ParserComp 2022 is open!

Unfortunately, based upon Gruescript documentation. It does not produce a parser games. :frowning:

//
Gruescript is a scripting language/online tool for creating
point-n-click text adventures.

Gruescript is a tool for creating point-and-click text adventures which feel like classic ‘puzzlebox’ games while eliminating the need for the player to type, making the games friendly to modern devices and players. You build your game online and download it as a playable HTML page.
//

2 Likes

I recall, though, that Gruescript does parse the input beneath the P&C interface. But I’m not an expert. Perhaps @robinjohnson can clarify?

True. If we allow Gruescript we should allow Twine and CoG. ???

I know this was discussed last year. It is more conducive to smartphone and tablets and may offer accessibility advantages.

But:

Rule 1. Only parser games are eligible for entry into ParserComp. ParserComp defines a parser game as one where the primary input method is the keyboard, commands are typed in, the computer uses a parser engine to understand commands and then outputs text to screen describing the results.

How far should ParserComp deviate from that rule?

I reckon that this covers it:

Yes, as long as the main game mechanic is text input, parsing, and text output and the game can’t be traversed purely by clicking on pre-defined choices to advance through passages of text.

There does seem to be a difference between key word selection → parsing and clicking choices to advance through passages.

But - it is a grey area!

Maybe a Point and Click category?

Having written both parser and choice-based games, I can honestly say that the process of planning and writing a Gruescript game is almost identical to planning and writing an I7 game, and nothing at all like writing in Twine or ChoiceScript. I’ve even been able to port an unfinished I7 game to Gruescript. It’s far more parser-like than it is choice-like, whatever the documentation says.

2 Likes

Thanks for that. I know this was discussed last year and was bound to come up again. Fos1 and I redrafted the rules but didn’t revisit this point at the time.

I’d say obviously choice-based games (Twine, ChoiceScript et al.) are out, obviously parser games (Inform, TADS et al.) are in, and anything really ambiguous we can make a judgement call on if we need to. But in reality, we’re unlikely to get many of those cases (but it will make it more interesting if we do!)

2 Likes

At this point we should allow Gruescript based upon the rules as published.

2 Likes

I’ve just played around a bit in the beginning of The Party Line (itch.io) and Detectiveland (itch.io). Those games feel very parser to me.

2 Likes

Yes, I think we’re agreed to allow it.

If we now get hundreds of Gruescript entries we’ll simply rename it GruescriptComp and carry on.

5 Likes

As long as we’re dividing up the turf, how about a PythonComp?

There’s been a bit of movement from that direction.

2 Likes

Is there more to registering than just joining the jam?

Nope - just join.

1 Like

I’m not involved with running Parsercomp nor have any say, but just to chime in, we might (per usual) be getting wrapped up in the letter of the law rather than the intention. Parsercomp is intended for parser games. While there are technical specifications

and since Parsercomp isn’t high-stakes and is more of a showcase for the parser format, it might seem a good venue for innovation. If someone could use Twine and fool players well enough into thinking they are playing a pure parser game, that might be a good reason for an entry.

I say this since Gruescript allows clicking and typing but may not technically be a full blown parser, and because Dialog - which is a bona-fide parser - allows the author to create a game that can be clicked all the way through and does still parse the input.

I know the main intention is to encourage old-school parser games, but it could also be a good showcase for how the parser style and feel can be implemented in any manner and potentially modernized. It would make sense that the voters ultimately would decide if something is “not parser enough”.

I’m not in charge of course, but I wanted to bring up that possibility!
[steps off soapbox]

7 Likes

I’d certainly agree with that.

2 Likes

So, like if someone build an on-screen keyboard using hypertext links, and build up words, auto-correct style, to enter the parser commands? I suppose that does look like a parser, but internally, it’s Twine.

Not that it’s doable by hand, mind you, but someone may have the bright idea of automating such process.

I’m glad I’m not the comp organizer, that I don’t have to worry about such thing! :sweat_smile:

1 Like

Seriously, if someone wants to build a parser-style Chinese Room that looks and behaves just like a parser engine but is really Twine beneath then they’re welcome to do so. But one wonders why they’d go to the effort rather than just using a parser engine…

3 Likes

Correct. If someone built a “parser simulator” plugin for Twine, I think Parsercomp could potentially provide a good showcase for it.

2 Likes

Faux Parse Comp anyone?

5 Likes

Because it’s HTML! The richness of the web media! One may even includes WebGL technology for fun display. And besides, Twine is much easier to use than Inform, right? :wink:

Either that, or build your own parser program from scratch.

2 Likes