1  ...  16  17  18  19  20  21  ...  42  |   Order by default

Dec 11, 2000, 1:29pm

AW:

genre: multi-user (chat) level editor
multi-user
fully 3D
1st- and 3rd-person views
fine control over object placement


The Sims:

genre: RTS (real-time strategy/simulation)
single user
3D avatars (sims) and some objects
isometric view w/4 rotations and 3 zoom levels
4-direction object placement


While interesting, The Sims in its current state isn't much competition for AW. A multi-user Sims IS in the works but it'll be a while (perhaps a year) before it's released or even in beta testing.

[View Quote] > I have seen the Sims program were one can build somewhat like in AWs but I
> have not used it yet.
>
> Has any one had a chance to use the program and if so is it like AWs when
> it comes to building? Could it in a small way be like AWs offline but with a
> save setup?
>
> I have dropped two of the three worlds where I have been building because of
> poor management and or just a do not care what happens attitude by the
> owner(s) or overseers.
>
> I now only work or build on AW when it is working LOL and I would like to be
> able to build like with AW offline. If the Sims is a no go is there another
> program what comes closer to AWs?

Dec 12, 2000, 2:45am

Unfortunately, since AWLD is incorporated under Delaware Corporation Law, someone who owns most of the stock has NO power over the company's board of directors (or whatever).

[View Quote] > Being 3AM in the morning and bored out of our skulls, my roommate (whom
> some of you may know as Jeff Raven) and I came up with a nefarious plot.
> This plan would solve all of the problems in AW, while simultaneously
> allowing it to prosper and grow. And it can be boiled down to three
> simple words:
>
> Buy. Them. Out.
>
> Now, I know you must think I'm nuts, (anyone who already doesn't must be
> new here) but hear me out. I did some research into the financial/stock
> situation of ActiveWorlds.com, Inc. and came up with some rather
> interesting facts:
>
> • AWLD has a total of 8,602,762 shares outstanding.
> • Out of those shares, 5,024,013 shares are closely held, roughly %58.4
> of the company shares.
> • Of those closely held shares, %29.7 (roughly 1,492,132 shares) is own
> by Rick Noll (ENZO) and %29.1 (roughly 1,461,988 shares) is owned by
> J.P. McCormick (Cryonics)
> • AWLD's current stock price is $1.03125 per share
>
> Now, what does all this mean? It means that no one person owns more than
> half of AWLD. Rick and JP own %58 of the company together, but if one
> were to stab the other in the back, all would be lost. Not only that,
> but someone else could buy only %60 of all stocks (roughly 5,161,657
> shares) and control the Board of Directors, and thereby, the company. At
> $1.03 a pop, that comes to a measly $5,316,506.92!
>
> Of course, no one person in AW has that kind of money, otherwise I would
> think they'd have the commons sense to buy them out years ago. So what
> we were thinking is forming an ActiveWorlds Stock Group. Get a bunch of
> people together and pool our money to come up with the necessary $5.3
> mil.
>
> Is it a risky scheme? Probably. Is it better than the alternative? (that
> being leaving Rick and JP in charge) I'd sure as hell like to think so.
> Think of it, we buy out AW and we'll be able to call the shots! AW for
> the people, by the people! Just picture the new staff we would have, and
> all the things that would actually get accomplished around here:
>
> President/CEO - Protagonist
>
> Business Management - Moria, Bonzer
>
> Software Development/Programming - Roland, Hamfon, Denette
>
> Customer Service/Technical Support - Flagg, Daphne, Dataman, AlphaBit
> Phalpha
>
> 3D Modeling - Young Shamus, Kalak of Tanagra, Just In
>
> Quality Assurance/Testing - Eep, Agent1
>
> Webmaster/Advertising - Bille, Goober King *grin*
>
> Now is that a staff or what? :) These are just the names I could think
> of at the moment, but I'm sure there are many more people who would be
> perfectly willing to join in on this project. I'm assuming the only
> reason they haven't yet is because of real life stuff. (i.e. already
> have jobs and all that good stuff) Still, with this staff running the
> show, *no one* will have reason to complain. Everything people want to
> see done *will* get done. No secret agendas. No ignoring of customers.
> Simply things as it should be: AW for AW users.
>
> Oh well. I guess this is probably a long-shot anyway. People seem
> content to complain and complain, but not actually do anything to effect
> change. But hey, a goober can dream, can't he?

Dec 13, 2000, 11:16am

Um, part of testing IS complaining about bugs and bad program design.

[View Quote] > hehe, it would be good with some better ppl in charge, but NEVER Eep!
> Putting him/her in quality/testing won'tbe a good idea either (hey, he/she
> complains about nearly EVERYTHING)! So, if you ever put Eep into a position,
> I'll sue you! (or maybe not...)
>
[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2000, 11:21am

I do? If that were true I would not have bothered to add other people's suggestions to my AW improvements page (http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html). Sure I have my own opinions about what features should be implemented, but so does everyone else. As a tester it is a good idea to offer suggestions as to what can improve/replace existing buggy and/or badly designed functionality.

[View Quote] [View Quote]

Dec 14, 2000, 11:25am

Well perhaps you need to read more carefully then. I still think AW has a high learning curve when it comes to building--not as high as REAL level editors, but still high nonetheless. Many improvments on the below page would make building EASIER for newbies, not harder. For example, one of my first suggestions back in late summer 1997 was for multiple object selection (which took AWCI YEARS to finally add it) which makes moving multiple objects MUCH easier. However, because Roland et al only implemented it half-assedly, manipulating multiple objects is still annoying. How hard would it have been to simply add the ability to EDIT multiple objects too? I mean come on...this is BASIC BASIC stuff. Regardless, multiple object selection makes building easier.

[View Quote] > I think the AWorld browser would be a great piece of software with a GUI
> that only few could handle, it would freak out most tourists and refuse
> to work for newbies. IMO our problem is that you can not imagine what
> problems can encounter if someone is not familiar with his computer or
> his OS - and (just my opinion too) AWorld is not a software that is
> developed for computer professionals. You lost contact to the
> low-knowledge users, they are not worth to mention for you. It is sure
> not as extreme as I express it here, but I (too) often get this idea
> when I read one of your replies.
>
> eep schrieb:

Dec 14, 2000, 11:28am

[View Quote] > well, as ananas wrote, Eep cares most about what he wants (but well, they
> could use him/her to test the Tech support team, as "the angry old
> lady"...).

Um, I'm a guy.

> And cybernome, I agree that AW is far behind of where it COULD
> have been right now, if they did the same effort as with 3.0 with EACH
> version, but I wouldn't try to beat 'em:
> we do have a great community in AW, I have used hours of time and energy on
> doing stuff here, many businesses depend on it, etc... it would have
> BIIIIIIIG consequences to "kill" AWCI.

No more consequences than any other piece of software. If something better comes along people will usually tend to use it instead. As more and more computer games include level editors (Tomb Raider being the latest that I'm aware of) and/or integrated building (10six, Vampire: The Masquerade Redemption, The Sims, Neverwinter Nights, etc), AW's "market share" will continue to diminish unless it develops quicker to offset the rapidly upcoming competition.

[View Quote]

Dec 14, 2000, 11:30am

Why wouldn't it? AW's in a perpetual state of development as it is now anyway. There's no reason A (single, one) new feature can't be THOROUGHLY tested before being released. If it needs to be "patched" later on, AW is fairly seamless in that manner. <shrug>

[View Quote] > As much as sometime I would like to use Eeps head as a basketball, he would make
> a good quality control geek. Only problem is that the product would never make
> it out the door.
>
[View Quote]

Dec 14, 2000, 11:35am

I would REALLY like to know what it takes TO get AWCI to work. It seems the only real influential AW users are the universe server owners, which is just stupid since they are HARDLY the majority of AW users. But, like in politics, it seems those with the money make the rules and influence the people in charge. However, UNLIKE politics (or at least the US democratic system), AWCI was never elected to run AW in the first place. Just because people have money doesn't mean they have the ability to run something, Rick and JP CLEARLY (to me anyway) don't know how to develop and market AW, much less have any vision for it beyond the latest mindless lemming media-overhyped buzzwords ("e-commerce").

[View Quote] > Well, just be grateful 3.1 has just as many new features, and in quicker
> time. :) You see, AWCI does know when to work if you whip em hard enough!
> *jk* :P
>
[View Quote]

Dec 14, 2000, 11:45am

[View Quote] > Well as the saying goes..."Proof is in the pudding!"
>
> I dont really think getting rid of AW is the problem too. They are a
> business like all the other online ecommerce sites. But I intended to show
> that without real direct competition in the VR communities market (since
> most will agree not much matches up to AW unfortunaely) they become a
> Microsoft putting out mediocre software and crappy customer service, and is
> in no way, close to what it could be in a more fuller competitive market.
> Someone needs to keep them on there toes, but its got to be from outside the
> loop of aw community cuz think about it, "who in there right mind running a
> business would stop taking money from ppl even though they were willingly
> screwing them and the ppl kept giving them money." People come to the
> newsgroups and post up their complaints (and if you notice there are alot of
> them) and only a little bit gets done. Now this isnt some thing thats been
> happening recently. This situation has been occuring since AW 2.0.

More like at least version 1.3 (when I first came to AW), but even earlier still.

> An improvement here and there...taking forever to get done. And I understand
> their side too cuz I run a company as well and know the rigors of keeping
> the peace.
>
> But WAIT ...there's more .. 8-) To top if off, with no company to give
> AWCI a run for their money, to make them make the software better and leaner
> for quality competition against other businesses who could jepordize their
> sales, they continue to be super sloths....see what I'm gettin at folks?
> This is the main reason AW is the way it is. I know ..."well what about
> Blaxxun...or Virtual Places..or even 3D Travler. Or even the AW
> derivatives....OuterWorlds (excellent place by the way), Vectorscape,
> Fandom...or City4All etc. Well they are all good companies dont get me wrong
> and give AW really *Decent* competition community wise... but
> technologically wait..humm....How many average joes have even heard of these
> othere places let alone Activeworlds. I mean AW barely advertises at
> all....but now that I think about it ..neither do any of the other places.
> So the market continues to stay stagnate and underground (How are businesses
> going to make virtual reality a mainstream icon to the masses if the masses
> dont even know it exist).

This is where 3D games are pushing the envelope. AW COULD have had a bigger part in this, but they continued to flounder instead, thus losing out on yet another opporunity.

> We the consumers still get nothing but "Half-Ass"
> software ...and we keep taking it like it was bad tasting medicine but
> granny said its good for you. "No it Ain't!!!". but I've blasted enough. So
> the big question is... "What is the solution to these growing complaints.
> Answer: Dream team, Conglomerate....what ever..."A directly competitve
> business" that will compete with AW to wake them up. It you wanted anything
> in life...or ever dreamed for something big to happen regarding this
> disconcerting problem.....ASK FOR THAT!!!!
>
> Cybernome
> www.lazerstore.com
> "Remember your unique. Just like everyone else"

"you're"

Dec 14, 2000, 5:25pm

[View Quote] > I kinda figured it was happening (the problems and holdups) since earlier
> than version 2.0 ..But it wasn't till that point I even gave a crap about
> it. With a track record like that it kinda makes ya wonder. We're at 3.0
> now...I been hearing alot of talk about 3.1 and its supposed new features.
> Question: Does anyone think this is goin to amout to a hill of beans?

Yes, I've been waiting for these features for years, yet they STILL won't bring AW up to most, if not all (or even not-so-) current 3D games.

> I don't. The new features that are being added are ones that "could have been"
> integrated a few versions ago. Eep you may know the answer to this one...
> Why is it that the renderware engine has so many options and features it can
> use yet AW refuses to integrate them?

Because Roland has to implement RW features to work within AW. RW is just the 3D engine API; AW is the "car" that houses the engine, dashboard controls (user interface), etc. Had Criterion made RW3 compatible with RWX, AW3 would not have taken so long to come out and more features would be in AW3 (probably at least the ones coming in AW 3.1). But because of AW's limited development "team" (if you can call 2 people a "team") at the time, AW3 development was slow, with Roland doing most of the work anyway. Even with Protagonist and Roland AW's development went slow. Anyway, hopefully AW will develop faster now that Shamus is a programmer...but we'll see. The delay of AW 3.1 beta is not a good sign.

> For example, fullscreen and vr peripheral interfacing.

Huh? Do you mean 3D glasses or something?

> The make of the browser and client -server control
> is a bit better since the ealier versions of AW but still seems so
> cumbersome compaired to the actual way Renderware does it. Is there a reason
> for this? (Stupid question I know) But inquiring minds want to know.

Ask Roland.

> Also, I agree the 3D gaming market is propelling the technology at an
> exponential rate. Yet it's still a step outside the vr community
> environment. 3D gaming has already hit mainstream and is growing which is a
> great help to the vr market in general. At the same time it is hindering it
> to a degree. 3D games are great, entertaining and in some cases educational.
> But very limited in practically of its market to anything other than those
> things I mentioned. True virtual reality on the other hand ...in what I
> consider pure virtual environments where business, communications, technical
> support and training...even engineering and medical visualization could be
> more prominent. This is the environment that will be the determining factor
> of the life and prosperity of VR. I say this about 3D gamming cuz ppl have a
> tendency to autolabel just about everything. Its a natural thing and
> everyone does it...from the criminal minded to the most strict of religous
> faith. This tendency makes everything else related to virtual environments
> look seemingly like the 3D gaming market. And since gaming is the
> mainstream, pure vr is looked at simply as another gaming environment in
> general.
>
> The fact of this is that, pure VR which would revolutionize the web and the
> interactivity with it and even its accessibility (interfacing with data,
> breaking language barriers, increasing the use of commerce and the
> efficiency of it all, constantly gets shunned as a practical viable
> resource. I guess it's just the way things are but pretty much all out
> sucks. Praise those who continually define the new uses of VR. Praise those
> that fight on a regular basis for the evolution revolution of VR to come.
> Praise those that complain and explain one of the most misunderstood and
> underused technologies on the planet. VR is here to stay but now we are at a
> point of figuring out what to do with it. Praise those that do figure it
> out. - Just another rant but an important one.

http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/ for my "VR" rant.

[View Quote]

Dec 13, 2000, 11:22am

http://www.urstudios.com/

[View Quote] > Some time ago, I remember that Ron Britvich ('Protagonist", original creator of AW) won a CY award,
> I believe, for making AW in the first place. He was unable to receive the award at the time because
> he was out somewhere working on a nice new rendering technlolgy (or something of the sort) called
> "GEL". Anyone know whatever happened concerning this? Anyone know the location of the nice GEL
> website that kinda has some news and stuff on it?

Dec 15, 2000, 12:12pm

Yo, cool it with all the exclamation points! It's! very! annoying!

[View Quote] > I just wanted to write another message here! I'm not good with words and
> sometimes I sound like something I'm not, but in this case, the first
> message I posted, I sounded harsh!
> I want to humbly apologize to ANYONE especially those of gor who were either
> hurt or offended by my message! My message was not to hurt or offend anyone
> but it has and I am sorry! *sigh*
> When I posted that message, I was very hurt, angry and very devastated and
> because I was listening to my feelings, I hurt some people in the process
> and you know who you are and for that I humbly apologize!
> I still don't agree with the gorean ways but I won't bash, abuse, or
> ridicule those that do! Just because I posted out of anger and hurt doesn't
> make it any better or excuse me! It was still just as hurtful regardless!
> *sigh*
> I took part in a conversation in Bingo on Wednesday that never should have
> never taken place! I would like to humbly apologize to ALL those of gor for
> that! I have NO excuse for my posts no matter HOW I was feeling!
> Unfortunately I made an enemy from one person of gor because I hurt and
> angered her! I am very sorry! I don't know if she will ever see this post
> but I hope she does! I did gram her and did try to apologize but the damage
> was done and I was asked not to gram her again! ....you know who you are if
> you do see this! Please accept my apologies!
> In the future, I for one will NOT take part in a conversation where those of
> gor are being bashed! As the saying goes in my world......There is NO excuse
> of abuse......That statment is so true! many of us have been abused enough
> in our lives and it's time to put a stop to it! I don't want to lose anymore
> friends or anger anyone else! Abuse whether it's verbal or whatever is very
> hurtful! Those that know me and know me well know that I am NOT a hurtful
> person! Atleast not intentionally! I am also the first to apologize when I
> know I was wrong, and in this case I was wrong! I may have had some valid
> points but my reason behind my posting was wrong and hurtful and does not
> excuse me!
> Winged Demon & to my other friend! I apologize the most to you 2 and you
> know why! Thank you for bringing certain things to my attention! I never
> meant to hurt either of you or your friends!
>
> To the person who felt or feels that I am a predjudice person, I just want
> to say that I'm not predjudice! I know my post certainly sounded like it,
> but honestly I'm not! The problem is, is that I was poised against those of
> gor! I have been told so many things that it has literally frightened me to
> no end! I was also given a URL to see (which is where I origionally heard
> about gor) that scared me so bad that I didn't come near the computer for 3
> days! The URL I am referring to is the one of the cit Faith! But again, just
> because I was poisoned on gor, still doesn't give ME the right to be hurtful
> and again I humbly apologize!
> Thank you!

Dec 17, 2000, 9:05pm

Don't make me smack you, kid. It's very immature of someone to exclamate each sentence. I left it quoted so you can actually READ it this time. Ask your mommy for help if you have to.

[View Quote] > Eep, don't make fun of people :) Some of us use to many smiles, so hush
> about that. Very imature of you to post that, really.
[View Quote]

Dec 15, 2000, 8:17am

I can't post there either as the message never stops sending--seems stuck in a feedback loop or something.

Dec 15, 2000, 11:46am

But for them to just DELETE all the previous messages is just STUPID. Is ALL of AWCI full of idiots or something? I just can't believe people can CONTINUALLY act so incompetently inept. They could have just created a NEW closed beta newsgroup or something...god damn...

[View Quote] > Below is the message I got from Calpantera.
>
> ------------
> Yes it does..
> Only New beta users will be able to post..
>
> Bill
>
[View Quote]

Dec 15, 2000, 1:52pm

Which is hardly anything to kid around about. I consider that just pathetic, which is why I won't EVER pay ANYTHING to AWCI until they get their act together.

[View Quote] > That's just it, AWCI doesn't see us as clients or 'customers.' More
> often than not, they really don't care about us. We're a form of
> entertainment to them. :P

Dec 15, 2000, 9:04pm

There were FAR more messages about bugs and their workarounds or just discussions about other things. It's not like Roland has been participating in the newsgroups lately anyway so for him (or some braindead AWCIer) to just all of a sudden wipe it without warning and then not give an explanation is just YET another example of how AWCI doesn't give a SHIT about the people who actually use and care about AW's future. Rick and JP do NOT deserve to be managing AW; they have CONTINUALLY proved inept at managing and interacting with its community and listening to what we want.

[View Quote] > well maybe if sertin cits had not just used the beta group as a froum to bad
> mouth others and roland him self maybet he 3.1beta would not be a closed one
> but a public one.
> and maybe they would not have deleted the messages already in the group but
> why keep them ???
> most were nothing more than personal atacks against one person or another
> many corps would have done this months ago.................................

[View Quote]

Dec 17, 2000, 2:13am

I swear it must be the influx of Juno twits, but this newsgroup has been getting a lot of shit lately. Wise up or I'll lay the smack down on you!

Dec 19, 2000, 6:24pm

How can a bot tell the difference between a unique citizenship and multiple accounts? How can it tell if a world is paid for?

[View Quote] > Thought this might interest some people... Originally posted at http://members.boardhost.com/Xavarella/msg/5283.html
>
> Posted by Syzygy on 12/18/2000, 4:55 pm
>
> Someone asked me about the "numbers" that AWcom did not want the investors to see ... this is part of a msg from 2000-11-17:
> -------------------------------
> Here is the output from the two new bots I have written. They count the number of paying citizens and worlds ...
> ***
> 11470 of 33329 users are paying for citizenships.
> 964 of 2313 worlds are paid for by users.
> ***
> Criteria:
> 1) Expire date is not "never"
> 2) Expire date is later than "now" (not expired yet)
> 3) Owner e-mail does not contain "activeworlds.com"
> 4) "trial" not found in Comments (worlds only)
> -------------------------------
> I don't know about "millions" of users, but as of a month ago there were only 11,000 active (paying) Citizens, and less than 1,000 worlds generating revenue.
> AWcom has a Serious Problem with retaining their customer base ... but each year there's a fresh crop of newbies to pony-up 20 bucks for something "kewl", so who cares if they renew after their first year? It's like that acne cream ... it doesn't work, it never has, but there's always a new generation to sucker with the promise of a cure. :-)
>
> What's Really Bogus in AW's case is that they leave all of the property built by Citizens who expired over two years ago (like "elvis") and retain their names so that people will *think* that there is a higher population density ... there are objects in AW that have been around since 1995 that still show the owner's name, even though they are Long Gone.
>
> The "Official" reason for keeping all these names and objects is, "Just in case they come back a year later, see their stuff is still there, and they can renew their citizenship with their old name and number." As if! :-)
>
> Let's see, 11,000 paid citizens time $20 equals $220,000 in annual income (assume that new citizens offset the ones who don't renew after their first year) ... how many salaries (and how much rent) can they pay with that? No, I don't think they'd want the public investors to see those numbers!
>
> "Dead men tell no tales." That is, like, so Old Paradigm ... you can no longer just cover up Bad News by getting rid of the person who found the skeleton in the closet. :-)
>
> -=DAH=-

Dec 22, 2000, 9:36pm

This is a newsgroup about AW, not your pathetic wanna-be organizations and other shit you idiots keep babbling about here. Evolve already.

Dec 23, 2000, 2:11am

Yo, twitfuck, learn how to use newsgroups CORRECTLY and stop fucking with message subjects. How old are you, 12? Evolve, kid, before Darwinism lays the smackdown on you. This newsgroup ISN'T for immature kids babbling on about their their wanna-be community organizations which are nothing more than weenie power trips for people with low self-esteem.

[View Quote] > This is a community newsgroup for lots of things.I Have to agree with Derek
>
[View Quote]

Dec 28, 2000, 8:11am

What's your video card? Got the latest video drivers? Try changing your mouse cursor to 16-color or lower.

Built-in video cards are a bad idea. Disable the one on the motherboard and put your old one back in, if you can, or just get a motherboard without built-in video.

[View Quote] > Hey everyone -
>
> I just got a new chip/motherboard for Christmas. Appearantly it uses
> a new graphics card. With my old graphics card things worked fine.
> Now that my computer is updated - whenever I go into Active Worlds
> my mouse pointer goes nuts. It starts blinking with the animates, and
> when I move it it's terribly slow. This only happens when I'm in AW.
> Does anyone know what could be wrong? And how to fix it? It makes
> it difficult to build without knowing where my pointer is. Thanks
> in advance.

Dec 28, 2000, 8:50am

First of all, don't reply by newsgroup AND email--pick ONE (1) reply medium. Second, learn to use your newsreader so you don't double post.

That video chip is crap. Take the motherboard back and get one without built-in video. What's your old video card? Use that instead, unless you get something better, which you should probably do anyway.

[View Quote] > My video card is a Intel(r) 82815 Graphics Controller 4.12.01.2607,
> is what it says according to system properties, it came with my
> Asus CUSL2 motherboard. I've been looking for drivers all night,
> I even installed Direct X 8.0, and nothing seems to be working.
> Also I notice the textures look as plain and clear to me as they
> did before we put the new motherboard/chip etc. in.
>
> I am baffled lol.
>
[View Quote]

Dec 29, 2000, 8:17am

Look in the BIOS to see if the onboard/built-in video can be disabled. If not, yank if off the motherboard and see how the system likes that. <smirk> No, really, you get what you pay (or don't pay) for. All those lame systems with rebates galore are just pure, unadulterated shit. Get as little built onto the motherboard as possible or you'll be regretting it later on when you upgrade sound, video, etc. Keep it modular; modularity is good; modularity is the way. Modular ground, good; infinite ground object, bad.

[View Quote] > I had the same problem with my eMachine P.O.S...used all the documentation
> for the motherboard and it still wants to install the on-board graphics
> card.I purchased a Voodoo3 2000 and that works fine,but everytime I re-boot
> it still tries to install the old Rage IIc,I just hit cancel everytime.
> rocknrollwoman,Maybe you can try a setup like that?
>
[View Quote]

Dec 29, 2000, 8:12am

Level editors don't create static environments (levels). Most current 3D game levels are anything BUT static. Objects can be broken, walls blown up, floors crumbling, etc, etc. You've obviously never played a 3D game. Hell, even Duke Nukem 3D from FOUR years ago had VERY dynamic levels. Multiplayer games handle level changes JUST fine. AW is simply lagging behind 3D games in general.

By making AW more gamelike, not only does it expand what could be possible with AW, it gives AW MUCH more marketable features. To me the business plan is obvious, but Rick and JP are obviously clueless about where to take AW--even Ron Britvich agrees per an interview by Rob Moyes (see http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/history.html for link).

I see a lot of potential in AW, which is why I don't plan on leaving it ANY time soon, but I will continue to speak out against its bad management, marketing focus ("e-commerce et al), and slow development until AWCI shapes or ships out and REAL management/development takes over...or until something better comes along (which isn't too far off).

[View Quote] > I think AW would need more of a commercially viable reason to rewrite their
> core 3D handling code. Mirrors would fall into a "nice to have" category in
> my view and "nice to have"s with a high development/implementation risk to
> the product (i.e. large cost/small return) don't make a lot of sense.
>
> Also, I think its time to stop comparing AW with all the 3D multiplayer
> games on the market. The only substantial dynamic data these games have to
> handle is the activities of the other "characters" in the environment.
> Handling a situation where the environment itself is changing (as required
> by AW to allow people to build, etc.) is a TOTALLY different matter. If AW
> only provided fixed worlds to run around in and interact with then that
> would be a fairer comparison. However, AW provides a more true-to-life
> environment which can be manipulated in real-time by many users
> simultaneously and it is this that sets it aside from the others. AW is not
> a level-editor for a game engine and in no way can it be compared to one
> because of (at least) one fundamental difference. Level-editors are
> effectively compiler/optimisers for fixed environments and that is not what
> AW is.
>
> Maybe the infrastructure on which AW is based is reaching the end of its
> shelf-life (personally, I think the changes from v2.2 to v3.0 fell well
> short of qualifying as a major product release), and v4 should be a
> strategic redirection, but right now, with the split between the
> server-based and client-based processing being so client heavy, some things
> are just not practical.
>
> If mirrors were to be added to AW, then they should be true mirrors and not
> a compromise of any form. If that means redeveloping large chunks of the
> rendering code or even switching rendering engines, then you've just got to
> accept that its not going to happen until AW can show in a business plan
> that the costs involved would be recouped, with interest, over a fixed
> period of time. Making such a change WITHOUT that business plan in place
> would constitute negligent management.
>
> AW are not going to prosper by blindly pandering to the requests of the
> likes of us, most of whom pay an annual pittance to AW to dabble in their
> environment. Even world owners (who pay) don't provide much of AW's
> revenue - their focus is, quite rightly, elsewhere. Business makes the world
> go around ... not hobbyists. Anyone who cannot accept the service AW provide
> should vote with their feet and be done with it.
>
[View Quote]

Jan 1, 2001, 12:50am

Hey, if AW itself requires redownloading the cell database each time it crashes, is it that surprising to find the world server programmed just as badly?

[View Quote] > if the database needs a rebuild every time something goes wrong, they use a
> crappy database, and it's time to move on to something else. Especially if
> it takes 10 hours every time something goes wrong. And if their server keeps
> doing weird things they should kick Sun. Hard.

Dec 30, 2000, 4:42am

[View Quote] > The main point I was making (perhaps poorly) was that the end result from a
> level editor is a fixed environment ... basically a set of predefined rules
> which equates ONLY to a fixed, completed world in AW (replace this wall with
> this one when someone shoots it, crumble the floor when someone walks on
> it). What it cannot handle, as AW can, is the scenario where one "player"
> can be on the third floor of a castle when another "player" comes along and
> replaces it with a rose garden. This is where I see the fundamental
> difference to AW which is focussed as a real-time, muti-user, interactive
> environment.

Again, this is simply incorrect. AW can VERY easily allow such dynamic environments which include your so-called "fixed" environments of level editors.

> If it is used to create a world which is then baselined and published, then
> yes, a comparison can be made, but I don't see how the central supports of
> the AW "community" (basically AlphaWorld and other public building worlds)
> could still be provided in that case.

Why can't you? AW already DOES support its "community" while at the same time allowing people to create worlds. <shrug>

> I have to agree that there is a likelyhood of new, better alternatives
> overtaking AW, but then that's how things work in the world. Its inevitable
> that someone else WILL come along and steal (at least) some of AW's market
> share. Its how AWCI respond to that intrusion that will decide their fate. I
> doubt they are a big enough company right now to pre-empt it.
>
> Final comment ... I know I've expressed this opinion before and I'll try to
> make it the last time. What AWCI do and how they do it is their business. A
> little more recognition of citizens as "customers" would be nice, but at the
> end of the day, if they don't want to concentrate on placating existing
> customers, then they don't have to. If they want to run the company into the
> ground (which I am not saying they are doing by any means), then it is the
> shareholders they answer to, not the customers (us).

Under Delaware Corporation Law, which AWCI is incorporated under, the shareholders have NO power over AWCI or its management. Please learn about things before commenting on them.

> When there's comparitive competition, then we'll see what happens.

You obviously don't pay attention to the gaming industry much. Perhaps you missed how popular Quake, Half-Life, and other games with level editors are. And with more and more multiuser online-only games coming in 2001, AW's so-called "market share" will be even more stressed.

[View Quote]

Jan 2, 2001, 12:23am

And what does this have to do with AW?

[View Quote] > Well, it seems now Outlook Express hates me too. Every time I start
> it, it crashes at the splash screen. Here's the details:
>
> MSIMN caused an invalid page fault in
> module MSOE.DLL at 0167:7a08f011.
> Registers:
> EAX=00000000 CS=0167 EIP=7a08f011 EFLGS=00010246
> EBX=00000000 SS=016f ESP=0056f6e4 EBP=0056fa30
> ECX=00000000 DS=016f ESI=00000104 FS=60d7
> EDX=0056f7f8 ES=016f EDI=0056f9f8 GS=0000
> Bytes at CS:EIP:
> 8b 08 52 50 ff 91 b8 00 00 00 3b c3 0f 8c b8 00
> Stack dump:
> 00000104 00000000 bff8516b 00000000 00000000 0056f81c 7a08ef70
> 00000000 0056f714 00000108 7ca73a30 bff8516b d47a0560 01bfc10f
> 00000001 00000000
>
> What the heck!?

Jan 6, 2001, 4:55am

Rest assured, interactive, real-time, multiuser level editing IS coming to 3D games. 10six, Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption, Neverwinter Nights, Dawn, etc. AW is increasingly losing whatever market share it might've had had Rick, JP, and Roland actually had a clue about 3D gaming and where it's been going for the past 5 years.

[View Quote] [View Quote]

Jan 5, 2001, 2:10pm

[View Quote] > Geesh ... here we go again ...

Indeed. Try actually READING this time.

[View Quote] You obviously don't have any clue about where the online gaming industry is heading. If you knew about games like 10six, you would know that editing a level (or "camp" as it's called in 10six) is QUITE possible while you're being attacked. While 10six doesn't have extensive editing capabilities like AW and TRUE level editors, it's a minor preview of what's coming up from games like Neverwinter Nights and already present in Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption where the level can have elements added and deleted in real-time while other people are playing it.

So get your head out of the sand and learn about these things BEFORE responding to this post and making yourself look even more clueless about the gaming industry.

> shareholders have NO power over AWCI or its management. Please learn about
> things before commenting on them.
>
> "Answer to" does NOT mean power over the running of the company. By
> definition, a shareholder has the power to plummet the company into
> financial ruin and therefore AWCI has a basic responsibility to them. The
> corporation law covering a company is irrelevant to the effect of the
> shareholders actions.

Wrong again. Shareholders have NO power over AWCI--even to the extent of selling all their stock, which AWCI will simply buy back like they have been.

> missed how popular Quake, Half-Life, and other games with level editors are.
> And with more and more multiuser online-only games coming in 2001, AW's
> so-called "market share" will be even more stressed.
>
> To my mind, there is no other product around at the moment that even comes
> close to what AW can offer. Multi-user, online games do not combine AW's
> ability for dynamic content (and lets get this straight ... dynamic meaning
> TOTALLY dynamic, not just a select few supported activities pre-coded into a
> "level" definition such as the destruction of a specific wall or a bridge)
> with the capability for mass usage and interaction. There is no comparison.

There is relative comparison and if you actually had a clue about the other games out there and upcoming ones I've mentioned you'd realize this. AW is pale in comparison to what most level editors can do, so AW's worlds aren't TOTALLY dynamic either.

And learn how to increment reply, newbie.

[View Quote]

1  ...  16  17  18  19  20  21  ...  42  |   Order by default