From my perspective I think we should at least aim to think widely about what is needed in a viewer given the resources needed to develop it. I am for revolutionary thinking. Maybe this is the time to leapfrog ahead of LL and go beyond the constraints of emulating an older design. We can only do this though thinking ahead and utilising the knowledge we have. This includes the current opensim developers and viewer developers.
It will not be too long before LL either withdraw it or place SL on the back burner whatever they say now. Given the links between SL and Opensim I suspect this will have a negative impact upon OpenSim. It is too easy to only look at what we currently have but a bit better e.g. Like the current viewer but getter graphics, more lightweight etc. A lot of experience has been built up both technological and in its usage. There is also a built in bias in this group in that we already find the current opensim sufficient for us to use. Ideally we need also to find out why others did not adopt. I suspect usability is a major one but not the only factor. The LL viewer seems to be based upon an old architecture and older versions opengl and approach to interface design. It is seems to me to be primarily a visual rendering engine with limited mouse, joystick and keyboard interfaces. It was a multi platform viewer of its time, when all we had to worry about was Linux, OS X, and windows on conventional pcs and laptops. We now have mobiles, tablets using Android and iOs ( love it or not). We can talk about greater realism, but what do we mean by this? Better graphics? Maybe what we are really talking about is an access enabler between the natural and computer generated environments? One that will enable people to act within these environments as naturally as possible. One that will facilitate the identity and social interaction and feeling physically there so important to that feeling of being within that environment. One that will ease our sense of embodiment. This access enabler should be as transparent as possible. Maybe with parts of the interface embedded within the 3D environment? Using the Oculus Rift highlighted the dissonance between 2D interface and 3D immersion. Action based approaches highlight the importance of being able to act. I have also tried to project SL and Opensim into CAVE and considered digital domes such as planetariums. There are a lot of developing ideas and old ideas of those aspects important to feeling present in this metaverse such as socially and physically. The role of identity is very important as is avatar appearance ( and they are associated) . How is this to be supported? The current avatar is very flexible especially in the way you can attach items but I have had people say they wanted to reach out and touch, only current technology requires you to run predefined styles of walking etc. reaching out depends upon clicking with a mouse. Yes the skeleton does need to be improved. Should an 'interface' be something we can act through rather than act upon? Is there more we can do to support emotional engagement further. From the discussion on unity v opensim it became apparent that people valued being able to build and code inside the environment. Technical challenges here I gather, but we can already import and export mesh. Maybe it should link up with geolocation in the natural world or feedback it's synthetic location back. How cool would it be to be in a natural location such as a castle, or city and interact with its mediaeval equivalent. Whether a modular approach is the right way I suspect so. Evolvability is a well known need in any design, and this is reflected in the architecture. There are also a ranges of uses. Maybe some modules could be not installed if not needed? Does opensim itself have the architecture needed? I suspect there will need to be changes there too, but maybe less drastic? The core developers will know far more here. Anyway, how do you guys feel about this? One of the criticisms of OpenSim and SL has been scalability. Will a viewer free up and provide opportunities here? How do we handle existing users and their identity. I am sure that existing names, and possibly avatars can be brought over. Maybe clothing can be brought over, especially mesh. Avatar looks - hmm porting that over to opensim and losing almost all of my SL clothes and skin was a wrench. But I guess even your favourite jeans wear out. Ok I am dreaming here a bit. But this is the time and it should be exciting. I hope the core developers think so. Tom Willans BSc(Hons) MBCS CITP PhD Student Serious Games Institute, Coventry University United Kingdom Managing Director Bessacarr Publications Ltd +44 (0)121 288 0281 email: [email protected] skype: tom.willans Second Life and OSGrid: Tom Tiros Sent from my iPad > On 7 Aug 2014, at 04:24, Michael Emory Cerquoni <[email protected]> wrote: > > some important things I think are essential to a next generation viewer I > would like to see > streaming audio (shoutcast or equivalent) > streaming video (quicktime/gstreamer or equivalent) > voice chat (mumble?) > MOAP (media on a prim) the ability to embed websites / youtube etc.. on > geometry surface or texture overlay > Lighting and Skies (Windlight Analog or equivalent or better) perhaps ability > to change the moon and sun with better textures or even mesh objects. > Animated Water perhaps that can be manipulated by physical objects (bluemars > had this) > Viewer based AO (we need to kill scripted AO's for good) > Particle System (Better weather ie: rain,snow with exclusion zones so its not > snowing in my living room :) also 3D particle support ie better grass and > cool effects. > better avatar skeleton support, quadrupeds+ etc.. > improved bump mapping and specular support, ability to animate materials same > as textures can be animated > optional viewer side physics support, better vehicles, joints, axles be nice > to have suspension and just better vehicles in general > better joystick, mouse, keyboard, HID support, ability to bind keys like a > normal video game would allow. > import / export of content in various formats ie: IARs and XML and various > mesh formats not just collada, perhaps KML > improved hypergrid integration HOP:// or equivalent new format > Floaters and Windows not bound by viewer window, can put floaters outside of > main window or on second screen (good for machinima) > > these are just some of the things I would like to so, I am sure I will > eventually think of more, some of these are probably more important than > others but I think they all are important to take things to the next level so > to speak. > > >> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Butch Arnold <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> Hello All, >> >> I This is a great discussion and many great opinions. >> >> I think there will be an endless amount of opinions and desires as OpenSim >> can be many different things to many people. >> While most users of opensim can write/edit simple scripts, upload textures, >> create simple textures, build simple prim based objects - there are a great >> many who prefer to simply explore and be entertained by those who can do >> these things. >> >> I myself am more interested in the "Server" side of things - I rarely >> venture into OpenSim worlds but to troubleshoot and experiment with new >> ideas, etc. >> >> I think the underlying ability of OpenSim to serve data when requested and >> to provide all of the other services it does should be leveraged in a way >> that an opensim "Virgin" will find interesting, entertaining, and easy to >> use. >> >> With that said, I think OpenSim would become more popular to the masses if >> we had a simple "No Frills" web viewer of sorts. >> I know, I know... web viewer.. hack cough, etc.... but really think about it. >> >> OpenSim as it is now is a very complicated affair if you are not already >> familiar with SL or OpenSim. >> The viewer itself is a very daunting piece of software to use if you are a >> new user to these types of platforms. >> >> If we could make a viable web based viewer which is designed to be a "First >> time user" viewer I think it would bring many more people into our platform. >> Once they've experienced our worlds by simply exploring, they will then >> become interested in further tasks such as building, scripting, etc. >> This would then drive them to "Try" a "Full" viewer, or one that is capable >> of all that we are now used to. >> >> This viewer would not need to be as complicated as the viewers we use now >> and could be a very good starting point. >> Not only would this provide us as a community with a split from SL, but it >> would provide a solid foundation on which to expand this simple viewer into >> a more robust viewer. >> The successful completion of this smaller project would then drive more >> users to our worlds and may also bring more interest in the development side >> from some who have sat on the fence thus far. >> >> The truth is, this platform seems to be for those of us who are a bit more >> technically inclined - "Grandma Sharon" in Washington State would never >> venture into our worlds as she would be terrified of the complexity of >> any of our available viewers, but if she could simply click a link and it >> work in her web browser she too would find it very entertaining. >> She may never build, script, texture, etc... but she would for sure enjoy >> some of the events, the socializing and exploring of our worlds. >> >> I think OpenSim should try to free itself from the bonds of SL for sure, but >> we should also try in some way to make our worlds more accessible to >> "Virgin" users. >> >> If you want revolutionary... OpenSim already is a very capable platform, but >> one which has been designed around a "Purpose Built" viewer - if we wanted >> to start fresh we could make a completely new viewer which uses the OpenSim >> platform to store and serve data to a viewer which is nothing like what we >> are currently used to - one with say much better graphics. >> >> If we do any new viewer in a modular way - it should be easy for others to >> produce "plugins" or "Modules" to do more interesting tasks. >> >> Just my thoughts. >> >> Butch >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 8/4/2014 9:08 PM, Mister Blue wrote: >>> I've been seriously thinking about creating a new viewer project. But with >>> Maria's survey[1] and all the different virtual world announcements >>> happening and the lively OpenSimulator vs Unity discussion on the >>> opensim-user list, I'd like to open up the discussion to the OpenSimulator >>> development community[2]. >>> >>> LL is making a new world and viewer (closed and proprietary as far as I >>> know). HighFidelity is making a new world and viewer (open source with >>> commercial 'grid services'). Unity 5 will have a multi-platform web viewer >>> and a new multi-user backend (pricing not announced). There are various >>> wonderful open source virtual world projects (realXtend, Virtual World >>> Framework, ...) as well as many emerging technologies (xml3d, html5, >>> asm.js). There are several forks of OpenSimulator (Aurora, ArribaSim, ...) >>> that have made many enhancements to the base system. Add to that several >>> successful virtual worlds build on OpenSimulator (inWorldz, Anvination, >>> Kitely, ...) as well as a few packaged distributions of OpenSimulator >>> (Diva, ...). Add to that the many SL/OpenSim third party viewers based on >>> the LL viewer. And that's just in our sphere. There is much more happening >>> in the gaming and education and training communities. >>> >>> So, what could a new viewer add to the mix? Whatever a new view does, it >>> approaches the question of what OpenSimulator should be three years from >>> now. >>> >>> For me, there are two basic choices[3]: evolutionary change or >>> revolutionary change. >>> >>> Evolutionary change says to build on existing OpenSimulator. Make due with >>> the existing LLLP (Linden Lab Legacy Protocol) and improve vehicles, make >>> installation and use easier and add an easier to use and improve viewer. >>> >>> Revolutionary change would be striking off on a new virtual world >>> architecture. It could have LLLP support but only for downward >>> compatibility and to keep that community and content. But other questions >>> arise: How would one build a viewer/virtual world where a HiFi avatar could >>> stand next to a SL avatar? How could content be delivered to a viewer so it >>> is displayable but is not in the original, copyable form? How to leverage >>> the distribution and power of 'the cloud'[4]? How could one make >>> hypergridable grids across the many virtual worlds? >>> >>> What do you think? Evolution or revolution? >>> >>> -- mb >>> >>> [1] >>> http://www.hypergridbusiness.com/2014/08/survey-better-vehicles-search-most-wanted-in-opensim/ >>> [2] I see this expanding to other forums eventually. >>> [3] With a lot of gray area in between >>> [4] I'm always amazed by Google Maps -- it displays the map with traffic >>> overlays and I can zoom in and out with almost immediate response. Why >>> can't a virtual world viewer do that? >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Opensim-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Opensim-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > -- > Michael Emory Cerquoni > _______________________________________________ > Opensim-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list [email protected] http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
