1  |   Order by index

Jul 8, 2000, 8:36pm

Eeps suggestion of AW being more towards a game, is a step in a
misleading direction.
AW is a VRML2 program a chat program at that.
Yes the future lies in E-commerce, which i believe AW is failing at, and
on-line Gaming.
It would be wiser for AWCOM to focus their attention on the On-Line
surge that is heading our way.
For those who do not wish to play games, but maybe like to trade, chat ,
build etc.. in a virtual community.

To focus on marketing AW as a "Community" is a better plan. Maybe even
to have it as a focal point for which ppl can move from here and meet up
in Games.

If AW as Eep would have it, were to be marketed and turned into an
on-line game, I am afraid 1. More ppl would leave and not come back. 2.
AWCOM would lose all its money and go bankrupt.

If you wish to play games, then buy UO, EQ, Or Vampire.

If you wish to create Levels, Maps, "Worlds" then buy the above.

Again, I say, as i said in the World builders NG... AW is not a game.
It is a virtual community. VR.

The Gang at AWCOM should be marketing towards a Virtual Reality
Community.
A global meeting place, for entertainment, work, and relaxing.

Adding features for MP3, movies, even live video from person to person,
would be steps in opening this On-Line world.

By creating more ways of destroying present day archaic communications (
Long Distance) we can bring the World, our friends (new and potential
friends), Families together.

The World is a small place and getting smaller. By developing VR, and
giving us a format to travel, learn and communicate openly, is the step
in the right direction.

Eep drop the "gaming idea" no one is goin to buy it.

Jul 8, 2000, 9:02pm

Hello Mr. Misinformation. AW is NOT VRML, nor has it EVER been. It is renderware which is NOT VRML. :) Also EQ and UO don't
have level editors, they are RPG's.

-Myrth

[View Quote]

Jul 8, 2000, 9:32pm

OK so those two dont, i was using them as examples that i have often heard AW naysayers use. "come to EQ, or Come to UO its so much
better..."

I guess maybe Vampire, or NWN (Never Winter Nights) would have been better examples.

Renderware schmenderware, You needed to argue my point, by pointing out my faults, Eep has taught you well lil man.

The point is, as the subject is, AW is not a Game.

Follow up on a Point and not the mistakes, and then maybe you might be existing on an actual of thought. worthy of some recognition

Thanx for the clarification though Myrth


[View Quote] > Hello Mr. Misinformation. AW is NOT VRML, nor has it EVER been. It is renderware which is NOT VRML. :) Also EQ and UO don't
> have level editors, they are RPG's.
>
> -Myrth
>
[View Quote]

Jul 8, 2000, 11:20pm

If no one points out the mistakes then we'd just get sloppier :)

[View Quote]

Jul 9, 2000, 1:40am

However, if AW integrated more "game-like" features, it might be easier to
market to a wider consumer base. If they have a larger (much more than now)
amount, perhaps registration fees could be dropped slightly to increase
registration. With more users, advertising would also be easier for AWCI.

> Adding features for MP3, movies, even live video from person to person,
> would be steps in opening this On-Line world.

The movies & MP3 would most likely add legal bickering over copyright
matters.

-Agent1


[View Quote]

Jul 9, 2000, 2:36am

> If AW as Eep would have it, were to be marketed and turned into an
> on-line game, I am afraid 1. More ppl would leave and not come back. 2.
> AWCOM would lose all its money and go bankrupt.

It is my understanding that he wants it more game-like, with updated
features. Besides, gaming is MUCH more popular anyway, and if AW was
updated, boxed, and sold, it would most likely become very successful. AW
would never destroy their building features anyway. That is what keeps them
in business. You see, if AW focused on creating better software to handle
better game worlds, then it really could become successful. But the key to
that would be updating.

> Eep drop the "gaming idea" no one is going to buy it.

LOL. Yeah right.

Jul 9, 2000, 7:32am

Perhaps you should try reading more carefully about the direction I think AW should be going at http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/. As other people have already pointed out to you in response to this blatant attack against me, I never claimed AW should ONLY be a game, but that it should have more gamelike features (jumping, inventory, shooting, etc), but not to ONLY rely on these gamelike features. Of course I still want to build and chat, but AW needs to be more diverse if it ever hopes to get more popular...and e-commerce just ain't in AW's future at this time.

And learn how to pronoun correctly. Back to grammar 101 with ya!

[View Quote] > Eeps suggestion of AW being more towards a game, is a step in a
> misleading direction.
> AW is a VRML2 program a chat program at that.
> Yes the future lies in E-commerce, which i believe AW is failing at, and
> on-line Gaming.
> It would be wiser for AWCOM to focus their attention on the On-Line
> surge that is heading our way.
> For those who do not wish to play games, but maybe like to trade, chat ,
> build etc.. in a virtual community.
>
> To focus on marketing AW as a "Community" is a better plan. Maybe even
> to have it as a focal point for which ppl can move from here and meet up
> in Games.
>
> If AW as Eep would have it, were to be marketed and turned into an
> on-line game, I am afraid 1. More ppl would leave and not come back. 2.
> AWCOM would lose all its money and go bankrupt.
>
> If you wish to play games, then buy UO, EQ, Or Vampire.
>
> If you wish to create Levels, Maps, "Worlds" then buy the above.
>
> Again, I say, as i said in the World builders NG... AW is not a game.
> It is a virtual community. VR.
>
> The Gang at AWCOM should be marketing towards a Virtual Reality
> Community.
> A global meeting place, for entertainment, work, and relaxing.
>
> Adding features for MP3, movies, even live video from person to person,
> would be steps in opening this On-Line world.
>
> By creating more ways of destroying present day archaic communications (
> Long Distance) we can bring the World, our friends (new and potential
> friends), Families together.
>
> The World is a small place and getting smaller. By developing VR, and
> giving us a format to travel, learn and communicate openly, is the step
> in the right direction.
>
> Eep drop the "gaming idea" no one is goin to buy it.

Obviously more people buy games than they do AW. YOU do the math...

Jul 9, 2000, 6:42pm

Jumping
I don't think of this as a game feature. AW is about moving around in 3d space. So naturally jumping and crawling should be implemented. But can't you do this with seqs? Anyway, avatar and object animation needs to be worked on.

Inventory
I don't want the knives and ropes kind of inventory. I don't think aw should be more like rpg's or first person shoot'em ups.... I choose to look at "inventory" as data (your inventory in this sense is your entire hd). AW isn't, and shouldn't be a game. It is a *real* form of communciation (spatial and textual/verbal), it must not be degraded to fiction.

Shooting
I didn't think even you liked that...If you want to "shoot" someone learn how to hack their computer.

On the other hand if someone chose to make a game world that is great, but I think it should be bot based. I don't want it implemented directly in aw.

AAsmund1

[View Quote] > Perhaps you should try reading more carefully about the direction I think AW should be going at http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/. As other people have already pointed out to you in response to this blatant attack against me, I never claimed AW should ONLY be a game, but that it should have more gamelike features (jumping, inventory, shooting, etc), but not to ONLY rely on these gamelike features. Of course I still want to build and chat, but AW needs to be more diverse if it ever hopes to get more popular...and e-commerce just ain't in AW's future at this time.
>
> And learn how to pronoun correctly. Back to grammar 101 with ya!
>
[View Quote]

Jul 9, 2000, 7:30pm

[View Quote] > Jumping
> I don't think of this as a game feature. AW is about moving around in 3d space. So naturally jumping and crawling should be implemented. But can't you do this with seqs? Anyway, avatar and object animation needs to be worked on.

SEQs are cumbersome and klunky. Like Myrth has been suggesting lately, skeletal animation and mesh deformation is what AW needs, on par with most current 3D games.

> Inventory
> I don't want the knives and ropes kind of inventory. I don't think aw should be more like rpg's or first person shoot'em ups.... I choose to look at "inventory" as data (your inventory in this sense is your entire hd). AW isn't, and shouldn't be a game. It is a *real* form of communciation (spatial and textual/verbal), it must not be degraded to fiction.

You're not thinking relatively. Just because AW would have an OPTIONAL inventory does not mean it COMPLETELY and ABSOLUTELY into a game. Besides, some of AW's worlds (Godzilla, The 13th Floor, Gor worlds, etc, etc) are "degraded" into fiction yet you don't seem to have a problem with them! But being able to hold multiple objects (perhaps even in a backpack) is hardly fictional. =

> Shooting
> I didn't think even you liked that...If you want to "shoot" someone learn how to hack their computer.
>
> On the other hand if someone chose to make a game world that is great, but I think it should be bot based. I don't want it implemented directly in aw.

Bots suck; they aren't server-based and there is a bot # limit.

OPTIONAL gamelike features should be directly implemented into AW. You don't HAVE to jump. You don't HAVE to move objects to/from your inventory. You don't HAVE to shoot. But the OPTION to do these things would make AW MORE gamelike and expand its versatility (what you can DO with AW). Attempt to think outside the box, please.

[View Quote]

Jul 9, 2000, 8:03pm

<snip>
| > Shooting
| > I didn't think even you liked that...If you want to "shoot" someone learn how to hack their
computer.
<snip>
| Bots suck; they aren't server-based and there is a bot # limit.

Removing the limit would be nice, and what you mean by not server-based? software isnt called a
"bot server" but bots can be run from a dedicated server...

<snip>
You don't HAVE to shoot
<snip>

Unless you are talking about a world option, a checkbox that says "shooting enabled" or something,
first of all this can be done easily with a bot but thats not what I am talking about. I AM talking
about how if one has the "option" to shoot someone in EVERY world, then its not really an option.
Someone chooses to be able to shoot and you dont, they come up and shoot and kill you. Or, if you
are actually hosting a game, and say if "shooting disabled" meant you could not get shot, then
anyone could be invincible when not shooting at someone. In r/l I am not an anti-gun person but in
VR there are no laws covering killing or death or annoying things like that. I pay my $20/year to
build and chat a little, not to build and chat and be worried about being killed or soemthing like
that. I think this is one time where you didn't think it thru very well.

<snip>
____________________
John Viper
http://www.jtsoft.net <-- Coming Soon!

Jul 9, 2000, 10:50pm

What you say about the killing feature, well, I don't agree with you there.
I am sure that no one who is with AW now (to build or chat) would want a
feature like that implemented. But how you say it could happen to you in
any world, well, that already exists in a way. It's called ejection.

If I sound rude, excuse me. It's just this whole tread hasn't been that
polite, has it?

Jul 10, 2000, 10:53pm

I maght have sounded confusing (it was late and i was tired) but I am against the killing feature.

Also, on ejection, this is true but:
1. In general (besides so called "paintball" worlds) oonly special people have priveledges to eject
and
2. ejection doesn't delete your citizenship permanently, it just removes you from that world.

hope that clears it up :-)
_________________________
John Viper
http://www.jtsoft.net <-- Coming Soon!
[View Quote]

Jul 11, 2000, 3:13am

Thanks for clearing that up. I didn't quite know what you meant with the
killing function, but now I agree with you from your definition. If someone
killed you and your citizenship "died" with you, that would REALLY stink.

Once again sorry for sounding rude.

Jul 11, 2000, 5:10am

[View Quote] > | > Shooting
> | > I didn't think even you liked that...If you want to "shoot" someone learn how to hack their

> | Bots suck; they aren't server-based and there is a bot # limit.
>
> Removing the limit would be nice, and what you mean by not server-based? software isnt called a
> "bot server" but bots can be run from a dedicated server...

Sure, just like worlds can, but try remotely controlling a bot running on a world server. Sorry, it ain't gonna happen at this time.

> | You don't HAVE to shoot
>
> Unless you are talking about a world option, a checkbox that says "shooting enabled" or something,
> first of all this can be done easily with a bot but thats not what I am talking about. I AM talking
> about how if one has the "option" to shoot someone in EVERY world, then its not really an option.
> Someone chooses to be able to shoot and you dont, they come up and shoot and kill you. Or, if you
> are actually hosting a game, and say if "shooting disabled" meant you could not get shot, then
> anyone could be invincible when not shooting at someone. In r/l I am not an anti-gun person but in
> VR there are no laws covering killing or death or annoying things like that. I pay my $20/year to
> build and chat a little, not to build and chat and be worried about being killed or soemthing like
> that. I think this is one time where you didn't think it thru very well.

Um, what do you need to shoot with? A gun. If your avatar doesn't have a gun, you can't shoot. And even if your avatar DOES have a gun, you don't HAVe to shoot. Think, please...and play some REAL 3D games to actually know what you're responding to before looking like a twit.

Jul 11, 2000, 12:29pm

| Um, what do you need to shoot with? A gun. If your avatar doesn't have a gun, you can't shoot.
| And even if your avatar DOES have a gun, you don't HAVe to shoot. Think, please...and play
| some REAL 3D games to actually know what you're responding to before looking like a twit.

I am not so sure I am a twit, you are making less sense than anybody here. That post was written
waaaay to late at night, so let me go over the important points again.

1. If you want "shooting enabled" a world option, I am OK with that (although the same effect can be
done easily with a bot, even I am writing one to do that right now) and the rest of this post can be
ignored and have a nice day :-)

2.If shooting is enabled in EVERY world across the uniserver, we have a problem. If I want to play
multiplayer shoot-em-ups, I will play Half-Life TFC or something. I like those games very much, but
I like to take a break from them in AW. in AW you can build and chat in peace. Visualize this: A
bunch of people are all happy and stuff just kinda building and talking and stuff having a big time
and someone feels like taking target practice. These poor people's citizenships could end up
deleted. Thats not what they pay for, they pay for build and chat.

3. If the abovementioned people's citizenships were NOT to be deleted, how else could you accomplish
the killing effect? just start over at GZ like in Quake? Or maybe your last saved spot like in
Half-Life? Or just being ejected from the world... but wait! All of my beautiful constructions are
in that world and I cannot go back for like weeks or maybe forever!

I am a huge fan of first person shooters. When I am angry there is nothing better than blowing
alien ass sky high, sometimes I even play Wolfenstein "3-D" lol and get rid of Nazis. When I am in
a good mood, I like the slight puzzles in Half-Life and Quake II. My friend, I have quite played my
share of 3-D games. (Wolfenstein 3-D (not really 3-D tho), Doom, Quake I, II, and III, Half-Life,
HL Opposing Force, I WILL play Half-Life 2, X-Wing and Tie Fighter and Top Gun and various other
flying games, oh what else is a 3-D game that I have played?) I have respected all of these games
(even Wolf3D because at that time that was a miracle) and if that is what I want I will play them,
but that is not what I want in AW, and if I took a poll, I am sure at least 75% of the people
responding would not mind the idea of "game worlds" but do NOT want all of AW to be a game. I
guarantee without a doubt that if AWCI put a killing feature in that they would go bankrupt, or at
least lose most of their citizens.

I hope THIS clears it up.

-John Viper

P.S.: There is no need for name calling (i.e.: "twit"), I am just trying to make civilized
conversation...

Jul 11, 2000, 2:48pm

Bot's can't simulate bullet's or damage. Also What in the hell are you thinking? There is no game that when you get killed once
boots you forever. Are you on crack?! All games respawn you... People LIKE repeat customers, what would make you even think that
aw would do something like that, or that Eep would even mean that.


-Myrth


[View Quote]

Jul 11, 2000, 7:19pm

A bot COULD be made to do that but the time and computations are just rediculous...

Also, how would you "respawn" in AW unless it were just a world option?

--
_________________________
John Viper
http://www.jtsoft.net <-- Coming Soon!
[View Quote]

Jul 11, 2000, 7:31pm

Well, you cant do most of the other game stuff yet, so that would be added. But in hQuests, whenever someone wins, the world closed
for a second, "respawning" everyone at gz.

-Myrth

[View Quote]

Jul 11, 2000, 9:53pm

[View Quote] > | Um, what do you need to shoot with? A gun. If your avatar doesn't have a gun, you can't shoot.
> | And even if your avatar DOES have a gun, you don't HAVe to shoot. Think, please...and play
> | some REAL 3D games to actually know what you're responding to before looking like a twit.
>
> I am not so sure I am a twit, you are making less sense than anybody here. That post was written
> waaaay to late at night, so let me go over the important points again.

You seem to use this excuse a lot. Solution: don't post when you're not fully conscious enough to have a meaningful post.

> 1. If you want "shooting enabled" a world option, I am OK with that (although the same effect can be
> done easily with a bot, even I am writing one to do that right now) and the rest of this post can be
> ignored and have a nice day :-)

Um, duh. You don't seem to be catching the word "OPTIONAL" in my posts. READ MORE CAREFULLY, CHAMP.

> 2.If shooting is enabled in EVERY world across the uniserver, we have a problem. If I want to play
> multiplayer shoot-em-ups, I will play Half-Life TFC or something. I like those games very much, but
> I like to take a break from them in AW. in AW you can build and chat in peace. Visualize this: A
> bunch of people are all happy and stuff just kinda building and talking and stuff having a big time
> and someone feels like taking target practice. These poor people's citizenships could end up
> deleted. Thats not what they pay for, they pay for build and chat.
>
> 3. If the abovementioned people's citizenships were NOT to be deleted, how else could you accomplish
> the killing effect? just start over at GZ like in Quake? Or maybe your last saved spot like in
> Half-Life? Or just being ejected from the world... but wait! All of my beautiful constructions are
> in that world and I cannot go back for like weeks or maybe forever!
>
> I am a huge fan of first person shooters. When I am angry there is nothing better than blowing
> alien ass sky high, sometimes I even play Wolfenstein "3-D" lol and get rid of Nazis. When I am in
> a good mood, I like the slight puzzles in Half-Life and Quake II. My friend, I have quite played my
> share of 3-D games. (Wolfenstein 3-D (not really 3-D tho), Doom, Quake I, II, and III, Half-Life,
> HL Opposing Force, I WILL play Half-Life 2, X-Wing and Tie Fighter and Top Gun and various other
> flying games, oh what else is a 3-D game that I have played?) I have respected all of these games
> (even Wolf3D because at that time that was a miracle) and if that is what I want I will play them,
> but that is not what I want in AW, and if I took a poll, I am sure at least 75% of the people
> responding would not mind the idea of "game worlds" but do NOT want all of AW to be a game. I
> guarantee without a doubt that if AWCI put a killing feature in that they would go bankrupt, or at
> least lose most of their citizens.
>
> I hope THIS clears it up.
>
> P.S.: There is no need for name calling (i.e.: "twit"), I am just trying to make civilized
> conversation...

How can you make civilized conversation when you're not fully there in the first place? Try posting when you're fully awake and have no other lame excuses to attempt to bail you out of your obvious incompetence.

Jul 11, 2000, 10:37pm

Ya know Eep if you had time you should give classes on how to write good =
come backs let alone what else you could teach then we could shut fools =
up with a few choice words.

[View Quote]

Jul 14, 2000, 1:53pm

AW tries to be irc, icq, game, game designer, ie, netscape, vrml....and with a one and a half programmer crew it is obvious they can't do it all. But I do agree with most of what you say, (but I don't think you are beeing specific enough). I can only say: it seems like an enormous task to add the features so worldbuilders can be game designers (that is what you want, right?). But perhaps a more resourceful company will come along and create something that will satisfy all of us....

On the other hand: why don't we use icq to locate our friends, a level designer to create levels, and Netscape to watch websites. Why must it all be cramped into aw???

[View Quote] [View Quote] >
>
> Bots suck; they aren't server-based and there is a bot # limit.
>
> OPTIONAL gamelike features should be directly implemented into AW. You don't HAVE to jump. You don't HAVE to move objects to/from your inventory. You don't HAVE to shoot. But the OPTION to do these things would make AW MORE gamelike and expand its versatility (what you can DO with AW). Attempt to think outside the box, please.

Jul 15, 2000, 2:08am

Because AW is basically a wanna-be multi-user level editor. This means it has real-time chatting and level editing built-in. The integrated Web browser is unnecessary. AW has a unique niche in being a wanna-be multi-user level editor. The only problem is AW is BARELY sufficient at this which is why it hasn't caught on yet. This is AW's potential and until Rick and JP realize this, AW will continue to flounder and attempt to be something it just simply is NOT designed to be. It's too bad Protagonist isn't around anymore or he'd be able to reiterate what AW's original concept and vision (design spec) was supposed to be. Perhaps Roland knows but he just doesn't seem to be very passionate about making AW like it...

It wouldn't be difficult for any ol' 3D game developer to make a multi-user level editor, but they just haven't reached that point yet...but they will soon. Games like 10six, The Sims, Neverwinter Nights, etc, etc are converging on this concept and I predict that through natural game design evolution a multi-user level editor will appear within a few years. Whether or not AW finally gets around to developing towards that goal is anyone's guess, but AW will probably continue to flounder and flail around like it basically has since its inception in 1995. AW needs vision...and "e-commerce" ain't it.

[View Quote] > AW tries to be irc, icq, game, game designer, ie, netscape, vrml....and with a one and a half programmer crew it is obvious they can't do it all. But I do agree with most of what you say, (but I don't think you are beeing specific enough). I can only say: it seems like an enormous task to add the features so worldbuilders can be game designers (that is what you want, right?). But perhaps a more resourceful company will come along and create something that will satisfy all of us....
>
> On the other hand: why don't we use icq to locate our friends, a level designer to create levels, and Netscape to watch websites. Why must it all be cramped into aw???
>
[View Quote]

Jul 16, 2000, 10:00pm

You can make a bot for inventory, bloodshed, etc. You can even make it chase
your butt around and delete itself after you hack it to quarks.

Jumping would be awesome for those worlds with flight turned off.

[View Quote]

1  |   Order by index