eep // User Search

eep // User Search

1  ...  3  4  5  6  7  8  ...  42  |  

Name changing

Jul 21, 2001, 10:59pm
No reason TO stop it; just have a way for AW to let people know it's been changed, including the last known name(s), by way of telegram or something.

[View Quote] > It shouldn't be possible to change the registred name at all. When you first
> register and become a citizen of Activeworlds, your name should not be
> allowed to play with. If anyone wanted to change the name, they should pay
> for doing so or simply buy another citizen. Users changing their name two to
> ten times a day do so just to play tricks on someone or can't make up their
> mind. Maybe it would be a good idea to have a name change limit of ten
> times? This way the users who can't make up their mind can try out
> different names up to ten times before the name become frozen and unable to
> be changed anymore. Does anyone else have any good idea to stop users from
> changing their name all the time???
> "agent1" <Agent1 at> skrev i melding
> news:3af2a332$1 at
> previous names a citizen has used, though.
> news:3af297b3 at

rotate command option

Apr 26, 2001, 10:35pm
"reset=no" or something to prevent it from resetting if the object is clicked again and the same rotation is executed (like for turning something).

Suggestion Box

May 8, 2001, 12:24pm
I doubt it's any different than this newsgroup, Builderz. I bet most (if not all) of the emails to this address are immediately deleted (or perhaps archived for some laughs later when Rick and JP are bored and need some entertainment. I mean there's just no way of knowing, but it's obvious from their lack of interaction with THIS newsgroup that they just don't seem to care what we want or think. Rick and JP have their own agenda for AW and it doesn't mean making AW easier to use or having new features unless a corporate customer with lots of money requests them (like NT4 support--uh, what's the point? It's already obsolete anyway considering Win2K is out and XP is in beta. Sure, it'll have OpenGL support, but whoopety do.).

No, what I think people (and MANY people!) need to do is constantly bug Rick, JP, and other AWCIers about ONE specific feature (say full-axis object rotation--without action commands--or overlapping sounds) so much that AWCI gets sick of hearing it requested and finally simply implements it to shut us all up. But such a "campaign" needs to be targeted and consistent--people need to bombard AWCIers with such requests and not let up. Yes, this is a "brute force" approach but I feel it's a last resort option given the attitude AWCI seems to have (or at least presents) towards us and AW's development.

[View Quote] > For those of you who don't visit AlphaWorld GZ often or just didn't hear
> about it yet, AWCI has created a "Suggestion Box" at
> I believe an employee
> of AWCI actually reads the suggestions that people submit (gasp, what a
> concept)! So, if you get no response from AWCI regarding your wishes
> here in the wishlist newsgroup (which is probably the case), you can
> suggest them using the Suggestion Box. Please note that: "Due to the
> large volume of suggestions we receive, we are unable to respond to them
> individually." At least AWCI is making SOME progress with this
> Suggestion Box idea.

Suggestion Box

May 9, 2001, 11:45am
Well, I already have my list at so if people agree with some, most, or even all of the things on it they should just point AWCI's attention to it, perhaps stating their most desired improvement. However, without ANY response from AW even in this newsgroup I doubt such a campaign will have little to any effect. The more people who bug AWCI on-line AND off-line, the better. AWCI needs checks and balances to keep it in-line with what its MUCH more abundant $20/year users want.

[View Quote] > Something else that might work: Every citizen send in an itemized list of what they want and why. I don't mean via email, use regular "snail mail". That way, they can't just click delete. They have to actually open the letter before knowing what it's about, and thousands of letters would send quite a message, don't you think? Sure it might cost a little bit for postage, but it might be worth it.
[View Quote]


May 18, 2001, 11:48pm
You can do this with the "wait" option. It would be nice to have a "stop" option tho because the max wait time is only 999 seconds.

[View Quote] > If this feature hasn't already been implemented, it would be nice to be able
> to tell an object to move and then stop at its destination.

Proposal: Being able to stand on moving objects (bandwidth-miserly

Jun 7, 2001, 5:45pm
I would hope so. I tire of having to rely on bots for more and more functionality that SHOULD be (and should HAVE been) implemented into AW itself in the first place.

[View Quote] > who said it was a bot...he said it would be in the actual program, am i
> right?

[View Quote] > robots know nothing about the moving objects.
> knowledge about the moving object.


Jun 7, 2001, 5:46pm
Keep dreamin'...

[View Quote] > AW doesn't listen to any of these posts but they do claim to listen to your
> suggestions sent through this:


Jun 7, 2001, 7:57pm
You were. Want to be again? Keep acting lame and you'll be filtered again soon enough.

[View Quote] > I thought I was "filtered" ;)
[View Quote]


Jun 7, 2001, 11:04pm
Perhaps because there was never anything useful IN them, twit. Consider yourself refiltered then. "Buh-bye now!"

[View Quote] > I doubt you filter anyone like I said earlier. And yes I do want to be on
> your filter list because you never had anything useful to say about my
> posts.
[View Quote]

A browser suggestion

Jul 5, 2001, 5:58pm
I think he's referring to hidden things (stuff behind walls, etc). AW would need portal rendering (or at least something like Trespasser does where walls act like clipping planes and block everything behind them at certain angles, etc).

[View Quote] [View Quote]

Excluding people from rights

Jul 10, 2001, 9:02pm
It helps to read past posts here. This has been wanted for YEARS, among a billion other things that'll never be implemented so long as Rick and JP (AWC's clueless suits) are in charge...

[View Quote] > Maybe the world server can be made so that you can have everyone except for
> a few people have a right. This would make it possible so that mass vandals
> in a world could chat, but not build and vandalize.

Excluding people from rights

Jul 11, 2001, 5:12am
I would suspect if Roland were let go and AWC were to hire a new programmer, AW would probably either be rewritten or stagnate even more than it already does as the new person struggles to figure it out. At any rate, Roland has some leverage he should use--problem is he doesn't really have the balls to because of the "cushiony" job. In other words, he's lost interest in AW and just does it because he has to, not because he WANTS to. That's not the kind of person *I* would want to have on MY team...but then AWC never has been much of a team player to begin with.

Oh and please put a blank line between your reply and quoted text. I did it this time...again.

[View Quote] > Blah, I wonder if Roland would ever implement it against order. They'd never notice...
> Even if they did, they'd be commiting suicide if they canned him, Roland has little concept of how some parts of the code work,
> imagine being someone else trying to interpret all of his code (Especially if he doesn't comment)

[View Quote]

3DS Loading

Aug 1, 2001, 1:26pm
A 3DS 3.1 3DS-to-RWX DLL already exists. Unfortunately, in Criterion's infinite moronical "wisdom" it can't be distributed...legally. I've been waiting for someone to send it to be anonymously but no one has yet, because I don't fear the "law" (it's JUST a fucking exporter for Christ's sake!). People I KNOW who have them (the RW3 SDK) are: AWC, Andras, and Neil Colvin (Modeler's developer).

[View Quote] > Ok:
> - Ever hear of scaling?
> - Supermodels: Man you only think rendering???
> Cob files contains much info to, but the AW browser
> does'nt load all the deformations and so. So with
> a 3DS file wich have spesific: Verties, TextureCords,
> Normals, wich makes modeling a dream actually.
> Its a common format and i would be then easy
> to export: SMD, MD2, MD3, OBJ, TIN, STL files
> to 3DS for use in AW, with my exporter then. And also
> SMD/MD2/MD3 actors will be 3DS files + SEQ files.
> Man, i use 3DS files for programs i program, they
> are nice, small and fast. And they are greate to make in
> 3DsMax! (I donno about TS and LW, cz i dont use them :)
> Let me make a DLL to load 3DS, all i ask for!
[View Quote]

3DS Loading

Aug 1, 2001, 9:15pm
Welp, try emailing the AW dictators Rick and JP, but good'll need it.

[View Quote] > Yeah see my problem, i cant get a decent exporter!
> So i want to make a DLL that can load 3DS files for
> AW Browser, also that AW add support to users to make
> plugins for other file formats. Cz i think they are using to much
> time to go COB way, and thats like Mirco$oft, limiting to
> their own format and they probably get money or something
> from Caligar to advertise a old version of TrueSpace!
> (TrueSpace sucks anyway, I tryed 4.2 and its not good, i like
> 3DsMax is way better, and the interface are more thinked trough )
[View Quote]

3DS Loading

Aug 6, 2001, 6:25pm
Unfortunately most 3DS objects tend to be WAY too complex for AW's real-time-rendering nature. However, 3DS CAN make low-poly objects but most (if not all) of the free ones are NOT.

At any rate, if you can make a DLL, go ahead. RWX is a simple enough format so if you have the 3DS format info, the converter should be no big deal. Talk to Roland.

[View Quote] > Yeah I'd love to see 3ds support for AW at least if they cant change the rwx
> files to 3ds (then we have to change the extensions on everything too). But
> there are a ton of free 3ds files on the net and maybe if AW switched to 3ds
> support too we'd get a little program to do the I don't have
> to suffer from the bad job 3dstorwx does with inverting the object :/

[View Quote]

The bird bot

Aug 3, 2001, 11:43pm
Yes, bots are VERY silly in and of themselves. They should be integrated into AW (at least as plug-ins) and not require an external program to run. Too bad Roland can't think this modularly...

[View Quote] > I think the "bird bot" should only count as one bot.... because when i log
> them in i can't log in my preston it says "you can not have any more bots
> online"
> I think its silly! and i wish they would fix it!

The bird bot

Aug 4, 2001, 3:42am
Most, if not all, bot functions can (and should) be integrated into AW. Since Roland doesn't have enough time (or "priority"--read, go-ahead from his mindless masters Rick and JP), bots should instead be plug-ins controlled through well-designed, comprehensive GUIs (ala Preston, which needs a bit of work, mind you). Anyway, once the base GUI "control panel" was in place, any "bot plug-in" would work since it would just mean new text strings, perhaps a new dialog or 2 (or 3 or 4), etc.

The POINT of plugins are so that external programs aren't required to run, which suck up more memory, CPU, and hard drive space. It's SUCH a horrendous design to require external programs running alongside the main program in order to get added functionality--and it's not like the bots are compatible with each other either. I had (have) an idea for modular bots that no one wanted to listen to either, which is why we have the bot mess we do today: redundant commands, crappy GUIs, and complex, confusing script languages. Blah--it's all shit. I only use Preston and even it sucks a lot of the time: lag, crashing, hanging, lack of functionality, etc, etc.

Just make the fucking bots plugins and be done with it already. Fucking's like people can't even THINK creatively or something anymore...

[View Quote] > Bots aren't silly, they are a key part to the overall look, feel and
> functionality of many worlds. Bots require no visual component by
> definition - i.e. they have no need for a dependancy on the browser - so why
> make them a plugin of the browser?
> Ryan obviously doesn't understand what the concepts are behind bots and I'm
> afraid you may be missing the point here also Eep.
[View Quote]


Aug 6, 2001, 12:38am
Um, excuse me! Excuuuuuuuuuuuuse me! This is NOT related to AW! Hence, it should be deleted. Go to general.discussion, putzes!

Eep, Bots should not be intigrated into the browser as plugins.

Aug 6, 2001, 6:44am
I mean the world server, not the browser (which could just have the GUI to CONTROL/CONFIGURE--or as a separate program--the plugins). Regardless, that separate GUI program would NOT have to be run all the time, unlike bots do now, since the "bots" (plugins) would be a part of the world server and run alongside it seamlessly like Web browser plugins do.

Next time please reply to the original post.

[View Quote] > Bots are best as separate programs. If they where integrated into the
> browser then we would have to stay logged in to AW all the time just for
> some of up to keep out 24/7 bots running. having the bot in a separate
> program like they are now means we don't have to be in AW just to keep the
> bots running, saves on PC resources, and on people thinking you rude not
> answering telegrams or letting them join you not knowing your sleeping and
> just keeping your 24/7 bot running.

Eep, Bots should not be intigrated into the browser as plugins.

Aug 6, 2001, 6:16pm
Play 3D games much? Some even have "bots" that run alongside the game server. Go play Quake and/or Unreal. Hell, go play ANY 3D game and you'll see there is a LOT more interaction and effects going on than in AW that DON'T require external programs running. Now quit being a pest and go LEARN about things before replying to posts about things you do NOT know ANYTHING about.

[View Quote] > hmm this would run useing the worlds rights list for bots.
> Wouldn't that lagg the world surver down?
> Besides the surver running the world or worlds and holding all that come in
> and out of them, it would also be running bots for each of the many users.
> Still think its best for the user to host the bot and not the surver.
> hmmm
> users + building
> or
> users + building + 3 bots per user each bot doing its own thing.
> You get a few of them more complex game bots in there that will drag the
> surver down alot.
[View Quote]

Eep, Bots should not be intigrated into the browser as plugins.

Aug 6, 2001, 6:22pm
No. Good god you people can't think (and I tire of having to do all the thinking around here--especially for Roland the Wonder Twinkie). Attempt to extrapolate. Obviously you wouldn't need a world server to run a bot since the GUI (integrated and/or external app) could control them. Most of what bots do are part of worlds anyway and not as "companions" or whatever (obect building/manipulation/seeding, etc, etc). THOSE kinds of bots could stay external (or run alongside the uniserver). What I'm referring to are the bots that change world features (day-night light cycle, weather, monitor and react to named objects, etc, etc). These are things bots do that should be integrated into the world feature list.

[View Quote] > so basicly those who dont host there own worlds cant run a bot.....or have
> to pay the person who hosts their world extra for hosting bots
[View Quote]

Eep, Bots should not be intigrated into the browser as plugins.

Aug 6, 2001, 8:47pm
That's where the extrapolation part comes in. If you didn't already know bots MOSTLY just control world features and other in-world effects than that's not MY problem, but yours--one of a lack of understanding of what bots actually do. <shrug> Learn more about something before replying to a post about it.

And don't change the subject field unless you leave the old one in. Extrapolate how that would look...

[View Quote] > Well why didn't you say it like that the first time, your 1st post about it
> and the others you posted never told this part of your idea, this version of
> it I like alot. I would be happy to have a built in bot that changes world
> features :-)
> And yes I do play 3D games. :-)
[View Quote]


Aug 6, 2001, 8:52pm
[View Quote] > 1. You should be able to join people without adding them to your contact list.

Yea, and being able to add a contact from the telegram context menu.

> 2. I think they should up the cell data

They who? Get a world and you can up it to 4000 bytes, but it would be nice to have a longer action field (250 characters is too limiting).

> 4. Ability to render EVERY movement of avatars (for fast computers)

SEQs already do this smoothly/fluidly; it's just dependent on frame rate.

> 6. Sometimes the visibility automatically ups itself to something else (i.e. 52) if i set it to 25. I want to be able to SET and let it STAY there.

Set frame rate to 100 and it'll NEVER (or at least VERY rarely, but I've never had it happen to me) go beyond the set visibility. What I don't like is how AW incorrectly reports the visibility distance (25m in options comes out to 22m in status bar; 75m, 72m, etc). Roland needs to learn how to do math correctly--not only does he royally SUCK at floating point (see but it looks like he can't even add whole numbers very well either. Pathetic.


Aug 17, 2001, 2:48pm
You're missing the point, Kah: PRIORITY. AWC simply doesn't feel like it's a high enough priority to warrant doing at this time. Perhaps when (if) Rick ever adds feature voting this can be addressed soon (after telegram muting and online indication hiding, probably).

[View Quote] > well, he still should, and its not THAT much more than to get the browser to
> handle another number, and since 2.2 is gonna be obsolete that won't be an
> excuse either.
[View Quote]


Aug 17, 2001, 6:25pm
Well, no, supposedly it WOULD be a lot of work to rewrite the cell database structure. If it was that easy the recently added "move" and "rotate" action commands would not have been implemented so half-assedly...

[View Quote] > yes I know, but ppl think that it's veeeeeery hard, but it isn't, it's just
> as you say, that they don't give it priority enough to do it.
[View Quote]

Max Payne's level editor

Aug 17, 2001, 1:26pm
It has some neat extrusion and modelling capabilities that AW could use...

portal rendering (was Re: Visibility Minimum)

Aug 24, 2001, 10:50am
Tip: get portal rendering and higher visibilities won't be such a strain on AW.

[View Quote] > From BETA
[View Quote]

Re: portal rendering (was Re: Visibility Minimum)

Aug 24, 2001, 11:43am
Doesn't have to be. Trespasser even does it with MOVING polygons (doors), where they act like clipping planes and as moved, things behind render seamlessly. I've never seen that in any other game. Max Payne has "exits" which do a VERY good job of clipping things at odd angles. Hell, even Tomb Raider 2 has portal rendering at odd angles in outdoor (non-enclosed environments). It's QUITE possible in AW with RenderWare...

[View Quote] > I would guess that lots of builds that people have are not totally enclosed, so portal rendering wouldn't work all that well in lots of places.
[View Quote]

Re: portal rendering (was Re: Visibility Minimum)

Aug 24, 2001, 1:49pm
Not necessarily; it would just be a matter of placing clipping planes behind walls, floors, ceilings, etc. They're quite versatile in games. For example, in Max Payne, the camera can move all the way around the outside of a room and only by looking through an "exit" hole can the next room be seen. In Trespasser it's even more dynamic, not limited to rooms without see-through windows and limited exits. In Tomb Raider the clipping planes are all over in outdoors, obscured by fog or polygons.

Portal rendering would GREATLY increase AW's frame rate.

[View Quote] > It would make a good addition, but builds would have to be changed in order to take advantage of portal rendering.
[View Quote]

new world owner feature

Aug 25, 2001, 1:52pm
I've had customizable fonts (+ colors) on my improvements list ( for years...

[View Quote] > im getting tired of the same old type and same old
> black grey and bold colors i think world owners
> should be able to decide the following things in
> their world:
> size/font/color for tourists
> size/font/color for citizens
> size/font/color for PS
> and a new one size/font/color for caretaker

1  ...  3  4  5  6  7  8  ...  42  | is a privately held community resource website dedicated to Active Worlds.
Copyright (c) Mark Randall 2006 - 2024. All Rights Reserved.   ·   ProLibraries Live   ·   Twitter   ·   LinkedIn