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

"Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)" <> Fri, 27 February 2009 01:31 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00F393A6ABE; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:31:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.515
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 ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2q8AsUPf-Hwt; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:31:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 001603A6A79; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:31:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30BC61414004; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:32:10 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <>
From: "Meadhbh Hamrick (Infinity)" <>
To: Jon Watte <>
In-Reply-To: <>
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: <> <>< .com> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3)
Subject: Re: [mmox] MMOX: Strawman scope/goals/approach
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Massively Multi-participant Online Games and Applications <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-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