Started with Wings3D for no apparent reason other than I remembered the website address first.

Wings3D
http://www.wings3d.com/

Nice little modeling program, and good for massaging models in other formats. It is falling out of use a bit now that I am settling down into a Maya/FragMotion partnership.

MilkShape
http://chumbalum.swissquake.ch/

Very happy I have this. Don’t use it much at the moment. (Again the Maya/Fragmotion taking over most functions.) But it has been good for converting some formats that FragMotion doesn’t deal with. Between the two of them I’m covered for most low-end, street urchin level modeling formats.

FragMotion
http://www.fragmosoft.com/

This is my workhorse animation program at the moment. Why? Because our target platform required md2 models. “Yikes! Are you idiots still using MD2?” Yes. We are still using MD2 models in our games. And, we actually find they are useful as part of our keep it simple philosophy of programming. Would we use a different format given the chance? Perhaps, but given a chance means we stumble across another lead programmer that is willing to work for nothing (not next to nothing, for nothing) on a non-profit charity project. At the moment the few chumps (i.e. worthy volunteers — of which I am one) are busy handling other aspects of the engine. Notably lighting, particles and physics. Next we tackle mp3/ogg. Later, we might get around to tearing everything apart so that we can use a more modern model. However, for me, I’d rather jump back into the AI a bit more. We already have one of the best AI systems available this side of Arcturus. But, games can always use a little more AI.

Also worthwhile but maybe not required:
MD2 Viewer
(available from the MilkShape folks) http://chumbalum.swissquake.ch/md2v/index.html

I use then when I can’t tell if a model is whack or if the game is misbehaving. If the model behaves in MD2Viewer, I figure it should behave in most games that use MD2.

As I’m going through the list of stuff to re-install, the point that I do too much stuff with too many programs is made painfully clear.

This will give me an opportunity to reevaluate whether or not I want to continue along certain creative avenues.

I suspect the answer will be “Yes! Of course”. But it doesn’t hurt to pose the question to one’s self periodically.

It will be the minor almost invisible things that will end up being the largest annoyance. For example, all of my special dictionaries are gone. That means I will need to teach several programs how to spell — once again. Or, I could stop using jargon that is out of the norm for most spelling program data files.

While waiting for the OpenOffice.org to download (127meg) I figured to fight my way through the install of Notepad+ from Rogsoft. It is an ancient piece of software that I happen to love as a replacement for the standard windows notepad.

Available at http://www.mypeecee.org/rogsoft/notepad.html as an archival download this replacement for notepad is worth the hassle (as far as I’m concerned.) It will edit huge (big big) files, and has many nice features missing from the standard notepad.exe

The hassle part comes from my desire to replace notepad with this program rather than just install then edit every stupid association to point to the new program. Turns out there exist more than a few hard coded references to the notepad.exe file. Leastwise it seems that way to me. So, I go through the trouble of poking and poking and prodding my way through a replacement.

I’m sure there is a systematic approach to this. But for me it mostly involves copying in the file, windows replaces the new file with the old (original [proper]) version. I turn off one option or another, copy in the file, windows replaces the new file again. I try turning off yet another restore option or other and retry. After doing this enough, windows will eventually give up.

Of course I need to replace the file in several folders (including some hidden system folders). If you do a search on notepad*.* and select the look in hidden/system folders that helps.

Yep, the hard drive on my main work computer died today. Actually just the C and G drives. That means I’ve only lost all of my programs (on C) and all of my games (on G). Yikes!!!

Now the real work of establishing a new working environment on a second computer starts.

To keep myself amused and perhaps even capture of record of steps for future such disasters, I’ve decided to blog my progress.

I suppose if you’re reading this log, you’ll need to work your way backwards if you care for a historical (or perhaps hysterical) account.

So while I take stock of the situation and muddle around trying to find which of the backup disks is the most recent, I’ll download OpenOffice. No way will I use the MSWorks that comes preinstalled on most windows systems.

More later. Off to http://www.openoffice.org to download my text editor.

Invisible Work And Other Things We Can’t See

There is a great mirror effect that works in the Bardo Safari environment when working with the group. I think without the group the mirror itself is invisible. The mirror is part of the reflection.

Isn’t it? Or is it? What I noticed is that tendencies that are invisible to me in this realm are visible and undeniable in the Bardo Safari realm.

There is no time to forget what happened because you have a present and very visible view the 3 Vs) of the whole situation. It is true that seasoned voyagers will have a better knowledge of what they are looking at on the screen than a noob and noobs will be more or less knowledgeable of what they are seeing depending on the degree of attention but no matter how much you see or don’t see, exposure to the space gradually sharpens, strengthens and focuses the attention and, other things as well. It seems to happen as if by magic but we know it took many, many BTUs of heat to get that little kernel to pop. When the motivation to change is for the benefit of the group and not for oneself it becomes a whole new bowl of cherries.

— Yoyodyne

Although, compared to some, I have not worked in Bardo Safaris much at all, however, each time I do, I notice how much the Bardo Safari situations are a mirror to life in this realm where I now sit.. I wanted to share this, most recent observation with you, today. Today, as I was entering a game with a plan to hunt for runes in the Tower (Countess Quest), where runes are guaranteed, it came to my attention that in the Bardo Safaris one is able to observe how “different characters” handle the same situations-differently depending on what kind of “character” type they are. One can choose a number (7) different characters to operate and learn to “voluntarily” operate each one.

In “the game” the NPCs (non player characters, like Akara, Charsi, Flavie … are programed to do what they do, without variation. They respond in a constant to the “character’s'” prompting.achievements…They always say the same things…They will sell pots, weapons, armor, anything the character wants can be had, as long as the character has the gold. The characters (sorc, druid, necro…) are not programed in exactly the way but they do have to abide the rules/laws of that particular environment that were developed by the “game designers” and their actions and
behaviors are completely tied to the directions given by “the player/operator” ( you, me, Joe Smith…). If the player/operator directs a level one character into a situation it has not been properly prepared for, it will die, likewise, if the character has been sufficiently prepared it will succeed perhaps in accomplishing one or another of the quests/obstacles on the path toward the shared goals. The player/operator cannot change the laws of the game universe for the character but can
assist the character by playing him/her/it. They, the character and player/operator have a relationship in which they “learn” the game together, do the Bardo Run together. The more the operator plays the character and understands the game, the better the character will perform in the game. This is one area where practice, practice, practice makes a big difference, like playing an instrument.The more the player/character “operates the character, the more likely she/he/it will learn how “to play” “the game”.

The character is programed to do certain number actions only.
With the vigilance of the operator it can come to perform these actions incredibly well. The operator will learn what skills the character has at his/her/it’s disposal and exploit them in the most advantageous ways. The operator will outfit the character to protect it, make it fast, make it strong or whatever is needed to achieve the aim at hand. The character and the player/operator learn the game together as they play. This brings to mind the ventriloquist act. A good act will convince the audience that there are two entites operating.even though there is the only one.

The character serves the operator in that it is through the character that it is possible for the operator to participate in this particular environment
for whatever reason the operator has in mind. It appears to quite a pleasant symbiotic situation since it is my supposition that the character does not have a life without the possession of the operator but I have no proof. I can see it like the “spirit/essence” giving life to a material form/machine. The operator/essence can work on “this” particular plane by taking possession of a character/machine/material form. The player will try to keep the character alive during the given situaltion in the order to further the mission.

It turned out to be much longer than anticipated but if you care to
add to, comment on, with any thoughts or inspirations you have had
along these or other lines related to the Bardo Safaris I would be
interested to know them.

Yoyodyne

Aloha,

…sometimes the solution to a problem is simply a sacrifice.

We saw this lesson in the Bardo Safari game yesterday.

We were having a hard time getting to the Throne Room in Hell.
Our telesoc was really having to work.

Just want to say that the transformation fwas tangable.

I am sure there are many verbally past down analogous stories that
would describe this event and, in EJ’s case, it would be a number of different jokes. Like the time…just kidding.

But, yeah, so any, our telesorc seemingly (on my pixel screen, anyway) transformed out of the catapillar mode, spread those teleporting wings and flew to the destination and although I could not see the movement from my post at the time I hold an image of a very quick but gentle vertical ebb and flow of rainbow colored light, well, with lots of bright white mixed in. When a gateway of such magnitude is opened for the group to witness,who cares where your experience bar registers. I am very grateful to have partaken in such an experiment and experience.

gg’s all,
Yoyodyne

Spiritual Gaming has a channel on YouTube. We’ve just started the process of adding bits and pieces selected from the hundreds of hours recorded on the topic.

Take a look, have a listen.

The channel is http://www.youtube.com/spiritualgaming

Survival is not the goal.

That doesn’t mean to suggest that death or reckless behavior is called for.
Simply, survival is not the goal.

When running a set of linked equations and optimizing on survival you get one answer. Take that same set of linked equations and optimize on something other than survival and you’ll get a different result.

I can’t really put into exact words the nature of what that other thing would be. I can’t put it into words for two reasons. One, the true nature of that other thing is non-human and thus can not be bound in a simple container of human language. Two, the exact nature of what that other thing could very well be different for me than it is for you.

So given that confession of wiggly-fuzziness consider the following as possible alternatives to survival as the goal:

Making the most of the life that one has been given.
Quality of life.
Contribution.
Communion with the underlying is-ness of it all.
Right action.
Not dying like a dog.
…
und-sew-forth

Somewhere in and amongst those phrases may lurk a valid alternative to survival as the goal.

This is the title for an old but still very relevant article found in the BBC news on the topic of video game development. The link can be found here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/6047566.stm

Quoting from the news article:

“Spiralling production costs, development time and accusations of a lack of innovation are causing problems for gaming companies. But some in the industry are hoping the revival of user-generated games may provide the solution.

Boasting 3D, photo-real graphics and 5.1 surround sound, contemporary video games are pretty impressive.

But games that look and feel next-gen do not come cheap.

With development costs running into tens of millions of dollars, the games industry relies on sequels and tried and tested formats.

Eidos’ Ian Livingstone says: “The industry really is relatively young but already it’s surpassed Hollywood box office in receipts. It’s [earned] $20bn [£11bn] a year in software sales alone, so it’s a huge business.

“I think publishers became a little bit more risk-aware because of the amounts of money involved.

“You get two or three titles wrong, and you’ve spent £5m [$9m] to £10m [$19m] each on them, you’re out of business in a hurry.”

Popular game genres like sports, racing and first person shooters, dominate the charts.

But where are the new, innovative ideas?

Observers think the industry needs an injection of imagination. “

The article then goes on to discuss the attempts by Microsoft and other software moguls to provide platforms that will allow individuals to penetrate the development scene.

Unfortunately, these platforms also serve the purpose of locking the would be developers into the preferred platform of the supplier.

There are two solutions to this dilemma that we like. One involves the creation of group productivity tools similar to those used on sourceforge.net for open source software. This would need to be enhanced in a wiki type fashion to allow for parallel development of story-lines and other non software aspects of the project.

Another solution we like is the use of simpler development platforms that are more friendly to small team (or solo) development.

In this regard I’m very familiar with the G.O.D.D. engine — as one of the co-developers I’m more or less forced to be aware of it. However, you may know of other small-team friendly development systems. Heck you might even be involved in such a beast. If that is the case please drop a line. It would be good to know about and perhaps review.

The problem with massive projects is the demand for justification. You simply can’t ask 150 people to work on a project without justifying to them in some fashion the why, where, and how of that project. This is not conducive to exploration of a creative hunch.