Re: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Proposal: For consistancy

[Dan Waldron <wald7330@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> 
> I agree with Josh.  I'd prefer to view the game as some sort of entity
> which is acted upon by players, rather than the other way around.  The
> game could be said to be the "gamestate"--the aggregate combination of
> ruleset, agents, objects, and so forth which exist within it at any given
> time.  Sort of a biological way of looking at it--that the game is not a
> single object, but an environment within which objects and actions exist.
> 
> Potter


You could make the same kind of argument about a person: that it is not an
agent of itself but an environment within which the component organs and
cells exist and act.  A biological organism could be said to be a
"biological-state", the aggregate combination of a number of living cells
of various kinds which exist at any given time.

Having said this, I am no longer of the opinion that I think it would be a
good thing for the game to be an agent.

Poulenc.