mszv,
I understand your point. I do. I don't agree with it entirely, but I understand it. :)
Here's my biggest problem, using Myst as an example.
By the logic of only what happens in Myst (the original CD-ROM game) is "canon":
1) The sun really never moved in any of the Ages, because it doesn't move in the original Myst. You can sit there on Myst Island and stare at the sun all day and all night (our time) for weeks on end and it will never budge an inch.
2) The clouds really never moved in any of the Ages, because they don't move in Myst.
3) There are only two butterflies on Myst Island and they keep precisely following the exact same few paths every time you see them. (Brand new retcon: Atrus spent all those years with nothing better to do than training his two pet butterflies (Moritmer and Willow) to follow those precise paths. (Relax... I'm kidding) :)
4) The waves in the ocean defy all physics and just remain absolutely motionless, despite the fact that I can hear the waves lapping on the shore.
5) Atrus and Catherine must have never eaten (except maybe the occasional bit of moldy cheese when they visit Sirrus in Channelwood) or sleep, or go to the bathroom, etc., because we don't see any food, beds, or bathrooms on Myst Island.
6)You can hear wind just about everywhere, but the trees stay perfectly still, even the nice, light, deciduous leaves in Selenitic don't move _at all_ in the breeze.
and on and on and on and on...
So, one has to either be content with a world that is completely inconsistent with itself (we're not just talking "a bit of retcon here and there" inconsistent, we're talking "fundamental inconsistencies between your own senses" inconsistent: I hear wind, but I see that the trees and clouds don't move. I hear water lapping, but I see that the water doesn't move, etc.); or you have to draw a line somewhere and say, "Hey, there are budgetary, time, technological, etc. limitations that limit what could be accomplished in creating Myst" (and would be just as true if it were made today, see: Uru.) You draw that line, even if it's only subconsciously, and (hopefully) suspend your disbelief: the Myst we (Cyan) are capable of representing on the screen will always be less complete than the Myst in your imagination.
But once you've drawn that line, you have to realize that the person next to you has drawn that line in a different place to satisfy their own personal "suspension of disbelief". They're bothered by certain things that you aren't bothered by, and you're bothered by things that they aren't bothered by.
One person is satisfied by filling in all those blanks on their own, with their own imagination. Someone else fills in those blanks while they're playing, but then is curious how we (the authors) would fill in those blanks, so they ask us.
Why? Because Myst isn't "just" a game to them. It certainly isn't "just" a game to me. That "ideal" Myst is a place I would love to visit. I want to know all about it. I'm not alone in that.
I will continue to maintain that there isn't a single "right" perspective that has to work for everyone. Each person is free to enjoy their Myst experience however they want.
If you want to fill in all of those blanks yourself, and you don't care how anyone else would fill them in - more power to you. You have my blessing. Go forth into the world and be happy. Please. Really!
And the person who writes to us and asks how we would have filled them in (well, if they wrote to me, they got an answer of how Rand would have filled them in, with my belated apologies to Robyn) is equally within their rights to do so, because that's what made _them_ happy in their Myst experience.
What has raised the hair on the back of my neck every time you've stated this position over the years, is that doesn't seem to even acknowledge that anyone else is allowed to ask us those questions. You're telling us what we (generically as authors) have the right to do and don't have the right to do. Quote: "You don't get to say 'I didn't mean that.'"
RAWA to fan: "Sorry, but since the sun doesn't move in the game, it really didn't move. My hands are completely tied, because we shipped the CD-ROM that way." That's just plain silly. :)
And so, whether I have your permission or not, I'm still going to say that the sun really did move on Myst Island if someone asks me, even though we couldn't render real-time shadows at the time. There really was wind, even though we couldn't animate all the trees and the water. And so on. :)
And once you've opened that door, then linking questions are also fair game, because that bothers some people just as much as something you've filled in with your imagination to suspend disbelief. And guess what? Rand and I spent months talking about this very thing before Myst was released, precisely because it bothered _me_ enough to ask Rand about it while we were working on it.
[Here's where I admit that you can't go by me, because I'm the guy who always listens to all the actors/director's commentaries on a DVD and watches all the deleted scenes, alternate endings, etc. when available, because I want to know all the stories about what didn't make it into the movie as much as what did and how and why.]
So when people write in and ask those same questions, I give them the answer Rand gave me when I asked. Is it in the game? No. Do those people care about the answer, even though it wasn't in the game? Well, it would seem that they cared enough about it to take the time to write to us and ask us.
The reason that we had an FAQ, as the name implies, is that there were questions that we were asked frequently. There were plenty of people out there that wanted to know what was on the white board, so to speak, even if it wasn't in the game.
There are millions of people who played, each with their own point of view, and they all get enjoyment from different facets of their Myst experience. It's a shame to limit anyone's enjoyment by telling them that there's only one view that's acceptable, and it isn't theirs, which is what you're doing by saying that only what's shown in Myst itself "counts".
I've never told you (generic "you", now) that you are required to accept any of my answers in order to play Myst. There is nothing in Uru's EULA that states that you have to agree with "RAWA's take on Linking Theory" in order to play. In fact, I've said the opposite many, many times over the years - "do what makes _you_ the happiest". And I've meant that sincerely every time I've said it. "If you don't want to drop the pellets, don't drop the pellets." "If you don't care about linking theory, you might want to move on to the next email" "If quantum mechanics makes your head hurt... join the club!", "If you don't like the withered carrot we have now, come back when we have fresh carrots!", "If you don't enjoy [insert topic here], then find something else you do enjoy. Please.",etc.
Really, I'm a "live and let live" kind of guy. Whatever floats your boat. Share and enjoy. Live long and prosper. But I extend that courtesy to those who don't hold your perspective, too.
I guess I don't understand why others can't be allowed to ask those questions, and why we shouldn't be allowed to answer them. And as long as my answers to those questions haven't changed over time (and they haven't, other than I may add a disclaimer for Robyn now), I don't have a problem with telling them how we (Rand and I) would have filled them in.
:)
RAWA
with love to Zardoz's pony.
_________________ CYAN - Richard A. Watson, RAWA v2.0
|