←back to thread

333 points freetonik | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.209s | source
Show context
fleabitdev ◴[] No.42471288[source]
This engine uses a Redux-like architecture. You have a State type (containing data like "the position of the black kingside rook") and a stream of in-game actions (like "knight to F3"). Each action is handled by a pure function which converts the current State to a new State. You can either transmit State deltas from the server to the client, or just transmit the actions themselves (https://longwelwind.net/blog/networking-turn-based-game/).

This design makes it easy to implement optimistic updates, rollback, replays, automated testing, and recovery after a disconnection. It's a surprisingly good fit for UI, too; you can render simple games as a React component which takes the current State as one of its props.

However, a stream of context-free actions can be a really inconvenient representation for some games. The rules of a board game are often like the control flow of a computer program: you'll see branching, iteration, local variables, function calls, structured concurrency, and sometimes even race conditions and reentrancy. When you try to represent all of this logic as a State object, you're basically maintaining a snapshot of a "call stack" as plain data, and manually resuming that "program" whenever you handle an action. It doesn't seem ideal.

I've been sketching a board game engine which would represent the game logic as normal code instead. It seems promising, but it really needs a couple of language features which don't exist in the mainstream yet, like serialisation of suspended async functions.

replies(5): >>42471791 #>>42472084 #>>42472570 #>>42475998 #>>42477605 #
LudwigNagasena ◴[] No.42472084[source]
My main pain point with any sort of Flux-like state management is transitions [1]. The state of UI is not fully described by the state of the game [2]. If I play a card, the game state can be instantly updated to the next decison-making point, but in reality I want to show steps of the game through animations, some of which are concurrent and some of which are consecutive. That usually ends up in a mess; and I've never seen someone implement it nicely.

[1] And generally dynamic stuff like drag-n-drop, which is infinitely times simpler in any other architecture than in React.

[2] That is also true for business apps, but their animations are usually so simple you can simply use CSS.

replies(7): >>42472171 #>>42472685 #>>42475075 #>>42475378 #>>42476566 #>>42476646 #>>42480234 #
nkrisc ◴[] No.42475378[source]
I toyed with an approach once that separated animations from game state updates.

Every player action could cause a cascade of updates, which would all be resolved “instantly” to the point no more cascaded updates were left to be processed.

While this is happening, any update that includes an animation pushes that to an “animation stack”, then the animations are played back one by one to show the player what happened. In this animation state most input in disabled and the game is effectively on hold until the animations complete (or are skipped by the player).

The “animations” were basically commands that the Model used to update the View, just with the option to apply them one by one over time. So the model is always up to date as fast as possible as possible, and the view just lags behind a bit and catches up.

replies(1): >>42478049 #
1. jay_kyburz ◴[] No.42478049[source]
I've found in the past its good to have the model updates in the queue so that the animation controllers can be simpler. The animations simply need to observe the model and react to changes, and post events when they complete.