Blake wrote:
> On Mon, 07 May 2007 04:08:27 -0700, Karl <karl.ramberg at comhem.se> wrote:
>
>> Cool, Squeak need more games. Have you seen the games at
>> http://www.swa.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/projects/olpc/index.html
>
> No, that's very cool.
>
>> I been hooked on DiceWars for a few days now. It's a risk type game 
>> and really addicting :-)
>
> I'm hoping to "wrap up" with an implementation of a "Chainmail" type 
> game.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chainmail_(game)
>
> I've been fooling with a Seaside interface for online multiplay.
>
> Basically, what I've been doing is writing little games like I the 
> ones I copied from Ahl's books:
>
> http://www.atariarchives.org/basicgames/
>
> then using them to explain some aspect of Squeak and/or programming in 
> geneal. It's been educative, to say the least. Those old BASIC games 
> were inscrutable from a distance. This is one of the better ones:
>
> http://www.atariarchives.org/basicgames/showpage.php?page=79
Brings back memories from typing in program listing from magazines :-) 
Those where the days...
>
> But, man, they were compact and to the point. I also miss being able 
> to see a complete listing so much that I've considered building an 
> editor that shows Smalltalk code in a scrollable format and allows 
> editing it that way. (Or hoping such a thing exists already.)
You could of course use the fileout format and write the whole thing in 
a workplace ;-)
>
> Of course, it's so much easier to actually expand a game when it has a 
> good design. With the very limited forms of structure available, my 
> old BASIC programs used to collapse under their own weight (and 
> sometimes they'd just collapse because I'd filled the 120K disk with 
> code, heh). I used to say to myself, "Wow, wouldn't it be great if I 
> could call the same routine, but with different variable sets, and it 
> could call different routines based on what those sets 
> represented...." I was quite disappointed when I couldn't say "GOSUB 
> SomeVar$".
>
>> Anyway, a game framework for Squeak would be really nice. I've seen a 
>> few attempts at it, but nothing that has come past the initial stages.
>
> Probably a different beast from what I've been doing--although if a 
> get a really good command structure going, it could be part of a 
> framework--but I agree it would be nice. I've done game frameworks 
> before. I broke them up into different types of games (1D, 2D, 3D 
> maps/1D, 2D, 3D graphics/real-time vs. turn based, etc. etc. etc.)

2D would suffice I guess, classes for graphics handling,  etc. I have 
never made such a framework. I'll look around a little on the net and 
see what I can come up with.

Karl