1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  42  |   Order by default

Dec 26, 2000, 10:44pm

It would? mIRC can parse (and catch and save) URLs and email addresses with no problem. Perhaps Roland just simply needs to become more adept at programming.

[View Quote] > Well, AW3.1 doesn't check the names for URLs, anyway... Not all URLs have those strings in them (or if they do it would take a while to parse them out of the string) anyway.
>
[View Quote]

Dec 27, 2000, 5:43am

Get it and see for yourself: http://mirc.co.uk

[View Quote] > Does mIRC require the protocol prefix to recognize URIs? That would be
> easy to implement I think.
>
> Or does it resolve the IP from names that could be an URL and mark only
> the valid ones? If it does that it would become a problem as the browser
> had to constantly resolve adresses, visiting crowded areas like AWGate
> would not be a good idea then.
>
> Implementing it "guess-based" is not a good idea, especially at the
> moment as long as not all new top level domains are decided.
>
> eep schrieb:

Jan 6, 2001, 5:05am

No, what shows what can be done with the software is in creating efficient objects that are not too complex, download and render quickly, and don't suck frame rate. Just as much, if not much MUCH more, thought is put into creating and BUILDING with such objects. I always ask Lara why she continues to build in AlphaWorld so much and she gives the same (I think lame) excuse as you do. But I also know she doesn't have the will to create objects so she would rather create "new" objects by intersecting and z-buffering many simpler objects together, dragging down frame rate in the process. I'm not dissing her "art" but there does come a point where simply creating a new object achieves a MUCH better, cleaner effect, which is why I prefer making my own objects.

But I understand not everyone has access to a world--hell, I'm VERY lucky to have had access for 3 years. Still, I got bored of AlphaWorld after about 6 months, so I learned RWX and have only gotten bored when AW's stagnated (like from AW 2.2 to AW3). I like new things. New versions usually mean new things to play with. AlphaWorld has had some new object additions, but they're still too bland and boring for me to get excited about--especially when I can simply create something better from scratch.

[View Quote] > Altho' I recognize the 'poetic license' employed by your comment I feel it necessary to point out that the 'lack of options (objects)' in Alpha (Prime) is one of the reasons I enjoy building there...
>
> Anyone can create a masterpiece if they have access to (the ability to use) unlimited objects and textures... The challenge for those who build in Alpha (Prime - and the other public worlds) is to build something special using what we have.
>
> I don't believe you could name something that couldn't be built using the default objects in Alpha.
>
> Sure, some of the Private World Owners have created/built things that Alpha builders couldn't begin to match as far as complexity or realism BUT being able to build something outstanding from 'walls, floors, trees and about 15 furniture pieces' is the fun (for me anyway) of continuing to build in Alpha.
>
> Over the last month Alpha (Prime) has been down and this has afforded me time to actually check out some of the Private Worlds. I'm impressed by most. BUT not as impressed as what I'v seen in Alpha (Prime). I like visiting a location that required thot' to put together. I'm always happy when I can Log Onto Alpha (Prime) and compare myself with others who enjoy building with the default list of objects and textures.
>
> I'm sure there'l be those who disagree but building in Alpha (Prime) shows what one can truly do with the software. This is where 'I' live. These are the builders I compete with (steal ideas from :-) ) when I'm building at my locations...
>
> http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/ty1/tyrell3.htm
>
> (for those who care...)
>
[View Quote]

Jan 11, 2001, 4:17am

You think that's stopped Roland from screwing up how things have worked for YEARS? Nope. For example, with AW3, removing an object's textures simply by applying a non-existant texture ("create animate me . 1 1 1") no longer works. I used that a LOT and had to go back and attempt to figure out the color of the polygons in order to match all the objects I removed the textures from. Personally I think Roland did it just to smite me, since I probably used that trick the most...

[View Quote] > Yea you can't just change an object's looks after it's been used millions
> and millions of times in the world. I do some fancy street stuff, putting
> the street code color on objects (create color 292929), so if it because
> textured, I'd have to go change all those objects that are in sync with the
> roads.
>
> but...I think it's worth it, I want them textured, but I don't think
> everyone else would.

Jan 21, 2001, 2:52am

For those who may not know, there's an AW improvements web page at http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html which has many common AW wishes and many you've probably never thought of. I am actually amazed AWCI seems to be implementing some of them. Let's hope the momentum continues after AW 3.1...

Jan 21, 2001, 6:56am

Yet another poor direction decision, if true. Cross-platform support should come AFTER getting AW up to speed as a multi-user level editor (which it basically is). Why doesn't Roland put in what MANY people want: to not be automatically visible when logging onto AW. Why doesn't he make movement controls customizable? Why doesn't he make the font/screen colors customizable? Why doesn't he make the toolbar customizable? Why doesn't he make AW remember the custom world background colors after AW closes? Why doesn't he make AW not reset the downloaded sounds/picture sizes to 100K if unchecked and the dialog closed? Why doesn't he fix all the annoying BUGS in AW before yet again taking AW off into a direction MOST people couldn't give a shit about? This is why he doesn't deserve to be AW's lead programmer: he CONTINUALLY proves he cannot make good design/direction decisions.

There have been bugs in AW ever since I found it that are STILL not fixed. There are still MANY bugs just from AW3 that still need fixing. Roland needs to learn how to do floating point calculations correctly so all those damn gaps/seams stop appearing and avatars don't jerk so much when turning and moving in STRAIGHT lines far away from GZ, for example. I can go on and on about how much AW needs to be FIXED before it adds cross-platform support--even to NT.

Ah, yes, but I'm sure it's some "big money" uniserver customer who wants NT support, so AWCI would rather get on their hands and knees to cater to THEIR wishes than those of the people who actually MATTER to AW's community and future. This is why Rick and JP don't deserve to be running AW. They simply do not know who are the more important customers and who they should be developing AW for.

[View Quote] > Word on the street.rwx (hehe, I'm witty!) is that 3.2 will be geared mainly
> towards getting AW onto NT 4.0...
>
> I hope they add the new commands into RWX and improve rotate.
>
[View Quote]

Jan 30, 2001, 1:49pm

[View Quote] > My word you are angry aren't you...

Der, gee, George, ya think? Golly...

> I have read you post and I agree wholeheartedly with all your assertions but
> one. And it is this one that will keep you angry and nobody interested in
> what you have to say. There is never ever a need to personally attack
> anyone, you can still be right without all the personal stuff and you would
> be happier as well.
>
> Instead your points are lost in the constant barrage of attack on
> individuals...

How can I focus ONLY on the problems without laying blame to the person/people causing them in the first place? If AWCI wasn't so incompetent I wouldn't HAVE to complain so much.

[View Quote]

Jan 28, 2001, 1:36pm

Right, it's actually the ground object but it doesn't look realistic since it infinitely repeats every 60m². Until the ground object can be "attached" to avatars so it moves SMOOTHLY with them, doing animated backgrounds and even sun/moon objects won't look real.

It's stuff like this that Roland et al need to be working on instead of making AW work on NT.

[View Quote] > what your seeing is not an animated background, it's a large dome object
> surrounding the world with a animated texture..
>
[View Quote]

Jan 29, 2001, 7:36am

[View Quote] [View Quote] You KNOW what I mean, twitfuck. 60m² = 60m horizontal x 60m depth.

>
> And you should work on your manner instead of posting unfounded rumors.

Well, I heard it from Myrth or Agent 1, so I doubt it's a rumor. But I haven't bothered to go to TechTalks lately or keep up with AW development since I'm not on the beta. <shrug> I'll have more mannerS (yes, there is more than one) when Roland gets his fucking act together and learns how to code adequately enough and develop AW more logically.

Jan 29, 2001, 3:04pm

Still, it's HIGH time Roland STOP adding new features and fix/improve existing features. It's just fucking ridiculous.

[View Quote] > The "making AW work on NT" is really just adding support for OpenGL. Not sure what else will be in 3.2, though.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 1, 2001, 12:45pm

While there can be patches of darkness if MANY lights are used in an overall dark world (like Metatropolis), calculating shadows for objects is VERY complex. However, shadows are becoming more and more common in 3D games, and the current leader (to my knowledge) in shadow rendering is Severance: Blade of Darkness by Rebel Act Studios. Check out my 3D game comparison honorable mentions (http://tnlc.com/eep/compare/mentions.html) to find out just how complex its shadows are. Then be sure to pick up the Severance demo to see them in action--it's quite stunning, and I've been comparing 3D games for over a year now--the advancements made in just the last couple of years have been awesome. It also shows me just how far behind AW is lagging behind the rest of the 3D computer/video entertainment software industry.

[View Quote] > I am not a beta tester, so I don't know if this feature is a by-product of
> the "light command" in 3.1. But, it would seem only natural for any light
> source to create shadows.

Feb 2, 2001, 4:41am

When Hole and Cubed are open to the public again, check them out if you want to see perhaps the BEST use of shadows in all of AW.

[View Quote] > i'm not too worried about shadows-the direction the light shines on objects
> isn't even coming from the same side that the sun is on the bg at.. if there
> is a sun there at all.. so with that in consideration, i'm not too worried
> about shadows.. that and i think that if someone built a giant walkway, it
> would cost a massive shadow blocking out sections of the world-shadows would
> be neat, but i think that most of us would complain if we had them-not even
> realizing how much we are glad we don't..
>
[View Quote]

Feb 2, 2001, 4:43am

Then the bounding box should rotate with the object and encroachment calculated appropriate. It's time AW's world cell database was rewritten anyway so we can get TRUE 2-dimensional object rotation and not have to use action commands like in AW 3.1.

[View Quote] > It still could be a problem, just like move. If you have a pp01.rwx right
> up next to someone elses build, and have create rotate 0 10 0 on it, it will
> gone into their land/building... This could make some people very mad.. some
> not..
>
[View Quote]

Feb 14, 2001, 4:29am

Uh, my name isn't "lanezeri". Pay attention to who you're responding to...

[View Quote] > Well SORRY, Eep, I didn't see the part where it said that he wanted on
> different buttons, and the ..(pause) is supposed to be 3 dots, atleast
> that's what my English teacher says (with the masters). Take your own
> advice, idiot.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 21, 2001, 2:58pm

If people learned how to change subject lines (and leave the old one in for reference!) then the off-topic posts could be more easily averted. However, why the need to post off-topic in the first place? Look who's mostly doing it: kids who don't think before posting: Agent Fox Mulder, j b e l l, xero, etc, etc. If they would simply THINK before they post and realize their off-topic post does NOT contribute to AW's development in any positive way (except to positively annoy most newsgroup readers who would rather read about DIRECTLY RELATED AW issues and not ramblings about the latest twit kid's newsgroup and other nonsensical crap).

My point is, a misc group is unnecessary if a little self-policing goes on.

[View Quote] > Having a misc group will solve greatly the off topic posts problem - simply continuing a thread there (learn your browser's "Follow-up" option!). I was listening to that idea and added an "OffTopic" tree to my ng. Unfortunately Follow-up doesnt work between different news servers.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 21, 2001, 5:25pm

Uh, so people can go to YOUR newsgroups if they want to post off-topic, A=
ndras; keep AW's newsgroups uncluttered.

[View Quote] > I strongly disagree. Ppl need forum where they can discuss what is in t=
heir mind. Most of the posters here rarely uses other newsgroups (no pun =
intended!) I bet most of them still thinks NG is another way of chat (but=
a slower one) which is of course bad but .... What would it cost to set-=
up an ng were everyone can talk about anything? For AWCI - as a publicly =
traded company (don't start to debate this issue please) has to keep the =
traffic in a controlled manner (one of the reason those private groups ar=
e not open for everyone). We can't think they will provide us a group whe=
re everyone can state her/his opinion regardless of the ng owner. Would y=
ou like to have your own ng where you read nothing else but bashing you? =
I doubt. I agree with you on the "Keep the posts on topic" agenda but the=
re is no other opportunity to post something absolutely off topic. people=
need it! (maybe you are an exception :) That is the reason I'm an advoca=
te to have such a group either within AWCI (which I doubt will happen) or=
on an independent NG where the rest of the topics are STILL aw related.
>
> Don't forget - all of us were a beginner once. Some of us learned faste=
r some didn't :)
>
[View Quote]

Feb 21, 2001, 5:26pm

Yo, idiot, don't quote a message just to change the subject line (and not keep the old one in, no less). Guess I have to filter you from THIS newsgroup too, eh? Stupid kid...

Feb 21, 2001, 7:47pm

Buh-bye, twit.

[View Quote] > then i won't have to put up with your idiotic replies.. please do..
>
[View Quote]

Feb 22, 2001, 3:32am

[View Quote] > I wouldn't mind an off-topic NG, it would probably lighten up the load on
> the "community" NG, Eep weren't you a n-e-w-b-i-e once too?

Yes, but I've never been as new as you and most others who post in AW's newsgroups... I've been against "fluff" since the beginning (summer 1997).

> I made a mistake when I fist arrived, but I try my mest to make sense here, just so I
> won't get flamed (kinda ironic isn't it?), Just as anansas(andras?) said,
> Some learn fast, others don't, and that's why you see so many 16 year olds
> in 8th grade, kinda pitiful, maybe it wouldn't hurt for you to stop
> insulting everyone and give them a chance (not including AFM). You know,
> Eep, not everyone is just like you, it would help if you realized that. Even
> if you do, please show it. :)

I DO show it by trying to ENCOURAGE people to be more like me. :D

[View Quote]

Feb 22, 2001, 10:20pm

I was never as incompetent and inept as you and others have been in these newsgroups, Crazy. Attempt to evolve.

[View Quote] > Yes but you WERE as NEW as everyone else at one time, and no one will ever
> be just like you, silly :P
>
[View Quote]

Feb 23, 2001, 4:47am

Um, you're the twit that insulted me first, Crazy. Or perhaps you don't think calling someone a newbie is an insult. Must I spell it out for your feeble mind to ATTEMPT to grasp? Perhaps I'll just filter you instead. Buh-bye.

[View Quote] > And just why are you telling me to evolve? You get cornered and you start
> insulting, I find that primitive, don't you?
>
[View Quote]

Feb 21, 2001, 7:43pm

Well, since I can't post in beta, guess this'll have to do:

disabling AW's sound should free up the sound device for other non-DirectSound apps

Feb 22, 2001, 3:14am

Uh, Windows 98's Media Player is a DirectSound app and it can play WAVs just fine with AW running and its sounds enabled. Non-DirectSound apps like Windows' Sound Recorder, Cool Edit, and GoldWave can't play sounds with AW running, regardless if WAVs are disabled in it. In AW3 if I wanted to play a sound in another app (DirectSound or not), I could simply disable AW's WAVs from the settings and the other apps would work fine. With AW 3.1 that is no longer the case.

[View Quote] > Even other DirectSound apps don't want to start playing sound while AW is
> running. Seems to happen regardless of sound settings. Go figure.
> DirectSound programs tested: Winamp w/ DirectSound output plugin, Tribes in
> DirectSound mode.
>
[View Quote]

Feb 22, 2001, 10:22pm

No effect, predictably so. Do you even know what a DirectSound app is, Crazy? I doubt it...

[View Quote] > Try restarting AW, because I haven't ever had that problem, because mine is
> always turned off :P
>
[View Quote]

Feb 22, 2001, 3:15am

Lights are placed on an object's CENTER but this isn't always desirable (especially for spotlights, streetlights, etc). An option to use the object's origin or even a specifably distance off-center would be better, in addition to the default object center position.

Feb 22, 2001, 4:38am

would help in creating accurate shadow positions for day-night cycles and just objects in general

Feb 22, 2001, 4:54am

Feb 22, 2001, 4:58am

Feb 22, 2001, 5:00am

AW should update the scene up to the visibility when the camera is moving and not just when stopped

Feb 22, 2001, 5:07am

walk, run, flying, passing through objects, colliding with something (generic collision detection, not just object bump)

1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  42  |   Order by default