A Structure for Modern Computer Narratives

  • Clark Verbrugge
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2883)


In order to analyze or better develop modern computer games it is critical to have an appropriate representation framework. In this paper a symbolic representation of modern computer narratives is described, and related to a general model of operational behaviour. The resulting structure can then be used to verify desirable properties, or as the basis for a narrative development system.


Constraint Logic Programming Discussion Thread Adventure Game Lock Door Narrative Development 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Baggett, D., Lee, F., Munn, P., Ewing, G., Noble, J.: Plot in interactive works (was re: Attitudes to playing (longish)). Discussion thread in archives (1994) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Olsson, M., Ewing, G.: Plot DAGs “undo”, and finite automata (was: Notes on “Annoy”). Discussion thread in archives (1994)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baggett, D., Plotkin, A.C., Arnold, J., Shiovitz, D., Clements, M.: Plot DAGs revisited (was re: Game design in general). Discussion thread in archives (1995),
  4. 4.
    Forman, C.E.: Game design at the drawing board. XYZZY News (1997),
  5. 5.
    Mateas, M.: An Oz-centric review of interactive drama and believable agents. Technical Report CMU-CS-97-156, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University (1997),
  6. 6.
    Burg, J., Boyle, A., Lang, S.D.: Using constraint logic programming to analyze the chronology in “A Rose for Emily”. Computers and the Humanities 34, 377–392 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brooks, K.M.: Do story agents use rocking chairs? The theory and implementation of one model for computational narrative. In: The 4th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pp. 317–328 (1996)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brooks, K.: Programming narrative. In: The 1997 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages, pp. 380–386 (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Strohecker, C.: A case study in interactive narrative design. In: The Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Roberts, M.J.: TADS the text adventure development system (1987), Software see
  11. 11.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The application of Petri nets to workflow management. Journal of Circuits, Systems and Computers 8, 21–66 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Adams, E.: The designer’s notebook: “Bad game designer, no twinkie!”. Online article from Gamasutra (1998),
  13. 13.
    Reisig, W.: Elements of Distributed Algorithms: Modeling and Analysis with Petri Nets. Spring-Verlag (1988)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cheng, A., Esparza, J., Palsberg, J.: Complexity results for 1-safe nets. Theoretical Computer Science 147, 117–136 (1995)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Esparza, J.: Decidability and complexity of Petri net problems—An introduction. In: Lectures on Petri Nets I: Basic Models, Springer, Heidelberg (1998)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ausiello, G., Italiano, G.F., Nanni, U.: Optimal traversal of directed hypergraphs. Technical Report TR-92-073, International Computer Science Institute, University of California at Berkeley (1992),
  17. 17.
    Pastor, E., Cortadella, J., Pena, M.A.: Structural methods to improve the symbolic analysis of Petri nets. In: The 20th International Conference on Application and Theory of Petri Nets, pp. 26–45 (1999),
  18. 18.
    Adams, S.: Scott Adams grand adventures (S.A.G.A) (2003),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clark Verbrugge
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceMcGill UniversityCanada

Personalised recommendations