38 lines
1.2 KiB
Markdown
38 lines
1.2 KiB
Markdown
|
# Play substrates — Tabletop Simulator, boardgame.io
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
`unverified` throughout — background knowledge, not checked this session
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## What they optimise for
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**Playing**, by humans, over a network. Tabletop Simulator gives a
|
||
|
|
physics sandbox with no rules enforcement; boardgame.io gives a
|
||
|
|
JavaScript framework for turn-based games with state management and a
|
||
|
|
networked client.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## How a game is defined
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
TTS: assets plus optional scripting; the rules live in the players' heads.
|
||
|
|
boardgame.io: JavaScript moves and turn order.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## What they can analyse
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Nothing. The rules are a script, not a claim.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Relevance to clay-borg
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**None for analysis, and one thing for the interface.** Our own
|
||
|
|
`cb-play` page and [`../specs/Ornamentation.md`](../specs/Ornamentation.md)
|
||
|
|
occupy this space, and the future `clay-animate` is squarely in it.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The useful contrast: **TTS proves that a table with no rules enforcement
|
||
|
|
is still fun**, which is an argument for taking ornamentation seriously
|
||
|
|
and against assuming the mechanism is the whole game.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Open questions
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- Whether boardgame.io's state model is worth borrowing for `clay-animate`.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Sources
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
None fetched. **Marked `unverified` in full.**
|