guyal brings up a good point in the comments. Humans seem much more likely to ascribe connections to things on a macro level then a micro level. In my generated story research, it’s actually proven critical. Without this trick, this logical leap of the brain, procedural content because much harder to tie together, because the AI has to determine intent on it’s own and then communicate it to the player as well. It’s easier if people just make intent up themselves, guided by common cultural clues. Try laying a few randomly chosen game events next to each other and to see the connections and stories people will create. In an interesting twist, I recall even the chapters of Don Quixote were designed to be read in any order and form an interesting plot, as was the style at the time.
I can’t find an online reference so correct me if I’m wrong. But my search did turn up these thoughts on some of the rules of story and how to apply them to procedural storytelling. I get so excited about this stuff. I’ve researched and used some of these rules, but this covers a broader level of detail then seems necessary in most games, filling in too many details you could say. But the key here is that there are rules behind stories, and rules are things we can program. We just could use more precise rules then Mr. Simakov presents here.