ThreadBoard ArchivesSite FeaturesActiveworlds SupportHistoric Archives |
Unofficial Active Worlds Poll (Community)
Unofficial Active Worlds Poll // CommunitylegionJul 22, 2003, 11:22pm
1.) What are the most needed features for future releases
2.) What type of features are most needed? (building features, world features, server features, etc.) 3.) Does GUI need any changes? How much does it need? What kind of specific GUI changes do you have in mind? 4.) Does Active Worlds need any significant advertising? 5.) In what direction should Active Worlds be headed for? (E-commerce business, gaming business, etc.) 6.) What type of new AWI world do you have in mind? Should it be public building? Or should it be a gaming world? Or what? (Examples of these includes Alphaworld for public building and The13th for entertainment world and Mutation for gaming) 7.) What can Activeworlds Inc. do to increase revenue? How can they attract new customers? 8.) Should Activeworlds Inc. increase size of existing public building world? For example, Colony Alpha has been full for a while. 9.) Should Activeworlds Inc. update other public building world's (other than Alphaworld, for that look for previous poll conducted earlier here) object path with new objects, textures, etc. 10.) Should Activeworlds Inc. release some more object libraries including COFMeta's and other for worldbuilder's use? (I'm still waiting for The13th object libraries lol) *imitating Porky the Pig, sttuttering* That's all Folks! NOTICE Please note this is unofficial Activeworlds poll and is not in any way affilated or whatever with Activeworlds Inc. This is only designed to assess general opinon of Activeworld residents on limited numbers of issues. This unoffical poll was created by me with interest in what your opinon is about certain issues. This is an interesting poll that may offer insights into general opinon of Activeworlds residents. Once again, neither is this poll an official poll nor am I in any way connected with Activeworlds Inc. You have rights to not respond to it or whatsoever obviously. Also please notice that this poll will not guarantee these features and other that you suggested will be implemented. Thank you for reading and responding to it. -- Legion "I think, therefore I am" - Rene Descartes, 17th-century French philosopher, Earth .duo.Jul 23, 2003, 12:10am
1) All of them, including allof the featurs that should be part of the
browser but are instead incorporated into bots. EXAMPLE: Backing up a world. Also, have graphics ratings as well as content ratings so a world with extremely high amounts of polys can be distinguished from one with few. Improved graphics, as well as improved rendering. 2) The improved world list which they offered in the feature vote, as well as a terrain grid based on quarter cells instead of cells (which allows for more detailed terrain). A lot more. Examples: Custom AVs, improved world, universe etc. server interfaces, cells which include vertical coordinates (cube shaped instead of the entire height, this would potentially reduce lag while at the same time improved building), enroachment formulas based on the actual edges of an object and not it's center, even more. 3) The GUI is pretty good. Skins would be nice. It could be easier, and have more options. 4) Yes, much. The more people the better. 5) As open-ended and free as possible. No corruption, proper services (example: a GOOD GK service. And AW don't reply saying that they are volunteers so your not complaining, believe me, there are a LOT of better people who would volunteer if they could or there was a better program). More possibilities. The ability to make avatars do anything, have items and such, kind of like an RPG since that's kind of what AW sort of is. 6) Mutation is crap. None of the bots nor AW software is advanced enough for proper gaming worlds. We need a well organised public building world where there is as much land as AW, except vandalism is controlled. Making seed objects MUST be built into the browser. 7) AW can advertise like mad, do fundraising, and come out with a well-balanced pricing plan. So far all the price hike has done is gotten rid of many people who make the AW experience better. Maybe different prices plans and options for citizenships. EXAMPLE: $20 a year for a limited citizenship where you are not allowed to own worlds or something and more disadvantages. $50/year for a citizenship where you get normal citizenship benefits. $90/year for a premium citizenship where you get access to a special world or something you normally would have to pay to enter. Also, reduced world prices would be good. It would encourage people to buy MORE worlds. Most of all, the ability to CHARGE for entry into a world (I know it sounds stupid, but read on). You would pay a little extra moeny for permission to do this. It would encourage premium citizenships, as well as encouraging higher quality worlds which are larger and can hold more users, because people would have more money for better worlds, and even try to make a profit, which would incite competion among worlds and more improvements and spending on worlds. It would have to be regulated however, or else ALL world owners would be charging, which would be ludicrous and kill the entire software. There are a million other things AW could do. 8) Yes, definately. If they got moere money they could have larger servers and be able to accomadate worlds which are 50000NESW. if many more people were building this would allow worlds such as AW to continue to have the same atmosphere as well as accomadate everyone. 9) YES, absolutely. It keeps the AW world thriving to have many different diverse worlds which are up-to-date. 10) Possibly, but they definately should hire some professional 3D artists to make objects so that AW would look much better. Also professional texture artists, beacuse honestly... many of the current textures are absolutely horrible and ugly. There is SOOOOOOOO much that could be done to improve AW. [View Quote] basixOct 6, 2003, 5:36pm
> 1.) What are the most needed features for future releases
A more gaming oriented aspect to AW, as well as basic browser enhancements. Physics, possibly for "riding" vehicles. Scripted objects would be nice as well. To give the builder more control over what happens in worlds. Possibly an AW Plugin Interface. > 2.) What type of features are most needed? (building features, world > features, server features, etc.) Didn't I just answer this? > 3.) Does GUI need any changes? How much does it need? What kind of specific > GUI changes do you have in mind? Skinable GUI's would be a great add-on. If they implimented the AWPlugin interface like I mentioned above. A user could add their own support for this. Getting developers more involved with the program changes itself is an important aspect in improving software, and the application market in general. > 4.) Does Active Worlds need any significant advertising? They need to advance in the middle of 3d online chatting, and also into the gaming portion of the market. If they added more 3d engine features, they could possibly make a comeback. If they stay with this "old" engine. They might as well just release atari to xbox fans. > 5.) In what direction should Active Worlds be headed for? (E-commerce > business, gaming business, etc.) As I mentioned above, Gaming/Chat/E-Business. > 6.) What type of new AWI world do you have in mind? Should it be public > building? Or should it be a gaming world? Or what? (Examples of these > includes Alphaworld for public building and The13th for entertainment world > and Mutation for gaming) No more entertainment worlds, they have a very short interest span to older users. Maybe some sort of building/gaming world? If a world is to be popular, its going to need a extended interest to the users. > 7.) What can Activeworlds Inc. do to increase revenue? How can they attract > new customers? Attack the gaming market, and expand the software! > 8.) Should Activeworlds Inc. increase size of existing public building > world? For example, Colony Alpha has been full for a while. There is plenty of space in AW still. Maybe one more building world would be useful though. > 9.) Should Activeworlds Inc. update other public building world's (other > than Alphaworld, for that look for previous poll conducted earlier here) > object path with new objects, textures, etc. They should upgrade their engine, to handle higher poly counts/increase framerates. > 10.) Should Activeworlds Inc. release some more object libraries including > COFMeta's and other for worldbuilder's use? (I'm still waiting for The13th > object libraries lol) The really old object paths should be open to builders, but that is my opinion. .duo.Oct 6, 2003, 6:12pm
We definately need a terrain/attribute/property backup built into the
browser. -- -.Duo. (342836) [View Quote] .duo.Oct 6, 2003, 9:33pm
well... maybe not, or maybe so. I guess the CT of the certain world would
decide. -- -.Duo. (342836) [View Quote] blogOct 6, 2003, 10:03pm
I don't think higher resolution textures would be a great upgrade. Currently
there is no limit on the texture size you can use although that dosen't necissarily mean they are displayed that way. This in mind, many AW users are on lower end machines and some still use software drivers to browse AW, I definetly don't think that their computers could handle the extra load put on by using high res textures. [View Quote] .duo.Oct 6, 2003, 10:35pm
true... but in two years any computer will be able to handle it. Seriously,
this is my computer: 700MHz Athlon 640MB SDRAM (128MB PC100, 512MB PC133) 80GB Hard Drive Sound Blaster Live! Geforce 2 MX 440 32MB and I can handle games on high quality mode, though occasionally the lack of video memory kills it. -- -.Duo. (342836) [View Quote] |