|
|
EverQuest: 300,000 registered players - AW's future (Community)
EverQuest: 300,000 registered players - AW's future // Community
Oct 5, 2000, 10:11pm
Just read this in the latest issue of PC Gamer on page 60. They'll be doing a review of massively multiplayer, persistent world games next month. But the EverQuest registered player count should be a wakeup call to AWCI: people like games more than they like to simply chat and build. Compare AW's citizen count (~25,000) to EverQuest's and that should be a clue.
And don't you ingrates start replying saying "Wahhhhhhhh, but AW isn't a game!&*(#^$&)^% at $# <froth, drool, spit>" because, yes, I KNOW this, and that's my point as to why AW isn't as popular as it COULD be. With just a few minor gamelike features like jumping, an inventory, and the ability to either shoot, hit, or simply TOUCH other people/things (not simply clicking them from long distances)--http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html for more AW improvements, AW could become more attractive to gamers, especially since I think AW is basically a multi-user level editor, and there aren't any such things that exist for any games that I know of (and, believe me, I've been looking for years).
Sure there are limited building RTS (real-time strategy) games like 10six and...er, well, I think that's it. Plus there are of course many 3D game level editors (but they usually have to be compiled and cannot usually be played while they're being created) and 2D map editors, but no game developer has done a REAL-TIME, multi-user 3D level editor. THAT is what keeps AW unique from every other wanna-be VR program out there, but AW just isn't gamelike enough to compete with true 3D game level editors.
AW COULD be the first in this market if Rick, JP, Roland, and Shamus wake up to this realization NOW and start moving AW's direction towards it. AW has stagnated and just gotten by for too long now--it's time AW had a REAL, MARKETABLE direction. E-commerce (stupid overhyped marketing buzzword) and distance learning education are fine SUB-designs, but there's no way AW will become profitable from them. The gaming industry--and, specifically, 3D gaming industry--has already proven itself to be VERY productive and popular; AW should learn and adapt accordingly.
--
http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
Oct 6, 2000, 10:41am
I agree; If a few game-like features were added to the browser/SDK, it would make AW that little bit more able to compete with
others.
-Agent1
[View Quote]eep <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DD122F.BA3861A6 at tnlc.com...
> Just read this in the latest issue of PC Gamer on page 60. They'll be doing a review of massively multiplayer, persistent world
games next month. But the EverQuest registered player count should be a wakeup call to AWCI: people like games more than they like
to simply chat and build. Compare AW's citizen count (~25,000) to EverQuest's and that should be a clue.
>
> And don't you ingrates start replying saying "Wahhhhhhhh, but AW isn't a game!&*(#^$&)^% at $# <froth, drool, spit>" because, yes, I
KNOW this, and that's my point as to why AW isn't as popular as it COULD be. With just a few minor gamelike features like jumping,
an inventory, and the ability to either shoot, hit, or simply TOUCH other people/things (not simply clicking them from long
distances)--http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html for more AW improvements, AW could become more attractive to gamers, especially
since I think AW is basically a multi-user level editor, and there aren't any such things that exist for any games that I know of
(and, believe me, I've been looking for years).
>
> Sure there are limited building RTS (real-time strategy) games like 10six and...er, well, I think that's it. Plus there are of
course many 3D game level editors (but they usually have to be compiled and cannot usually be played while they're being created)
and 2D map editors, but no game developer has done a REAL-TIME, multi-user 3D level editor. THAT is what keeps AW unique from every
other wanna-be VR program out there, but AW just isn't gamelike enough to compete with true 3D game level editors.
>
> AW COULD be the first in this market if Rick, JP, Roland, and Shamus wake up to this realization NOW and start moving AW's
direction towards it. AW has stagnated and just gotten by for too long now--it's time AW had a REAL, MARKETABLE direction.
E-commerce (stupid overhyped marketing buzzword) and distance learning education are fine SUB-designs, but there's no way AW will
become profitable from them. The gaming industry--and, specifically, 3D gaming industry--has already proven itself to be VERY
productive and popular; AW should learn and adapt accordingly.
|
Oct 6, 2000, 10:46am
I don't think AW is interested about these things. They are more interested
in selling educational universe's to university's and schools all around the
world for educational use not so much what we think.
Regards,
Anduin Lothar
[View Quote]"agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
news:39ddc866$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I agree; If a few game-like features were added to the browser/SDK, it
would make AW that little bit more able to compete with
> others.
>
> -Agent1
>
>
> eep <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DD122F.BA3861A6 at tnlc.com...
doing a review of massively multiplayer, persistent world
> games next month. But the EverQuest registered player count should be a
wakeup call to AWCI: people like games more than they like
> to simply chat and build. Compare AW's citizen count (~25,000) to
EverQuest's and that should be a clue.
game!&*(#^$&)^% at $# <froth, drool, spit>" because, yes, I
> KNOW this, and that's my point as to why AW isn't as popular as it COULD
be. With just a few minor gamelike features like jumping,
> an inventory, and the ability to either shoot, hit, or simply TOUCH other
people/things (not simply clicking them from long
> distances)--http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html for more AW improvements,
AW could become more attractive to gamers, especially
> since I think AW is basically a multi-user level editor, and there aren't
any such things that exist for any games that I know of
> (and, believe me, I've been looking for years).
10six and...er, well, I think that's it. Plus there are of
> course many 3D game level editors (but they usually have to be compiled
and cannot usually be played while they're being created)
> and 2D map editors, but no game developer has done a REAL-TIME, multi-user
3D level editor. THAT is what keeps AW unique from every
> other wanna-be VR program out there, but AW just isn't gamelike enough to
compete with true 3D game level editors.
wake up to this realization NOW and start moving AW's
> direction towards it. AW has stagnated and just gotten by for too long
now--it's time AW had a REAL, MARKETABLE direction.
> E-commerce (stupid overhyped marketing buzzword) and distance learning
education are fine SUB-designs, but there's no way AW will
> become profitable from them. The gaming industry--and, specifically, 3D
gaming industry--has already proven itself to be VERY
> productive and popular; AW should learn and adapt accordingly.
>
>
|
Oct 6, 2000, 11:05am
Actually, I'm fairly sure they're interested in "e-commerce" right now... Could be wrong. I seriously doubt they are really
interested in selling educational products. They provide a 1/3 discount, I believe... and they have their own "Eduverse" -- That's
about all I can think of.
-Agent1
[View Quote]"anduin lothar" <uswf at centercom.com.au> wrote in message news:39ddc993 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I don't think AW is interested about these things. They are more interested
> in selling educational universe's to university's and schools all around the
> world for educational use not so much what we think.
>
>
> "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> news:39ddc866$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> would make AW that little bit more able to compete with
> doing a review of massively multiplayer, persistent world
> wakeup call to AWCI: people like games more than they like
> EverQuest's and that should be a clue.
> game!&*(#^$&)^% at $# <froth, drool, spit>" because, yes, I
> be. With just a few minor gamelike features like jumping,
> people/things (not simply clicking them from long
> AW could become more attractive to gamers, especially
> any such things that exist for any games that I know of
> 10six and...er, well, I think that's it. Plus there are of
> and cannot usually be played while they're being created)
> 3D level editor. THAT is what keeps AW unique from every
> compete with true 3D game level editors.
> wake up to this realization NOW and start moving AW's
> now--it's time AW had a REAL, MARKETABLE direction.
> education are fine SUB-designs, but there's no way AW will
> gaming industry--has already proven itself to be VERY
|
Oct 6, 2000, 11:57am
Oh yes they will go on and on about their e-Commerce but umm... *looks around* where is it? Where
is teh advertising? Where are the stores where we can go in and buy stuff? (and don't give me the
at mart crap... if THATS what they think of e-Commerce, a separate world which just links you to
their web page, its purdy sad)
_________________________
John Viper
http://www.jtsoft.net
[View Quote]"agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message news:39ddce1a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
| Actually, I'm fairly sure they're interested in "e-commerce" right now... Could be wrong. I
seriously doubt they are really
| interested in selling educational products. They provide a 1/3 discount, I believe... and they
have their own "Eduverse" -- That's
| about all I can think of.
|
| -Agent1
|
|
| "anduin lothar" <uswf at centercom.com.au> wrote in message news:39ddc993 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
| > I don't think AW is interested about these things. They are more interested
| > in selling educational universe's to university's and schools all around the
| > world for educational use not so much what we think.
| >
| >
| > "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
| > news:39ddc866$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
| > > I agree; If a few game-like features were added to the browser/SDK, it
| > would make AW that little bit more able to compete with
| > > others.
| > >
| > >
| > > eep <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DD122F.BA3861A6 at tnlc.com...
| > > > Just read this in the latest issue of PC Gamer on page 60. They'll be
| > doing a review of massively multiplayer, persistent world
| > > games next month. But the EverQuest registered player count should be a
| > wakeup call to AWCI: people like games more than they like
| > > to simply chat and build. Compare AW's citizen count (~25,000) to
| > EverQuest's and that should be a clue.
| > > >
| > > > And don't you ingrates start replying saying "Wahhhhhhhh, but AW isn't a
| > game!&*(#^$&)^% at $# <froth, drool, spit>" because, yes, I
| > > KNOW this, and that's my point as to why AW isn't as popular as it COULD
| > be. With just a few minor gamelike features like jumping,
| > > an inventory, and the ability to either shoot, hit, or simply TOUCH other
| > people/things (not simply clicking them from long
| > > distances)--http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html for more AW improvements,
| > AW could become more attractive to gamers, especially
| > > since I think AW is basically a multi-user level editor, and there aren't
| > any such things that exist for any games that I know of
| > > (and, believe me, I've been looking for years).
| > > >
| > > > Sure there are limited building RTS (real-time strategy) games like
| > 10six and...er, well, I think that's it. Plus there are of
| > > course many 3D game level editors (but they usually have to be compiled
| > and cannot usually be played while they're being created)
| > > and 2D map editors, but no game developer has done a REAL-TIME, multi-user
| > 3D level editor. THAT is what keeps AW unique from every
| > > other wanna-be VR program out there, but AW just isn't gamelike enough to
| > compete with true 3D game level editors.
| > > >
| > > > AW COULD be the first in this market if Rick, JP, Roland, and Shamus
| > wake up to this realization NOW and start moving AW's
| > > direction towards it. AW has stagnated and just gotten by for too long
| > now--it's time AW had a REAL, MARKETABLE direction.
| > > E-commerce (stupid overhyped marketing buzzword) and distance learning
| > education are fine SUB-designs, but there's no way AW will
| > > become profitable from them. The gaming industry--and, specifically, 3D
| > gaming industry--has already proven itself to be VERY
| > > productive and popular; AW should learn and adapt accordingly.
|
|
|
Oct 6, 2000, 1:01pm
Exactly! So don't you think it's HIGH time Rick and JP started reorienting AW's development in a new direction? I'm telling you (and AWCI), gaming is where AW should be headed. Again, you twits who have a limited definition of "gaming" need not reply because if you think it just means running around shooting people, sorry, get a clue. Yes, AW has some board/card games, but I am referring to action, adventure, role-playing, and even strategy type gaming genres. Sure, you could just go play a REAL game of one or all of these genres, but where in those games are you allowed to create new levels/worlds/tracks/maps/whatever in real-time with other people?
And that's my point: if AWCI could simply merge their "multi-user level editing" design with gaming, AW would FINALLY become marketable enough to actually stand on its own as a viable alternative to on-line/multiplayer persistant games like Ultima Online, EverQuest, Asheron's Call, the upcoming Soverign and Neverwinter Nights, etc.
How much longer will AW continue to flounder while the rest of the 3D gaming industry passes it by and eventually develops AW's design into its games on its own? Mark my words, 3D games ARE getting to the point of adding multi-user editors--10six and Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption are perhaps the closest, and Neverwinter Nights will be even closer.
AW will be nothing more than a fading dream within, at most, 2-3 years MAX at this rate (7 years seems like a good, common number)--OK, so I'm pulling a wanna-be psychic prediction there, but I really do see this happening more and more and REALLY wish Rick and JP would stop playing the silly, stupid "e-commerce" card and go play some 3D games and get a clue already as to AW's potential.
[View Quote]
> Oh yes they will go on and on about their e-Commerce but umm... *looks around* where is it? Where
> is teh advertising? Where are the stores where we can go in and buy stuff? (and don't give me the
> at mart crap... if THATS what they think of e-Commerce, a separate world which just links you to
> their web page, its purdy sad)
>
[View Quote]> "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message news:39ddce1a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> | Actually, I'm fairly sure they're interested in "e-commerce" right now... Could be wrong. I
> seriously doubt they are really
> | interested in selling educational products. They provide a 1/3 discount, I believe... and they
> have their own "Eduverse" -- That's
> | about all I can think of.
> |
> | "anduin lothar" <uswf at centercom.com.au> wrote in message news:39ddc993 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> | > I don't think AW is interested about these things. They are more interested
> | > in selling educational universe's to university's and schools all around the
> | > world for educational use not so much what we think.
> | >
> | > "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> | > news:39ddc866$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> | > > I agree; If a few game-like features were added to the browser/SDK, it
> | > would make AW that little bit more able to compete with
> | > > others.
> | > >
> | > > eep <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DD122F.BA3861A6 at tnlc.com...
> | > > > Just read this in the latest issue of PC Gamer on page 60. They'll be
> | > doing a review of massively multiplayer, persistent world
> | > > games next month. But the EverQuest registered player count should be a
> | > wakeup call to AWCI: people like games more than they like
> | > > to simply chat and build. Compare AW's citizen count (~25,000) to
> | > EverQuest's and that should be a clue.
> | > > >
> | > > > And don't you ingrates start replying saying "Wahhhhhhhh, but AW isn't a
> | > game!&*(#^$&)^% at $# <froth, drool, spit>" because, yes, I
> | > > KNOW this, and that's my point as to why AW isn't as popular as it COULD
> | > be. With just a few minor gamelike features like jumping,
> | > > an inventory, and the ability to either shoot, hit, or simply TOUCH other
> | > people/things (not simply clicking them from long
> | > > distances)--http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html for more AW improvements,
> | > AW could become more attractive to gamers, especially
> | > > since I think AW is basically a multi-user level editor, and there aren't
> | > any such things that exist for any games that I know of
> | > > (and, believe me, I've been looking for years).
> | > > >
> | > > > Sure there are limited building RTS (real-time strategy) games like
> | > 10six and...er, well, I think that's it. Plus there are of
> | > > course many 3D game level editors (but they usually have to be compiled
> | > and cannot usually be played while they're being created)
> | > > and 2D map editors, but no game developer has done a REAL-TIME, multi-user
> | > 3D level editor. THAT is what keeps AW unique from every
> | > > other wanna-be VR program out there, but AW just isn't gamelike enough to
> | > compete with true 3D game level editors.
> | > > >
> | > > > AW COULD be the first in this market if Rick, JP, Roland, and Shamus
> | > wake up to this realization NOW and start moving AW's
> | > > direction towards it. AW has stagnated and just gotten by for too long
> | > now--it's time AW had a REAL, MARKETABLE direction.
> | > > E-commerce (stupid overhyped marketing buzzword) and distance learning
> | > education are fine SUB-designs, but there's no way AW will
> | > > become profitable from them. The gaming industry--and, specifically, 3D
> | > gaming industry--has already proven itself to be VERY
> | > > productive and popular; AW should learn and adapt accordingly.
|
--
http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
Oct 6, 2000, 3:13pm
Question, eep. Is renderware capable of the type of gaming invironment
that you are refering to? Or would Roland and company have to basicly
rewrite all of the code? Just asking.
Holistic1
[View Quote]eep wrote:
>
> Exactly! So don't you think it's HIGH time Rick and JP started reorienting AW's development in a new direction? I'm telling you (and AWCI), gaming is where AW should be headed. Again, you twits who have a limited definition of "gaming" need not reply because if you think it just means running around shooting people, sorry, get a clue. Yes, AW has some board/card games, but I am referring to action, adventure, role-playing, and even strategy type gaming genres. Sure, you could just go play a REAL game of one or all of these genres, but where in those games are you allowed to create new levels/worlds/tracks/maps/whatever in real-time with other people?
>
> And that's my point: if AWCI could simply merge their "multi-user level editing" design with gaming, AW would FINALLY become marketable enough to actually stand on its own as a viable alternative to on-line/multiplayer persistant games like Ultima Online, EverQuest, Asheron's Call, the upcoming Soverign and Neverwinter Nights, etc.
>
> How much longer will AW continue to flounder while the rest of the 3D gaming industry passes it by and eventually develops AW's design into its games on its own? Mark my words, 3D games ARE getting to the point of adding multi-user editors--10six and Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption are perhaps the closest, and Neverwinter Nights will be even closer.
>
> AW will be nothing more than a fading dream within, at most, 2-3 years MAX at this rate (7 years seems like a good, common number)--OK, so I'm pulling a wanna-be psychic prediction there, but I really do see this happening more and more and REALLY wish Rick and JP would stop playing the silly, stupid "e-commerce" card and go play some 3D games and get a clue already as to AW's potential.
>
> john viper wrote:
>
>
> --
>
> http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
> Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
> DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
|
Oct 6, 2000, 5:33pm
Renderware is almost 99.9% likely to be able to do this. Simply because renderware only takes care of... Rendering and closely related things. However, because renderware is so inefficient even on midrange systems, it'd take a varitable supercomputer to handle RW and AW code that requires server checks and local CPU time on collision detection (avatars) projecting whats in you're touch zone (if we could reach out and touch someone or fire weapons with a max range). Projectile trajectories... More CPU time to calculate where it moves to and then hand it off to the modem to send. Add into this equaion multitasking with CPU intensive programs like Winamp, and
IE. And then the usual complement of accessory programs. AIM and/or ICQ, system monitoring programs (Norton, Motherboard monitor), and the all important Windows. Seems that this would require a buttload of RAM and at LEAST a GHz of CPU horsepower, and a DSL/Cable modem
[View Quote]
> Question, eep. Is renderware capable of the type of gaming invironment
> that you are refering to? Or would Roland and company have to basicly
> rewrite all of the code? Just asking.
>
> Holistic1
>
[View Quote]
Oct 6, 2000, 6:16pm
Here is my view on teh matter..... either they need to follow Eep and get gaming technologies in
there (and so long as it is a per-world thing and not affecting me in any way unless I want to enter
that world then I am OK with it) OR they need to actually do some e-Commerce. Gaming, though, seems
the only way to go at this point unless they actually ADVERTISE!!!! and Eep, Games are great. I
love a well programmed game, and AW does have the potential, but I have also played the strategy and
RPGs (Command & conquer ruled, Final Fantasy was OK). You have to have things like money to do
stuff, and I fear that if ALL of AW were converted to a game-like situation, the things that I value
so much as building, chatting, existing in a place which far surpasses Reality in many respects,
would be lost to things like having to worry that you have enough credits or umm whats it called...
nil? to do such things. Now, if you could buy a gaming world server or something like that which
hosted a gaming world... then I am all for it, and agree with Eep in every way. If ALL of AW would
be converted to such a thing, then no.
And Eep don''t reply to tis message if you are going to believe that since I don't think ALL of AW
should be game-based, that I am a twit or whatever. As for game-like features such as jumping or
picking up stuff or getting in a car or whatever, hell yes implement it at once!
_________________________
John Viper
http://www.jtsoft.net
[View Quote]"eep" <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DDE2C2.379BBD73 at tnlc.com...
| Exactly! So don't you think it's HIGH time Rick and JP started reorienting AW's development in a
new direction? I'm telling you (and AWCI), gaming is where AW should be headed. Again, you twits who
have a limited definition of "gaming" need not reply because if you think it just means running
around shooting people, sorry, get a clue. Yes, AW has some board/card games, but I am referring to
action, adventure, role-playing, and even strategy type gaming genres. Sure, you could just go play
a REAL game of one or all of these genres, but where in those games are you allowed to create new
levels/worlds/tracks/maps/whatever in real-time with other people?
|
| And that's my point: if AWCI could simply merge their "multi-user level editing" design with
gaming, AW would FINALLY become marketable enough to actually stand on its own as a viable
alternative to on-line/multiplayer persistant games like Ultima Online, EverQuest, Asheron's Call,
the upcoming Soverign and Neverwinter Nights, etc.
|
| How much longer will AW continue to flounder while the rest of the 3D gaming industry passes it by
and eventually develops AW's design into its games on its own? Mark my words, 3D games ARE getting
to the point of adding multi-user editors--10six and Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption are
perhaps the closest, and Neverwinter Nights will be even closer.
|
| AW will be nothing more than a fading dream within, at most, 2-3 years MAX at this rate (7 years
seems like a good, common number)--OK, so I'm pulling a wanna-be psychic prediction there, but I
really do see this happening more and more and REALLY wish Rick and JP would stop playing the silly,
stupid "e-commerce" card and go play some 3D games and get a clue already as to AW's potential.
|
| john viper wrote:
|
| > Oh yes they will go on and on about their e-Commerce but umm... *looks around* where is it?
Where
| > is teh advertising? Where are the stores where we can go in and buy stuff? (and don't give me
the
| > at mart crap... if THATS what they think of e-Commerce, a separate world which just links you to
| > their web page, its purdy sad)
| >
| > "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
news:39ddce1a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
| > | Actually, I'm fairly sure they're interested in "e-commerce" right now... Could be wrong. I
| > seriously doubt they are really
| > | interested in selling educational products. They provide a 1/3 discount, I believe... and they
| > have their own "Eduverse" -- That's
| > | about all I can think of.
| > |
| > | "anduin lothar" <uswf at centercom.com.au> wrote in message
news:39ddc993 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
| > | > I don't think AW is interested about these things. They are more interested
| > | > in selling educational universe's to university's and schools all around the
| > | > world for educational use not so much what we think.
| > | >
| > | > "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
| > | > news:39ddc866$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
| > | > > I agree; If a few game-like features were added to the browser/SDK, it
| > | > would make AW that little bit more able to compete with
| > | > > others.
| > | > >
| > | > > eep <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DD122F.BA3861A6 at tnlc.com...
| > | > > > Just read this in the latest issue of PC Gamer on page 60. They'll be
| > | > doing a review of massively multiplayer, persistent world
| > | > > games next month. But the EverQuest registered player count should be a
| > | > wakeup call to AWCI: people like games more than they like
| > | > > to simply chat and build. Compare AW's citizen count (~25,000) to
| > | > EverQuest's and that should be a clue.
| > | > > >
| > | > > > And don't you ingrates start replying saying "Wahhhhhhhh, but AW isn't a
| > | > game!&*(#^$&)^% at $# <froth, drool, spit>" because, yes, I
| > | > > KNOW this, and that's my point as to why AW isn't as popular as it COULD
| > | > be. With just a few minor gamelike features like jumping,
| > | > > an inventory, and the ability to either shoot, hit, or simply TOUCH other
| > | > people/things (not simply clicking them from long
| > | > > distances)--http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html for more AW improvements,
| > | > AW could become more attractive to gamers, especially
| > | > > since I think AW is basically a multi-user level editor, and there aren't
| > | > any such things that exist for any games that I know of
| > | > > (and, believe me, I've been looking for years).
| > | > > >
| > | > > > Sure there are limited building RTS (real-time strategy) games like
| > | > 10six and...er, well, I think that's it. Plus there are of
| > | > > course many 3D game level editors (but they usually have to be compiled
| > | > and cannot usually be played while they're being created)
| > | > > and 2D map editors, but no game developer has done a REAL-TIME, multi-user
| > | > 3D level editor. THAT is what keeps AW unique from every
| > | > > other wanna-be VR program out there, but AW just isn't gamelike enough to
| > | > compete with true 3D game level editors.
| > | > > >
| > | > > > AW COULD be the first in this market if Rick, JP, Roland, and Shamus
| > | > wake up to this realization NOW and start moving AW's
| > | > > direction towards it. AW has stagnated and just gotten by for too long
| > | > now--it's time AW had a REAL, MARKETABLE direction.
| > | > > E-commerce (stupid overhyped marketing buzzword) and distance learning
| > | > education are fine SUB-designs, but there's no way AW will
| > | > > become profitable from them. The gaming industry--and, specifically, 3D
| > | > gaming industry--has already proven itself to be VERY
| > | > > productive and popular; AW should learn and adapt accordingly.
|
| --
|
| http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
| Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
| DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
|
|
Oct 6, 2000, 7:25pm
"Renderware" IS the format for a gaming engine (Previous version of
Criterian software). Check Criterians web site, the new software (engine) is
the engine behine the Sony 128 bit playstation.
Casay
[View Quote]"holistic1" <tkafader at pattan.k12.pa.us> wrote in message
news:39DE016F.498A7440 at pattan.k12.pa.us...
> Question, eep. Is renderware capable of the type of gaming invironment
> that you are refering to? Or would Roland and company have to basicly
> rewrite all of the code? Just asking.
>
> Holistic1
>
> eep wrote:
reorienting AW's development in a new direction? I'm telling you (and AWCI),
gaming is where AW should be headed. Again, you twits who have a limited
definition of "gaming" need not reply because if you think it just means
running around shooting people, sorry, get a clue. Yes, AW has some
board/card games, but I am referring to action, adventure, role-playing, and
even strategy type gaming genres. Sure, you could just go play a REAL game
of one or all of these genres, but where in those games are you allowed to
create new levels/worlds/tracks/maps/whatever in real-time with other
people?
editing" design with gaming, AW would FINALLY become marketable enough to
actually stand on its own as a viable alternative to on-line/multiplayer
persistant games like Ultima Online, EverQuest, Asheron's Call, the upcoming
Soverign and Neverwinter Nights, etc.
gaming industry passes it by and eventually develops AW's design into its
games on its own? Mark my words, 3D games ARE getting to the point of adding
multi-user editors--10six and Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption are
perhaps the closest, and Neverwinter Nights will be even closer.
MAX at this rate (7 years seems like a good, common number)--OK, so I'm
pulling a wanna-be psychic prediction there, but I really do see this
happening more and more and REALLY wish Rick and JP would stop playing the
silly, stupid "e-commerce" card and go play some 3D games and get a clue
already as to AW's potential.
*looks around* where is it? Where
stuff? (and don't give me the
world which just links you to
news:39ddce1a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
now... Could be wrong. I
discount, I believe... and they
news:39ddc993 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
interested
around the
browser/SDK, it
news:39DD122F.BA3861A6 at tnlc.com...
They'll be
should be a
to
AW isn't a
it COULD
TOUCH other
improvements,
there aren't
like
compiled
multi-user
enough to
Shamus
too long
learning
specifically, 3D
The Sims
http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
|
Oct 6, 2000, 10:52pm
Im waiting for Anarchy Online...those movies look beautiful :))) Wish I
would have gotten beta testing :)) Mmmm 300,000 players paying 10 dollars a
month is a nice profit :)) Theres an emulator for EQ coming out, they just
need to break the encryption :)))))
-American Police
Oct 7, 2000, 12:47am
You're a twit for thinking I want AW to be ALL of a game. I've NEVER said that. You need to think relatively and learn to read more carefully. I simply would like AW to be more gameLIKE. Do you know what LIKE means? Of COURSE all of these gameLIKE features would be OPTIONAL--I've been saying that ALL along, if you bothered to actually READ more carefully...
[View Quote]
> Here is my view on teh matter..... either they need to follow Eep and get gaming technologies in
> there (and so long as it is a per-world thing and not affecting me in any way unless I want to enter
> that world then I am OK with it) OR they need to actually do some e-Commerce. Gaming, though, seems
> the only way to go at this point unless they actually ADVERTISE!!!! and Eep, Games are great. I
> love a well programmed game, and AW does have the potential, but I have also played the strategy and
> RPGs (Command & conquer ruled, Final Fantasy was OK). You have to have things like money to do
> stuff, and I fear that if ALL of AW were converted to a game-like situation, the things that I value
> so much as building, chatting, existing in a place which far surpasses Reality in many respects,
> would be lost to things like having to worry that you have enough credits or umm whats it called...
> nil? to do such things. Now, if you could buy a gaming world server or something like that which
> hosted a gaming world... then I am all for it, and agree with Eep in every way. If ALL of AW would
> be converted to such a thing, then no.
>
> And Eep don''t reply to tis message if you are going to believe that since I don't think ALL of AW
> should be game-based, that I am a twit or whatever. As for game-like features such as jumping or
> picking up stuff or getting in a car or whatever, hell yes implement it at once!
[View Quote]> "eep" <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DDE2C2.379BBD73 at tnlc.com...
> | Exactly! So don't you think it's HIGH time Rick and JP started reorienting AW's development in a
> new direction? I'm telling you (and AWCI), gaming is where AW should be headed. Again, you twits who
> have a limited definition of "gaming" need not reply because if you think it just means running
> around shooting people, sorry, get a clue. Yes, AW has some board/card games, but I am referring to
> action, adventure, role-playing, and even strategy type gaming genres. Sure, you could just go play
> a REAL game of one or all of these genres, but where in those games are you allowed to create new
> levels/worlds/tracks/maps/whatever in real-time with other people?
> |
> | And that's my point: if AWCI could simply merge their "multi-user level editing" design with
> gaming, AW would FINALLY become marketable enough to actually stand on its own as a viable
> alternative to on-line/multiplayer persistant games like Ultima Online, EverQuest, Asheron's Call,
> the upcoming Soverign and Neverwinter Nights, etc.
> |
> | How much longer will AW continue to flounder while the rest of the 3D gaming industry passes it by
> and eventually develops AW's design into its games on its own? Mark my words, 3D games ARE getting
> to the point of adding multi-user editors--10six and Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption are
> perhaps the closest, and Neverwinter Nights will be even closer.
> |
> | AW will be nothing more than a fading dream within, at most, 2-3 years MAX at this rate (7 years
> seems like a good, common number)--OK, so I'm pulling a wanna-be psychic prediction there, but I
> really do see this happening more and more and REALLY wish Rick and JP would stop playing the silly,
> stupid "e-commerce" card and go play some 3D games and get a clue already as to AW's potential.
> |
> | john viper wrote:
> |
> | > Oh yes they will go on and on about their e-Commerce but umm... *looks around* where is it?
> Where
> | > is teh advertising? Where are the stores where we can go in and buy stuff? (and don't give me
> the
> | > at mart crap... if THATS what they think of e-Commerce, a separate world which just links you to
> | > their web page, its purdy sad)
> | >
> | > "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> news:39ddce1a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> | > | Actually, I'm fairly sure they're interested in "e-commerce" right now... Could be wrong. I
> | > seriously doubt they are really
> | > | interested in selling educational products. They provide a 1/3 discount, I believe... and they
> | > have their own "Eduverse" -- That's
> | > | about all I can think of.
> | > |
> | > | "anduin lothar" <uswf at centercom.com.au> wrote in message
> news:39ddc993 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> | > | > I don't think AW is interested about these things. They are more interested
> | > | > in selling educational universe's to university's and schools all around the
> | > | > world for educational use not so much what we think.
> | > | >
> | > | > "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> | > | > news:39ddc866$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> | > | > > I agree; If a few game-like features were added to the browser/SDK, it
> | > | > would make AW that little bit more able to compete with
> | > | > > others.
> | > | > >
> | > | > > eep <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DD122F.BA3861A6 at tnlc.com...
> | > | > > > Just read this in the latest issue of PC Gamer on page 60. They'll be
> | > | > doing a review of massively multiplayer, persistent world
> | > | > > games next month. But the EverQuest registered player count should be a
> | > | > wakeup call to AWCI: people like games more than they like
> | > | > > to simply chat and build. Compare AW's citizen count (~25,000) to
> | > | > EverQuest's and that should be a clue.
> | > | > > >
> | > | > > > And don't you ingrates start replying saying "Wahhhhhhhh, but AW isn't a
> | > | > game!&*(#^$&)^% at $# <froth, drool, spit>" because, yes, I
> | > | > > KNOW this, and that's my point as to why AW isn't as popular as it COULD
> | > | > be. With just a few minor gamelike features like jumping,
> | > | > > an inventory, and the ability to either shoot, hit, or simply TOUCH other
> | > | > people/things (not simply clicking them from long
> | > | > > distances)--http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html for more AW improvements,
> | > | > AW could become more attractive to gamers, especially
> | > | > > since I think AW is basically a multi-user level editor, and there aren't
> | > | > any such things that exist for any games that I know of
> | > | > > (and, believe me, I've been looking for years).
> | > | > > >
> | > | > > > Sure there are limited building RTS (real-time strategy) games like
> | > | > 10six and...er, well, I think that's it. Plus there are of
> | > | > > course many 3D game level editors (but they usually have to be compiled
> | > | > and cannot usually be played while they're being created)
> | > | > > and 2D map editors, but no game developer has done a REAL-TIME, multi-user
> | > | > 3D level editor. THAT is what keeps AW unique from every
> | > | > > other wanna-be VR program out there, but AW just isn't gamelike enough to
> | > | > compete with true 3D game level editors.
> | > | > > >
> | > | > > > AW COULD be the first in this market if Rick, JP, Roland, and Shamus
> | > | > wake up to this realization NOW and start moving AW's
> | > | > > direction towards it. AW has stagnated and just gotten by for too long
> | > | > now--it's time AW had a REAL, MARKETABLE direction.
> | > | > > E-commerce (stupid overhyped marketing buzzword) and distance learning
> | > | > education are fine SUB-designs, but there's no way AW will
> | > | > > become profitable from them. The gaming industry--and, specifically, 3D
> | > | > gaming industry--has already proven itself to be VERY
> | > | > > productive and popular; AW should learn and adapt accordingly.
|
Oct 7, 2000, 12:48am
Which you shouldn't be having running in the background ANYWAY when playing 3D games. Any true gamer knows this.
[View Quote]
> Renderware is almost 99.9% likely to be able to do this. Simply because renderware only takes care of... Rendering and closely related things. However, because renderware is so inefficient even on midrange systems, it'd take a varitable supercomputer to handle RW and AW code that requires server checks and local CPU time on collision detection (avatars) projecting whats in you're touch zone (if we could reach out and touch someone or fire weapons with a max range). Projectile trajectories... More CPU time to calculate where it moves to and then hand it off to the modem to send. Add into this equaion multitasking with CPU intensive programs like Winamp, and
> IE. And then the usual complement of accessory programs. AIM and/or ICQ, system monitoring programs (Norton, Motherboard monitor), and the all important Windows. Seems that this would require a buttload of RAM and at LEAST a GHz of CPU horsepower, and a DSL/Cable modem
>
[View Quote]
--
http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
Oct 7, 2000, 12:59am
Please don't take us down the EQ road again Eep, no one wants to be a Dwarf, or a Wizard.
I am sure Awcom see's their growth and bla bla.
Sign up for EQ, and go OD on it, AWCOM has their own agenda, and if it fails
then you can say "I told you so". Until then, stop spamming us with you RPG
Crap.
Ever think that the User that are citizens in AW come here because they like the lack of Gameing type
options?
Do you ever think of anything else?
Pull your head outa yer ass!
[View Quote]
> Here is my view on teh matter..... either they need to follow Eep and get gaming technologies in
> there (and so long as it is a per-world thing and not affecting me in any way unless I want to enter
> that world then I am OK with it) OR they need to actually do some e-Commerce. Gaming, though, seems
> the only way to go at this point unless they actually ADVERTISE!!!! and Eep, Games are great. I
> love a well programmed game, and AW does have the potential, but I have also played the strategy and
> RPGs (Command & conquer ruled, Final Fantasy was OK). You have to have things like money to do
> stuff, and I fear that if ALL of AW were converted to a game-like situation, the things that I value
> so much as building, chatting, existing in a place which far surpasses Reality in many respects,
> would be lost to things like having to worry that you have enough credits or umm whats it called...
> nil? to do such things. Now, if you could buy a gaming world server or something like that which
> hosted a gaming world... then I am all for it, and agree with Eep in every way. If ALL of AW would
> be converted to such a thing, then no.
>
> And Eep don''t reply to tis message if you are going to believe that since I don't think ALL of AW
> should be game-based, that I am a twit or whatever. As for game-like features such as jumping or
> picking up stuff or getting in a car or whatever, hell yes implement it at once!
> _________________________
> John Viper
> http://www.jtsoft.net
>
[View Quote]> "eep" <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DDE2C2.379BBD73 at tnlc.com...
> | Exactly! So don't you think it's HIGH time Rick and JP started reorienting AW's development in a
> new direction? I'm telling you (and AWCI), gaming is where AW should be headed. Again, you twits who
> have a limited definition of "gaming" need not reply because if you think it just means running
> around shooting people, sorry, get a clue. Yes, AW has some board/card games, but I am referring to
> action, adventure, role-playing, and even strategy type gaming genres. Sure, you could just go play
> a REAL game of one or all of these genres, but where in those games are you allowed to create new
> levels/worlds/tracks/maps/whatever in real-time with other people?
> |
> | And that's my point: if AWCI could simply merge their "multi-user level editing" design with
> gaming, AW would FINALLY become marketable enough to actually stand on its own as a viable
> alternative to on-line/multiplayer persistant games like Ultima Online, EverQuest, Asheron's Call,
> the upcoming Soverign and Neverwinter Nights, etc.
> |
> | How much longer will AW continue to flounder while the rest of the 3D gaming industry passes it by
> and eventually develops AW's design into its games on its own? Mark my words, 3D games ARE getting
> to the point of adding multi-user editors--10six and Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption are
> perhaps the closest, and Neverwinter Nights will be even closer.
> |
> | AW will be nothing more than a fading dream within, at most, 2-3 years MAX at this rate (7 years
> seems like a good, common number)--OK, so I'm pulling a wanna-be psychic prediction there, but I
> really do see this happening more and more and REALLY wish Rick and JP would stop playing the silly,
> stupid "e-commerce" card and go play some 3D games and get a clue already as to AW's potential.
> |
> | john viper wrote:
> |
> | > Oh yes they will go on and on about their e-Commerce but umm... *looks around* where is it?
> Where
> | > is teh advertising? Where are the stores where we can go in and buy stuff? (and don't give me
> the
> | > at mart crap... if THATS what they think of e-Commerce, a separate world which just links you to
> | > their web page, its purdy sad)
> | >
> | > "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> news:39ddce1a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> | > | Actually, I'm fairly sure they're interested in "e-commerce" right now... Could be wrong. I
> | > seriously doubt they are really
> | > | interested in selling educational products. They provide a 1/3 discount, I believe... and they
> | > have their own "Eduverse" -- That's
> | > | about all I can think of.
> | > |
> | > | "anduin lothar" <uswf at centercom.com.au> wrote in message
> news:39ddc993 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> | > | > I don't think AW is interested about these things. They are more interested
> | > | > in selling educational universe's to university's and schools all around the
> | > | > world for educational use not so much what we think.
> | > | >
> | > | > "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> | > | > news:39ddc866$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> | > | > > I agree; If a few game-like features were added to the browser/SDK, it
> | > | > would make AW that little bit more able to compete with
> | > | > > others.
> | > | > >
> | > | > > eep <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DD122F.BA3861A6 at tnlc.com...
> | > | > > > Just read this in the latest issue of PC Gamer on page 60. They'll be
> | > | > doing a review of massively multiplayer, persistent world
> | > | > > games next month. But the EverQuest registered player count should be a
> | > | > wakeup call to AWCI: people like games more than they like
> | > | > > to simply chat and build. Compare AW's citizen count (~25,000) to
> | > | > EverQuest's and that should be a clue.
> | > | > > >
> | > | > > > And don't you ingrates start replying saying "Wahhhhhhhh, but AW isn't a
> | > | > game!&*(#^$&)^% at $# <froth, drool, spit>" because, yes, I
> | > | > > KNOW this, and that's my point as to why AW isn't as popular as it COULD
> | > | > be. With just a few minor gamelike features like jumping,
> | > | > > an inventory, and the ability to either shoot, hit, or simply TOUCH other
> | > | > people/things (not simply clicking them from long
> | > | > > distances)--http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html for more AW improvements,
> | > | > AW could become more attractive to gamers, especially
> | > | > > since I think AW is basically a multi-user level editor, and there aren't
> | > | > any such things that exist for any games that I know of
> | > | > > (and, believe me, I've been looking for years).
> | > | > > >
> | > | > > > Sure there are limited building RTS (real-time strategy) games like
> | > | > 10six and...er, well, I think that's it. Plus there are of
> | > | > > course many 3D game level editors (but they usually have to be compiled
> | > | > and cannot usually be played while they're being created)
> | > | > > and 2D map editors, but no game developer has done a REAL-TIME, multi-user
> | > | > 3D level editor. THAT is what keeps AW unique from every
> | > | > > other wanna-be VR program out there, but AW just isn't gamelike enough to
> | > | > compete with true 3D game level editors.
> | > | > > >
> | > | > > > AW COULD be the first in this market if Rick, JP, Roland, and Shamus
> | > | > wake up to this realization NOW and start moving AW's
> | > | > > direction towards it. AW has stagnated and just gotten by for too long
> | > | > now--it's time AW had a REAL, MARKETABLE direction.
> | > | > > E-commerce (stupid overhyped marketing buzzword) and distance learning
> | > | > education are fine SUB-designs, but there's no way AW will
> | > | > > become profitable from them. The gaming industry--and, specifically, 3D
> | > | > gaming industry--has already proven itself to be VERY
> | > | > > productive and popular; AW should learn and adapt accordingly.
> |
> | --
> |
> | http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
> | Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
> | DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
> |
|
Oct 7, 2000, 2:36am
That could give us alot more realistic interactions in-world
[View Quote]
> You're a twit for thinking I want AW to be ALL of a game. I've NEVER said that. You need to think relatively and learn to read more carefully. I simply would like AW to be more gameLIKE. Do you know what LIKE means? Of COURSE all of these gameLIKE features would be OPTIONAL--I've been saying that ALL along, if you bothered to actually READ more carefully...
>
[View Quote]
Oct 7, 2000, 3:17am
[View Quote]"zero" <dmonix at home.com> wrote in message news:39DE8D88.97608575 at home.com...
>
>
> Please don't take us down the EQ road again Eep, no one wants to be a Dwarf, or a Wizard.
|
When did he (or anyone) ever say they wanted to be a "Dwarf, or a Wizard"?
> Sign up for EQ, and go OD on it, AWCOM has their own agenda, and if it fails
> then you can say "I told you so".
Ahh... but why wait until something goes wrong to try to set them on the right path?
> Until then, stop spamming us with you RPG
> Crap.
> Ever think that the User that are citizens in AW come here because they like the lack of Gameing type
> options?
> Do you ever think of anything else?
> Pull your head outa yer ass!
Spamming? Since when was making suggestions spam?
Ever think that some citizens may want to make use of "gamelike" features in AW? It would be very interesting to see what people
could come up with if avatars could carry things, for instance...
Sheesh...
-Agent1
Oct 7, 2000, 3:21am
Eeps rant as I said has been going on for sometime. Sure take a pole and see who wants what. Most ppl are pretty happy with what
they have, If you lot fancy the features of EQ and such, go on, get, let awcom do their thing their own way.
[View Quote]
[View Quote]> "zero" <dmonix at home.com> wrote in message news:39DE8D88.97608575 at home.com...
>
> When did he (or anyone) ever say they wanted to be a "Dwarf, or a Wizard"?
>
>
> Ahh... but why wait until something goes wrong to try to set them on the right path?
>
>
> Spamming? Since when was making suggestions spam?
> Ever think that some citizens may want to make use of "gamelike" features in AW? It would be very interesting to see what people
> could come up with if avatars could carry things, for instance...
>
> Sheesh...
>
> -Agent1
|
Oct 7, 2000, 4:20am
I don't think you get it. We don't want ALL of the features in EQ and other games of "today", we (or I, at least) think that AW
could benifit with a few of their features (inventory, etc.). I don't think the e-commerce thing is working out, so they need to do
something new... They've got something great, now let's make it better :)
-Agent1
[View Quote]"zero" <dmonix at home.com> wrote in message news:39DEAEA2.390CA21B at home.com...
> Eeps rant as I said has been going on for sometime. Sure take a pole and see who wants what. Most ppl are pretty happy with what
> they have, If you lot fancy the features of EQ and such, go on, get, let awcom do their thing their own way.
>
> agent1 wrote:
>
|
Oct 7, 2000, 7:53am
Do you ever bother to read and use your brain to extrapolate? Didn't think so. Nowhere did I mention AW should become ONLY like an RPG or any other PARTICULAR (you DO know what that big word means, don't you?) game genre. Consider yourself filtered, twit.
[View Quote]
> Please don't take us down the EQ road again Eep, no one wants to be a Dwarf, or a Wizard.
> I am sure Awcom see's their growth and bla bla.
> Sign up for EQ, and go OD on it, AWCOM has their own agenda, and if it fails
> then you can say "I told you so". Until then, stop spamming us with you RPG
> Crap.
> Ever think that the User that are citizens in AW come here because they like the lack of Gameing type
> options?
> Do you ever think of anything else?
> Pull your head outa yer ass!
>
[View Quote]
--
http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
Oct 7, 2000, 8:02am
Yep, which is why physics is on my AW improvements list at http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html#physics
[View Quote]
> That could give us alot more realistic interactions in-world
--
http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
Oct 7, 2000, 11:55am
Hrmm, a few of those things are pretty pointless to have in the background while gaming (IE, Norton and Winamp) but I wasn't talking about gaming here. I was talking about AW integrating more gamelike features. IE for surfing the web (KILL THE WEB PANE), Norton is still pretty pointless, it just crashes itself (I thought it was supposed to assist in preventing crashes), and Winamp is very much important if you don't listen to the crappy midis and wavs in AW (such as myself. Now if we did away with the midis and very cheesy wavs, and replaced them with MP3s and decent wavs it'd be liveable). Nonetheless, it till takes HUGE amounts of power to work this kind of
stuff.
[View Quote]
> Which you shouldn't be having running in the background ANYWAY when playing 3D games. Any true gamer knows this.
>
[View Quote]> wing wrote:
>
>
> --
>
> http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
> Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
> DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
|
Oct 7, 2000, 2:34pm
Power? To run MP3s? Not. Remember, you already CAN MP3-encode WAVs and use them in AW, providing you have an MP3 CODEC, which comes with later Media Player versions (like from the last year or so).
..MP3s are nothing more than MP3-encoded WAVs with special header info in them to make them unplayable on most WAV players. I blame WinAmp for this annoyance, but now even Media Player can play MP3s so most people probably won't even notice MP3 is a propietary format.
[View Quote]
> Hrmm, a few of those things are pretty pointless to have in the background while gaming (IE, Norton and Winamp) but I wasn't talking about gaming here. I was talking about AW integrating more gamelike features. IE for surfing the web (KILL THE WEB PANE), Norton is still pretty pointless, it just crashes itself (I thought it was supposed to assist in preventing crashes), and Winamp is very much important if you don't listen to the crappy midis and wavs in AW (such as myself. Now if we did away with the midis and very cheesy wavs, and replaced them with MP3s and decent wavs it'd be liveable). Nonetheless, it till takes HUGE amounts of power to work this kind of stuff.
>
[View Quote]
--
http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
Oct 7, 2000, 2:54pm
Winamp is far more functional than Media Player. On my older comp that codec wouldn't work period. Cyrix MII/32mb RAM/Win95. Haven't gotten around to trying it on Win98, needa replace floppy drives and reformat before I mess anything else up
[View Quote]
> Power? To run MP3s? Not. Remember, you already CAN MP3-encode WAVs and use them in AW, providing you have an MP3 CODEC, which comes with later Media Player versions (like from the last year or so).
>
> .MP3s are nothing more than MP3-encoded WAVs with special header info in them to make them unplayable on most WAV players. I blame WinAmp for this annoyance, but now even Media Player can play MP3s so most people probably won't even notice MP3 is a propietary format.
>
[View Quote]> wing wrote:
>
>
> --
>
> http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
> Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
> DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
|
Oct 7, 2000, 3:17pm
> It's getting so that I know exactly what you're going to say.... Hee hee hee
By the way, I sent you an email with a question, did you receive it? Thanks for all your help, Ingie
Oct 7, 2000, 11:24pm
Media Player plays more formats than WinAmp; hence, MP is more functional for playing multiple formats. WinAmp plays MP3s in more ways (if you consider the silly filters, more) than MP, so WinAmp is more functional for MP3s. <shrug>
[View Quote]
> Winamp is far more functional than Media Player. On my older comp that codec wouldn't work period. Cyrix MII/32mb RAM/Win95. Haven't gotten around to trying it on Win98, needa replace floppy drives and reformat before I mess anything else up
>
[View Quote]
--
http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
Oct 8, 2000, 7:43pm
:-) no problem Eep... I am afraid I am not a twit though
_________________________
John Viper
http://www.jtsoft.net
[View Quote]"eep" <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DE8816.31B97E67 at tnlc.com...
| You're a twit for thinking I want AW to be ALL of a game. I've NEVER said that. You need to think
relatively and learn to read more carefully. I simply would like AW to be more gameLIKE. Do you know
what LIKE means? Of COURSE all of these gameLIKE features would be OPTIONAL--I've been saying that
ALL along, if you bothered to actually READ more carefully...
|
| john viper wrote:
|
| > Here is my view on teh matter..... either they need to follow Eep and get gaming technologies
in
| > there (and so long as it is a per-world thing and not affecting me in any way unless I want to
enter
| > that world then I am OK with it) OR they need to actually do some e-Commerce. Gaming, though,
seems
| > the only way to go at this point unless they actually ADVERTISE!!!! and Eep, Games are great.
I
| > love a well programmed game, and AW does have the potential, but I have also played the strategy
and
| > RPGs (Command & conquer ruled, Final Fantasy was OK). You have to have things like money to do
| > stuff, and I fear that if ALL of AW were converted to a game-like situation, the things that I
value
| > so much as building, chatting, existing in a place which far surpasses Reality in many respects,
| > would be lost to things like having to worry that you have enough credits or umm whats it
called...
| > nil? to do such things. Now, if you could buy a gaming world server or something like that
which
| > hosted a gaming world... then I am all for it, and agree with Eep in every way. If ALL of AW
would
| > be converted to such a thing, then no.
| >
| > And Eep don''t reply to tis message if you are going to believe that since I don't think ALL of
AW
| > should be game-based, that I am a twit or whatever. As for game-like features such as jumping
or
| > picking up stuff or getting in a car or whatever, hell yes implement it at once!
|
| > "eep" <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DDE2C2.379BBD73 at tnlc.com...
| > | Exactly! So don't you think it's HIGH time Rick and JP started reorienting AW's development in
a
| > new direction? I'm telling you (and AWCI), gaming is where AW should be headed. Again, you twits
who
| > have a limited definition of "gaming" need not reply because if you think it just means running
| > around shooting people, sorry, get a clue. Yes, AW has some board/card games, but I am referring
to
| > action, adventure, role-playing, and even strategy type gaming genres. Sure, you could just go
play
| > a REAL game of one or all of these genres, but where in those games are you allowed to create
new
| > levels/worlds/tracks/maps/whatever in real-time with other people?
| > |
| > | And that's my point: if AWCI could simply merge their "multi-user level editing" design with
| > gaming, AW would FINALLY become marketable enough to actually stand on its own as a viable
| > alternative to on-line/multiplayer persistant games like Ultima Online, EverQuest, Asheron's
Call,
| > the upcoming Soverign and Neverwinter Nights, etc.
| > |
| > | How much longer will AW continue to flounder while the rest of the 3D gaming industry passes
it by
| > and eventually develops AW's design into its games on its own? Mark my words, 3D games ARE
getting
| > to the point of adding multi-user editors--10six and Vampire: The Masquerade - Redemption are
| > perhaps the closest, and Neverwinter Nights will be even closer.
| > |
| > | AW will be nothing more than a fading dream within, at most, 2-3 years MAX at this rate (7
years
| > seems like a good, common number)--OK, so I'm pulling a wanna-be psychic prediction there, but I
| > really do see this happening more and more and REALLY wish Rick and JP would stop playing the
silly,
| > stupid "e-commerce" card and go play some 3D games and get a clue already as to AW's potential.
| > |
| > | john viper wrote:
| > |
| > | > Oh yes they will go on and on about their e-Commerce but umm... *looks around* where is it?
| > Where
| > | > is teh advertising? Where are the stores where we can go in and buy stuff? (and don't give
me
| > the
| > | > at mart crap... if THATS what they think of e-Commerce, a separate world which just links you
to
| > | > their web page, its purdy sad)
| > | >
| > | > "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
| > news:39ddce1a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
| > | > | Actually, I'm fairly sure they're interested in "e-commerce" right now... Could be wrong.
I
| > | > seriously doubt they are really
| > | > | interested in selling educational products. They provide a 1/3 discount, I believe... and
they
| > | > have their own "Eduverse" -- That's
| > | > | about all I can think of.
| > | > |
| > | > | "anduin lothar" <uswf at centercom.com.au> wrote in message
| > news:39ddc993 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
| > | > | > I don't think AW is interested about these things. They are more interested
| > | > | > in selling educational universe's to university's and schools all around the
| > | > | > world for educational use not so much what we think.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
| > | > | > news:39ddc866$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
| > | > | > > I agree; If a few game-like features were added to the browser/SDK, it
| > | > | > would make AW that little bit more able to compete with
| > | > | > > others.
| > | > | > >
| > | > | > > eep <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DD122F.BA3861A6 at tnlc.com...
| > | > | > > > Just read this in the latest issue of PC Gamer on page 60. They'll be
| > | > | > doing a review of massively multiplayer, persistent world
| > | > | > > games next month. But the EverQuest registered player count should be a
| > | > | > wakeup call to AWCI: people like games more than they like
| > | > | > > to simply chat and build. Compare AW's citizen count (~25,000) to
| > | > | > EverQuest's and that should be a clue.
| > | > | > > >
| > | > | > > > And don't you ingrates start replying saying "Wahhhhhhhh, but AW isn't a
| > | > | > game!&*(#^$&)^% at $# <froth, drool, spit>" because, yes, I
| > | > | > > KNOW this, and that's my point as to why AW isn't as popular as it COULD
| > | > | > be. With just a few minor gamelike features like jumping,
| > | > | > > an inventory, and the ability to either shoot, hit, or simply TOUCH other
| > | > | > people/things (not simply clicking them from long
| > | > | > > distances)--http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html for more AW improvements,
| > | > | > AW could become more attractive to gamers, especially
| > | > | > > since I think AW is basically a multi-user level editor, and there aren't
| > | > | > any such things that exist for any games that I know of
| > | > | > > (and, believe me, I've been looking for years).
| > | > | > > >
| > | > | > > > Sure there are limited building RTS (real-time strategy) games like
| > | > | > 10six and...er, well, I think that's it. Plus there are of
| > | > | > > course many 3D game level editors (but they usually have to be compiled
| > | > | > and cannot usually be played while they're being created)
| > | > | > > and 2D map editors, but no game developer has done a REAL-TIME, multi-user
| > | > | > 3D level editor. THAT is what keeps AW unique from every
| > | > | > > other wanna-be VR program out there, but AW just isn't gamelike enough to
| > | > | > compete with true 3D game level editors.
| > | > | > > >
| > | > | > > > AW COULD be the first in this market if Rick, JP, Roland, and Shamus
| > | > | > wake up to this realization NOW and start moving AW's
| > | > | > > direction towards it. AW has stagnated and just gotten by for too long
| > | > | > now--it's time AW had a REAL, MARKETABLE direction.
| > | > | > > E-commerce (stupid overhyped marketing buzzword) and distance learning
| > | > | > education are fine SUB-designs, but there's no way AW will
| > | > | > > become profitable from them. The gaming industry--and, specifically, 3D
| > | > | > gaming industry--has already proven itself to be VERY
| > | > | > > productive and popular; AW should learn and adapt accordingly.
|
|
Oct 9, 2000, 6:18am
Yes, you are. And if you persist in BEING such a twit, I'll simply filter you--it's that simple.
[View Quote]
> :-) no problem Eep... I am afraid I am not a twit though
>
[View Quote]> "eep" <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DE8816.31B97E67 at tnlc.com...
> | You're a twit for thinking I want AW to be ALL of a game. I've NEVER said that. You need to think
> relatively and learn to read more carefully. I simply would like AW to be more gameLIKE. Do you know
> what LIKE means? Of COURSE all of these gameLIKE features would be OPTIONAL--I've been saying that
> ALL along, if you bothered to actually READ more carefully...
|
Oct 13, 2000, 3:41am
Hmmm, yea that'd be cool, but you still got a good number of people who just
like AW for building and community stuff. Shooting some kinda...thing, would
kick %#^ though, as long as it doesn't damage my stuff ^_^
[View Quote]"eep" <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DD122F.BA3861A6 at tnlc.com...
> Just read this in the latest issue of PC Gamer on page 60. They'll be
doing a review of massively multiplayer, persistent world games next month.
But the EverQuest registered player count should be a wakeup call to AWCI:
people like games more than they like to simply chat and build. Compare AW's
citizen count (~25,000) to EverQuest's and that should be a clue.
>
> And don't you ingrates start replying saying "Wahhhhhhhh, but AW isn't a
game!&*(#^$&)^% at $# <froth, drool, spit>" because, yes, I KNOW this, and
that's my point as to why AW isn't as popular as it COULD be. With just a
few minor gamelike features like jumping, an inventory, and the ability to
either shoot, hit, or simply TOUCH other people/things (not simply clicking
them from long distances)--http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html for more AW
improvements, AW could become more attractive to gamers, especially since I
think AW is basically a multi-user level editor, and there aren't any such
things that exist for any games that I know of (and, believe me, I've been
looking for years).
>
> Sure there are limited building RTS (real-time strategy) games like 10six
and...er, well, I think that's it. Plus there are of course many 3D game
level editors (but they usually have to be compiled and cannot usually be
played while they're being created) and 2D map editors, but no game
developer has done a REAL-TIME, multi-user 3D level editor. THAT is what
keeps AW unique from every other wanna-be VR program out there, but AW just
isn't gamelike enough to compete with true 3D game level editors.
>
> AW COULD be the first in this market if Rick, JP, Roland, and Shamus wake
up to this realization NOW and start moving AW's direction towards it. AW
has stagnated and just gotten by for too long now--it's time AW had a REAL,
MARKETABLE direction. E-commerce (stupid overhyped marketing buzzword) and
distance learning education are fine SUB-designs, but there's no way AW will
become profitable from them. The gaming industry--and, specifically, 3D
gaming industry--has already proven itself to be VERY productive and
popular; AW should learn and adapt accordingly.
>
> --
>
> http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The
Sims
> Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html
for more info.
> DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
>
|
Oct 13, 2000, 3:50am
Yea they need to advertise...heck, they haven't even told the people at,
like cnet (download.com) to upgrade the version from 2.2 to 3.0. I really
really really wonder what AWCom does all day. They're not all programming;
I barely see them doing any kinda publicity stuff online. Then they spend
weeks planning some new world, like WildAW, which just ends up failing and
dieing in a week or so. They don't see what they already have in
AlphaWorld, it's the most popular, but it really sucks, LOL. If they made
alphaworld like totaly awsome they'd surely get more happy tourist which'll
register.
[View Quote]"john viper" <jviper at jtsoft.net> wrote in message
news:39de3330 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Here is my view on teh matter..... either they need to follow Eep and
get gaming technologies in
> there (and so long as it is a per-world thing and not affecting me in any
way unless I want to enter
> that world then I am OK with it) OR they need to actually do some
e-Commerce. Gaming, though, seems
> the only way to go at this point unless they actually ADVERTISE!!!! and
Eep, Games are great. I
> love a well programmed game, and AW does have the potential, but I have
also played the strategy and
> RPGs (Command & conquer ruled, Final Fantasy was OK). You have to have
things like money to do
> stuff, and I fear that if ALL of AW were converted to a game-like
situation, the things that I value
> so much as building, chatting, existing in a place which far surpasses
Reality in many respects,
> would be lost to things like having to worry that you have enough credits
or umm whats it called...
> nil? to do such things. Now, if you could buy a gaming world server or
something like that which
> hosted a gaming world... then I am all for it, and agree with Eep in every
way. If ALL of AW would
> be converted to such a thing, then no.
>
> And Eep don''t reply to tis message if you are going to believe that since
I don't think ALL of AW
> should be game-based, that I am a twit or whatever. As for game-like
features such as jumping or
> picking up stuff or getting in a car or whatever, hell yes implement it at
once!
> _________________________
> John Viper
> http://www.jtsoft.net
>
> "eep" <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message news:39DDE2C2.379BBD73 at tnlc.com...
> | Exactly! So don't you think it's HIGH time Rick and JP started
reorienting AW's development in a
> new direction? I'm telling you (and AWCI), gaming is where AW should be
headed. Again, you twits who
> have a limited definition of "gaming" need not reply because if you think
it just means running
> around shooting people, sorry, get a clue. Yes, AW has some board/card
games, but I am referring to
> action, adventure, role-playing, and even strategy type gaming genres.
Sure, you could just go play
> a REAL game of one or all of these genres, but where in those games are
you allowed to create new
> levels/worlds/tracks/maps/whatever in real-time with other people?
> |
> | And that's my point: if AWCI could simply merge their "multi-user level
editing" design with
> gaming, AW would FINALLY become marketable enough to actually stand on its
own as a viable
> alternative to on-line/multiplayer persistant games like Ultima Online,
EverQuest, Asheron's Call,
> the upcoming Soverign and Neverwinter Nights, etc.
> |
> | How much longer will AW continue to flounder while the rest of the 3D
gaming industry passes it by
> and eventually develops AW's design into its games on its own? Mark my
words, 3D games ARE getting
> to the point of adding multi-user editors--10six and Vampire: The
Masquerade - Redemption are
> perhaps the closest, and Neverwinter Nights will be even closer.
> |
> | AW will be nothing more than a fading dream within, at most, 2-3 years
MAX at this rate (7 years
> seems like a good, common number)--OK, so I'm pulling a wanna-be psychic
prediction there, but I
> really do see this happening more and more and REALLY wish Rick and JP
would stop playing the silly,
> stupid "e-commerce" card and go play some 3D games and get a clue already
as to AW's potential.
> |
> | john viper wrote:
> |
> | > Oh yes they will go on and on about their e-Commerce but umm...
*looks around* where is it?
> Where
> | > is teh advertising? Where are the stores where we can go in and buy
stuff? (and don't give me
> the
> | > at mart crap... if THATS what they think of e-Commerce, a separate
world which just links you to
> | > their web page, its purdy sad)
> | >
> | > "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> news:39ddce1a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> | > | Actually, I'm fairly sure they're interested in "e-commerce" right
now... Could be wrong. I
> | > seriously doubt they are really
> | > | interested in selling educational products. They provide a 1/3
discount, I believe... and they
> | > have their own "Eduverse" -- That's
> | > | about all I can think of.
> | > |
> | > | "anduin lothar" <uswf at centercom.com.au> wrote in message
> news:39ddc993 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> | > | > I don't think AW is interested about these things. They are more
interested
> | > | > in selling educational universe's to university's and schools all
around the
> | > | > world for educational use not so much what we think.
> | > | >
> | > | > "agent1" <Agent1 at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> | > | > news:39ddc866$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> | > | > > I agree; If a few game-like features were added to the
browser/SDK, it
> | > | > would make AW that little bit more able to compete with
> | > | > > others.
> | > | > >
> | > | > > eep <eep at tnlc.com> wrote in message
news:39DD122F.BA3861A6 at tnlc.com...
> | > | > > > Just read this in the latest issue of PC Gamer on page 60.
They'll be
> | > | > doing a review of massively multiplayer, persistent world
> | > | > > games next month. But the EverQuest registered player count
should be a
> | > | > wakeup call to AWCI: people like games more than they like
> | > | > > to simply chat and build. Compare AW's citizen count (~25,000)
to
> | > | > EverQuest's and that should be a clue.
> | > | > > >
> | > | > > > And don't you ingrates start replying saying "Wahhhhhhhh, but
AW isn't a
> | > | > game!&*(#^$&)^% at $# <froth, drool, spit>" because, yes, I
> | > | > > KNOW this, and that's my point as to why AW isn't as popular as
it COULD
> | > | > be. With just a few minor gamelike features like jumping,
> | > | > > an inventory, and the ability to either shoot, hit, or simply
TOUCH other
> | > | > people/things (not simply clicking them from long
> | > | > > distances)--http://tnlc.com/eep/aw/improve.html for more AW
improvements,
> | > | > AW could become more attractive to gamers, especially
> | > | > > since I think AW is basically a multi-user level editor, and
there aren't
> | > | > any such things that exist for any games that I know of
> | > | > > (and, believe me, I've been looking for years).
> | > | > > >
> | > | > > > Sure there are limited building RTS (real-time strategy) games
like
> | > | > 10six and...er, well, I think that's it. Plus there are of
> | > | > > course many 3D game level editors (but they usually have to be
compiled
> | > | > and cannot usually be played while they're being created)
> | > | > > and 2D map editors, but no game developer has done a REAL-TIME,
multi-user
> | > | > 3D level editor. THAT is what keeps AW unique from every
> | > | > > other wanna-be VR program out there, but AW just isn't gamelike
enough to
> | > | > compete with true 3D game level editors.
> | > | > > >
> | > | > > > AW COULD be the first in this market if Rick, JP, Roland, and
Shamus
> | > | > wake up to this realization NOW and start moving AW's
> | > | > > direction towards it. AW has stagnated and just gotten by for
too long
> | > | > now--it's time AW had a REAL, MARKETABLE direction.
> | > | > > E-commerce (stupid overhyped marketing buzzword) and distance
learning
> | > | > education are fine SUB-designs, but there's no way AW will
> | > | > > become profitable from them. The gaming industry--and,
specifically, 3D
> | > | > gaming industry--has already proven itself to be VERY
> | > | > > productive and popular; AW should learn and adapt accordingly.
> |
> | --
> |
> | http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison,
The Sims
> | Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping.
http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
> | DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
> |
>
>
|
Oct 13, 2000, 1:07pm
Yea, after someone pointed out that my RenderWare object site was mentioned in about.com's Web3D section (http://web3d.about.com/compute/web3d/library/weekly/aa042199.htm?terms=active+worlds), I immediately went to check. After reading it I had a slew of corrections to email, and it took Sandy weeks to finally edit them (and he STILL didn't get them all correctly added/changed). For example, he claims avatars (in AW 2.2 but he makes no distinction) "don't use a Z buffer so avatars show up from behind walls in annoying ways", which is wrong. Aw 2.2 avatars simply aren't rendered in-scene, but, of course, AW3's avatars are. I specifically pointed this difference out to him but I guess some people are just born incompetent...
Anyway, my point is if I were AWCI I would be checking to see what people are saying about AW and clarifying where appropriately (minus all the overhyped marketing bullshit, of course).
[View Quote]
> Yea they need to advertise...heck, they haven't even told the people at,
> like cnet (download.com) to upgrade the version from 2.2 to 3.0. I really
> really really wonder what AWCom does all day. They're not all programming;
> I barely see them doing any kinda publicity stuff online. Then they spend
> weeks planning some new world, like WildAW, which just ends up failing and
> dieing in a week or so. They don't see what they already have in
> AlphaWorld, it's the most popular, but it really sucks, LOL. If they made
> alphaworld like totaly awsome they'd surely get more happy tourist which'll
> register.
--
http://tnlc.com/eep/ - Active Worlds, Tomb Raider, 3D game comparison, The Sims
Enable line/word wrap if text not wrapping. http://tnlc.com/eep/wrap.html for more info.
DON'T QUOTE SIG WHEN REPLYING!
|
