Slashdot Mirror

Python for Scripting (Or Ruby; Or Lua)

I worked as the lead programmer on a game that used Python for scripting, at a company where another team was also using Python for scripting. From a bugcount and quality-assurance perspective, Python worked out very badly for both games.

The dynamic nature of the language bit us in the ass over and over and over. Suppose early in the game, based on what someone does, there's a script that states:

globalFlags.killedRedDragon = true;

On a quest much later in the game, there's a script that goes something like (loosely paraphrasing Python syntax):

if (player.characterClass == paladin):
        if (NPC.BobTheBlacksmith.GetDisposition() == friendly):
                if (globalFlags. killedRedDagron ):
                        # do some special thing where Bob offers to make
                        # you a special paladin-only helmet from the
                        # bones of the red dragon

You'll note there's a syntax error on that third line. It happens, and it happens especially often with scripters, who are generally among the least experienced coders at a company. You have to build that expectation into your entire development process, and languages with the dynamic flexibility of Python just don't do that.

The problem is that we won't know about the error until that line is actually executed during gameplay. If the scripter himself is doing it, that's going to take several hours. If not, depending on QA, that might not happen for several months. Or if the hourly grunt whose task was to play through the game as a paladin who likes blacksmiths decided to blow off killing the dragon even though it was in his test script, it might not happen at all and you ship with a few hundred outstanding bugs.

Sure, better processes and better people could have used Python to great success. But given limited time for processes and limited budgets for recruiting talent, we would have done much better with something that A) doesn't give people enough flexibility to get most things wrong, and B) gives the team the opportunity to catch what's wrong much earlier in the cycle.

...getting me some more Firefly episodes and a sequel to Vampire Bloodlines http://www.vampirebloodlines.com/...

Oh! If you like this kind of thing you might enjoy playing as a Malkavian in the Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines game that is out for PC. Every now and then interesting insanity effects pop up in that, especially when you are watching TV.

Do you mean this or are you talking about some other vampire based RPG?

in Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines, there's a radio programme wherein the commercial block includes commercials for the local Republican, and the incumbent democrat is accused of killing along these lines:
"Last year Democratic Senator bought a SUV, and since then there has been two unsolved vehicular homicides involving Sports Utility Vehicles. Is he responsible? Do you want to take that risk?"
Actually, most of the radio commercials in that game are hilarious... And great gameplay.

It uses the Source engine (the Half-Life 2 one).

Vampire: Bloodlines
Source engine feature list

MMORPG. It's of a contradiction in terms, because under the current paradigm, increasing the scope of a MMO game reduces the amount of game that is actually available to any given player. For several years I've watched new MMO releases with anticipation, hoping that someone will find a way to break the flawed mold. It hasn't happened, and I've given up hope that it will happen in the near future. Creating real game content in the current MMO paradigm just isn't cost-effective.

Give me a real RPG anytime, with actual story and some way to empathize with the characters in a meaningful way. A game where your decisions have some tangible effect other than "Ooh, this sword gives me +3 damage". The only recent RPG I've played that is worthy of the name is Vampire: Bloodlines, IMO one of the best games of 2004.

Powerleveling? Treadmills? My god, people! Those terms should not be complementary to anything pretending to be a real game. The only thing that current MMO games have going for them is social interaction, and even in that respect they fall somewhere under the quality of IRC.

How do I know this? My roommates play World of Warcraft. One of them has been playing since the release, and has levelled to the high forties. My other roommate just bought it. What do I hear when they're playing at the same time? "Goddamnit, this is so boring when you guys are all too high level to play with me!" Their screens look the same... usually a perspective of a couple orcs hacking at a large spider-like thing for a while until it dies. It's not a game, it's a screensaver with slightly complicated clicking patterns!

Get off the MMORPG treadmill. Buy some of the incredibly good single-player games that have recently been released, like Half-Life 2, Vampire: Bloodlines, or Rome: Total War if you're a strategy fan. I have a feeling that it's going to be a very looong time before MMO games have even the potential for fun factor and immersion of high-quality PC games.

The MMO genre is only a few years old, is based on incremental improvements, and has longer development cycles than conventional design. Worse, evolutionary considerations for MMO games favor the least common denominator of complexity and involvement. It should come as no surprise that they still suck, even though I keep hoping otherwise.

MMORPG. It's of a contradiction in terms, because under the current paradigm, increasing the scope of a MMO game reduces the amount of game that is actually available to any given player. For several years I've watched new MMO releases with anticipation, hoping that someone will find a way to break the flawed mold. It hasn't happened, and I've given up hope that it will happen in the near future. Creating real game content in the current MMO paradigm just isn't cost-effective.

Give me a real RPG anytime, with actual story and some way to empathize with the characters in a meaningful way. A game where your decisions have some tangible effect other than "Ooh, this sword gives me +3 damage". The only recent RPG I've played that is worthy of the name is Vampire: Bloodlines, IMO one of the best games of 2004.

Powerleveling? Treadmills? My god, people! Those terms should not be complementary to anything pretending to be a real game. The only thing that current MMO games have going for them is social interaction, and even in that respect they fall somewhere under the quality of IRC.

How do I know this? My roommates play World of Warcraft. One of them has been playing since the release, and has levelled to the high forties. My other roommate just bought it. What do I hear when they're playing at the same time? "Goddamnit, this is so boring when you guys are all too high level to play with me!" Their screens look the same... usually a perspective of a couple orcs hacking at a large spider-like thing for a while until it dies. It's not a game, it's a screensaver with slightly complicated clicking patterns!

Get off the MMORPG treadmill. Buy some of the incredibly good single-player games that have recently been released, like Half-Life 2, Vampire: Bloodlines, or Rome: Total War if you're a strategy fan. I have a feeling that it's going to be a very looong time before MMO games have even the potential for fun factor and immersion of high-quality PC games.

The MMO genre is only a few years old, is based on incremental improvements, and has longer development cycles than conventional design. Worse, evolutionary considerations for MMO games favor the least common denominator of complexity and involvement. It should come as no surprise that they still suck, even though I keep hoping otherwise.

For those who haven't heard, Vampire: Bloodlines is a vampire game done by Troika. It also uses the Half-Life 2 engine and looks to be a very interesting game. Reports are that Vampire should ship soon after Half-Life 2.