Christian Walther wrote: As a side note, I just can’t see that happening, […]
I suspect anyone that has worked with different games will be able to see the mountain of problems with the idea. I first started seeing the ‘interoperability’ idea in early 2009. It was in play well before then. I wrote one of my first posts about it on GoMa in March 09,
MOOS - INTEROPERABILITY STANDARDS.
These links are in the post:
http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2009/02/other- ... tes-2.htmlhttp://oxcgn.com/2008/09/21/world-of-wa ... -browsing/http://gwynethllewelyn.net/2009/03/02/p ... standards/The last of the three has the most technical information. It is also 17 good sized screens of info. Some of the other information is in nVidia whitepapers, which I can’t find links to, about using server side graphics render. This has lots of possibilities but I’m not sure how well their idea flies with game makers. But that would be a big step toward making things more compatible.
I tend to ramble in answers. Sorry. I read a post and form an idea and respond to that… which I know can be confusing to the reader.
Christian Walther wrote:So, from what I gather from your post, you’re basically saying “your understanding of the title is correct” as well as “the description is accurate”, right? That still leaves me with a conflict between the title and the description, and you’re not really addressing that.
On this point I was not clear. That is where your conflict of ideas likely comes from.
I included the non-SL/OS ones in the section as a catch all. I hung on to the Hypergrid label for search engine placement as I think that will draw more people. It’s my personal search engine thing. If I had not wanted that then
Other Worlds would have been pertinent and probably more accurate.
I include BM for several reasons. I know that SL has plans and pressure to update their avatars. Blue Mars’ avatars are better. But when you have the whole rest of the world moving toward a standardized avatar, how long can they hold out? So, it does not seem as farfetched to me to include them as it may to you.
If I have a choice of using a marginally better av in a few worlds or a slightly lower quality av in thousands of worlds, I’ll spend more time wearing a more compatible av. I think the majority of people will do the same. Do I buy Blue-ray Disc or HD DVD? Whichever the most people go with is the one that wins. That could be BM’s av. But the best does not always win.
Fortress, Fallout, and Mars aren’t Hypergrid compatible. Whether they ever will be is doubtful and certainly debatable with 'NOT' having a good lead. They certainly don’t have the pressure to change that SL and BM do.
I agree the title is more ‘exclusive’ than inclusive. Until we have those that want to run a Blue Mars, TF or FO3 section… I chose to lump them in here. It’s not the best solution but for now it is practical. That does not make it the optimum solution, but it will work until we have someone that wants to split them off and care for them. Dot, Tai'lahr, and I are currently more interested in Hypergrid/OpenSim, so that is a starting place.
I think all these worlds will become more alike as time passes. If you disagree, I only have my opinion to convince you and there is no problem if you chose to believe otherwise. Only time is likely to change our minds.
I think as I do because I expect the building tools to start to standardize at some point. I expect avatars to standardize too. In the foreseeable future there will be professional tools like Blender, 3DMax, and Maya and simplified tools for… amateurs… novices… whatever. The professional tools pretty much all do the same thing with different user interfaces now. Novice tools do less and have simplified interfaces and fewer abilities but still have to accomplish the same things. Eventually this will all standardize. So, I don’t see any of these as all that different.
I missed answering the foot note question. Brain-fade from the time read until written. As far as I know there is no term comparable to ‘the web’ for hypergrid. Hypergrid has my vote for the term. That only leaves about 6 billion votes to go. The term Web 3 is used in some circles to describe the new 3D compatible web. But, nothing has general acceptance and a popular understanding of what is meant. Until this leaves the realm of the techies we probably won’t know.