1  |   Order by index

Mar 13, 2006, 4:00pm

Hi Eep. It's your uncle Starax here!. :)

Hello AW folks. I come from that other world (Second Life) and I like what I
see here in AW.

As time goes on, Active Worlds is becoming more and more attractive to me. I
see a mass exodus on the horizon. The problems I see with AW is that it
needs more content creators. People will come if there is something to see.
But content creators wont create content without an audience/customers. It's
the olde boring catch 22 problem.

So this means the company that owns AW needs to hire content creators. This
should start the ball rolling hopefully. Yet what is very puzzling is that
there are already some lovely worlds in AW, but the company behind AW
doesn't seem too eager about promoting these worlds. If they can't even be
bothered to promote a nice world that's already made. What are the chances
of them ever hiring content creators to create nice worlds? Newcomers enter
the gate, they try a few crap worlds at random and leave thinking the whole
place is crap. Sad!!

Do the company behind AW actually want it to be successful? Perhaps they
have another source of income and aren't really eager to see this place
succeed. Or have they tried everything they can think of to make AW succeed,
failed and given up?

Tao is probably the most beautiful place in AW. yet I stumbled upon it by
accident. If I hadn't have seen that world then I may have just given up on
AW completely.

I think the core design/technology of Active Worlds is way ahead of Second
Life and appears to be more stable. Second Life is nice on the outside and
yet flawed at the core. Active Worlds seems to be the opposite, it's a king
in a tramp's clothes.

The team that develop AW could really make AW more appealing if they would
just make some alterations to its default settings. Controls, window size,
view distance etc. When I tried AW with the default settings, it was awful.
After tweaking them I found everything felt so much better. They'd be wise
to make the controls similar to Second Life's.and make the viewing window as
big as possible. Not opening the Web window on the initial start of AW would
help alot too. Even the nicest worlds can look crap through a small window.
A small window destroys the immersion. With a small window, you're aware of
looking into the world, rather than actually being in it. Perhaps the AW
guys are all peeping Toms? :)

I still think Second Life has alot of potential and Linden Lab could fix
alot of its problem. Ultimately though, it all comes down to the developers
behind either platform that will determine which one reigns. Active Worlds
might be a King in a tramp's clothes. But if it never changes those clothes
then it will continue to be ignored.

So my advice is:

o Make the AW gate much more attractive. First impressions last? Perhaps
transfer the gate to Tao? :)

o Make the AW default viewing window as big as possible. For immersion's
sake!. It's a world we're entering, not a spreadsheet!

o Keep the 'Worlds to Watch' area updated. Perhaps surround the main gate
with "Worlds to Watch" portals.

o Make the 'Worlds' list less obvious to newcomers, so that they don't go
wandering off into crap worlds, never to return.

o Most of all. Don't give up!! AW has potential and could one day rule the
world.

As for an economy, I don't think AW needs one. If visitors like AW and wish
to create their own world here, then they will be willing to buy their
virtual goods through websites. But again, those people aren't going want to
spend money on creating a world that nobody will ever see. It's all about
showing off!.



To sum up:- Total Population=Productive People*100;

Okay, I'm not an expert. I just made that above equation up! But hey, it
sounds good! :)

Mar 13, 2006, 4:28pm

This ain't The Gate, soooooooooooo.........

AMEN!!!! and HALLELUJUH!!!!

*clap* *clap* *clap* *clap*

[View Quote]

Mar 14, 2006, 12:05am

AW's Potential......... Well you mentioned that it needs more content
creators.... Well I dont think would generate increased user base. There are
already many beautiful creative worlds & features, including interactive games
and features. What I see as a reason for the dwindling Userbase is the
prohibitive cost of membership. Any creative content needs an audience to view
it. When you have a huge userbase you gain not only the cost of those
memberships, but the potential purchases they would make, such as; additional
memberships, world purchases and product sales.

Promoting the Activeworlds program as a 3D chat medium would require enough
Users to develop chats. Filling up worlds with users to appreciate creative
content, requires enough user base to participate. As with any business, fad or
enterprise, people flock where others congregate. My view is that developing a
userbase by fitting the membership rate to the actual type of users would help
increase the volume of traffic in Activeworlds. Who are the types of people that
would find entertainment online? Internet professionals, college age people,
teens, retired, disabled (or homebound) and those on a limited budget.

Online businesses seem to flock to sites that have the most traffic. I would
think that would happen for AW too if there was an increase in the amount of
people actually members in the program. I arrived here in 1999 and back then
there were many more people than now. Too many people have left this program due
to an inability to renew their membership cost, even long time members.

Sincerely,
Pamela CoLor

[View Quote] > Hi Eep. It's your uncle Starax here!. :)
>
> Hello AW folks. I come from that other world (Second Life) and I like what I
> see here in AW.
>
> As time goes on, Active Worlds is becoming more and more attractive to me. I
> see a mass exodus on the horizon. The problems I see with AW is that it
> needs more content creators. People will come if there is something to see.
> But content creators wont create content without an audience/customers. It's
> the olde boring catch 22 problem.
>
> So this means the company that owns AW needs to hire content creators. This
> should start the ball rolling hopefully. Yet what is very puzzling is that
> there are already some lovely worlds in AW, but the company behind AW
> doesn't seem too eager about promoting these worlds. If they can't even be
> bothered to promote a nice world that's already made. What are the chances
> of them ever hiring content creators to create nice worlds? Newcomers enter
> the gate, they try a few crap worlds at random and leave thinking the whole
> place is crap. Sad!!
>
> Do the company behind AW actually want it to be successful? Perhaps they
> have another source of income and aren't really eager to see this place
> succeed. Or have they tried everything they can think of to make AW succeed,
> failed and given up?
>
> Tao is probably the most beautiful place in AW. yet I stumbled upon it by
> accident. If I hadn't have seen that world then I may have just given up on
> AW completely.
>
> I think the core design/technology of Active Worlds is way ahead of Second
> Life and appears to be more stable. Second Life is nice on the outside and
> yet flawed at the core. Active Worlds seems to be the opposite, it's a king
> in a tramp's clothes.
>
> The team that develop AW could really make AW more appealing if they would
> just make some alterations to its default settings. Controls, window size,
> view distance etc. When I tried AW with the default settings, it was awful.
> After tweaking them I found everything felt so much better. They'd be wise
> to make the controls similar to Second Life's.and make the viewing window as
> big as possible. Not opening the Web window on the initial start of AW would
> help alot too. Even the nicest worlds can look crap through a small window.
> A small window destroys the immersion. With a small window, you're aware of
> looking into the world, rather than actually being in it. Perhaps the AW
> guys are all peeping Toms? :)
>
> I still think Second Life has alot of potential and Linden Lab could fix
> alot of its problem. Ultimately though, it all comes down to the developers
> behind either platform that will determine which one reigns. Active Worlds
> might be a King in a tramp's clothes. But if it never changes those clothes
> then it will continue to be ignored.
>
> So my advice is:
>
> o Make the AW gate much more attractive. First impressions last? Perhaps
> transfer the gate to Tao? :)
>
> o Make the AW default viewing window as big as possible. For immersion's
> sake!. It's a world we're entering, not a spreadsheet!
>
> o Keep the 'Worlds to Watch' area updated. Perhaps surround the main gate
> with "Worlds to Watch" portals.
>
> o Make the 'Worlds' list less obvious to newcomers, so that they don't go
> wandering off into crap worlds, never to return.
>
> o Most of all. Don't give up!! AW has potential and could one day rule the
> world.
>
> As for an economy, I don't think AW needs one. If visitors like AW and wish
> to create their own world here, then they will be willing to buy their
> virtual goods through websites. But again, those people aren't going want to
> spend money on creating a world that nobody will ever see. It's all about
> showing off!.
>
> To sum up:- Total Population=Productive People*100;
>
> Okay, I'm not an expert. I just made that above equation up! But hey, it
> sounds good! :)

Mar 14, 2006, 1:26am

thanks for the post AW Rocks! forever! i would like to see a 3d world
based on the microsoft flight sim, its a real earth globe, Sl is boring
to me i tried it before. AW seems like a nice art in a way ; ) I wish
the ppl who own aw to open there eyes. they are very illusive very
strange ppl.

[View Quote] > Hi Eep. It's your uncle Starax here!. :)
>
> Hello AW folks. I come from that other world (Second Life) and I like what I
> see here in AW.
>

Mar 14, 2006, 2:30am

Hey, Starax, nice to see you here.

Unfortunately, I can't agree with most of what you say. See my reply in "AW4 vs. SL features" thread for more info. But most of what
you say basically amounts to "fluff" features and don't really have much substance. Yes, content is fine, but the underlying core
technology limits that content--and AW's technology is VERY limiting (especially compared to SL's in most respects).

Yes, AW allows external models, but they are static and boring for the most part. AW's action commands pale in comparison to SL's.
Yes, AW 4.1 has some minor things SL does not, but SL's scripting language still blows AW's action commands out of the water
overall. You may be able to model everything in your wand, but forget about doing all the cool things with those models you do in
SL. (For those who don't know Starax, he made a magic wand that spawns many things that do various things. See
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5182759758975402950&q=%22second+life%22 for a presentation by SL's president Phillip
Rosedale and lead developer Cory Ondrejka.)

While I like being able to run a separate AW world, it really does feel apart and not a part of any kind of bigger world/solar
system/galaxy/universe/whatever. While SL sims can be connected, they can also be separate islands. There's talk of adding waterway
sims to link them all, which will be cool, keeping the seamlessness of an overall world. However, SL sims are VERY small compared to
what AW worlds can be--and outrageously expensive compared to AW worlds! For this AW is much better. However, what you can DO in AW
worlds compared to SL sims is a HUGE difference. AW is making some leeway with global events but it still needs a physics engine
(the latest RenderWare has one, by the way, so why not AW?) and MUCH more improvement before it can truly compete with SL.

Competition is fine, but I'd rather see collaboration: take the good parts of There (vehicles, from what I've read--never been
there), SL, and AW and combine them a single awesome program. The Croquet Project just seems to be starting from scratch, as is
every other "next big multiverse-wannabe" that comes along, mindlessly reinventing the wheel. It's just silly and VERY
unproductive/inefficient. However, an open-source multiverse would at least be a step in the right direction. While I've read about
SL eventually becoming open-source (in 2010?), I doubt it will happen and other apps like Croquet will come along and sweep SL, AW,
There, and any other closed-source, propietary multiverse out of the way as FireFox is doing with Internet Explorer (slowly, but
give it time).

Anyway, I tire beating a dead horse so if it happens, it happens. If not, oh well--it'll just take longer or something. Who
knows...it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things anyway--nothing does, really; this is all a distraction, but, alas,
that's for another discussion.

I'll stick around and see how AW progresses, but I won't be as active as I used to be.

[View Quote]

Mar 14, 2006, 8:18am

People like myself, who have a team and ideas + over eight years experience
in ActiveWorlds, programming, modelling, game development and the like -
have tried emailing Active Worlds, Inc. but they really don't want to
contribuate to AW.

The thing is, people like I just mentioned won't pay upto $2,000 for a world
when they can either go and buy a galaxy or a uniserver and market
everything themselves - or, even go and make their own 3D games.

The only reason why my team has halted any further game development is
because we rather take a break from such hobbies that generate little to
zero profit - we just can't afford the time anymore.

We went to AWI, as we have enough time for AWI (It takes far less time to
put something in AW than in a real game).

It is also a lot better as the 3D engine is already built, the online aspect
of things is all set and the fact that both the developers and end-user can
interact with the environment so much, that they can even re-build it.

-Equin0x.

[View Quote]

Mar 14, 2006, 12:05pm

Hey you! :)

Oh, I wasn't trying to say that the ONLY thing Active Worlds needs is the
default settings changing blah blah... I was just suggesting some simple
things that they could change to make it much more appealing from the start.
I'm well aware that they're maknig a new version - 4.1. But even if that
version has a small window and a crap AWGate then they're still not going
attract people. I think the AW gate alone is enough to put people off. It's
only when visitors get out of the gate and see worlds like Tao do they
realize what AW is capable of with a creative person inside one of its
worlds.

I hope I don't offend the people who made the gate. The gate is just out of
date. I'm sure it was very nice in the 90's.

SL and AW could never combine. Linden Lab stuggle just to make the simplest
of changes to Second Life. That's probably because even the simplest of
changes have far reaching consquences in a complex program like Second Life.

What could be possible is that Linden Lab could drop Second Life and take
control of AW. Then the king would finally have his nice new clothes. :)

You was right about the static models being boring. That was the reason why
I made the magic wand. :). Although I do think if a world creator can keep
their content changing then people will return to see what's new. I've been
to Tao, and as beautiful as it is. I now have the world in my head and if I
was to go back there in 2 months, it'll probably still be the same place.
Yet the creator of Tao does seem very active here. So who knows?

I'm starting to see that another problem with AW is that it's just not very
profitable for the people that own it. A company that owns Active Worlds is
never going to be able to make money from providing a service because the AW
client has been designed in such a way as to not really need a service
provider. You can compare AW to a web browser. A web browser that's owned by
a company that wants you to subscribe to use it. :)


[View Quote]

Mar 14, 2006, 5:40pm

First off, lots and lots and lots of assumptions on your end, Starax.

I would probably quit AW altogether if Linden Labs took over the AW client.
Why? Because I have heard horror stories about that company :)

The AWGate is a cool world. I visited Tao, and no offense, but the graphic
appeal of the gate far out does that of the private world.

I have personally found that the second life browser is far more clunky and
obtrusive when it comes to moving in the environment than the AW environment
itself. I would consider it an incredibly sad day if we were to lose AW to
Second Life. The only thing Ive ever really wished for was a more attractive
GUI.

Poseidon

[View Quote]

Mar 14, 2006, 7:40pm

For once, me and Pos are in agreement. I checked out SL via a friend
who had it. Some places were kina prettier, but it wasn't somewhere I'd
want to hang out, even if 100% free given the alternative of AW.

AWI maybe never replies to emails anymore, but they are SUPER busy with
4.1 so I forgive them. I've heard some pretty bad 'gossip' about Linden
labs though.

[View Quote]

Mar 15, 2006, 2:14am

ya, i agree about SL not being much fun, joined twice, and never came back
after the 3rd day both times.
i mean, i lag over there, and i've got a pretty alright computer, never
lagged before, anywhere, on anygame, plus, other then the default Linden
Labs models, everything else is pretty shit.

-SWE

[View Quote]

Mar 15, 2006, 2:51am

I do not like SL in general. However, I've intentionally immersed myself in
SL for the last 3 months. There is a lot of good stuff in SL, as well as
bad.

1. The ability to share, the ability to trade, the ability to sell.
2. Building can be done by anyone, but is overly complicated for the
uninitiated.
3. Building is Free if you limit your space, and you easily have the ability
to expand your space depending on the limit of your pocketbook.
4. The worlds is ever expanding... seems without limit, and environments can
mesh, blend together or simply change from one square to the next...

I've got a reasonable computer for a year ago... I've got an anthlon 64
3500+ with 1gb mem and a 6800 nVidia video card... and I only get lag when I
decide to change the default video settings to higher values. In AW I can
max everything out at vis 200 and still get a reasonable frame rate.... but
a I am fairly convinced that has a lot to do with particle systems.

When I first came to AW though, I hated the build interface... now it is
second nature. So, if I were first encountering SL without the knowledge of
AW, I might feel the same.

[View Quote]

Mar 15, 2006, 4:08am

Sorry to hear you guys don't like SL much. That's too bad because I think SL is so much more immersive than AW. I love the day-night
light cycle and SL's scripting language allows SO much more object interaction than AW's action commands do. SL's particles are fun
to play with too. AW 4.1's particles look interesting, and even have some parameters SL's don't, but it's just enough to keep me
interested in AW over SL overall (or with movers). Zones look cool but, still, I feel SL is better overall.

SL lag has been really bad since SL 1.7 so you really need to keep local lighting off if you're in congested areas (Welcome Area,
clubs, etc). Most SLers don't know how to model efficiently, and because of SL using parametric instead of vert-poly models, there
are LOTS of covered polygons and lights mindlessly used. But, since most people have local lighting OFF, they don't experience light
lag (they just see the prims prelit). SL only recently added a prelight ("full bright" they call it) option but most designers
haven't changed their older stuff to it.

AW 4.1 is a step closer to what SL can do, but it still has a long way to go to catch up overall.

[View Quote] Like what?

Mar 16, 2006, 2:05pm

hmm, with the replys of you and talisan, i'm starting to think maybe
changing the video options to display almost everything at full
detail/whatever might have been the problem.
but ya, SL has some nice features, just, i'm more interested in using AW for
modeling then trading/selling or meeting people, so guess thats mostly why
SL doesn't appeal to me much.

-SWE

[View Quote]

Mar 17, 2006, 7:57am

Well, you don't really need AW to do modelling since it has no built-in modelling capabilities anyway. At least SL can do parametric
modelling but it's still not full vert-poly modelling--but it's closer to modelling than AW is...and it's a much faster to make
stuff in SL than in AW (at least for me anyway). No dorking with RWXes or converters or cleaning up all the code--blah blah blah. Of
course there's always LSL (scripting) code to clean up but that's different. ;)

[View Quote]

Mar 17, 2006, 5:34pm

ya, but in AW, i can make things in 3DS Max, and then put them into AW, and
walk around, in SL, would have to make things in it, and that would just
piss me off. no accuracy in it from what i remember, atleast not without
being extremely confused.
AW, in my opinion, is great for looking at things you've made, and thats why
i use it :)
i mean, no way are SL going to be able to make a modeler any better then 3DS
Max, or Maya, or whatever one uses.

-SWE

[View Quote]

Mar 17, 2006, 5:48pm

[View Quote] It's annoying at first but you quickly realize what you can create and are knocking out stuff like nothing--at least that's what I
did. I recreated in SL in a few months most of what I had made in AW in a few YEARS! Granted, I was learning modelling in AW during
that time but, still...SL modelling is SO much easier. Of course visual modelling (vs. in a text editor with RWX) is faster but SL's
modelling is really user-friendly and easy-to-use. Of course I'd still like to be able to get down to the vert-poly level but for
what object interaction (scripting) is possible in SL, I'm willing to forgo this (for now--no reason static vert-poly models
couldn't still be importable though).

> no accuracy in it from what i remember, atleast not without being extremely confused.

Define "accuracy". Things can be lined up near-exact to the thousandths place floating point precision on position (but it's been
wonky the past few months). SL has grid-snapping (which can be set to custom sizes/increments).

> AW, in my opinion, is great for looking at things you've made, and thats why i use it :)
> i mean, no way are SL going to be able to make a modeler any better then 3DS Max, or Maya, or whatever one uses.

Well, however improbably, it's always possible. I've read about some modellers implementing collaboration (shared modelling) but I
don't have any details on how it works. However, if modellers do MOVE to this, it will mean competition for AW/SL/etc. Granted, it's
unlikely lots of people could be modelling at once, as in a massively mulitiplayer environment/game, but ones games get the idea of
shared level design, I think AW/SL/etc's clock will be pretty much up--unless they too can adapt and incorporate game level
(environment, really) design.

[View Quote]

1  |   Order by index