Joel Uckelman on Fri, 23 Jul 2010 08:07:39 -0700 (MST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [game-lang] a survey of previous work

Thus spake Simon McGregor:
> Hi Joel,
> Thought I'd put my 2p in,.
> > * GDL:
> I don't know much about logic programming, and GDL looks like it comes
> from this stable. I like the declarative aspect to GDL, but it really
> really needs to incorporate some basic spatial and arithmetical
> concepts. These could conceivably be in the form of a library, but I
> suspect GDL is not very extensible.

My feeling right now is that the way to go is to build up some broadly
applicable game concepts (e.g., adjacency, ownership, ownership) and
and possibly some genere-specific ones (e.g., zone of control) and then
provide the rules translator the capacity to define the game-specific
concepts he needs. I think that most rules can be stated pretty simply
once the right concepts are defined.
> > * Extended General Gaming Model
> >
> >
> I can't make sense of this yet.

This one I've read and thought about already. The simple synopsis is
that it's a way of defining game rules in Python. The way that you do
model checking in this framework is by seeing whether your proposed
next move is a member of the list returned by getChoices()---and this 
means that you have to have all possible transitions out of a given
state already represented as a list. Hence, either you get an infeasibly
large list, your you have to start breaking up moves into submoves,
as we discussed earlier (possibly this discussion was still in the
thread at Boardgame Geek).

(More comments to come, on your list of disiderata...)

game-lang mailing list