W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > December 2010

Re: Possible Idea For a Sem Web Based Game?

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 00:39:36 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTimZVChfTUcJfpWJwkL67+E5urwynviWyAKvf1uZ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
On 14 December 2010 22:21, Pierre-Antoine Champin
<pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this is fun, but we have to ask ourselves: what is the added value of
> RDF/sem-web/linked-data here?
> What does http://drogon.me/ have that wouldn't be possible with HTML+PHP?

To me the Web, particularly the Sem Web is a universal space whose key
advantage is interoperability.

So, each world can interop with similar worlds.

Also worlds can operate with other parts of the Semantic Web Space.  I
use the acronym SEMANTIC to describe key areas:

Social
Entertainment
Markets
Access
Nearby services
Trust
Information management
Currencies

So a game can be social, have trading with virtual currencies and
markets, you can interact with a personal or public web of trust, with
existing information or things in the real world in your locality (eg
augmented reality), using web standards.

Granted each area on the list is still in an embryonic phase.  But
this is a level of interop simply not available in other systems.

We've seen linking of basic social and trust in PHP+HTML (facebook)
and social and entertainment (zynga) get some traction.  But when we
have interop across all areas we'll have a that much more powerful
system.

> Don't get me wrong, I think those ideas is great, and kudos to you guys for
> turning them into code so quickly!
>
> My two cents on this question:
>
> 1/ linking to real world data is definitely an interesting track, because
> this leverages existing linked data for the purpose of the game

Yes, agree, leverage interop.

>
> 2/ another way to use linked data principles is that the game can be
> distributed, even more so than an HTML-based game.

Exactly.

>
> I imagine that every character, place, item... could have its own RDF
> description, linking to each other. A triple between two objects (X is
> located at Y, X owns Z...) is considered true only if both the subject and
> the object claim it.
>
> This implies that the RDF files are hosted by "smart" servers that will
> allow updates by anybody, but under certain conditions.

You dont need smart servers, just socially aware cloud storage.  Flat
files are fine, you can let Agents do all the middleware.

http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/CloudStorage.html

>
> For example, a place will acknowledge that it contains a person only if the
> person claims to be in that place, and only there.

This is game logic.  It need not reside on a server.

>
> The protocol might be tricky to design for more complex things like
> transactions. I imagine that an item would change its owner only after
> checking that both the old and the new owner explictly agree on the
> transaction
>
>  <#me> game:agreesOn [
>    a game:Transaction ;
>    game:give some:sword ;
>    game:receive some:money ;
>  ]

Im working on an economic aspect.  This is an interesting proposal on
transactions and contracts:

http://iang.org/papers/ricardian_contract.html

I have reasonable confidence we can introduce a sophisticated economy
that can be leveraged by all sem web projects, probably before end of
next year.

>
> Plus, the buyer would have to trust the sword not cheat on them and return
> to its previous owner without notice...
>
> Fights will probably be even trickier... But I think the idea is worth
> exploring...

Many ways to model this, again agents can handle this.

Traditional architecture is

client <--> middleware <--> data store

Web oriented architecture is more flexible and can have, in addition:

client <--> data store
client <--> agent <--> data store
client <--> data store <--> agent

With trust and PKI regulating actions.  Of course we see why WebID is
important here too.

>
>  pa
>
>
> On 12/02/2010 01:20 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>
>> On 2 December 2010 01:13, Toby Inkster<tai@g5n.co.uk>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 23:06:42 +0100
>>> Melvin Carvalho<melvincarvalho@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think the next thing I need to model is 'items'.
>>>>
>>>> At present need to work out a way to say a location has an item.
>>>
>>> Perhaps model it the other direction?
>>>
>>>        <item22>  game:initial_position<node394>  .
>>
>> I was thinking more along the lines of:
>>
>> Location x has
>>   item 1
>>   item 2
>>   player 1
>>   player 2
>>
>> With a trusted Agent(dungeon master) adding them to a copy of the game
>> world.
>>
>> The DM is allowed to sparql update the locations via insert and
>> delete, contains the game logic, and interacts with players.
>>
>> In this way you can have 1 or more DM's given access to administer the
>> worlds, the best DMs would become 'resident' in the game world.
>>
>> Agree, it's not the only way to model it, but I like the idea of a
>> file based solution mediated by agents.
>>
>> Make sense?
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Toby A Inkster
>>> <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk>
>>> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 14 December 2010 23:41:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:40 GMT