Programming in games

I was checking out pic related, when something occurred to me:
But on the other side, if there is one real life skill a videogame could teach you, is how to program software and use different coding languages and plugins.
Is there a game like that around?
If not, then… why not?

I think one of those hacking sim games has some kind of coding aspect to it.

programming isn't generally seen as escapism, but if you see it that way, you are blessed with your gifts, and the rest of humanity would rather you churn out little autistic gifts than play gameu all day

It's a logic test, are you telling me every puzzle game is autistic aswell?

Because learning the syntax of some retardedly clumsy and specific function library isn't fun.

non-visual puzzle games, yes
spatial intelligence is easier than logic

Without a competent amount of background knowledge (programmer playing a programming game f.e.), or the patience to learn the rules/syntax/etc of the provided language (even if it's relatively simple with helper functions and/or intellisense) then it's too big of a hurdle for almost all people.
Most people want to pick up a game, and enjoy it would having to read through a bunch of required information to even get a decent grasp of how to interact with the game.

Also, for me at least, the most entertaining part about programming isn't necessarily the syntax, logic, or any of those small details; it's the bigger picture.
I can create programs, and algorithms that create interesting, new, and amazing things; to solve problems that I can run the abstract details through in my head, but not all of thousands, which racks up to millions of small details without the aid of modern tech.
It's like I'm creating my own big puzzles to solve, and giving myself all these challenges that have an awesome end result; which actually have a real functional purpose to me.
Coding/hacking games don't have this, and lack these fundamental aspects.
f.e. you code an algorithm for some challenge, and woho, you move onto another stage/other mundane shit.
So, it's lacking that "tangible result" provided by coding (except, maybe some points or an item/etc, which doesn't compare to the real thing), and this algorithm has no functionality for the work you just put in except that in-game reward.
Overall, it pales in comparison to the "real thing".

How would that ever be fun?
Understandable for people that specifically like that stuff (the logic of it, small details, not the big picture as mentioned above)… but for everyone else not in this elusive niche you're outta luck.
It sounds more like an educational game than a "game game" to me.

various hacking games… and some older simulator games.
Though, not much, because they generally don't sell well; the root causes being the barrier to even interacting with the game, and that they're just not fun to most people.

You stupid fucking kids.
I love your innocence

Interesting argument. Assuming that you are well-acquainted with the different iterations of programming norms throughout history, would you mind opening us what exactly has changed?

It's like you only care for shekels

You don't use logic to solve problems anymore. You use libraries and standardized solutions (design patterns).

Most of the work in programming nowadays is figuring out which already existing solution is the best and most adequate way to solve the problem. Solving the problem itself is not done anymore. Most discussions nowadays revolve around code standards, coding style, the most "reusable" way to write code, what the best naming system is, etc. It's boring, bureaucratic, pedantic, non fun shit.

This benefits corporations greatly because it ensures the code you wrote is void of any meaningful legwork, and uses solutions most people understand (aka popular libraries), so your replacement will have no problem picking up your work after you left. When you attempt to write your own solutions you actually get yelled at and your code gets called "ugly". This is done not only so that replacing you is easy, but it also ensures that your payment will be minimal since you're forced to be a code monkey that doesn't have logical skills and is only good at using pre-made solutions. This effectively turns you into a very easy to replace cog in a much larger machine.


You need those shekels to eat if you want to make a living out of programming, tard. Either play this game or try to find a job in something else.

Shenzhen I/O is literally assembly instructions just very restricted in order to give you constraints to work around, so I don't think that's a great example.

Programming is problem solving. Learning a solution and when to apply it. This is why so many first-time games are so poorly done: because the dev learns a few solutions and tries to apply them to everything, simply because they don't know better. Games like Shenzhen I/O or similar games (even simple ones like Human Resource Machine) teach you how to approach problems and if they're well designed: that you can't use the same solution for every problem.

That doesn't really sound like a game and more like Code Academy or the like where you're given specific goals and asked to complete them. Also if you're talking about 'real' programming (i.e. compiled languages) then you're basically asking them to develop an IDE, include a compiler, etc.

Not disagreeing overall with you OP, I think there's always room for new, fun ways to teach people how to program. It really should be a much larger focus in education. The only thing I can really think of is Apple's shitty playgrounds feature they added to iPads to try and teach kids how fun it cam be.

My line of tought is that it's something that doesn't exist yet, thus it should be made.
I know that Shenzhen I/O is a bad example, it just sparked a line of tought, and a bitter feeling or such a thing not being real.

Programming is boring.
Plain and simple.

sure, all programming problems are solved, all is left is to take code left and right and patch it together, right? R&D does not exist, no one needs that anymore

Code Spells tries.

Tries being the key word here.

Quake taught me to program.

If you actually want a video game that incorporates programming, it's probably going to have to be limited to the point that the programming loses much of it's fun.
There might be something interesting to do in a game where you script an AI to accomplish something, and I think that there are some like that, but I've never played any.

I remember playing a web game which had you programming AI in Javascript. It gave you limited sections in the code which you could modify. By having certain sections be unchangeable, you had to become creative in your solutions as certain behaviours would happen and you had to work around them.

I do recall some game along those lines being shilled once either on halfchan or here, but it turned out you had to pay a subscription fee after the introductory levels and OP was rightly called a faggot.

I know you're being sarcastic, but that's pretty much the situation. Not a lot of programming jobs let you solve new problems, R&D jobs are scarce when compared to the huge demand of code monkeys.

There's really no point if you're just writing a program that provides X functionality and not doing something more in depth such as scripiting an AI like said. Your "game" is called actually learning to program.


You mean like MindRover and Robocode? I played the shit out of MindRover in the early 2000s and there were a ton of mods for it.

Something that could teach you programming with enough depth that you could use that knowledge practically is a tough pill to swallow since you may as well just take a class at that point. Zach's puzzle games work because they're games of limitation and using very limited assembly language to solve puzzles is what makes Shenzhen I/O and TIS-100 entertaining. Obviously you could use that to learn innovation by working through the limitations, for example someone implemented an almost fully-functional version of Tetris in Shenzhen (and I think someone made Pong in TIS-100 too), but otherwise I don't know how helpful it would be.

OP, you gotta consider what makes a "game" in the first place.
Spacechem and Shenzhen work because they give you obstacles and limitations.
They then give you tools to overcome those obstacles in the first place.
Now you might think this is just like programming, but there's several differences here:
First, the obstacle can be tailored. You can make a level harder or easier by giving you more or less tools and relaxing or tightening your constraints.
Second, the fact that you can finish a level with multiple solutions gives the game two layers: first layer is just finding a solution, not matter which. Second layer is the turbo-autistic search for THE BEST solution.

Real Life programming doesn't aim at being a proper challenge for your skills. And the constraints you get are all over the place. Sometimes noone gives a shit if you take 13 months and loads of money to finish a project.
Sometimes you got 3 weeks and the whole thing has to be less than 100 kb.