Re: [mmox] MMOX: Strawman scope/goals/approach

"Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)" <infinity@lindenlab.com> Fri, 27 February 2009 01:31 UTC

Return-Path: <infinity@lindenlab.com>
X-Original-To: mmox@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmox@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00F393A6ABE; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:31:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.515
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.515 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.084, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2q8AsUPf-Hwt; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:31:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tammy.lindenlab.com (tammy.lindenlab.com [64.154.223.128]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 001603A6A79; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:31:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from regression.lindenlab.com (regression.lindenlab.com [10.1.16.8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by tammy.lindenlab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30BC61414004; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:32:10 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <6CE24396-7167-4B37-A9AC-B1AA3CF7E7AF@lindenlab.com>
From: "Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)" <infinity@lindenlab.com>
To: Jon Watte <jwatte@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <49A7184D.3050602@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3)
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:32:09 -0800
References: <ebe4d1860902240729x5e86306bpd0950b05c3a11f28@mail.gmail.com> <OF7F32322B.61DEE52B-ON85257567.00564FEE-85257567.00585420@us.ibm.com><61dbdd7d0902261335q608ee9ferc083fdffa87071ed@mail.gmail .com> <49A7184D.3050602@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3)
Cc: mmox-bounces@ietf.org, mmox@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mmox] MMOX: Strawman scope/goals/approach
X-BeenThere: mmox@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Massively Multi-participant Online Games and Applications <mmox.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox>, <mailto:mmox-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmox>
List-Post: <mailto:mmox@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmox-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox>, <mailto:mmox-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 01:31:49 -0000

i don't think we get to mandate what code people implement the  
protocol in, but i would certainly add lisp, smalltalk and occam to  
the list.

seriously thought... remember... we're talking about a wire-protocol,  
not a library that implements the protocol.

On Feb 26, 2009, at 2:31 PM, Jon Watte wrote:

> Gareth Nelson wrote:
>> any code should be produced in. My vote is for python and C.
>>
>
> Let me vote for Lua and C++, and then the OpenSim people can vote  
> for C# and Java and we have all the bases covered :-)
>
>
>> games are relevant (after all, MMORPGs for example are just huge
>> virtual worlds with game rules thrown in), I fail to see how  
>> networked
>>
>
> I think that's a common mis-conception. Most (almost all) MMOGs do  
> not have much in the way of persistency, other than character  
> possessions and stats. They also have a very static world, that  
> generally does not allow users to move things around or place new  
> things into the world. Finally, they do not support any form of UGC,  
> which I think is more or less a requirement for a "real" virtual  
> world. Lacking all three means that the technical job of  
> implementing and running the MMORPG is much easier, but it also puts  
> them on a lower rung of the expressiveness. A VW could express a  
> MMORPG (with significant overhead compared to the MMORPG itself),  
> but a MMORPG couldn't express a VW.
>
>> Practically everything people do online is "multiuser", and lots of
>> things are "massively multiuser" - look at any big site such as
>> wikipedia for example.
>>
>>
>
> "What is virtual worlds" has been a general question for a long  
> time, but I believe the "rough consensus" answer is that it's at  
> least:
>
> Interactive
> Persistent
> Identity Based
> Collaborative
> Supports UGC
> (controversial) Based on a 3D Simulation
>
> But, if we believe that we all need to agree on exactly what a  
> virtual world is before we can make progress, experience shows we  
> won't be able to make progress at all.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> jw
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmox mailing list
> mmox@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox