ThreadBoard ArchivesSite FeaturesActiveworlds SupportHistoric Archives |
mouselook should work in all three dimensions when flying (Wishlist)
mouselook should work in all three dimensions when flying // WishlistgrimbleNov 16, 2000, 4:35pm
wingNov 16, 2000, 6:13pm
Nope, no text.
[View Quote] > was there any text with this or am I just to impatient for it to download? > [View Quote] tony56Nov 16, 2000, 8:37pm
Details? Please?
-- - Tony56 (aka Chandler56) "Freedom: That's What The Government Wants You To Believe!" ____________________________________________________________ [View Quote] glokNov 17, 2000, 2:58am
I believe he means that mouselook mode should, while the user is flying, act
like mouselook does in any Quake-style game while flying. That is to say that pitching the view down should cause you to travel at a downward angle. Or, to put it another way, that you should go in the direction you are pointing in a vertical sense as well as the horizontal sense. Wouldn't really be a terrible option, I'd say.. [View Quote] john viperNov 17, 2000, 3:04am
The whole "movement" thing needs a major overhaul -- as well as avatars, sound, avatars, object
rendering, overall rendering engine, and did I mention that the Avatar rendering stuff needs a major overhaul? well it does. OK anyway the point is that it needs to be redone -- like in Quake I like how if you bump into a wall, unless you are completely perpendicular to it (impossible) you will slide against it. On the other hand, in AW its like you are velcroed (spelling?) as soon as you barely touch the object. And of course the moving -- Heres what I think on that. There should be a gravity mode and non-gravity mode -- in public worlds like AW it could be set to user-option, or maybe in like Atlantis it could be always non-gravity, but with gravity the + button would make you jump (or something like that) and in non-gravity movement would be achieved similar to quake. _________________________ John Viper http://www.jtsoft.net "Java is a machine. You put Java code in one end, and money comes out the other." - Anonymous [View Quote] grimbleNov 17, 2000, 8:02am
I like the gravity/non-gravity idea. Trying to maintain a fixed position in
"space" to overlook something (like your building) is a pain. Grims [View Quote] aasmund1Nov 17, 2000, 11:53am
sorry...what I meant was: when you are flying (gravity=off) while using
mouselook you should move the exact direction you're facing. Even up or down... AAsmund1 [View Quote] > Perhaps it is a secret ... ?? > > Grims > [View Quote] john viperNov 18, 2000, 2:24am
Yes this is true, but there are two things about this. 1. Locally, you cannot decide if there is a
ground object or not, therefore you still don't really have a choice, and 2. The ground object existing or not should not control the gravity. Some people choose not to have a ground and just make it themselves (like DEM2RWX worlds), and walking up stairs and hills and stuff can be a pain in the bootie. _________________________ John Viper http://www.jtsoft.net "Java is a machine. You put Java code in one end, and money comes out the other." - Anonymous [View Quote] eepNov 18, 2000, 6:49am
http://tnlc.com/rw/rwx.html#ground to learn practically everything you ever wanted to know about AW grounds but were afraid to ask, including how to use modular ground AND have gravity enabled.
[View Quote] > Yes this is true, but there are two things about this. 1. Locally, you cannot decide if there is a > ground object or not, therefore you still don't really have a choice, and 2. The ground object > existing or not should not control the gravity. Some people choose not to have a ground and just > make it themselves (like DEM2RWX worlds), and walking up stairs and hills and stuff can be a pain in > the bootie. > [View Quote] john viperNov 18, 2000, 1:45pm
Thats kewl but I still wish there were a user option about gravity or now (if the world permits of
course) _________________________ John Viper http://www.jtsoft.net "Java is a machine. You put Java code in one end, and money comes out the other." - Anonymous [View Quote] eepNov 18, 2000, 4:24pm
I agree, to which you can find more info about such a feature request at http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html#gravity
I would like to suggest to everyone that before posting in this newsgroup you review this web page to see if your wish is already on it (or a variation thereof). Then discuss additions/corrections/suggestions on THAT wish here and if enough people chime in in agreement, I'll add it to the list and hopefully Roland will add it to AW! If it's VERY popular and REALLY needed/wanted, perhaps a petition and "wish fulfillment" (how cheesy; let's call it "feature request" instead) campaign can be initiated. [View Quote] > Thats kewl but I still wish there were a user option about gravity or now (if the world permits of > course) > > "Java is a machine. You put Java code in one end, and money comes out the other." - Anonymous > [View Quote] grimbleNov 18, 2000, 7:03pm
Eep, I would imagine, from the name you make for yourself (no offense), that
hosting such a central "feature request" list on your site might not be the most productive (and I believe I've already shared my views on these "petitions". Isn't the reason for this NG to put forward new ideas? Just a thought. Grims [View Quote] wingNov 18, 2000, 7:24pm
[View Quote]
>
> Isn't the reason for this NG to put forward new ideas? > It's supposed to be, but I personally doubt it even gets read grimbleNov 18, 2000, 7:37pm
Looking at the size of some of these threads and the deviation from the
topics on a lot of them, is it any surprise? Grims [View Quote] aasmund1Nov 18, 2000, 9:04pm
the point is: if we can agree on what is the most important features, like
say: everyone who has a geforce card join together and keep telling Rolland we want hardware T&L support maybe he'll make it a priority.... AAsmund1 [View Quote] > Looking at the size of some of these threads and the deviation from the > topics on a lot of them, is it any surprise? > > Grims > [View Quote] agent1Nov 18, 2000, 10:30pm
I don't think that's something Roland could do... You'd probably have to talk to someone at Criterion.
-Agent1 [View Quote] grimbleNov 19, 2000, 8:33am
But AW would have more clout with Criterion than us poor, insignificant
users. Perhaps it would be best to go through Roland somehow. My main point here is that I think there has to be a more effective and non-antagonistic manner of influencing future product updates than these flaming petitions. Grims. [View Quote] eepNov 19, 2000, 11:33am
Hence why I made an AW improvements page so Roland could get right down to what needs improving in AW without all the bullshit.
[View Quote] > Looking at the size of some of these threads and the deviation from the > topics on a lot of them, is it any surprise? > [View Quote] eepNov 19, 2000, 11:37am
Hardware T&L (transform and lighting for the ignorant) is up to Criterion. I think I heard they are working on it for RenderWare but I'm not sure. Regardless, Criterion seems to still be caught up in all the so-called "next-generation" console marketing hype. Once they realize it IS just hype, and that the PC simply blows consoles away, perhaps they'll work on making the PC RW more up-to-date with other PC 3D engines. Until then, don't expect it in AW ANY time soon.
[View Quote] > the point is: if we can agree on what is the most important features, like > say: everyone who has a geforce card join together and keep telling Rolland > we want hardware T&L support maybe he'll make it a priority.... > [View Quote] eepNov 19, 2000, 11:39am
I've emailed Criterion before about the fragmented polygon bug, but I don't think I ever got a response (or if I did it was a useless PR one). Anyway, Roland mentioned in a recent TechTalk that he talked to Criterion about that and other bugs but they were no help as usual. What he NEEDS to do is band together with other RW developers and start putting pressure on Criterion to fix all their damn bugs...
[View Quote] > But AW would have more clout with Criterion than us poor, insignificant > users. Perhaps it would be best to go through Roland somehow. My main point > here is that I think there has to be a more effective and non-antagonistic > manner of influencing future product updates than these flaming petitions. > [View Quote] john viperNov 19, 2000, 2:03pm
The list IS popular and very logical. However if Roland doesn't even look at this NG I doubt he
will look at the improve list... (unless you know he has in the past) _________________________ John Viper http://www.jtsoft.net "Java is a machine. You put Java code in one end, and money comes out the other." - Anonymous [View Quote] eepNov 19, 2000, 8:42pm
I've told him about it. He knows about it--he just doesn't care, much like he doesn't seem to care about this newsgroup because there is simply too much to improve in AW and not enough time to do it all. Hopefully with Shamus as a programmer now AW WILL get improved quicker and more often, but we'll see...
I'm already glad to see the AW 3.1 features coming, so it's a start. Now if it can just keep up AW will perhaps be competitive with other 3D games and level editors. [View Quote] > The list IS popular and very logical. However if Roland doesn't even look at this NG I doubt he > will look at the improve list... (unless you know he has in the past) > [View Quote] aasmund1Nov 19, 2000, 11:36pm
Actually they used to claim to support it on their site, but it looks kind of trimmed at the moment. When confronted with it, at one of the tech talks, Roland said it would take some "pretty funky" programming, but that he'd look into it for future releases...
AAsmund1 [View Quote] > Hardware T&L (transform and lighting for the ignorant) is up to Criterion. I think I heard they are working on it for RenderWare but I'm not sure. Regardless, Criterion seems to still be caught up in all the so-called "next-generation" console marketing hype. Once they realize it IS just hype, and that the PC simply blows consoles away, perhaps they'll work on making the PC RW more up-to-date with other PC 3D engines. Until then, don't expect it in AW ANY time soon. > [View Quote] |
