Textfyre has been in pivot mode for awhile now. As has been blogged before, we’re going to move away from the strict educational model we were hoping to build. We’ve already moved away from asking authors and designers to focus on the middle-school demographic.

It’s clear that mobile platforms and are going to be one of the places to be with new media and casual gaming content. That said, desktops aren’t going anywhere. What’s become clear is that we need to have a viable product on all platforms. This means standard web, social web, desktop, mobile phone, mobile slate, and eReaders. Once we’ve built the product delivery system on all of these platforms, we will be able to draw content from external sources and offer what is essentially a new pipeline for content.

Content creators can then use our delivery system for original content or for older content. Content creators can use our delivery process as a way to offer a necessary bump to their marketing cycle.

We’re close to having all of the platform delivery systems addressed and expect to be platform complete by the end of 2010.

The website is going to change dramatically in the coming weeks. Instead of focusing on specific content, were going to focus on Interactive Fiction as a new medium for new and existing content and provide information to content creators on how they can utilize our delivery mechanisms.

I’m excited about these changes. They bring the focus of Textfyre back to Interative Fiction as a medium instead of a source of supplemental education materials.

  1. Harry Kaplan says:

    Just to set the record straight, Jason Scott would have like to interview both Emily Short and Graham Nelson. Emily declined, certainly her prerogative, and Graham either never responded to multiple inquiries by Jason or didn’t respond until it was just too late, I forget which. This information was contained in an email Jason once sent to everyone who had registered for news on the GET LAMP site. Jason listed the five people he didn’t interview whom he would have most loved to interview, and explained why those interviews didn’t happen. Both Emily and Graham were among the five.

    • Sure and that’s understandable. But there is a body of IF that starts in the early to mid 70’s and goes through today. My concern is that the amount of work in the last 15 years far exceeds the accomplishments of the the first 15. The film isn’t balanced. It covers the history. Whether there are interviews of certain people or not, there’s still very important information left out surrounding those people.

      How on earth can you discuss IF without talking about Inform, TADS, Hugo, and all of the other tools? The DM4. The websites. The theory and craft that have been developed.

      It’s not just that the movie leaves out these things…it seems to me to act as if they never happened or are not as important if not more important than the history that is covered.

      I believe IF is significantly more than the movie portrays. If you were an outsider you might finish watching the movie and believe the medium is dead.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s