one has mentioned Oulipo. This is a literary movement from France in the mid 20th century which I think poses some of the same questions about what narrative really is.
Oulipo arose as a way of creating constraints within which artists could work. Practitioners hoped that the constraints would force greater creativity. For example, one practitioner wrote a book (in French) without ever using the letter “e”.
The basic premise of Oulipo was to create “potential literature” using random elements like throws of dice or some other way of randomly generating which line of text (or other narrative element) comes next. One Hundred Thousand Million Poems, for example, is a children’s book of poetry where the pages are cut into strips and each strip contains a line of poetry, so the reader can choose which lines are displayed and therefore create their own poem. An interactive version here shows how it works.
I think Oulipo raises really similar issues to games. Is a narrative that consists of elements that are accessed in any order really a narrative? I would say that of course it is – because the same overall amount of information is present for the reader/user to discover as there would be in a linear version – it just has more possible paths through the information.
