<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Emergent Game Design</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mcmains.net/2007/12/27/emergent-game-design/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mcmains.net/2007/12/27/emergent-game-design/</link>
	<description>Come for the words, stay for the...HEY! Come back!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2011 04:04:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Morse</title>
		<link>http://www.mcmains.net/2007/12/27/emergent-game-design/comment-page-1/#comment-56477</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Morse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 20:45:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mcmains.net/2007/12/27/emergent-game-design/#comment-56477</guid>
		<description>It sounds like EGD is to old-school game design as object-oriented programming is to GoTo code.  Can that be true?  But does that mean the distinctive development of EGD is object-orientation?  But then it would have taken off earlier and bigger.  What about &quot;shooting a cylinder with poisonous gas&quot; -- isn&#039;t that a trivial maneuver from Awful Green Things From Outer Space?  And why allocate two hours on &quot;Desktop Tower Defense,&quot; as the author recommends, when one may perfectly well expend an entire weekend, resulting in the inflamed and tender ganglia I am now experiencing?

To return to the point, I can&#039;t imagine game design is stuck in pre-object architecture, while the tools used to build the games have all shifted to object-oriented.  For one thing, you could almost say object orientation was modeled in the paper-based role-playing game architecture of GURPS.  (Is GURPS an historical precedent for OO?  Graduate thesis anyone?)  

GURPS:  Empty, unformed, opaque.  Who wants to do all the work of developing a GURPS game, anyway?  Judging from the quantities of this-world that-world GURPS manuals, someone did.  A clever someone with an organized mind and a latent affinity with computers.  

If most games are still built around GoTo, someone has some explaining to do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It sounds like EGD is to old-school game design as object-oriented programming is to GoTo code.  Can that be true?  But does that mean the distinctive development of EGD is object-orientation?  But then it would have taken off earlier and bigger.  What about &#8220;shooting a cylinder with poisonous gas&#8221; &#8212; isn&#8217;t that a trivial maneuver from Awful Green Things From Outer Space?  And why allocate two hours on &#8220;Desktop Tower Defense,&#8221; as the author recommends, when one may perfectly well expend an entire weekend, resulting in the inflamed and tender ganglia I am now experiencing?</p>
<p>To return to the point, I can&#8217;t imagine game design is stuck in pre-object architecture, while the tools used to build the games have all shifted to object-oriented.  For one thing, you could almost say object orientation was modeled in the paper-based role-playing game architecture of GURPS.  (Is GURPS an historical precedent for OO?  Graduate thesis anyone?)  </p>
<p>GURPS:  Empty, unformed, opaque.  Who wants to do all the work of developing a GURPS game, anyway?  Judging from the quantities of this-world that-world GURPS manuals, someone did.  A clever someone with an organized mind and a latent affinity with computers.  </p>
<p>If most games are still built around GoTo, someone has some explaining to do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

