I've gotten some questions: does it really make sense to plan to build a distributed game system as part of the fediverse? Will that actually pay off or is it just one big gamble?
I think:
- Having things be fun for players/users may make them more likely to join. People want to build things together. May help alleviate the "join a federated social network to talk about federated social networks" problem
- Having things be fun for me is good too :)
Also, if we focus on letting people set up "realms" that don't necessarily have a universal game state it's not that hard (but some realms can voluntarily share, and you can reuse your identity)
@cwebber Now, does it assume a network with 100% uptime?
@astraluma Hopefully not. You can connect as long as your connection is up and going. Like minecraft servers where people shut things down for a while and then resume them, you can connect when both you and the server can. No big deal if either is down, hopefully. There will be other game servers to play on.
@cwebber Oh, I missed "what is spritely actually", I thought we were back on actor models.
@astraluma I'm working on an actor model (Goblins) and the first use is an AP server + game server (Spritely)
@cwebber Yeah, I missed the bit where you actually said what spritely is. Last I remember, it was a mystery project that used actor models.
That sounds like a game of Nomic with its rules tailored for roleplaying.
If it doesn't pan out, the fediverse is doing pretty good right now. Maybe I can introduce some new and interesting things.