1  ...  21  22  23  24  25  26  ...  42  |   Order by default

Feb 18, 2001, 8:36am

Word. Besides, S3's defunct now anyway. Tip: stick to companies still in business. nVidia isn't going anywhere anytime soon, especially not with their chip in Microsoft's X-Box, the console killer...<smirk>

[View Quote] > Don't get a S3, get a geforce or dont get nothing, don't waste money on
> anything else. Nothing beats a geforce.

Feb 19, 2001, 12:22am

omniverse

[View Quote] > I have an Active Worlds -- and related universes -- project I'm working
> on, but I'm stumped on one part of the name. What would you call all of the
> universes, based on the Active Worlds software, as a whole. I mean, it
> sounds pretty lame and uncreative to just call them "the Universes." It
> needs something with more kick. Your suggestions would be appreciated.
> Sorry, I'm not ready to let anyone know just what the project is, at
> this point. It's still just in the planning stages. I'm sure most of you
> wouldn't do this, but if I gave away my idea too early, someone might grab
> it, put up a cheap rendition of my idea, and then lessen the appreciation of
> my work.

Feb 19, 2001, 3:10am

The dictionary; "omni-" means "all". http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=omni

[View Quote] > Hmm...Where'd you dig that outa eep?

Feb 19, 2001, 3:12am

There is a GROUP of something and then there is ALL of something; hence multiverse vs omniverse--I like the latter.

[View Quote] > Actually eep a group of related universes are called a "Multiverse" so for
> AW it would be the "Active Worlds Multiverse".
>
[View Quote]

Feb 20, 2001, 3:45am

Wait...MEGAVERSE! OH GOD SAILOR MOON SAVE US ALL!&%$*(#

eh

[View Quote] > The general concensus seems to be toward omniverse, so omniverse it
> shall be. Thanks for the input -- especially you, eep. Now just gimme a
> few weeks, and I'll let you know what this omniverse stuff'll be all about.

Feb 20, 2001, 3:44am

Um, what does this have to do with AW? Stop posting off-topic posts in here--this includes all the rest of you, too!

Consider this my initial "nice" response to this matter. Continued off-topic posts will be dealt with MUCH more harshness...

[View Quote] > I was wondering if any one here in the ng would be interested in doing
> reviews for game for my web site as well as some one to act as a forum
> moderator and some one to what amounts to searching the net for walkthroughs
> and faqs for various games.
> For now their would be no money involved and who know here may never be but
> if at some point i get some good sponsers and can afford to pay the peeps
> who help out now it could become a paying job.
> i have a mirc chanel set up right now im on enter the games irc server
> #nova-gaming-center
> my curent web site wich suxx and hasnt been updated in over 2 or 3 years is
> at
> http://www.novaflare.com

Feb 21, 2001, 2:32pm

Lara, look at Hole and Cubed. Do your objects look screwed up permanently because I added slightly more extreme surface settings? They didn't use to all be consistently surfaced (.5 .3 .1, .8 .1 0, etc, etc) but are now all mostly .5 1 0 (with darker objects having .5 .1 0) and everything looks BETTER and MORE REALISTIC because of it. If anything, I say the lit objects be applied to AW GZ or Beta world first as a test to SHOW that previous builds WON'T be screwed up by the change.

[View Quote] > Syntax, that probably would be the simplest way to handle it. However, I do wonder how it would affect literally thousands of already-built places in Alphaworld. Since Andras has kindly offered to do extra versions of the models which need texturemode lit, why not let him do the extras and leave the old objects alone? That "one tiny thing different" ... I guess I'd have to see several of my buildings both ways before I could really get a good idea of what it might do to existing builds on Alphaworld.
>
> With just a small "l" in front of the new names, all the newly lit panels, walks, floors, etc., would be listed together, easy to find in the alphabetical list of AW models (objects).
>
> At present, the L part of the list at http://objects.activeworlds.com/aw/models/ has only lamp01.rwx and the seven land objects.
>
> Looks like a logical location for a long list of lit lobjects. Yeah, I deliberately put an "l" in front of "objects"...I was on a roll with the "L"s in that sentence. ;-) But seriously, I do prefer the idea of bunching the newly lit objects together alphabetically.
>
> Which reminds me... yes, Rolu, your point about small "l" being confused with the letter "I" (and even more so with the numeral one) is well-taken. I think everyone would get used to recognizing it as a lowercase L fairly quickly.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 21, 2001, 2:37pm

Only if there is a high specular value (for AW 2.2 and below users only, however). Even the highest diffusion value (.5 1 0) only shows up slightly whiter in AW 2.2 because RW3's lighting is slightly darker (perhaps still a bug). Regardless, most of AW's objects have .5 .3 .1 surface and so won't be much brighter in AW 2.2 anyway, and certainly won't be in AW3.

[View Quote] > With texture mode lit you can also end up with total wash out basicly it
> ends up being so burned as to end up being white.
> In a case like that you will not get realism but totaly useless objects.
> imo new objects not modified old objects.

[View Quote]

Feb 22, 2001, 10:37pm

Know much about objects, Kah? Doesn't seem like it. AW's objects are going to need to have their surfaces changed if they want to be able to reflect light more realistically. Currently, most AW's objects are .5 .3 .1. They should at least be increased to .5 .5 .1 (though specularity has no effect in AW3+, but AW 2.2 users--yes, they still exist--can still see it) or a higher diffusion so light is reflected more. I use .5 1 0 but in AW 2.2 polygons facing the light source are white, but in AW3+ they're simply brighter. So I figure .5 .5 0 or even .5 .75 0 is a good tradeoff if AWCI wants to support AW 2.2 more (which they probably should since not everyone has a 3D card--hard to believe as that may be).

Oh and the correct subject reply prefix is "Re:" not "SV:".

[View Quote] > YOU FOOL! have you ever seen the difference between walk029.rwx and
> landa.rwx (I'm not talking about size)? they're REALLY different, but they
> still use the same texture, grasso.jpg... I KNOW that that screws up, I've
> tryed myself!
>
> eep <no at 1.com> skrev i meldingsnyheter:3A9311F7.972FBE63 at 1.com...
> object names will be a pain to remember and won't sort alphabetically
> correctly.
> creating an ENTIRE new set of objects, which is just silly to me, especially
> when builds will be ENHANCED, not "destroyed" because of having lit objects.
> with an "L". ;-)
> necessary changes on AW's objects (even on Yellow and Mars and etc) You know
> me - I'll write a tool to do that in no time :) This tool will add the "l"
> prefix to the object as Lara proposed (or how about adding it as a suffix?
> Like walk029hl.rwx? - maybe it will lead to confusion? It is up to you folks
> to pick the best naming method!) We should keep the names as short as
> possible (Darned BI!!)
> texturemode lit command to them (and they did not have it before). IMO it is
> a dangerous action!! Zillions of beautiful constructions will be screwed up
> badly!
> the objects statistically it will affect about 7,000,000 existing objects
> inworld!!!
> introduce another sets of objects with those commands added!
> something
> are
> task and
> work.
> want to, I

Feb 23, 2001, 4:41am

Until there's an RWX Modeler worth using that gives me the control editing them in text files does, perhaps. However, a GUI to add avatars (and their SEQs, sounds, etc) to a world would be MUCH more user-friendly and easier to use than having to edit avatars.dat.

[View Quote] > RWX files must either be binaries or you must be a masochist if you deal
> with them ;)
>
[View Quote] Anything can be offensive: your smiley is offensive, your "schrieb" vs "wrote" is offensive--as is your condescending "I'll translate it for you" bit--simply change the word and don't be such a prick about it. Your "Aw:" subject line prefix is offensive. Your lack of actually QUOTING something I wrote is offensive. Your bad punctuation is offensive. In short, Ananas, YOU are offensive, so if you don't want to be flamed for your offensiveness, simply don't BE offensive.

Feb 23, 2001, 9:09am

I don't like idiots, Ananas. You continually act idiotic towards me. I don't like YOU, Ananas. Stop being an idiot. Suck filter, twit.

[View Quote] > ok, ok - flame if you like - you don't like smiling people, you don't
> like foreigners, you don't like newbies, you don't like people who work
> with text files, you don't like people who have different ideas than you
> - is there anyone left you like (not counting yourself) ?
>
> eep schrieb:

Feb 23, 2001, 9:10am

And what was the point in sending such a telegram except to be a twit, SW? Duh. Attempt to evolve, primate.

[View Quote] > LMAO, he got all mad at me when I sent him a telegram that said nothing but
> "O_O" just to see what he'd do. Anyone else woulda thought nothing of it.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 23, 2001, 1:41pm

Totally; hardly anyone bitched when most of AW's textures were mindlessly resized to 256x256 instead of getting the original, larger versions and resizing them down to 256x256 like they should've been. AWCI obviously needs to go back to image editing 101 and learn about pixelation.

[View Quote] > We lived through the texture changes, we can live through the addition of
> lights.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 23, 2001, 2:57pm

Well, that's why Facter said a test world with probably AlphaWorld GZ in it will be done to show what it'll look like before it's applied to all of AlphaWorld. He and AWCI (according to him) don't think AlphaWorld will be affected much by the change since .3 diffusion isn't that much light reflection in AW3+ anyway.

[View Quote] > The problem is that, like colorizing old movies, you are changing things that were created with a different scheme in mind.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 24, 2001, 5:11am

Then they should have left the ones alone in which larger versions weren't available. They replaced some with entirely new ones (which I think most are better), however. But to mindlessly resize 128x128 to 256x256 does nothing except waste memory and download time.

[View Quote] > None of the original textures WERE larger...that is, not what was brought into AW. Almost every texture in AW was stolen from somewhere else. :)
>
[View Quote]

Feb 24, 2001, 5:12am

Uh huh...they you wonder why I flame you and other idiots who simply fuck with me to get a laugh. Back into the filter you go, twit.

[View Quote] > Awww, as for what it was for? I told you: to see what you would do. I get a
> good laugh at watching you get mad so easy. You win the award for least
> self control. Your the one that should be "evolving" I say.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 25, 2001, 1:11pm

You wouldn't happen to have any of the original versions at higher resolutions or uncompressed formats (BMP, TGA, TIF, etc), would you, Rus? I'm specifically interested in fall_g but will take any others. I've telegrammed AWCI people numerous times about this but they never respond.

[View Quote] > Um hell yah, and it generally looks crappier too. :)
>
[View Quote]

Feb 25, 2001, 5:23pm

Well, I know some come from Criterion RW 2.1 demos, and others from 3D Studio Max, but some I haven't seen before. AWCI still has SOME originals (metal1 and tree7 I recall offhand) though...ah well.

[View Quote] > No as I say, they were stolen from elsewhere, mostly by Danny who no longer works with AW and who probly wouldn't have saved the originals anyway.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 25, 2001, 11:17pm

I don't give a shit if they were stolen. I'm hardly disappointed by it either. ;P But AWCI has to have the original, uncompressed (non-JPG) BMPs/TGAs/whatever of most of the textures...

[View Quote] > Um, well I hate to disappoint ya but I don't think any of the texture maps were created in-house. A lot of the objects were stolen too, and Cy as well.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 26, 2001, 8:52pm

Do you not know how to read, Fox? I already stated that AWCI changed SOME of the then 128x128 textures to 256x256 and didn't simply RESIZE them like they did SOME others. I'm just curious if they missed some (fall_g, etc) since they're not thorough and consistent at other things (except being inept). Pay attention and read more carefully before you respond to my posts.

[View Quote] > I know that, I was just referring to your "AWCI has to have the original,
> uncompressed (non-JPG)
> if they were stolen in the jpg format... But as you know i'm not AWCI and
> don't know if it's the case or not (although dataman seems to say so). It
> was no offence, just a thought :o).
>
> "eep" <sum at 1.com> a écrit dans le message news: 3A9A7160.2EA0424C at 1.com...
> knows and/or can find out...

Mar 5, 2001, 8:05pm

That's not entirely true. With "texturemode lit" added, objects facing light sources (including the single world light source) will be brighter on one side than on the other facing away from the light source. However, surface .5 .3 0 (standard settings for AlphaWorld objects) won't make that much of a difference for light reflectivity. However, it WILL make a difference on objects that did not HAVE "texturemode lit" on them before since they will now look slightly darker on one side, but this won't be as drastic and damaging as some people (Lara et al) think.

Anyway, I would recommend using at least surface .5 .5 0 or .5 .75 0 or even .5 1 0 (like I do in Hole and Cubed, but AW 2.2 users see white on the sides facing the light because the lighting has changed in AW3+).

[View Quote] > I think all the objects should be replaced with the new liteable objects. It
> will not effect older builds in anyway whatsoever. Only if you put a create
> light brightness=100 next to it, lol Besides AW already has light
> restrictions in the world settings that should not effect any old builds
> whatsoever, someone would have to literally build 20 meters away and set out
> to destroy the look of someones build to accomplish that, lol So I say
> change them ALL :)
>
[View Quote]

Mar 7, 2001, 8:05pm

I say people shell out the measly $50 for an adequate enough 3D card (3Dfx Voodoo3, for example) and upgrade to AW3+ and be done with it. Most 3D games don't even support software rendering anymore so why should AW? Oh, right, I "forgot": AW is still YEARS behind most 3D games...

[View Quote] > I still say change them all, look at what happened to 3.0 users with the
> mask commands, if we can tolerate that then 2.2 and 2.3 browser people might
> have to tolerate a little glare on white objects I guess. Eventually
> everyone gets use to their environments once it's done it's done. I say deal
> with it, LOL
>
[View Quote]

Mar 8, 2001, 3:28am

NT is a whole different ballgame. NT can run certain DirectX versions (I know because I had 4x4 Evolution running on NT4). I hear Win2K (NT5) can run the latest DirectX 8 fine, too, so perhaps you just need to upgrade or something. Either way, AW doesn't need to be held back by obsolete software and some people's inability to get a decent video card.

[View Quote] > I use NT4 and will continue using it as long as possible, so I cannot
> use AW3.x either - not before there will be OpenGL support. The reason
> why I don't "upgrade" is that I don't want to loose the quality that NT4
> has after several bugfixes - I would have access to all windows
> versions. Running Linux as second OS would be an option as I worked on
> Unix in several projects - but not any of NT5, 2K, 98, CE, ME as long as
> I can avoid it.
>
> rolu schrieb:

Mar 8, 2001, 7:14am

<shrug> NT isn't a gaming platform--you're supposed to be doing "real" work on it. Get back to work and stop dorking around with AW, Ananas...

[View Quote] > You mix up two things - I have no problem to upgrade my hardware - I
> have a problem with upgrading to an operating system that is not used by
> any of my customers, and hopefully will not be used.
>
> eep schrieb:

Mar 8, 2001, 11:49am

Um, for all intents and purposes, AW IS a game (and a bad one at that). Regardless, NT isn't the OS to be using AW on...yet. I hear Roland is yet again implementing new features instead of fixing bugs and improving existing features. So now yet more bugs can be introduced by his shotty programming and AW will be even MORE "enjoyable" to use. OH YAY

[View Quote] > I agree, NT isn't a gaming platform - and AW isn't a game for me. If I
> wanted to play games I would use a different PC, a different OS and
> different software.
>
> eep schrieb:

Feb 21, 2001, 9:25pm

His old one, http://users.penn.com/~shamus/ no longer works. Anyone know his new one (if any)?

Feb 22, 2001, 2:55am

One more time in comprehensible English, please. Translation: slow down and concentrate on your typing.

[View Quote] > Have you tryed a search on some nfor you know hed have on the new site if
> one exists?
> Like you can search novaflare or finale fantasy 7 and get to of my sites.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 22, 2001, 10:38pm

Typo (singular)? Try typoS (plural). Would you like to try again or simply have your response ignored? <shrug>

[View Quote] > heh oops didnt see the typo
>
[View Quote]

Feb 22, 2001, 10:39pm

Buh-BYE now! Be sure to let the door hit your ass on your way out!

[View Quote] > Hope you all are happy.. I really do.. I am leaving.. I am gonna pretty
> much give away my cit.. so I just want to say hope you are happy.. cuz I
> know a lot of you waited for this day..
>
> and for people who care..
>
> goto..
>
> http://wt.s5.com/leaving.html

Feb 23, 2001, 2:58pm

http://biz.yahoo.com/t/a/awld.html

Perhaps why AWLD is tanking recently? <chuckle>

1  ...  21  22  23  24  25  26  ...  42  |   Order by default