New Game Engine Soon?

I just tried SL. Seriously... it totally stinks. I can't believe that it has not been upgraded. You people could learn a lot from every other game out there with 3rd-person-view character controls (like The Sims, MMORPGs, etc.). This game engine doesn't run very well at all. My system can run some impressive games but this one is very clunky. This game is just pathetic. Upgrade it to something completely different or risk losing customers.

It's not a game, Ace.

Thanks, fanboy. Like I haven't heard that advertising propoganda from SL before. It's in the same genre, so get off your high horse.

We hope to lose you soon.

LOL. It's already uninstalled. I won't be back, that's for sure.

LOL. Oh be nice to the OP. He's right you know... "every other game out there with 3rd-person-view character controls (like The Sims, MMORPGs, etc.)" all run slick as a whistle and they all have dynamic, constantly changing, usuer created content.

Thanks for being nice.

I tried SL because I respected the reputation that they built years ago. Now I see that much better options in MMO gaming are available. Upgrade or slowly die out.

Just as a matter of interest, what other "game" has user created content and runs as smooth as silk, it must have an in world programming language based on C or similar, must be able to build absolutely anything you can imagine, must have a full working currency that is exchangeable for RL money, and a few other things, but that will do for now.

When you tell me the name I will be off there like a shot

It's not, actually.

It's a 3d representation of a community, that allows for world customization beyond what just about any 'game' offers, as well as a real economy, and so on.

There is no objective in SL, which disqualifies it as being a game, by many definitions. Just because it's not real life, and involves avatars and a computer doesn't mean it's a game.

Also, Second Life runs very smoothly on any relatively good quality machine, can look excellent considering that almost every bit of content is user created, and so on and so forth.

Second Life is not a game. It contains games, sure, some people treat it as a game, again true, but just because some use it purely for entertainment does not mean it's a game.

ETA:: There are VERY good reasons that Second Life doesn't offer many of the higher end graphics technologies. One of these would be shadows, where in a static would they don't really ever change much. In Second Life, where things are created, made, and so on, allowing for shadows causes a considerable amount of resources to be used for relatively simple shadow casting, and slows the entire application down immensely.

We have gotten an update in graphics in the past year (Or so), which has increased the visual quality of the Second Life world considerably for the better-than-low-end machines.

Sure, SL is a great idea. That's why I was interrested in the first place. Despite that, it runs like crap. It's strikingly similar to games designed in Java 3-D which usually look lame and run very poorly. Having the great features and ideas you mentioned is worthless if the main characteristic of the game (of any game) is garbage.

You're completely distracting from the topic. This has nothing to do with my point except for the middle paragraph which is simply ill-informed.

EDIT: Sorry for the double post. My bad.

I am ectremely confused, I dont see it running like crap at all, but then I have a decent computer with a good graphics card,

I make furniture and write scripts, and virtually live in SL. I really dont see what you are complaonong about, there are some 80,000 people on line at any one time in SL, if it were really crap, why are they spending time, AND money there???

So, what specifically is bad about the game engine? We have relatively (Not quite precise, especially for sculpties, but generally accurate) physics, easy movement controls, interactive mouselook (Including viewing your own avatar), Not-at-all-bad graphics, and so on. What's wrong with it?



It is? SL runs absolutely smoothly on my machine, unless I'm lagging from internet, or running Blender with a complex scene rendering.

Graphically, here's a basic comparison:
Java-3d:


SL:


Hoo boy, I can sure see the similarities there.
ETA: Slightly better Java-3d example here: https://lg3d-wonderland.dev.java.net/images/2007-11-29-demofloormtg.png

I can run games like Crysis, Call of Duty 4, and Battlefield 2142 very nicely. They run smoothly and look fantastic. I use the same quality of settings for the graphics in SL and it runs like crap. Sure, I could lower the settings to the bottom and make it run smoothly, but any game that needs that is poorly made. It takes more than nice user-created content to make a game engine look great and run nicely.

@ Keira Wells: Nice lighting. Am I supposed to be seeing something? Also, you haven't seen updates on what's possible with Java 3-D. The new stuff looks exactly like SL.

And of course those games all have the constantly changing user created content , scripting, money etc that SL has,

I can run those games very nicely as well. And I run Second Life at maximum settings, aside from draw distance, which I keep around 200m, as I don't want to be constantly downloading and processing the data of tens of thousands of objects at once.

As for the better Java 3d, this is the best graphic example I've found for Java 3d so far, and it's well below Second Life, even with a specified genre and static world.



I'd like to see the 'Looks like SL' proof, if you have it.

I've already discussed this. It's becoming painfully obvious that the stereotypical label of "No Lifers" is true. I'm not discussing this with you people any more. Go beyond SL and try other stuff for once. You all sound like you haven't played any other games for years.

@ Keira Wells, Someone actually created an MMO using Java 3D. I don't remember the name and won't bother finding it again for you. I tried it once. It looked nice, but ran poorly. I have college experience with it too. SL wreaks of Java 3D.

Ok... once we get to the third hill go around the corner and there will be three monsters there. Make sure you attack the one on the left first without agro-ing the other two. Don't worry though... if we don't get it right this time we can start over and they will be in exactly the same place next time. Boring yes... but it sure does run smoothly.

ok, the BIG main point now.

WE all live in SL, If you sit and watch the forums, you will see people complaining about SL to each other.
But YOU are an outsider, dont you DARE to say anything bad about SL, we will defend it to the death.

Serious point?

That is what makes Second Life completely different to any other ( I HATE the word) " game"

SL IS a life, not a game.

You haven't, at least not in this thread.

Do you know why the fact that everything isn't static is such a big issue? As it is, objects are relatively low poly, and have small sized textures that still enable wonderful quality. Even our sculpted prims only take around 1-15 kilobytes each, at the very maximum.

Now, imagine if everything was higher poly, and used 'proper 3d models' rather than sculpt maps as we do, those file sizes (For each and every individual object) would muliply by around 5 to 10 times, minimum. Considering the amount of objects drawn in any given environment, rezzing a single skybox would take a few minutes, at minimum, and a full sim could take hours.

Now, add real-time shadows to that, and you're processing all that data, along with some form of raytracing, since there is no 'This object is always here and can always use this set of shadows because the world only has so many lighting settings', and you get a slowdown that would make playing SL absolutely unfeasible to anyone with less than very top-end computers and connections.

So... Basically SL is for content creators who actually care about what can be done with networking limitations, etc. However, the average user who simply wants to explore what you've made and enjoy it doesn't matter. All of those users are gonna think and do the same as me. What is the value in creating if there is no audience other than your creator-peers? You've become a clique. Such online gaming environments are on the road of a slow death.

There are many, many, manymanymany people who aren't content creators, who use it for social networking. There are hundreds (Thousands?) of clubs and social meeting areas, you can view various types of media, there are art galleries, places like the above photo (Which is both a store and example of their products, and takes the form of essentially a park), classes on various subjects, sex clubs (For those into that), and establishments for just about all social circles you may belong to.

ETA: There are also many RPG 'game' sims, and 'hardcore' RPG sims for those into that. There are hundreds of games, ranging in variety from card games to shooters to all out quest-driven RPGs (Though the latter is rare, as the scripting is a bitch)

Every person in SL is a content creator. They may only be able to make a T-shirt or a plywood box, but they can and do create things, and this is the point. Most people in SL don't understand the first thing about 3-D modeling and what is easier for a computer to render on the client side. Games like WOW and the others are designed by... professional game developers and every bit of information is optimised to render as fast as possible... AND.. it's already all downloaded onto your hard drive.
So... SL iss completely different from games, and it's useless to try and compare it to games.

Barcutt, I agree with you that SL doesn't look a good as Crysis, Call of Duty 4, Battlefield 2142, Bioshock, UT3 etc. which I also play and love

However, the technical difference is that all the maps and levels for those games are mostly pre-baked with lighting with dynamic lighting added on top. The content sits on your hard drive, usually consumes lots of disk space and doesn't have to be downloaded from the internet every time you run round a corner you haven't been recently.

Second Life is more dynamic where everything - textures, sounds, 3d models (which agreed are basic compared to what you find in modern games) scripts etc. is downloaded to your computer into a cache which gets overwritten all the time when you visit a new place.

If you want the quality of Crysis, Call of Duty 4 in Second Life, which to be honest I would love as well, then visiting an island and rendering each time would take as long as it would take to install a modern game. And then of course if the island was changed, then that would happen even if the island was already in your cache. Yay, I would really like that - not.

I think SL does pretty well for a dynamic, ever changing environment on today's technology. Do I want it improved. Of course I do. I can't wait till I step into a holodeck like on Star Trek for Second Life - lol. But for now I will enjoy Second Life for what it gives me now which is fun, albeit with slightly outdated graphics

And do you know the really funny thing about this topic? In the gaming community they keep complaining that game companies concentrate too much on the graphics and not on the gameplay or fun factor. You can't win!

And yes, Second Life is not a game, although you can play games within Second Life and do other stuff as well, have meetings, discussions. music events etc.

Barcutt, it's a shame you don't find Second Life fun enough to look beyond the limitations of the graphics. Hopefully you will give it a try again the next time there is a major upgrade to the graphics

/me goes back to Second Life...

That people are taking it seriously?