[Standards-JIG] A jep for the Games

Nolan Eakins sneakin at semanticgap.com
Tue Jan 24 09:53:15 UTC 2006


Trejkaz wrote:

> I said to someone who replied to me off-list, that multiplayer games 
> do in fact have a certain amount of stuff in common, no matter what 
> game it is.
>
> All games do have a certain amount in common.  You have two main use 
> cases: creating a new game and joining an existing game.

I would also add "Currently playing ..." to that list. This need not be 
restricted to just games, "Currently using ..."

> At some point, the player creating the game has to tell the game 
> service that they're starting the game, at which point the game is no 
> longer considered to be open (so new players looking to join a game 
> won't see it.)

That's not the case with all games/apps. An FPS would be a prime 
example. You can typically join the game whenever you want. So 
specifying if a game is closed or not depends on the game. (That also 
has me thinking of MMPGs where you may want to publish your virtual 
location).

> As for specific interoperability for different game types, it's almost 
> like a sub-group should be created to manage creation of these "JGPs". 
> I can easily see the set of all games becoming greater than the set of 
> all other JEPs, and it's possible that something like game protocols 
> shouldn't be handled as seriously as other standards in the first place.

A generic protocol to handle the use cases above for games and/or 
colloborative apps could be set into stone. The only problem is where 
and how to register the game/app (or maybe protocol?). That may not be 
necessary with UUIDs...but there could still be a conflict.



More information about the Standards mailing list