Yes, please explain what you mean by "SL-type". MXP was designed with the intention of supporting distributed physics, which danx0r found to be quite feasible, and which is not at all SL-like, seems to me; when I think of SL architecture the big thing that sticks out at me is that a monolithic "sim" controls everything within a specific "region"; and MXP does not imply this at all. Nor does MXP attempt to specify what types of content may be placed into the virtual space.
You need to separate the nature of a protocol from the way it may be used before you say it implies a certain type of architecture, and you certainly need to get specific about your vague claims. Please describe this other type of virtual world you are claiming MXP does not support. Arkowitz On Oct 27, 2:42 am, Kripken <[email protected]> wrote: > Even if the SL-specific assumptions you mention are lifted in MXP, you still > have what I called an "SL-type virtual world". You can call it something > else if you want (I guess the name bothers you). But my point is that, for > MXP to support the non-Second Life like aspects I mentioned (here and in the > MXP mailing list), it would need many changes or an entirely different > approach. > > In other words, what you call "moving beyond the SL assumptions", I see as > still being an SL-type world (just a better version of it). But again, > that's just terminology, the actual details are what matter. > > - kripken > > > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:44 PM, arkowitz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > "Second-Life-like"? NOOOOOO!!!!!!! If you want a "Second-Life-Like" > > virtual world, go with OpenSim... the architecture I contributed to > > MXP is not intended to replicate the Second Life set of assumptions. > > And I think if MXP is producing a Second Life experience, it is > > because it is being used in a certain way. > > > Can it be that I architected something specifically to move beyond the > > Second Life assumptions (square regions tied to specific hardware, > > avatars as special objects, scripting only in the server, and on and > > on) and then have it come full circle and be described as producing a > > "Second-Life-like" experience? There is a major disconnect here. > > > Arkowitz > > > On Oct 26, 9:07 am, Kripken <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 2:40 PM, arkowitz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Kripken - just what do you mean by "for what it does"? > > > > MXP is a nice, clean, from-scratch protocol for a *Second Life*-like > > virtual > > > world. > > > > However, some people want other things. For example, if you want a more > > > fast-paced virtual world (that allows action games like Quake etc.), or > > at > > > the other extreme if you want a very slow-paced virtual world (only > > > semi-realtime, and maybe with limited places you can walk to - limited > > and > > > scripted), then you would need and prefer a different protocol than MXP. > > > > Btw, I have discussed this stuff with the MXP devs, in their mailing list > > > and on IRC, there might be logs somewhere (the mailing list, for sure). > > > > - kripken --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/realxtend http://www.realxtend.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
