Yes, but see how brilliant my scheme was , now we have a corrected direct code comparison with exact codes (I just typed what I remembered, although I did forget the labels, admittedly. And the indentation).PyTom wrote:Well, the image line only appears once in the Ren'Py game, FWIW. (The syntax is also kinda off.)
Well, it's not like it's a lie. And apart from the less lines, the second argument is also worth a lot - since it's not those scary programmers' brackets, and no unnatural @s in the text. And it's much clearer where you are, you have a better overview and you script the file mostly with WORDS, as opposed to shotcuts and weird signs.PyTom wrote:That's 23 non-empty lines for Blade versus 10 for Ren'Py... and I would expect the gap to widen as the game gets bigger. (I don't know how many lines this would take in Papillon's engine... I suspect it's not comparable, since I believe the images are defined out of band.)
Lines of code are only one metric, however... I personally believe Ren'Py is easier to read, since there's less use of magic numbers. (For example, we use "witch" rather then "0" to refer to the "Witch" character.)
(However, remember I'm quite biased here, so take what I say with the appropriate-sized grain of salt.)
As for the "-quotation marks and indentation, it's the trickiest part of Ren'Py. But it's not so hard getting used to it and it becomes quite natural - plus the internal editor highlights and indentates everything, you have a built-in debugger, so it's substantially easier.
So there you are, at least for me, this is quite a clear proof that Blade isn't simpler than Ren'Py. It doesn't mean that for some people Blade can't be more conveniet of a choice, maybe they find its scripting system more attractive, and that's okay. But I think the code comparison shows a lot, and everyone can decide for themselves.