Following a conversation with Xalavier Nelson Jr. about my process and about how my process produces games that are missing a 'resolution' or satisfying end to dialogue with the player, I reflected upon the design of Big A little a; here are my observations.

(SPOILERS)

Big A little a has a discrete collection of player powers: "ji", "A", "a", "|<".

Big A little a has two endings.

You can (easily) reach the right-side ending without using a or ji, which lead Daniel Linssen to comment that he thought he did something wrong --- belying, I think, an incomplete satisfaction with the game mechanics. He also said it depends on if he got "the best ending" or not.

There is no best or better ending; the left-side ending requires the usage of a and ji, but can be completed without the others. It is not "better" though.

The two endings together activate the full set of powers but there is no one whole satisfying experience.

---

OK, I think that's everything.

ENDING AS RESOLUTION

[ A. Games may end. What do i want an ending to accomplish?
  B. An ending closes the loop and sets you free. It satisfies an entire domain of mastery. The player displays complete understanding. The game acknowledges. ]

HIERARCHY OF ENDINGS

[ A. What relationship do endings have to one another? Why have multiple endings? Does one ending need to be 'better' than another?
  B. People develop and become more complex, eventually containing multiple related masteries. One ending may satisfy a player who has mastered every domain; another may satisfy a player who has only mastered one or two. Each ending is a plateau on a developmental path of understanding. ]

Note neither of these speaks to narrative endings, this is about games and gameplay feelings. Narrative is woven in with these, but I have not thought very deeply about how. It is a problem for another droqen, perhaps.

Note on [ A. B. ] structure; the intention of this first post is to summarize the beginning and end of my understanding of the topic. All below posts represent my more complete thought structure. The way that this was written was I created a first post that simply contained "[AB]", I wrote all the below posts, then I came back to edit this first post. It is my hope that this makes for more readable threads.

Quote from: p10The vision that is a "glaze of panoptic attention" . . . is attentive to opportunities for action, not to details of the scene.

Regarding Hubert Dreyfus' and Sean Dorrance Kelly's
"All Things Shining"

Quote the development of a haiku game does not involve moments of discovery, except self-discovery; no prototypes or design decisions are to be made or even considered

ah i remember. bala (big a little a) was created as an exercise in reproduction.... there was not a specific longing at its core and i think it was not as successful as 235 as a result. i just tried to make something with mosa lina vaguely in mind. but what did i WANT? what did i want? what did i want?


i did not want enough. with 235 i wanted something specific, something cutting. i wanted to be playing "make ten," but playing it was frustrating, i really wanted a tiny part of the experience of making ten.

what did i want from bala? nothing, and in so doing broke one of my haiku games manifesto rules:

designs' specific accomplishments and failures? i wanted to fix something about big a little a, but im too sleep to remember what i thought even 1 minute ago apparently...

One of my 31 unmarked games slides is 100-150 words, so 🌕 is roughly four self-contained slides. To me this says that a moon's quarters are a reasonable approximation of a "small intuitive unit of work." This seems fine.

Using the [A .. B] frame, consider each 🌗 through the lens of making one short movement. What can I say with five such short movements, what do I want to say? I will need to make time for my get connect process.

Each moon represents 500 words. Entire application roughly [🌕🌕🌖 🗣 ]

🌑 Summary of project. ACTIVITY, EVENT, DATES, i.e. "to participate in x at location y from sep xx to yy" [1.3] [25w]
🌗 Describe project. Schedule of activities. Ask organizers for schedule, check website for description. [1.9] [250w]
🌗 Reason for doing it now. Should be simple. I was invited, talk about how I've wanted to go to Polaris ever since its inception! omg! I was invited!!! [1.10] [250w]
🌗 Artistic development, future opportunities. Game design thoughts. Visibility of published work. [1.11] [250w]
🌗 Choice of organizers, mentors, etc. This one should be simple too... I didn't choose them! Hmm. Too similar to reason for doing it now? Figure that out. [1.12] [250w]
🌘 How was I selected? What is the registration process and what is my status within it? Big topic. How was I selected? I am sure I expressed interest at some point. It's invite-only. My status is . . . well, you see where I am now, lol. [1.13] [100w]
🌗 Anything else. Write this at the end if there's anything I wanted to say that did not fit in. [1.15] [250w]

🗣 Biography of mentors/collaborators. Do I request this from the mentors/collaborators or do I write it myself??? [3.1] [one page]
🗣 Information about partners, training institutions, or host organizations. Attach confirmation. (of what, my attendance?) [3.2] [attached docs]

In sheer practical terms it does not matter whether I consider myself to be a good applicant.
What matters is whether I can communicate my good-applicant status given the channels afforded to me. So let's get into...

Can I write a good application?

The rubric given above has told me what is expected of a good applicant; a good application expresses these qualities. What are the formal constraints of an application, how am I allowed to express these qualities?

QuoteYou will need to provide information about:

- your project and its potential impact
- the partners, training institutions, host organizations, mentors or collaborators, if any

You will also need to include:

- your budget
- a biography of mentors or collaborators, if any
- confirmation from your mentor, training institution or host organization (if confirmed)

And I think there are specific fields to fill out in the application form...

Quote
1.3 Provide a one-sentence summary of your project. If possible, use the format ACTIVITY, EVENT (if relevant) and PROJECT DATES. (approximately 25 words, 150 characters)
For example, "To participate in a master class at the ABC Centre from month/year to month/year."
This summary will be used in the Canada Council's official reporting.

1.9 Describe your project. Include a schedule of activities, if pertinent. (approximately 250 words, 1700 characters)

1.10 Why do you wish to complete this project at this time? (approximately 250 words, 1700 characters)

1.11 How will this project contribute to your artistic development and generate future opportunities? (approximately 250 words, 1700 characters)

1.12 For the partners, collaborators, mentors, training institutions or host organizations involved, describe why you have chosen them for this project. (approximately 250 words, 1700 characters)

1.13 Describe the registration process, if any, or how you were selected to participate in the activity. Also describe where you are in the process. (approximately 100 words, 650 characters)
Is there an assessment process? Are there registration fees (i.e. workshop, training, mentorship fees)? Have you registered? Are you waiting for an answer? Have you been accepted? Etc.

1.15 If there is anything that has not been asked that is essential to understanding your application, provide it here. (approximately 250 words, 1700 characters)
Do not use this space to provide additional information related to earlier questions.

I am crossing out this item as I do not believe it has anything to do with the stated internal assessment criteria. I will answer it ofc and I think it's important but it is part of an entirely separate line of thinking.
1.16 You are responsible for complying with any regional and/or national public health and travel measures when carrying out activities funded by the Canada Council. If there are currently public health or travel measures that impact your project, describe what precautions you are taking to comply with these measures. (approximately 250 words, 1700 characters)

3.1 Attach a one-page biography of the mentors or collaborators you are working with, if applicable.

3.2 Attach information about the partners, training institutions or host organizations, if applicable. If available, attach confirmation from your mentor, training institution or host organization.

There are all of the fields in the form which pertain to scoring well. Forms are very overwhelming; minimizing them to only the relevant bits helps me to think about them clearly.

The next step is to consider my approach to filling out this minimal set of fields -- perhaps there are too many and I will need to break the process down further.

Am I a good applicant?

QuoteYour application to the Professional Development for Artists component of Explore and Create will be internally assessed on the following weighted criteria, and must receive a minimum score in each category to be considered for a grant:

Impact 40% (minimum score of 25 out of 40)
The potential of the project:
- to contribute to your artistic development
- to generate future opportunities for professional growth

Relevance 40% (minimum score of 25 out of 40)
- The artistic rationale, including timeliness and suitability of the project
- The suitability of the partners or host organizations involved, if any

Feasibility 20% (minimum score of 10 out of 20)
- The capacity and experience you and your partners or host organizations have to undertake the project

Hi, newforum! I have been invited to the Polaris Game Design Retreat (!!!) and I am now going to write an application for the Canada Council for the Arts' Professional Development for Artists grant, in the hopes that I can go. I'm in a weird spot, so I don't want to pay for this out of pocket... However, the timing is difficult:

It's exactly three months to Polaris, they of course want to have confirmed spots as soon as possible, but the grant process says that it may take four months! So, here's the conundrum:

1. I want to attend Polaris.

2. I will apply for a grant. IF I get the grant, I will happily and gratefully choose to attend Polaris. If not, then I will not. Easy decision!

3. I will not know if I get the grant until after Polaris HAS ALREADY HAPPENED AND ENDED.

4. Therefore I must choose whether to attend Polaris without knowing the result of my grant application.

So the spot I'm in now is one of . . . gambling, sort of. Well, I don't want to think of it as a gamble. I want to know, simply, am I a good applicant? If I am a good applicant then I will write a good application, operate presuming its success, so long as I am capable of gracefully accepting a possible rejection. If I do not think I am a good applicant, if I do not think I will write a good application, then I will not be able to operate presuming its success, and I will not go to Polaris. A shame but it is what it is.

Luckily, the CCA provides a rubric of sorts.

gallery game composition manifesto.

- DIVIDE THE PLAYER'S WHOLE EXPERIENCE INTO SMALLER EXPERIENCES

- THESE SMALLER EXPERIENCES ARE DISTINCT BEINGS, THEY DO NOT RUN TOGETHER INTO A GRADIENT OR A SMEAR; UNLESS THE GRADIENT IS ITSELF THE BEING, UNLESS THE SMEAR ITSELF IS THE BEING

- AN EXPERIENCE MUST HAVE A BEGINNING AND AN END

- THE OBJECT OF EACH EXPERIENCE IS AUTHORED BY ONE PERSON, CAPTURING ONE PERSONAL EXPERIENCE

- THE PRIMARY TERRAIN THAT LIES BETWEEN EACH SUBJECT AND EACH SUCH EXPERIENCE IS PRIMARILY EXPERIENTIAL AND SUBJECTIVE IN NATURE; THAT IS, THE PLAYER TRAVERSES AN INTERNAL TERRAIN: THE OBJECT OF EXTERNAL TERRAIN IS SECONDARY AND ULTIMATELY SERVES SUCH PERSONAL SELF-TRAVERSAL.

~ linked from Abstract scavenger game needs an ending

Composition.

The primary problem with my line of thinking is that i am trying to solve the problem or question of structure before hand, as though it is a separate concern. However. There is no automatic or automated system which will produce structure as beautiful as a human artist's intentional performance. That is just the way it is.

Consider the three wide grid of Instagram. There are very good reasons for it to automate the organizational scheme and people do work within it to accomplish certain feats but if i am the one designing the structure then devising a system up front will always always produce a result lesser than the pinnacle of wh a t is possible.