Rejouer le récit dans différentes adaptations ludiques de l’univers de J.R.R. Tolkien
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’univers de J.R.R. Tolkien semble avoir une propension à susciter un fort sentiment d’immersion dans différents genres ludiques. Mais la connaissance préalable d’un récit mène à une expérience bien différente de celle d’une histoire inconnue. À travers l’exploration de différentes adaptations vidéoludiques, notamment le jeu de stratégie en temps réel The Lord of the Rings : The Battle for Middle-earth (EA Los Angeles, 2004), on verra comment celles-ci tendent à vouloir préserver des mécaniques de genres conventionnelles. Au contraire, le jeu de plateau La Guerra dell’Anello (Roberto Di Meglio, Marco Maggi et Francesco Nepitello, 2004) en adapte l’esprit plutôt que la lettre, en se centrant d’une manière plus précise sur le sentiment d’incertitude des personnages. Cet article propose une analyse comparative de différentes stratégies d’adaptation, entre jeux traditionnels et jeux numériques, dans un contexte où un joueur ou une joueuse en connaît déjà les enjeux narratifs majeurs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".