Unreal Developer's Kit now free!

Melissa sent me this link. Awesome! This is another pro in favor of Unreal.
http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/12/free-unreal-dev-kit-already-has-over-50k-users/
http://www.develop-online.net/news/33252/UDK-surpasses-50k-users

Wavering moment of doubt

Hmmm. Our story doctor, Melissa, showed me Unreal 3's editor. I learned how to use the previous version, Unreal 2004, a couple years ago. Unreal 3 is now much improved, in areas that always pissed me off before.

Hmmm. The new level editor makes me want to use Unreal Editor 3 to make Emeralda. I don't know what to do. It might be a worthwhile endeavor to make the game in both, just to compare, but I think Bill's been waiting long enough to see something tangeable, considering how infrequently I can work on it.

Hmmm.

Here's a comparison (scroll down cause it seems Blogspot has trouble with tables):

SecondLife/SpotOn3D	Unreal Editor
Massively multiplayer functionality already built in, including chat, voice, commerce, and messaging capabilities.	Can have multiplayer functionality, can include a chat HUD, but that would take extra work. Voice chat and commerce would be out of my skillset. However, we could charge a one-time fee through PayPal.
The server that runs the game is always up, and maintained by Linden Labs.	I would have to run the game server 24/7 on a computer that I own.
Monthly land ownership dues starting at $80 per month.	A one-time license fee. I've emailed to find out how much. TorqueX is only $100, but I know Unreal costs more. Update: Looks like I'd need a "royalty-bearing license", which is $100 according to this page.
Can only run on PC.	Can build for PC, Xbox, or PlayStation 2. (Hmm. TorqueX can build for PC or Xbox, and gives you more control. But I'm less familiar with it than with Unreal.)
Designed for social realms.	Designed for first person shooters, but you can modify scripts to omit weapons, change default avatars to they don't look like soldiers, and provide other objects to manipulate. That would take a LOT of work, though.
Custom 3D objects (sculpty prims) are very restrictive. Ie, you can only start with specific objects (cylinders, spheres) with a set number of vertices. This makes sharp edges and crisp textures almost impossible on flat surfaces.	You can design any 3D object with any number of vertices you want! Complex objects too.
Custom 3D objects (scupty prims) take a long time to load, including their textures.	Unreal object instantiation is fast.
Lag due to lots of factors.	Less lag, more under my control.
Limited number of objects on your land.	Unlimited number of objects.
Limited space/land.	Unlimited space/land.
Restrictive terraforming.	Unrestricted terraforming and bump-mapping.
Simple UI, but still daunting to our demographic (35-65 yo women).	More control over the UI.
Noteriety and popularity, and useful to our players for other things besides playing our game.	No other usefullness.
Object animations cause lots of lag.	Again, Unreal is faster by default, and faster still because of how few people will be on the server.
Avatars are highly customizable, which is a pretty attractive feature.	Letting people customize their avatars would require a LOT of work. Might be out of my skillset.

Wow. Still don't know what to do. I'd better chat with Bill.

Bill's new blogs

Wow, Bill's written a whole bunch of new blogs! I've added links to them under "BLOGS RELATED TO THE GAME" on the right side. I've glanced at them and it's clear I'll need to read through them. Good stuff, Bill!!

How could I not know about the foliage in SecondLife/SpotOn3D?

I was messing about in SpotOn3D. One of the developers was online and we started chatting. Turns out, you can create trees and things as easily as creating cubes and spheres. Who knew?!?! I should've, that's for sure.

All you do is right-click your land, click Create, select Tree or Grass, and then click where you want it. Each time you create a tree, it's a different tree. It seems random - I got a spruce, then a fir, then a snowy tree, then a deciduous, etc. The generated trees weren't named.

I thought, man, what if, when I'm building Emeralda, I want a specific tree? I'll have to cycle through creating a bunch of trees til I have the right one. So, I thought I'd catalog them. I created tree after tree, and grass after grass, until I started getting repeats. Then I named them all, took copies into my inventory, took screenshots, and named the screenshots so that I would have a reference of what the trees in my inventory looked like.

How real should we get?

I was sitting in front of the computer, wondering how to design the world of Emeralda. It was daunting. I realized, I wasn't even sure how to make a tree look real. So, I thought, "I'll go around town and take photos of cool stuff." After all, the game is set in the Pacific Northwest, so the architecture and nature should look like what we have here.

I found some gorgeous, huge trees in Magnussen Park. I love evergreens. They're my favorite kinds of trees. So, naturally, I spent a LOT of time in the park. I tried to find the "wind-channeling pipe sculpture" from which the musical band Sound Garden took its name, but I think access is still restricted because of 9/11. On the way there, I caught sight of a really cool, Art Deco-feeling gate. I love the light at the top. I think I'll use something like that in the game as a visual indicator of an entryway, or to guide a player's route.

By the gate, I noticed leaves on the ground. It's details like this that make a landscape more realistic. At least, in autumn. Should I change up the landscape in the game depending on the time of year? Should I change deciduous trees from green to orange?

I found this coffee shop in Lynwood. I love how it looks. It's like a... I don't know, a lighthouse.

I also saw some other cool architecture, like this apartment building, or these houses. I love the green vine above the porch, and the landscaping.

But wait a minute, if I recreated these things in the game, sure, the game would look like the Pacific Northwest, but I'd also be recreating the ways by which people move around. For example, players would have to open a virtual door. Players would have to enter a building to see inside it. Players would have to wind their way around paths in a manicured landscape.

Why, if I have the tools of a virtual environment at my disposal, would I force people to do the mundane tasks of everyday real life? In SecondLife/SpotOn3D, players can fly. It's easier and faster to lift off the ground in a straight line than to enter a building and walk up a flight of stairs. Why have sealed buildings when there's no rain or cold weather to trouble my players? Why have windows when there's so much to see outside, so just omit the wall altogether. If Emeralda was a first-person shooter game or a similar genre, then yeah, I would provide walls and buildings, for cover and extra challenge. But this is an explorer's game. Let freedom reign!

Bill started a blog too!

Yay! Bill started a blog too. I think it'll be interesting to see the development of the game from both of our perspectives.

http://makingemeralda2.blogspot.com