#tinag

So, this is a timely question to ask. A bunch of creators and figures in the scene were discussing this the other day. The short version: TINAG as the main protocol is dead. Alex Kister, Kane Pixels, Alex Bale, and others have frankly killed it through their incredible breakthrough works with names emblazoned front and center. The long version: I'm always going to enjoy the immersion of "this is not a game" presentation more, because it's one of the elements that truly makes this kind of content unique, but it's become very clear that unfiction is so much wider a field than projects that exist without an author's name or credits put somewhere. It also, really, doesn't have any impact on the quality of the work and its execution unless it was trying a TINAG presentation and just put authorship out there anyway. There are projects that are going to nail their effect much better by keeping the author in the dark, and there are tales that could certainly get away with having the author listed.

For instance: Tom Ransom never could've gotten away with putting his name on "I Am Sophie" upfront, because the nature of the project is such that its impact owes so much to the illusion of reality and Sophie's character. However, NOC+10 is a project that could instantly flip to ownership (or have had it to start in a sly spot), because the storytelling is so deep into the fantastic and movie-level sci-fi that it wouldn't really mess with our enjoyment. We would understand from the start that some robo-brain in Mariana's Trench isn't really trying to communicate with us via a bunch of puzzles, that a human made it for our enjoyment, and the experience wouldn't be tarnished. Analog horror's popularity and the willingness by authors to own their work has finished pushing the TINAG protocol off the table while expanding what we understand unfiction to be.

À ce moment-là, j’avais intérieurement fait le vide.