1  ...  38  39  40  41  42  |   Order by default

Aug 31, 2004, 2:43am

I've had a similar problem with 3rd-person view suddenly enabling after I hit the mouselook button (middle mouse button) and rotate the view quickly (but not THAT quickly). And then there's the mouselook-terrain bug I mentioned in an earlier post. Whatever AWI did to mouselook has really screwed it up!

[View Quote]

Sep 6, 2004, 3:53pm

You and your younger guy fetish, Mauz... :P

[View Quote]

Sep 8, 2004, 5:39pm

How about fixing the issue with only allowing 22-character object names. That's just lame....

[View Quote]

Sep 11, 2004, 6:11pm

So why is there a limit then? 22 isn't even a common programming denomination/limit (16, 32, 64, 32276, 65535, etc).

[View Quote]

Sep 11, 2004, 11:56pm

This isn't a bug. You can't build above 327.67m. All objects above that will wrap to -327.67m. http://tnlc.com/rw/measurement.html for more info.

[View Quote]

Sep 12, 2004, 1:05am

Well, it might just be your connection--but it should be near-instantaneous--at least last time I checked it (years ago).

[View Quote]

Sep 23, 2004, 4:51am

Mayhaps your ISP is using a older cached version...

[View Quote]

Sep 29, 2004, 11:32pm

AW has floating point errors all OVER the place--and they get worse in large worlds the further away one is from GZ and if not building parallel to the world axes.
Seams are another problem, too: http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html#seams

It's bad enough we can't move objects finer than 1cm increments...

[View Quote]

Sep 30, 2004, 3:39am

Manual entry? For seams? Huh?

[View Quote]

Sep 30, 2004, 5:06pm

I doubt it since the cell database is, according to Andras anyway, written only to a certain accuracy (1cm-translation and .1-degree rotation). Basically, changing the object positioning would require a complete world server rewrite...or something.

[View Quote]

Oct 1, 2004, 7:11am

Yes, I mentioned this to Roland, Shamus, and practically everyone else who listened, YEARS ago, but nothing was ever done about it, as usual. Also note that infinitely-repeating ground objects will bounce as you move (or simply move the camera around via mouselook) throughout the world; this is most easily seen in AlphaWorld. You also cannot even move in a straight line due to these same floating point errors (which are no doubt the cause of ALL these problems).

[View Quote]

Oct 1, 2004, 7:14am

Huh? Which objects are you referring to? If Cubed's modular ground in the seams image in that link, they were (and still ARE) 10x10m with only varying heights of 1m increments. Regardless, while related to floating point errors, seams are a separate issue from gaps in lining up objects when building.

[View Quote]

Oct 24, 2004, 9:06pm

Yes, AW and RW programmers have sucked in terms of floating point errors for years. Math is math--and programming is FULL of it, floating point errors or otherwise.

[View Quote]

Oct 28, 2004, 3:43am

So? I don't come here that much anymore and it's not like this place is hopping with time-sensitive info...<shrug>

[View Quote]

Sep 30, 2004, 3:44am

C'mon, Chrispeg (or whoever's in charge of AW programming now): update the beta release notes!

Oct 1, 2004, 7:09am

Why don't you add them to the BETA release notes, http://www.activeworlds.com/help/aw36/beta.html since it's page title is "Latest Beta Notes", not "Introducing 3.6" (which is what the link you provided goes to)? Also, the release date of each build, as on the beta release notes page, should be added for builds after 551. And, to better sort the builds, just use a SINGLE bullet and indent (<uv> tag) multiple fixes as sub-bullets. Consistency is the key...

[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2005, 5:03pm

No, it's not. However, Second Life is at $10 for LIFE. AW can't even come close...

[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2005, 5:00pm

And even then they were false. http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/history.html for more info.

Try SecondLife; it rules!

[View Quote]

Feb 6, 2005, 6:56pm

Well, you can always build a bright light source near where you're building, but Second Life allows attaching light sources to your av so it makes it easier to build in total darkness.

[View Quote]

Mar 12, 2006, 10:26pm

Um, no. SL's vehicles blow away AW's pathetic "movers" easily.

I am somewhat impressed with AW4+'s improved interface, particles, and zones. However, The object properties box is even worse--it's
still too wide and now it's even longer. It could be designed so much better. While AW still has a long way to go before it can
compete with Second Life (SL), it's showing promise and potential (still). However, I think AW and SL should just merge.

This SL forum post (not sure if non-SLers can access it) outlines AW 4.1's features compared to SL's (and see my 3D Game Comparison
for a link to a virtual world comparison between AW, SL, and There).

[View Quote]

Mar 12, 2006, 10:32pm

It SHOULD be way better considering it took 3+ years! But, for 3+ years in development it's just quite pathetic. Entire GAMES are
developed in 3 years, not just a measily upgrade!

Worked perfectly? Try the vehicles--specifically, the jetski (the red one out in front)--it floats up as soon as you get on it. The
vehicles control like crap too. No engine sound or anything either. GTA3/VC/SA AW4+'s vehicles are NOT!

[View Quote]

Mar 12, 2006, 8:46pm

Perhaps you, and others, should consult more informed sources before replying next time... I didn't spend years creating
http://tnlc.com/rw/ for the hell of it, you know. Use it.

[View Quote]

Mar 12, 2006, 10:39pm

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0555_01C645F3.95A64870
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

http://help.activeworlds.com/ lists new features for Active Worlds 4.1. =
Some of these things SL doesn't have:
a.. Zones : SL needs this for at least under water. SL already changes =
lighting/fog under water so why not other things like gravity, splash =
sound/effects, etc (without having to wear an attachment all the time!)?
b.. Particles
a.. Particle type: sprite, facer (apparently there's a difference =
between the 2 terms), flat panel, or model. SL particles can only be =
sprites.
b.. Particles can have gravity. While SL particles can have downward =
force, it's not true gravity (especially with bouncing).
c.. zone-exclusivity
d.. camera position
c.. camera objects: SL 1.9's new camera commands might be the same =
thing
d.. smooth rotate/move: SL's rotate and position functions always have =
slight acceleration/deceleration and can't just move abruptly.
e.. GUI - dockable/floating windows: SL's interface could seriously =
benefit from something like this! The inventory window doesn't need to =
be open all the time and could more intuitively slide (though I would =
prefer "pop") in/out of view. This could also work for the object edit =
window, IM window, etc. AW4+'s vertical tab panels are a bit too thick =
for my tastes though.
f.. terrain: 1km elevation range (500m above/below 0 altitude): SL's =
is only 8 METERS
g.. VoIP: voice chat
h.. GIF/PNG textures
SL already has and AW now has:
a.. downslide: avatars slide down slopes (AW doesn't have a formal =
physics engine so physics only applies to avatars)
b.. global events: all users can see triggered (touch/bump) events =
(opening doors, playing sounds, etc)
c.. screenshot key
Old features AW has but SL doesn't (and should):
a.. external models: old debate but I still think it's valid that SL =
should allow external models (i.e. 3DS) but, since non-parametric model =
(SL's prims) vertex manipulation can be bandwidth-intensive, only allow =
them to be static for the most part (could still allow full-object =
color, light, full-bright, texture, etc changes)
b.. terrain
a.. editing: vertices can be moved to any vertical position =
instantly, unlike SL's slow terrain editor
b.. holes
c.. light
a.. type: point, cone, spot - SL only has point
b.. radius: object-independent, can be over 10m - SL light radius =
limited to 10m (max prim size)
c.. brightness: seperate from object color
d.. effects: blink, fade in/out, fire, flicker, flash, pulse - SL =
can do blinking/flickering but only prims will register it fast enough =
(but not always in recent builds); the ground lags considerably. Some =
things SL should NOT do server-side!
e.. coronas: SL has these in the debug menu but can't be specified =
per light source like AW can. AW's world light source's (i.e. the sun) =
texture (normal + corona) can also be changed, unlike SL's static =
textures (and badly-gradiented corona)
d.. client-side effects: along with light, rotation and =
movement/position are much smoother in AW (aside from SL's llTargetOmega =
rotation function) because they are client-side. SL doesn't need to do =
everything on the server. Position should have an =
llTargetOmega-equivalent (llPositionOmega?) and can be interpolated on =
the client so it looks smooth.
e.. sky: while AW doesn't have cellular automata clouds, its sky looks =
MUCH better than SL's through the use of 3 cloud layers (see World =
Features (no direct link to sky but it's towards the bottom) for more =
info
f.. water: while SL's water looks better (with pixel-/vertex-shading =
ripple effects anyway), AW's water is far more configurable (see World =
Features link above for more info)
I think AW and SL should just merge...
------=_NextPart_000_0555_01C645F3.95A64870
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#80828c background=3D""><A =
href=3D"http://help.activeworlds.com/"=20
target=3D_blank>http://help.activeworlds.com/</A> lists new features for =
Active=20
Worlds 4.1. Some of these things SL doesn't have:
<UL>
<LI><A href=3D"http://help.activeworlds.com/document.php?zones"=20
target=3D_blank>Zones</A> : SL needs this for at least under water. SL =
already=20
changes lighting/fog under water so why not other things like gravity, =
splash=20
sound/effects, etc (without having to wear an attachment all the =
time!)?</LI>
<LI><A href=3D"http://help.activeworlds.com/document.php?particles"=20
target=3D_blank>Particles</A>
<UL>
<LI>Particle type: sprite, facer (apparently there's a difference =
between=20
the 2 terms), flat panel, or model. SL particles can only be =
sprites.</LI>
<LI>Particles can have gravity. While SL particles can have downward =
force,=20
it's not true gravity (especially with bouncing).</LI>
<LI>zone-exclusivity</LI>
<LI>camera position</LI></UL></LI>
<LI><A href=3D"http://help.activeworlds.com/document.php?cameras"=20
target=3D_blank>camera objects</A>: SL 1.9's new camera commands might =
be the=20
same thing</LI>
<LI>smooth <A =
href=3D"http://help.activeworlds.com/document.php?rotate_command"=20
target=3D_blank>rotate</A>/<A=20
href=3D"http://help.activeworlds.com/document.php?move_command"=20
target=3D_blank>move</A>: SL's rotate and position functions always =
have slight=20
acceleration/deceleration and can't just move abruptly.</LI>
<LI>GUI - dockable/floating windows: SL's interface could seriously =
benefit=20
from something like this! The inventory window doesn't need to be open =
all the=20
time and could more intuitively slide (though I would prefer "pop") =
in/out of=20
view. This could also work for the object edit window, IM window, etc. =
AW4+'s=20
vertical tab panels are a bit too thick for my tastes though.</LI>
<LI><A href=3D"http://help.activeworlds.com/document.php?terrain"=20
target=3D_blank>terrain</A>: 1km elevation range (500m above/below 0 =
altitude):=20
SL's is only 8 <B>METERS</B></LI>
<LI><A href=3D"http://help.activeworlds.com/document.php?voip"=20
target=3D_blank>VoIP</A>: voice chat</LI>
<LI>GIF/PNG textures</LI></UL>SL already has and AW now has:
<UL>
<LI>downslide: avatars slide down slopes (AW doesn't have a formal =
physics=20
engine so physics only applies to avatars)</LI>
<LI>global events: all users can see triggered (touch/bump) events =
(opening=20
doors, playing sounds, etc)</LI>
<LI>screenshot key</LI></UL>Old features AW has but SL doesn't (and =
should):
<UL>
<LI>external models: old debate but I still think it's valid that SL =
should=20
allow external models (i.e. 3DS) but, since non-parametric model (SL's =
prims)=20
vertex manipulation can be bandwidth-intensive, only allow them to be =
static=20
for the most part (could still allow full-object color, light, =
full-bright,=20
texture, etc changes)</LI>
<LI><A href=3D"http://help.activeworlds.com/document.php?terrain"=20
target=3D_blank>terrain</A>
<UL>
<LI>editing: vertices can be moved to any vertical position =
instantly,=20
unlike SL's slow terrain editor</LI>
<LI>holes</LI></UL></LI>
<LI><A =
href=3D"http://help.activeworlds.com/document.php?light_command"=20
target=3D_blank>light</A>
<UL>
<LI>type: point, cone, spot - SL only has point</LI>
<LI>radius: object-independent, can be over 10m - SL light radius =
limited to=20
10m (max prim size)</LI>
<LI>brightness: seperate from object color</LI>
<LI>effects: blink, fade in/out, fire, flicker, flash, pulse - SL =
can do=20
blinking/flickering but only prims will register it fast enough (but =
not=20
always in recent builds); the ground lags considerably. Some things =
SL=20
should NOT do server-side!</LI>
<LI>coronas: SL has these in the debug menu but can't be specified =
per light=20
source like AW can. AW's world light source's (i.e. the sun) texture =
(normal=20
+ corona) can also be changed, unlike SL's static textures (and=20
badly-gradiented corona)</LI></UL></LI>
<LI>client-side effects: along with light, rotation and =
movement/position are=20
much smoother in AW (aside from SL's llTargetOmega rotation function) =
because=20
they are client-side. SL doesn't need to do everything on the server. =
Position=20
should have an llTargetOmega-equivalent (llPositionOmega?) and can be=20
interpolated on the client so it looks smooth.</LI>
<LI>sky: while AW doesn't have cellular automata clouds, its sky looks =
MUCH=20
better than SL's through the use of 3 cloud layers (see <A=20
=
href=3D"http://help.activeworlds.com/document.php?world_features_dialog" =

target=3D_blank>World Features</A> (no direct link to sky but it's =
towards the=20
bottom) for more info</LI>
<LI>water: while SL's water looks better (with pixel-/vertex-shading =
ripple=20
effects anyway), AW's water is far more configurable (see World =
Features link=20
above for more info)</LI></UL>I think AW and SL should just=20
merge...</BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0555_01C645F3.95A64870--

Mar 13, 2006, 6:00pm

Yes, well, I copy-pasted the text from an SL forum post and didn't feel like editing it for ASCII. :P

[View Quote] Thankyou for beginnning to drag newsgroups kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

[View Quote]

Mar 14, 2006, 2:01am

[View Quote] Thanks.

> makes AW sound better then SL that. guess for building and object modeling it is though.

In some respects. AW is good that it allows external models but its in-world editing is VERY limited and primitive compared to SL's.
I've read rumors about SL eventually adding external model support but I don't see it on the horizon anytime soon. Primitives are
fine but VERY wasteful in terms of framerate: MANY hidden/covered sides/polys, can't specify # sides/polys so it's whatever your LOD
is set at which can easily bring SL to a crawl--especially with lights. I manage to knock out stuff MUCH faster in SL compared to
AW, however. There's a debate about parametric models (SL's primitives) vs. meshes ("static" models) I'm in at the LSL (Linden
Scripting Language) Wiki at http://secondlife.com/badgeo/wakka.php?wakka=ParametricDebate if anyone's interested (a bit hard to
follow though). Anyway, I just don't see why both types of models can't be in the same program.

Anyway, I'd rather model in-world than have to use an external modeller. I've read about some of the 3D modellers (not sure which)
are starting to add collaborative modelling. I don't know anything about it but it it means allowing multiple people to model
something in real-time, that's going to edge in on what AW/SL do. Expand that to entire 3D scenes and, well, there you go: new
competition. Granted, I doubt the 3D modelling apps (3DS Max, trueSpace, etc) will move to that, but there's no reason 3D game
level editors couldn't...but I've been saying this for years: http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/

Ah well. If it doesn't happen with AW or SL it'll happen with another program eventually. I hate not being able to use my years of
work in AW in SL but SL's modelling is easy enough I can knock out decent AW replicas quickly (they're really not that complex
anyway). Hell, I've made so much in SL already that puts my AW stuff to shame. I enjoyed my time in AW (for the most part) but AW
just hasn't been keeping up with technology and so I had to move on. It's too bad but that's life. I really don't see AW ever
catching up at this rate so I'm not getting my hopes up for it anymore (haven't for a while now).

It would be nice if SL had many of AW's features--and that's really the only way I see AW surviving at this point--but SL is decent
enough as it is to carry on the multiverse torch. I just hope it too doesn't stagnate the way AW has for FAR too long...

Mar 15, 2006, 1:11am

The furries are mostly harmless in SL but there are some that go the "yif" (sex) route, much like the Gor do in AW (which are also
present in SL), but SL is hardly just, or even mostly, about furries and/or Gor anyway. AW has conservative elements? That's
funny...it's always seemed pretty liberal to me.

[View Quote]

Mar 17, 2006, 7:59am

Ah but AW is developed in the US, which uses 4/1 to be April 1, not January 1. Anyway, AW 4.1 is pretty much a joke compared to SL.
:P

[View Quote]

Mar 14, 2006, 2:30am

Hey, Starax, nice to see you here.

Unfortunately, I can't agree with most of what you say. See my reply in "AW4 vs. SL features" thread for more info. But most of what
you say basically amounts to "fluff" features and don't really have much substance. Yes, content is fine, but the underlying core
technology limits that content--and AW's technology is VERY limiting (especially compared to SL's in most respects).

Yes, AW allows external models, but they are static and boring for the most part. AW's action commands pale in comparison to SL's.
Yes, AW 4.1 has some minor things SL does not, but SL's scripting language still blows AW's action commands out of the water
overall. You may be able to model everything in your wand, but forget about doing all the cool things with those models you do in
SL. (For those who don't know Starax, he made a magic wand that spawns many things that do various things. See
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5182759758975402950&q=%22second+life%22 for a presentation by SL's president Phillip
Rosedale and lead developer Cory Ondrejka.)

While I like being able to run a separate AW world, it really does feel apart and not a part of any kind of bigger world/solar
system/galaxy/universe/whatever. While SL sims can be connected, they can also be separate islands. There's talk of adding waterway
sims to link them all, which will be cool, keeping the seamlessness of an overall world. However, SL sims are VERY small compared to
what AW worlds can be--and outrageously expensive compared to AW worlds! For this AW is much better. However, what you can DO in AW
worlds compared to SL sims is a HUGE difference. AW is making some leeway with global events but it still needs a physics engine
(the latest RenderWare has one, by the way, so why not AW?) and MUCH more improvement before it can truly compete with SL.

Competition is fine, but I'd rather see collaboration: take the good parts of There (vehicles, from what I've read--never been
there), SL, and AW and combine them a single awesome program. The Croquet Project just seems to be starting from scratch, as is
every other "next big multiverse-wannabe" that comes along, mindlessly reinventing the wheel. It's just silly and VERY
unproductive/inefficient. However, an open-source multiverse would at least be a step in the right direction. While I've read about
SL eventually becoming open-source (in 2010?), I doubt it will happen and other apps like Croquet will come along and sweep SL, AW,
There, and any other closed-source, propietary multiverse out of the way as FireFox is doing with Internet Explorer (slowly, but
give it time).

Anyway, I tire beating a dead horse so if it happens, it happens. If not, oh well--it'll just take longer or something. Who
knows...it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things anyway--nothing does, really; this is all a distraction, but, alas,
that's for another discussion.

I'll stick around and see how AW progresses, but I won't be as active as I used to be.

[View Quote]

Mar 15, 2006, 4:08am

Sorry to hear you guys don't like SL much. That's too bad because I think SL is so much more immersive than AW. I love the day-night
light cycle and SL's scripting language allows SO much more object interaction than AW's action commands do. SL's particles are fun
to play with too. AW 4.1's particles look interesting, and even have some parameters SL's don't, but it's just enough to keep me
interested in AW over SL overall (or with movers). Zones look cool but, still, I feel SL is better overall.

SL lag has been really bad since SL 1.7 so you really need to keep local lighting off if you're in congested areas (Welcome Area,
clubs, etc). Most SLers don't know how to model efficiently, and because of SL using parametric instead of vert-poly models, there
are LOTS of covered polygons and lights mindlessly used. But, since most people have local lighting OFF, they don't experience light
lag (they just see the prims prelit). SL only recently added a prelight ("full bright" they call it) option but most designers
haven't changed their older stuff to it.

AW 4.1 is a step closer to what SL can do, but it still has a long way to go to catch up overall.

[View Quote] Like what?

Mar 17, 2006, 7:57am

Well, you don't really need AW to do modelling since it has no built-in modelling capabilities anyway. At least SL can do parametric
modelling but it's still not full vert-poly modelling--but it's closer to modelling than AW is...and it's a much faster to make
stuff in SL than in AW (at least for me anyway). No dorking with RWXes or converters or cleaning up all the code--blah blah blah. Of
course there's always LSL (scripting) code to clean up but that's different. ;)

[View Quote]

1  ...  38  39  40  41  42  |   Order by default