On the entry page, authors can choose from the following "Gameplay Platforms":
{
"website": "Browser-based JavaScript",
"inform": "Glulx or Z-code, not packaged with a website",
"quixe": "Glulx, using Inform's \"Release with a website\" feature",
"parchment": "Z-code, using Inform's \"Release with a website\" feature",
"inform-website": "Glulx or Z-code, presented within a custom website",
"adrift": "ADRIFT (download-only)",
"adrift-online": "ADRIFT (online play available)",
"adventuron": "Adventuron",
"choicescript": "ChoiceScript",
"hugo": "Hugo",
"ink": "Ink",
"quest": "Quest (download-only)",
"quest-online": "Quest (online play available)",
"tads": "TADS (regular UI)",
"tads-web-ui": "TADS 3.1 Web UI",
"texture": "Texture",
"twine": "Twine",
"unity": "Unity",
"windows": "Windows executable",
"other": "Other"
}
But most of these are development systems, and not gameplay platforms. They have confusing overlap.
- Adventuron, ChoiceScript, Ink, Texture, and Twine all just generate websites. They should all just be "website."
- Sometimes authors of these systems select "website", e.g. Twine authors select "website", and thus we lose track of the author's development system
- Unity generates Windows executables (and macOS executables)
Also, we have pairs of options depending on whether the author did or didn't provide their own website in addition to a game file, but we're missing some. For example, Unity can generate a website, but there's no unity-online option.
I think the thing to do is to make a separate field for what development system the author used (with options like Inform, Twine, Unity, etc. including a fill-in-the-blank "Other" field) and a section for "Gameplay Platforms", which would be a list of checkable boxes:
- Web browser (offline supported)
- Web browser (online only)
- Glulx interpreter
- Z-Code interpreter
- ADRIFT interpreter
- Hugo interpreter
- Quest interpreter
- TADS interpreter
- Å-machine interpreter
- Windows executable
- macOS executable
- Other (fill-in-the-blank)
This would allow you to select as many platforms as you support.
For example:
- a Unity developer who generates executables for Windows and macOS and a web-playable version would select "Development System: Unity", and check "Web browser (offline supported)" "Windows executable" and "macOS executable"
- A Dialog developer who generates a Z-Code file, an
.aastory Å-machine file, and a website would select "Development System: Dialog", and check "Web browser (offline supported)", "Z-Code interpreter", and "Å-machine interpreter"
- An Inform developer who generates a Glulx file and a website would select "Web browser (offline supported)" and "Glulx interpreter".
- An Inform developer who generates a Glulx file without a website would just select "Glulx interpreter"; we'd make the game playable online via Parchment.
On the entry page, authors can choose from the following "Gameplay Platforms":
But most of these are development systems, and not gameplay platforms. They have confusing overlap.
Also, we have pairs of options depending on whether the author did or didn't provide their own website in addition to a game file, but we're missing some. For example, Unity can generate a website, but there's no
unity-onlineoption.I think the thing to do is to make a separate field for what development system the author used (with options like Inform, Twine, Unity, etc. including a fill-in-the-blank "Other" field) and a section for "Gameplay Platforms", which would be a list of checkable boxes:
This would allow you to select as many platforms as you support.
For example:
.aastoryÅ-machine file, and a website would select "Development System: Dialog", and check "Web browser (offline supported)", "Z-Code interpreter", and "Å-machine interpreter"