1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  14  |   Order by default

Feb 6, 2003, 10:04pm

Maybe you should ignore mine, I just read yours before and got the wrong
message when i scanned through it yesterday.

My reply was thinking that you were wondering if universe owners can try
3.4.

[View Quote]

Feb 18, 2003, 6:13am

I wish AWRPG became as much AWCOM sponsered as Mutation is, after all, it is
"AW"rpg

Feb 24, 2003, 5:13am

[View Quote] >that's not what this is about.

Feb 26, 2003, 6:01am

A wishlist is for items to be added, not subtracted.

Apart from that, some people need to use 2.2 for go, not show.

[View Quote]

Feb 26, 2003, 8:22pm

The feature in one of the versions, where the ground would stop repeating
when the end of the world was reached, you obviously cannot build beyond
your world point anyway, and some world owners would like the option if we
could turn on and off the feature for the ground to just stop after the
world size limits.

Feb 26, 2003, 8:37pm

It would be good to have some people to build in your world, but not be able
to actually SELECT other objects which are not under their names, It would
be handy for NewAw, and other RPG games. The feature would be something such
as "Allow all object selection", etc.

For some RPG worlds, the owner would need to give you an object to start off
with (or even a bot), but it adds a touch of realism that you cant just go
investigating everyone's property to veiw their commands and such.

Feb 26, 2003, 11:07pm

When will the world server include the coding for a global chat?

It's like saying "Why do you need a world server with anything? A bot can do
it all."

Making a chat relay bot may open up more features, but a simple "Global
Chat" option is very valuable to some worlds.

In 3.4, they wasted all this space putting in features just so you can
program your own bot to do it, instead of adding features for the world
server.

Feb 26, 2003, 11:30pm

First we must hope they will actually read the Wishlist :)

[View Quote]

Feb 26, 2003, 11:36pm

I am on a roll with the new features today, anyhoo, here we go...

A feature to allow others to see objects move when clicked on, such as when
opening a door, I would like all to see that I opened the door and walked
in, not just them seeing me walk through a closed door.

Apr 11, 2003, 11:02pm

You cant spell, your attampt to kick him out is stupid and he is not a
hacker. If he can hack Aw software, then...hell, im not even going to
bother... He can't hack it.

[View Quote]

Aug 29, 2003, 7:44am

Why don't you need to see the new universe messages and such? And if it was,
AW would miss advertising to tourists from the messages.wvm ("Join now and
you get...").

[View Quote]

Sep 2, 2003, 5:40am

Goddamnit..Aw doesn't think about the kids..First some offensive words:

Rick loves you.
Bill loves you.
Everyone else at Aw love you.

(post edited by ENZO xx/xx/xx)

Jan 16, 2005, 12:17pm

GTA: Vice City + GTA: San Andreas too.

[View Quote]

Jan 15, 2005, 1:36am

I was wondering if it was possible to have a command to have some objects re
act to being touch/hit by another object, the best example would be a soccer
ball.

I'm not sure how it would work.. But if it was just for the one person to
see (much like the activate move command), it shouldnt be all that hard. If
it was to be done and show everyone, it would be quite harder, I would
imagine.

I think for few reasons, it should be a seperate special command itself, so
people cannot misuse and abuse it in worlds like AW.

Jan 15, 2005, 8:16pm

Opps.. I was meaning an object being hit by an avatar.
My bad.


[View Quote]

Nov 3, 2005, 11:22am

Meh.. no fullscreen yet.. You can take snapshots, finally. So fullscreen
should be about another five years off.

[View Quote]

Nov 3, 2005, 11:28am

He put it on 'standby' I'm guessing.

You can see how he tested some things there, before taking them over to AW,
such as the create media.

[View Quote]

Nov 3, 2005, 11:24am

Weight is a variable.
Weight of an object is totally dependant on the gravity.

You're looking for 'mass', no matter what the gravity is, the mass of an
object is always stable.

-Equin0x.

[View Quote]

Dec 8, 2005, 8:35pm

I just felt like pointing it out, before anyone else did.


[View Quote]

Nov 3, 2005, 11:26am

[View Quote] Blame Windows, just like everyone else.

Feb 22, 2006, 8:31am

For most of it, like the invisible bump to open "Automatic doors", you use
the tags on them so that, as long as the doors are open, the bump object is
below ground level (or elsewhere that cannot be bumped in that time
period).. Gives the effect that they are indeed automatic doors and not some
doors that somehow magically skip close and open again when you move about.

[View Quote]

Feb 28, 2006, 3:46am

I was just thinking, all these private worlds which have one or two users
in.. I thought it would be good to, say, right click a world and select
"Request entry" or the like.

Doing so would print a console message (or other means) in the closed world
saying something like "Citizen X (Citnum Y) wishes to enter the world".

I mainly want this, just incase there is a closed world, some world owners
may let a person or two in.
And since I go world hopping and don't know who owns which world, I can just
request entry.

I don't know.. sounds a bit contradicting, but other chats use it.

Mar 1, 2006, 8:32pm

How does a bot get caretaker names?
Wouldn't it require access to every world?

[View Quote]

Mar 2, 2006, 4:27am

For some, this may become a bit annoying, so I would suggest an option to
enable and disable it. But to the point;

I have confirmation for join requests enabled, and sometimes I quickly run
somewhere and come back, or have ActiveWorlds minimized and do not relize
its flashing.. Finally when I either come back or do relize that the
titlebar is flashing, the join request or file request is long gone.

I'd like to be able to look in the chat history to see something like
"Immigration Officer: X (Citizen #Y) attempted to join you", possibly with
a time stamp.

Mar 15, 2006, 9:48am

It would be good to get in all the older citizens, as well as it would give
ActiveWorlds a quick boost in world numbers, a high percentile of which
would most likely renew - if at the release of 4.1, the citizens who have
previous owned a 30-day trial world, could sign-up for a 4.1 trial world.

I suggest this only because 4.1 appears to be such a revolution in the
software, with so many new features which are usable by world owners only
(not testable in worlds like AW).

Obviously, there would be a problem if everyone automatically signed up for
the world, AWI would be stuck with hosting a few houndred worlds -- which
would mean if you want a trial server, you'd have to host it yourself.

Another option would for it to be avaliable only for those who are long-term
citizens (I have been with AW for over eight years now, having my current
citizenship since 2002).

I honestly think that this would work.
If you think about it a few ways, 4.1 will have the following effect;

Many users, including existing users who have since expired or left AW for
other reasons, will all populate in AW to see the new upgrade - just look
how fast Stagecoach filled up in its first days announced to AW users. It
got users that aren't even in AW anymore.

Now, I thought if we could somehow catch some of the flowing users, there
will be more registrations in AW, and hopefully more worlds. This isn't just
good news for AWI, but for us everyday users, think if AW was half as
populated as it use to be.

Some former-AW users will register again to trial a world, sure.. But what
about those who want their original citizenship? They should be allowed to
get a run of a 30-day trial, since they are paying the same price (or a lot
more, if they last registered for $20/yr) - Some will argue that it is just
that - a trial of a world, one time - but they got a trial of a much less
effective version. It's only fair they try the much more improved software.

Then again, we cannot keep it there - all users (or those who registered
during + before the year of XX) should get a trial world, just so they can
know what they are paying for. If they had a trial world before, and did not
buy a world - there must've been something they the worlds lacked. If 4.1
existed when they had their trial, a lot more users would have renewed it.

Of course, there could be a "signup period", so that there are numerous
signups by users coming every now and then.. its up to the company to direct
that.

There is too much for me to argue with this, but if it is the least
advisible to AWI (if this was ever to get to them), then I am happy, and
would be more than happy to continue debating.

I doubt most will read this post, but I had to explain in a high detail.

My conclusion, AWI can try and think about this idea, or they can close
their eyes, release 4.1 and hope for it to sell itself.

-Equin0x.

Mar 15, 2006, 11:40pm

I mean by the release of AW4.1.

And as for Stagecoach, it has no building or anything to offer users.. Even
so, it usually has at least one or two users on.

[View Quote]

Mar 18, 2006, 8:19am

Thats the common "the not-so-expierenced ruin everything for the good and
well-experienced users" though.

Just because there are some bad builders out there, doesn't mean people who
cannot already afford a world should need to re-mortage their house just for
a 3d hobbie.

[View Quote]

Mar 20, 2006, 2:38am

I can't afford my PC.. It takes me three years to pay it off, which, by
then, is out of date!

If worlds really didn't cost that much, I would have one. But after I take
into currency conversion to Australian Dollars, it goes expensive for me.

I still can't believe PS2/XBOX games only cost around the $50 mark in the
US!

Back to the matter, I mean it would be good for users who have been with AW
for quite a few years, or even have owned a world previously.. That way,
they can see whats new, and it won't be too much inconvience for anyone
else.

Hell, if it makes things easier - make these 4.1 trial worlds hidden from
the world list - since its only one month, they can try out what they want,
and show their friends, without getting the world-hoppers attention.

[View Quote]

Mar 19, 2006, 8:00am

Although I don't agree with the exaggeration by joeman, he does have a
point.. Citizens should not need to go and download a bot to do something
that should be in the browser.

Regardless, I have nothing against Strike's bot.. But if the feature is that
well formed, it may as well be in the browser.

[View Quote]

Mar 24, 2006, 7:34am

What about a timer, that if aworld.exe recieves no user input for xx
minutes, the browser activates *AFK* mode, printing a message in the chatbox
or elsewhere that stands out: "AFK Mode" - maybe even in the upper right of
the viewport.

1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  14  |   Order by default