Re: content on the Web
Dennis wrote: I don't want to get too far off topic, so I'll keep it short. VR is unique as a medium. But VRML isn't the only form of VR. If you could produce something indistinguishable from VR in, say, ShockwavePlus (a hypothetical Shockwave+3D technology that I'm positing for the sake of argument), would you do it? ...Okay, so maybe I'm inappropriately combining a couple of things that aren't really the same. I really should have said something more like this: 1. I like VRML a lot, but if some better VR format comes along, I'll (reluctantly) support it, even if it comes down to a choice between the two. VR is more important to me than VRML per se, especially after what VRML's been through in the past couple years. 2. I like VR a lot, but it's going to be a while before what I really want to do with it is possible. Until then, there are a variety of approaches I could take, including: a. Do other stuff until advances mysteriously get made by other people. Unfortunately, this is the road I seem to be taking right now. b. Work to push VRML and other VR technologies as far and as fast as they can go. That's why I went to Platinum with Cosmo, but at this point I'm waiting for a clear future-of-VR technology to emerge from the rubble. (Or, to use a pleasanter metaphor, to rise up like a phoenix.) c. Create whatever it's possible to create with current VR technologies. Some of y'all have done admirable and inspirational work in that regard. d. Resort to non-VR technologies in the interim. If some form of interactive stories on the Web takes off, I'd like to be there, even if the initial form isn't VR. Lessons learned will carry over. So will audiences. I don't know whether mass entertainment a la shockwave.com even has the potential for the kind of interactivity I'm interested in, but I think it's worth looking into, which is why I was asking about others' experiences with any of this stuff. Does that make more sense? --jed, who shouldn't have tried to make any sort of pronouncement about how everyone on the list feels
Re: content on the Web
But VRML isn't the only form of VR. If you could produce something indistinguishable from VR in, say, ShockwavePlus (a hypothetical Shockwave+3D technology that I'm positing for the sake of argument), would you do it? Note I said VR, not VR(ML). I'm married to the concept not the file format. I couldn't agree with your letter more Jed. Even though this list's seperate visions are varied our goals are similar and we will get to them by circutious routes. Experimentation is paramount. There is a lot to be learned in the 2d forms, and I hope everyone will pass these lessons on to me/us. Basically I'm just a stage builder waiting for you all to figure out how to tell the stories. --jed, who shouldn't have tried to make any sort of pronouncement about how everyone on the list feels hehe :) I was off topic in my reply, sorry. Mostly I want to wanted to reply to wish my friends on the list all of the best for the Holidays in hopes that one of them would buy me a really expensive HMD for Christmas. Dennis Geometrek VRML solutions - http://geometrek.com
Re: content on the Web
Dennis McKenzie wrote: I'm married to the concept not the file format. That's the way I feel too. Even though my bread is buttered with VRML, I believe the real magic comes not from the technology but the way it's used. My goal is not to create cool worlds but to create good interactive stories, in 2D, 3D, 2.5D or whatever other D does the job. I happen to like 3D because of my own approach to interactive fiction, which is to replace time with space as the organizing principle. Not that you can't do this in 2D, but if you're going to build a spatial model to hold the story you might as well use the same model to generate the story's visual representation. Mostly I want to wanted to reply to wish my friends on the list all of the best for the Holidays Same here! in hopes that one of them would buy me a really expensive HMD for Christmas. (I'll settle for a cheap one.) Michael
Re: content on the Web
I am hoping to do some VR fiction in the next few months if I get time. I will probably be working on a system for a dance performance to input movements to avatars thru cheap webcams for the next few months (beats having to use mice, joysticks, and expensive data suits). After that I want to sit down and do some serious VR fiction. I have a semi-permanent job managing a multi-user virtual world at the moment so hopefully that will pay the bills. I have a story eating its way out of me at the moment. It is about VR -- I think that would make a nice self-referential base for my first piece of VR fiction. Best wishes, - Miriam - http://werple.net.au/~miriam/ Virtual Reality Association (VRA) Melbourne, Australia http://www.vr.org.au/
Re: content on the Web
Jed Hartman wrote: I've looked at some of the Flash cartoons out there, and so far I haven't been impressed -- the art mostly *looks* fine (though still nothing to write home about), but the stories are mostly just bad. Is that a natural consequence of Sturgeon's Law and/or growing pains of a new medium? Are the good storytellers just hard to find among the chaff? Or are they biding their time, waiting for a better medium/format? Sturgeon's law? Is that Theodore Sturgeon, the sci fi writer? What does the law say? Michael
Re: content on the Web
Michael wrote: Sturgeon's law? Is that Theodore Sturgeon, the sci fi writer? What does the law say? Yep, Theodore Sturgeon, who once said "Sure, 90% of science fiction is crud. That's because 90% of everything is crud." At least, the Jargon File claims he said "crud"; I've always heard it quoted as "crap," but the Jargon File says that's a misquote. At any rate, the usual formulation of Sturgeon's law is simply, "90% of everything is crap." --jed
