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

[Joel Uckelman <uckelman@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Quoth Matt Potter:
> > >
> > >The game is an agent because it has ways of getting its component agents
> > >and officers to do things for it.
> > 
> > That explanation presupposes that it IS an agent.
> > 
> 
> 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

That is a fair description of how I've always viewed it.

Woo hoo, looks like we have a real debate going on here...