1  |   Order by index

Jul 15, 2002, 3:34am

Have you guys ckecked out NeverWinter Nights? Not only can you "play the
game," you can competely rewrite the "official" scenario, and write your
own scenario. IE, build your own 3D world, add your own characters,
storyline, your own modeled items, avatars, just about *everything* you can
do in AW, and a whole lot more, in a scripting API based on C. Windows and
Linux servers are free for the download.

*Children* are building worlds and running their own servers for the $69.00
US cost of buying the game. And *thousands* are logging on....

I'm not trying to "down" AW, but.... We need to get on the ball here. Eep
is correct. Back in the mid-90s, 3d for its own sake was new and cool and
worth participating in. Now, it's old hat and taken for granted, and if AW
doesn't keep up with what's possible here in 2002, (*WHAT* 3D environment
doesn't offer chat???) our investments in AW will all be shot to hell,
because what's been "saved" by the owners is nothing but the old, go-nowhere
scenario. In other words, I don't want to have to rename my world,
"Crisis3D_cum_hep_me". Change my cit name to "IN-capacitated."

What can we, as paying users, do to get the folks in charge to CATCH A
CLUE??? There's so much better value out there and it's so frustrating
because I want to take us all on *THAT* merry-go-round.... I just hate
feeling like I've put a ton of effort into something that's inevitably going
to be left in the dust... Aren't you all building worlds to have people
visit your creation, to acknowledge that you've done an awesome job in
giving them an experience that's special and meaningful and surprising that
they can't get anywhere else??

Or am I just crazy here???

Jul 15, 2002, 10:03am

I agree that a lot more can be done on the 3D/building/interactive side
of things, but we don't have to go full-blown gaming to succeed. Look at
it this way: Even with the "low-key" 3D of AW's engine and the rather
extravagant prices for citizenships and worlds, people keep coming back.
People keep logging in on a daily basis, and AW continues to get new
citizens every day. (Granted, they may not be at the same levels as last
year, but hear me out.) So why do they keep coming back? It's not as if
they don't have anywhere else to go.

I'll tell you why: It's the community. Roland put it best, "Our user
base and community have always been the envy of all the other online 3D
ventures." People keep coming back because of what's happening here, not
because of how graphically pretty the worlds look or because it has all
sorts of sexy features. Even with a depleted user base, there's always
something happening here. All it would take would be for AWI to see that
and use it as advertising and the population here would skyrocket.

But while only Rick and JP can do something about features and such,
*we* can do something about the community. Start events, get some new
org going or get involved with an existing one, build, chat, and
participate. If we can keep this community strong, despite Rick and JP's
bungling, we could turn AW into the biggest word-of-mouth success story
in history!

As I said in my column last month, Rick and JP have dug their own hole,
and we need to stop looking to them to fix all our problems. We need to
take the initiative to get this thing back off the ground. You can sit
and complain, or you can do something about it. Which would you rather do?

[View Quote] > Have you guys ckecked out NeverWinter Nights? Not only can you "play the
> game," you can competely rewrite the "official" scenario, and write your
> own scenario. IE, build your own 3D world, add your own characters,
> storyline, your own modeled items, avatars, just about *everything* you can
> do in AW, and a whole lot more, in a scripting API based on C. Windows and
> Linux servers are free for the download.
>
> *Children* are building worlds and running their own servers for the $69.00
> US cost of buying the game. And *thousands* are logging on....
>
> I'm not trying to "down" AW, but.... We need to get on the ball here. Eep
> is correct. Back in the mid-90s, 3d for its own sake was new and cool and
> worth participating in. Now, it's old hat and taken for granted, and if AW
> doesn't keep up with what's possible here in 2002, (*WHAT* 3D environment
> doesn't offer chat???) our investments in AW will all be shot to hell,
> because what's been "saved" by the owners is nothing but the old, go-nowhere
> scenario. In other words, I don't want to have to rename my world,
> "Crisis3D_cum_hep_me". Change my cit name to "IN-capacitated."
>
> What can we, as paying users, do to get the folks in charge to CATCH A
> CLUE??? There's so much better value out there and it's so frustrating
> because I want to take us all on *THAT* merry-go-round.... I just hate
> feeling like I've put a ton of effort into something that's inevitably going
> to be left in the dust... Aren't you all building worlds to have people
> visit your creation, to acknowledge that you've done an awesome job in
> giving them an experience that's special and meaningful and surprising that
> they can't get anywhere else??
>
> Or am I just crazy here???
>
>
>


--
Goober King
He was an inspirational speaker in another life :P
robrod at prism.net

Jul 15, 2002, 10:10am

Well, paying AWI more would be nice, I guess. You're comparing David to
Goliath, really.

Don't get me wrong, I'd like to have all those features too, but if it's
going to happen, it's going to progress at a slow rate, and become outdated
again, I think. NWN probably has a million dollar budget, we're working with
a few hundred thousand? Purchasing licensing and new Renderware and stuff
don't come cheap, so I'm told. Also, we only have a handful of developers
and programmers at AWI, they have a whole company of them. Those two are
really working on two different bases too, NWN is a game that was released
after 5 or 10 year development. AW has been open since the begining, and
constantly updates itself, where as NWN can only go as far as add-ons that
cost more money. I say, give it time and money, and AW will be up there,
eventually.

--
From the Newbie's Guide to the AW NG:

"Nornny11 - The original wishy-washy man, this one can actually insult you
and compliment you in the same breath, and in the end say absolutely
nothing! What a talent!"

[View Quote] >
> What can we, as paying users, do to get the folks in charge to CATCH A
> CLUE??? There's so much better value out there and it's so frustrating
> because I want to take us all on *THAT* merry-go-round.... I just hate
> feeling like I've put a ton of effort into something that's inevitably
going
> to be left in the dust... Aren't you all building worlds to have people
> visit your creation, to acknowledge that you've done an awesome job in
> giving them an experience that's special and meaningful and surprising
that
> they can't get anywhere else??
>
> Or am I just crazy here???
>
>

Jul 15, 2002, 2:14pm

Damn you, Goober, for screwing up the follow-up...

[View Quote] > Blah blah blah, community shummunity. I'm so sick of hearing about AW's pathetic "community". Hell, modifiable games have FAR more community than AW ever had--at last modders actually get together and create new game content (total conversions, levels, objects, skins, etc). All AWers do is piddly non-interactive, boring, rehashed worlds with nothing cool in them to even BEGIN to compete with 3D games.
>
> Why? Because AW lacks even the most basic of gaming (and decent environmental interaction) features like jumping, shooting/hitting, an inventory, etc. Even just jumping (assuming it was implemented decently enough, of course, and not half-assedly as most everything else is) would open up AW to a LOT more possibilities than what it has now. The only thing AW has going for it that every other game (except with the possible exception of Neverwinter Nights, but I still haven't tried it yet) is that it's basically a multi-user level editor--and a crappy one at that.
>
> But, see, no game developer/publisher has quite been able to make this realization which is why AW is BARELY hanging on (The Sims Online and Neverwinter Nights are edging in on AW's market share) and if Rick and JP expect AW to survive they MUST redirect AW's development towards gaming. Nothing else has worked so far--and nothing else will, except gaming. Note that this does NOT mean AW will ONLY be game-oriented but simply that it will be CAPABLE of being as such, so chatters can still just chat, and builders ("level editors") can just build ("level edit")--and, of course, people can just explore and do neither. ;) The point is: potenial. AW needs more marketability if it is to survive.
>
[View Quote]

Jul 15, 2002, 3:02pm

My point is that AW shouldn't be trying to compete with 3D Games, in
fact, I highly doubt they even *could* compete with all the 3D games out
there, even if they had all the spiffy gaming features you were looking
for. The market is way too saturated as it is.

While I agree that gaming features could greatly enhance the community
aspect (they aren't mutually exclusive, y'know), I also think the
community aspect of AW is just as marketable as gaming, if not more so.
Sometimes, people just want a place to hang and flex their creative
muscles, which is harder to do within the confines of a gaming-oriented
environment. I think AWI would be able to draw in a *much* wider range
of users if they billed AW as being a community-based software package
that also has gaming abilities, rather than a gaming-based platform that
you can also chat in. It's simply just a matter of emphasis.

[View Quote] >


--
Goober King
Guess we'll be keeping it in Community after all... :P
robrod at prism.net

Jul 15, 2002, 3:32pm

But AW needs to first GET gaming abilities before it can market them, community-based or otherwise. But "multi-user level editor" implies "community" anyway, but it's best to stay neutral and not lean towards extrovert OR introvert and just offer BOTH as possibilities without alienating either type of person. Level editing is traditionally a solitary experience so by labelling AW as a MULTI-USER level editor, that at least shows the capabilities of AW as developing into a community without forcing that community onto its users (most noticeably--and finally!--apparent in the new contact list privacy options, which still need work).

AWC/AWI has failed at marketing AW as a community based anything, gaming or otherwise because it lacks any real substance and use. Gaming features, at least, would give AW some much needed purpose and direction after its lifetime of floundering in the shallow end; it would finally be able to at least make an attempt to go into the deep end of the pool and swim with the big kids. Whether or not it could STAY swimming there is another issue, however. But if Rick and JP are serious about AW's development, they'll stop dorking around and get gaming programmers who know what they're doing.

AW will market itself once it gets competent enough, but that's been the problem all along: AW has NOT had the features and marketability to draw much attention or attain any real purpose. Gaming would at least finally GIVE it a purpose--something to stand up on and stand out in the saturated (as you claim) [gaming] market--which isn't saturated by multi-user level editors, by the way. AW still has a chance to get in on the action if Rick and JP finally wise up to the reality of AW's marketability situation and truly focus on something they obviously know and have little experience with: gaming.

[View Quote] > My point is that AW shouldn't be trying to compete with 3D Games, in
> fact, I highly doubt they even *could* compete with all the 3D games out
> there, even if they had all the spiffy gaming features you were looking
> for. The market is way too saturated as it is.
>
> While I agree that gaming features could greatly enhance the community
> aspect (they aren't mutually exclusive, y'know), I also think the
> community aspect of AW is just as marketable as gaming, if not more so.
> Sometimes, people just want a place to hang and flex their creative
> muscles, which is harder to do within the confines of a gaming-oriented
> environment. I think AWI would be able to draw in a *much* wider range
> of users if they billed AW as being a community-based software package
> that also has gaming abilities, rather than a gaming-based platform that
> you can also chat in. It's simply just a matter of emphasis.
>
[View Quote]

Jul 15, 2002, 9:59pm

If the worst happens, and Activeworlds closes down, the community should
emigrate to Neverwinter Nights. I'll tell you why I think so.

I've been using NWN's toolset to create a personal world that's about 100 by
100 coords--a city, a harbor, a deep forest, wild sea-cliffs, plus inland
rural areas. Constructing all this took about a week, parttime. Now I'm
putting in a population of inhabitants that move about on their daily lives.
Whenever I want, I can put this world online, going through the official
world server, and meet with online friends there. Plus I can set up teleport
links to other people's worlds.

So far this is what I could have done in AW....if I had a lot of money to
pay AW's world and hosting fees, plus new citizenship fees! Using NWN's
server costs nothing. Creating a personal NWN world costs nothing, except
for the onetime US$60 for the game+toolset+script collection+objects/avatars
in the box.

Now if I wanted to, I could use this same toolset to script and build a
complete game, with a story and plot and roles for people to play. Maybe
most of the hundreds of thousands of NWN game purchasers intend to do just
that, and it looks like NWN is so easy to use that it might actually be done
by a lot of them.

But I just want to build an online world, complete with living beings, that
will be a place to meet with a few old AW friends and to check out the
worlds that they are building. Just select the Alternative category on the
NWN world server: it's for this sort of thing.


[View Quote]

Jul 16, 2002, 9:57pm

OK, I've finally tried NWN and must say it's hardly any competition for AW. There's no 1st-person view, new objects can't be created and the modules are pretty standard in their design (can't change terrain height or anything). AW is still FAR more customizable in terms of modelling (but not scripting). At least NWN is another step towards multi-user level editing, but a quite small one at that, unfortunately. Next...

[View Quote] > Have you guys ckecked out NeverWinter Nights? Not only can you "play the
> game," you can competely rewrite the "official" scenario, and write your
> own scenario. IE, build your own 3D world, add your own characters,
> storyline, your own modeled items, avatars, just about *everything* you can
> do in AW, and a whole lot more, in a scripting API based on C. Windows and
> Linux servers are free for the download.
>
> *Children* are building worlds and running their own servers for the $69.00
> US cost of buying the game. And *thousands* are logging on....
>
> I'm not trying to "down" AW, but.... We need to get on the ball here. Eep
> is correct. Back in the mid-90s, 3d for its own sake was new and cool and
> worth participating in. Now, it's old hat and taken for granted, and if AW
> doesn't keep up with what's possible here in 2002, (*WHAT* 3D environment
> doesn't offer chat???) our investments in AW will all be shot to hell,
> because what's been "saved" by the owners is nothing but the old, go-nowhere
> scenario. In other words, I don't want to have to rename my world,
> "Crisis3D_cum_hep_me". Change my cit name to "IN-capacitated."
>
> What can we, as paying users, do to get the folks in charge to CATCH A
> CLUE??? There's so much better value out there and it's so frustrating
> because I want to take us all on *THAT* merry-go-round.... I just hate
> feeling like I've put a ton of effort into something that's inevitably going
> to be left in the dust... Aren't you all building worlds to have people
> visit your creation, to acknowledge that you've done an awesome job in
> giving them an experience that's special and meaningful and surprising that
> they can't get anywhere else??
>
> Or am I just crazy here???

Jul 17, 2002, 2:19am

Well, yes and no. There's no 1st-person view, which is a shame. It's a 3/4
down view, because it limits the amount of data which has to be sent from
your computer (working as the server) to your online guests. It's sending a
lot more than AW does, because your NWN world can include complex
interactions between citizens and the background population.

NWN supports plugging in additional objectsets (users have already
contributed desert and arctic objectsets). One reason NWN can offer the
universe server and citizenships for free is that they plan to design (and
sell) a lot of new avatars and objectsets. Clothing is separable, and you
can change clothes and armor online.

You can't pull terrains to make heights and valleys, but there are objects
for cliffs, ramps, waterfalls, and raised terraces. There are many
variations that don't show when you just scan the list of objects: for
example, if you put down a stream approaching a road that runs along the
foot of a cliff, you can then pull the stream-end over the road and up the
cliff, and toolset will make a bridge in the road for you, and a waterfall
down the cliff. The lighting, both adjustable on the objects and in shadow
and fog effects, is also more sophisticated than AW. Occasional rain,
thunder, and lightning can be scheduled with a single checkmark; another
checkmark, and you have a night/day routine.

The scripting support is far more comprehensive than AW's SDK. And you don't
have to be a programmer to create complex events, because there are
scripting wizards, and plentiful example scripts to copy from. After you
play the game in the box, you can see how every scene and every action was
done, because all the scripts are there to read.

[View Quote]

Jul 17, 2002, 3:28am

Regardless, NWN won't catch on and will be lucky if it lasts as long as The Sims' popularity has thus far. Why? Because NWN is too confusing for the average person to bother with--plus it's heavily fantasy-oriented which limits the attractiveness to the general gaming public. AW is QUITE versatile in world theme because it's completely up to the world owner/builders to use whatever objects they want, unlike NWN's quite limited object set (if Bioware thinks they'll make money selling avatars and object sets, they're QUITE mistaken--hence why free server and citizenships won't last long why NWN will inevitably fail in the end if it continues at its current rate).

No, AW still has many more potentially marketable features NWN, VTMR, 10six, and every level editing program don't have: multi-user "level editing". If NWN had this, more theme varations (anything, really--not limited to any one theme), and the ability to create your own objects and import them, THEN it may be able to compete with AW's market. But as it currently is, it'll be lucky if it can survive, let alone compete. Of course, AW needs to implement more things if it is to compete (and survive) too...

[View Quote] > Well, yes and no. There's no 1st-person view, which is a shame. It's a 3/4
> down view, because it limits the amount of data which has to be sent from
> your computer (working as the server) to your online guests. It's sending a
> lot more than AW does, because your NWN world can include complex
> interactions between citizens and the background population.
>
> NWN supports plugging in additional objectsets (users have already
> contributed desert and arctic objectsets). One reason NWN can offer the
> universe server and citizenships for free is that they plan to design (and
> sell) a lot of new avatars and objectsets. Clothing is separable, and you
> can change clothes and armor online.
>
> You can't pull terrains to make heights and valleys, but there are objects
> for cliffs, ramps, waterfalls, and raised terraces. There are many
> variations that don't show when you just scan the list of objects: for
> example, if you put down a stream approaching a road that runs along the
> foot of a cliff, you can then pull the stream-end over the road and up the
> cliff, and toolset will make a bridge in the road for you, and a waterfall
> down the cliff. The lighting, both adjustable on the objects and in shadow
> and fog effects, is also more sophisticated than AW. Occasional rain,
> thunder, and lightning can be scheduled with a single checkmark; another
> checkmark, and you have a night/day routine.
>
> The scripting support is far more comprehensive than AW's SDK. And you don't
> have to be a programmer to create complex events, because there are
> scripting wizards, and plentiful example scripts to copy from. After you
> play the game in the box, you can see how every scene and every action was
> done, because all the scripts are there to read.
>
[View Quote]

Jul 18, 2002, 10:06am

Hey Eep,

Actually, other than the fact that there's no first-person view, your
objections aren't grounded. New objects *can* be created with your favorite
modeling program, and terrain height *can* be changed with just a mouse
click in the Toolset. But foremost, in my view anyway, NWN gives you
something to *do* inside all the stuff you can create. Granted, AW off the
bat lets you build with a more "low-level" set of objects (walls rather than
complete *buildings*), however, should you choose to model your own walls
and build from that more fundamental level, you can certainly do so with
NWN. But it's the scripting part that, frankly, blows me away. As far as
I'm concerned, the scripting makes AW's SDK look paltry by comparison.

And ultimately, when I look at what worlds are more often than not at the
top of the AW list, I see Gor worlds; worlds where the cits are already
heavily into roleplaying as it is. NWN is a natural for creating and more
fully realizing that kind of thing.

My point is, if AW gave us an easier way to create something to *do* in and
with our worlds besides just sit there, host them, and stare at them, hoping
somebody comes by, AW would be further along, and I think that's the
direction the company needs to take. After all, AW *was* the ultimate
"level_editor" back when it began because it uniquely offered the ability to
build. But, at this point, it's turning into a little bit of a dinosaur
(and the stock price is obviously reflecting that...).


[View Quote]

Jul 19, 2002, 2:38am

Aren't grounded? Does NWN allow real-time multi-user building? Nope. I don't even think the DM mode allows it beyond a certain extent of adding NPCs/enemies and tweaking some basic parameters. The scripting may be better than AW's SDK, but it takes programming to really DO anything with it, which is something most gamers won't even bother with. No, NWN will have to be a LOT better before it can really compete with AW. Of course, AW needs to be better before it can really be marketable...

[View Quote] > Actually, other than the fact that there's no first-person view, your
> objections aren't grounded. New objects *can* be created with your favorite
> modeling program, and terrain height *can* be changed with just a mouse
> click in the Toolset. But foremost, in my view anyway, NWN gives you
> something to *do* inside all the stuff you can create. Granted, AW off the
> bat lets you build with a more "low-level" set of objects (walls rather than
> complete *buildings*), however, should you choose to model your own walls
> and build from that more fundamental level, you can certainly do so with
> NWN. But it's the scripting part that, frankly, blows me away. As far as
> I'm concerned, the scripting makes AW's SDK look paltry by comparison.
>
> And ultimately, when I look at what worlds are more often than not at the
> top of the AW list, I see Gor worlds; worlds where the cits are already
> heavily into roleplaying as it is. NWN is a natural for creating and more
> fully realizing that kind of thing.
>
> My point is, if AW gave us an easier way to create something to *do* in and
> with our worlds besides just sit there, host them, and stare at them, hoping
> somebody comes by, AW would be further along, and I think that's the
> direction the company needs to take. After all, AW *was* the ultimate
> "level_editor" back when it began because it uniquely offered the ability to
> build. But, at this point, it's turning into a little bit of a dinosaur
> (and the stock price is obviously reflecting that...).
>
[View Quote]

Jul 19, 2002, 7:05am

NWN already *is* competing with AW, though in a different way. Multi-user
building is cool, but obviously not cool enough. Here's how it looks to me:
NWN as it stands won't hold a candle to what's going to be possible six,
seven years from now. AW, still trying to capitalize on the features that
made it successful six, seven years *ago*, is, now, close to biting the
dust.

I'm not suggesting that NWN can or will take over what AW provides. (I
doubt if BioWare is even remotely interested in doing that.) I'm just
saying, "Hey, look at this 3D implementation here; it's drawing far more of
a crowd and far more market share. Can we learn from what it has to offer
so that we can make *our* 3D implementation more viable?" I think that we
can. NWN is not the end-all, be-all of virtual environments. And you're
right, most gamers won't want to deal with the programming, any more than
most AW-ers want to deal with the SDK. But the point is, that wealth of
programming opportunity is there for those folks who want to take advantage
of it, and it provides far more possibility.

And (while I'm on it..) another thing I think we can learn from? I really
like the way NWN's building blocks come in digestible sets--or the way
clicking on an object attaches a ghost of the object's apprearance to your
mouse when you're in the Toolset. This business of "object yards" is
incredibly unwieldy and hard to work with--remembering cryptic object names
and their appearances out of a collection of thousands just doesn't cut it,
nor does having to visit the "object yard" every time I want to use
something I've seen, but can't remember the name of.

In any event, these are just a few ideas which I believe would help bring AW
back into the running. It costs a lot to have and host these worlds: we
need to start getting our money's worth in relation to the other
opportunities out there.

Syn <---Steps down off of soap box now.


[View Quote]

Jul 19, 2002, 5:50pm

[View Quote] > NWN already *is* competing with AW, though in a different way. Multi-user
> building is cool, but obviously not cool enough. Here's how it looks to me:
> NWN as it stands won't hold a candle to what's going to be possible six,
> seven years from now. AW, still trying to capitalize on the features that
> made it successful six, seven years *ago*, is, now, close to biting the
> dust.

Heh, in 6 or 7 years from now I'm sure AW (if it's still around, of course) will be MUCH different than it is now, just as AW is different than it was in 6 or 7 years ago. Take a trip to http://mauz.info/awhistory.html if you don't believe me.

> I'm not suggesting that NWN can or will take over what AW provides. (I
> doubt if BioWare is even remotely interested in doing that.) I'm just
> saying, "Hey, look at this 3D implementation here; it's drawing far more of
> a crowd and far more market share. Can we learn from what it has to offer
> so that we can make *our* 3D implementation more viable?" I think that we
> can. NWN is not the end-all, be-all of virtual environments. And you're
> right, most gamers won't want to deal with the programming, any more than
> most AW-ers want to deal with the SDK. But the point is, that wealth of
> programming opportunity is there for those folks who want to take advantage
> of it, and it provides far more possibility.

The key difference being that AW's SDK allows end-users (non-programmers) to use 3rd-party bots while NWN's scripting still requires programming.

> And (while I'm on it..) another thing I think we can learn from? I really
> like the way NWN's building blocks come in digestible sets--or the way
> clicking on an object attaches a ghost of the object's apprearance to your
> mouse when you're in the Toolset. This business of "object yards" is
> incredibly unwieldy and hard to work with--remembering cryptic object names
> and their appearances out of a collection of thousands just doesn't cut it,
> nor does having to visit the "object yard" every time I want to use
> something I've seen, but can't remember the name of.

Yup; I added an object preview mode to my AW improvements list (http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html ) years ago...

> In any event, these are just a few ideas which I believe would help bring AW
> back into the running. It costs a lot to have and host these worlds: we
> need to start getting our money's worth in relation to the other
> opportunities out there.

And what opportunities are those for AW? NWN (or any OTHER app/game) doesn't even offer the same things as AW so there ARE no opportunities out there at this time.

[View Quote]

Jul 20, 2002, 5:27pm

Online multiuser building should appear starting in late 2002 in MMORPG like
The Sims Online, StarWars Galaxies, Horizon, and Atriarch. But to get it in
NWN needs serious scripting.

But--don't think that an exciting, realistic NWN world, complete with
nonplayer characters and special effects, requires scripting.

No. Every person, beast, building, or placeable item in the toolset comes
with a default script: just by placing creatures or objects in your
landscape, your world visitors get to see and hear all their default
behaviors, with no scripting on your part at all.

Open up the panel associated with any of the creatures that you placed in
your world, check a few options, and your creature will roam about at
random. Check a different panel option, put down a few invisible waypoints,
and your creature will follow the path you indicated. Check another option,
and the creatures will fight or greet others encountered along the path,
returning to routine when the fight is over.

A few days ago, to test this out, I put a sprinkling of characters from
different factions onto the docks in the City Harbor, chose a few options,
selected clothes and weapons for them, changed their abilities, their hair
and skin colors, and gave them individual names. When I went to check them
out in the game, there they were, strolling, pausing, yawning, walking up
the ramps into the residential section, splashing through the shallow harbor
canals, etc. One pair of them had already gotten into a fight. And when I
spotted a Celestial Tiger near the Guard Barracks, he rushed over to deal me
a humiliating lesson in swordsmanship.

All that without any scripting whatsoever.

[View Quote]

Jul 20, 2002, 8:26pm

That's fine and all for pre-existing (pre-programmed) behavior, but if you expect to get any variety out of things you're going to have to learn the scripting/programming language and/or acquire more scripts from other people (i.e. Bioware, NWN's developers).

I was experimenting again with the NWN toolset to see about modifying the ground, and the problem with it is that each tileset has its own objects and tilesets aren't combined (allowing maximum object availability), so raising/lowering the terrain (which is misleading since there is no vertex manipulation like there is in AW) is impossible. The only "raising" and "lowering" is done by pre-existing ground objects (cliffs, etc) that are simply placed on top of the pre-existing flat ground.

NWN's modules are fairly bland and dull because of their cookie-cutter, LEGOlike modularity. I've never liked the idea of tilesets...in NWN OR Flatland's blocksets--they're just too restricting. And the lack of any real in-world (in-game, in-level) modelling doesn't help much either. Of course, AW also suffers from this inability.

[View Quote] > Online multiuser building should appear starting in late 2002 in MMORPG like
> The Sims Online, StarWars Galaxies, Horizon, and Atriarch. But to get it in
> NWN needs serious scripting.
>
> But--don't think that an exciting, realistic NWN world, complete with
> nonplayer characters and special effects, requires scripting.
>
> No. Every person, beast, building, or placeable item in the toolset comes
> with a default script: just by placing creatures or objects in your
> landscape, your world visitors get to see and hear all their default
> behaviors, with no scripting on your part at all.
>
> Open up the panel associated with any of the creatures that you placed in
> your world, check a few options, and your creature will roam about at
> random. Check a different panel option, put down a few invisible waypoints,
> and your creature will follow the path you indicated. Check another option,
> and the creatures will fight or greet others encountered along the path,
> returning to routine when the fight is over.
>
> A few days ago, to test this out, I put a sprinkling of characters from
> different factions onto the docks in the City Harbor, chose a few options,
> selected clothes and weapons for them, changed their abilities, their hair
> and skin colors, and gave them individual names. When I went to check them
> out in the game, there they were, strolling, pausing, yawning, walking up
> the ramps into the residential section, splashing through the shallow harbor
> canals, etc. One pair of them had already gotten into a fight. And when I
> spotted a Celestial Tiger near the Guard Barracks, he rushed over to deal me
> a humiliating lesson in swordsmanship.
>
> All that without any scripting whatsoever.
>
[View Quote]

1  |   Order by index