A colleague recently sent round a clip of The Unfinished Swan (thank you, Steph) - it's a first-person painting game set in an entirely white 3D world.

Players navigate through the Bowie-free labyrinth by splattering paint to aid wayfinding.

Watch this to get a better idea (remember to view full screen):

The atmosphere and sound design are both excellent for such a simple (but really effective) concept.

The game is still in development and no full release plans have been announced. However, you can track the game's development on the creator's blog.

Compare that to this clip from the infamous 2007 low-budget Spanish faux-horror documentary, [REC]: apparently so scary that some audience members (in New Zealand anyway) had 'accidents' (of the No. 2 persuasion) while viewing (sounds like a really hoary Internet myth to me).

Anyway, watch the trailer:

Obviously, The Unfinished Swan is (or will be) interactive, [REC] is not. 

Both use suspense, narrative and sound to engage the audience. (If you like the look of [REC] by the way, there are some far more grisly clips on Rotten Tomatoes - you need to register though.)

Now imagine combining the two clips. Many in the film, web and gaming industries see this combination as inevitable, desirable and entirely achievable. The Holy Trinity of cinematic production values, good storytelling and user-defined endings etc etc. People have been talking about this prospect for decades.

So it will be interesting to see where we are in 10 or 20 years ... does the thought of this combination appeal? I think we'll always have both (linear and interactive narratives), but it's clear that the latter format is winning the commercial battle for revenue as films increasingly become 'extended trailers' for the gaming and merchandising franchises that they spawn.    

It's simply part of the natural evolution of storytelling. Or do you find this kind of evolution to be the scariest thing of all?

Note to self: no need to always end post with a question :)