In an interview with gamesindustry.biz, the acclaimed developer also discusses his next game, ‘Judas’, generative AI and why it “wasn’t easy to step away from BioShock”

  • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    Your explanation is good and thorough.

    I always struggle to know when to use the square brackets. The straightforward answer is to just quote directly where possible. But especially in interviews, someone’s answer may be jumbly, so the most honourable thing to do may be to use square brackets to make it easier for the reader to understand the speaker’s point, but you’re not being misleading.

    For example, maybe this interviewee said something like “in the future, it — we might come to see that game development, and games overall, will end up turning out to be player-driven”, which could be straightforwardly shortened to what we see in the screenshot: “in the future, it [will be] player driven”. Square brackets, in the hands of a skilled journalist, can be used to manipulate a narrative through selectively quoting people, but they can also represent a speaker’s point far more authentically and cogently than the literal words.

    "in the future, it will be player-driven

    • pory@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      There’s also just grammatical stuff that looks better in text. “In the future, it’s player driven” would conversationally flow perfectly well, but as written text the tense of “it’s” doesn’t line up with the statement being about the future. Hence the present tense being corrected to future tense.

    • Elevator7009@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      One I’ve had to do super often is injecting a name back in a sentence. Why say

      Mary said the following about Jane: “She went to the store today.”

      when I could say

      Mary said, “[Jane] went to the store today.”

      I mean, I could just paraphrase Mary and do away with the quotation marks and brackets entirely, but when I am trying to prove something (primarily that I’m not talking out of my ass) I like quotes because you can easily just take it as direct evidence, an exact citation of what the other person said that you can use as evidence yourself, instead of a paraphrase by some random person whose reasoning and motives you do not trust.

      Of course, that doesn’t get into how people can manipulate quotes and take them out of context, or even just straight up write something in quotation marks that was never said, but…