Jump to content

going underground


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 2116 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

I've seen skyboxes and read complaints about them. Can't say I disagree about the complaints. Some things make sense in the sky. Others are needless clutter.

I had a thought about putting one underground. While getting the box underground is possible, no way to get an avatar to it. All the various ways to teleport an avatar won't port the avatar below ground level.

Some will ask why not just terraform the ground. I've done that, but the estate settings limit how much I can do (a group I'm in owns land). And, anyone renting land isn't going to have that option.

So, why not allow access to the space under the ground?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can certainly do that if you own land in a private estate, where roughly 2/3 of all land in SL is.  Almost all Mainland regions have a +/- 4m terraforming limitation.  Linden Lab keeps that restriction in place because they want to minimize wrenching differences in land levels across region boundaries.  As the landlord for continent-sized groups of regions, they want to have adjacent regions continue to match up properly.  If people on each region started digging 75 m holes and making 75m mountains, they wouldn't .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand why the terraforming limits are in place. Sometimes exceptions can be negotiated for important enough tenants.

Which is why the idea of having access to under the land makes sense. And under the land could include submerged structures, for example, Nemo's underwater base as on display in Arcardia Asylum.

It makes at least as much sense as skyboxes do and provides an opportunity to get some of those skyboxes out of the sky. Sure, some things belong in the sky, like sky stations and "space" stations. And I know there are, and will be, sims stacked full of skybox rentals.

So, again,why not allow access to the space under the ground?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nemo's underwater base is not an exception.  Linden Lab's Department of Public Works creates the landscape and any special features like Nemo or Bay City or Horizons that sit on it.  Residents occupy the landscape, the same way we may live on rental property in RL. We don't get to dig big holes because Linden Lab says we can't.  They own the Mainland, so they make the rules the same way a RL landlord makes the rules about whether you can dig holes in the back yard and move the driveway there. Debating policy among ourselves doesn't change that.  If you have a better idea, submit a JIRA report and ask for a feature change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used fake ground where I could lower the land enough to not raise the result - or where raising the result made sense.

That still leaves parts where things could have gone under the land if not for the limit on teleporting avatars.

As I said, I understand why the limits on terraforming - both by LL and by private estate owners. And the same reasoning applies to using fake land.

While limits on terraforming in SL do parallel RL limits on digging holes in one's own yard, access to space under SL land has no RL parallel. There is no infrastructure or "features of nature" (examples: aquifers, bedrock, fault lines, etc) under SL land. And when the current owner/tenant vacates, any objects under the land are just as easy to clear out as objects far above the land and on the land.

So, what more do I need to make a strong enough case to even consider submitting a feature change request?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, InannaSin said:

So, what more do I need to make a strong enough case to even consider submitting a feature change request?

That's a good question. Others have made similar requests in the past (for example MISC-2382, which was archived many years ago), but they've never been considered seriously.   My guess is that the technical challenges are complex enough that you would need a super-compelling justification to make it past the "well, that would be nice" stage.  Just off the top of my head, I can think of several features (starting with the basic location matrix that the servers use for finding and moving objects and going on to properties like gravity and operations like pathfinding ) that might behave badly if the Lab started messing with how the ground is defined, so this is not a simple, inexpensive weekend project.  If you think you can make such an argument, though, give it your best shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 2116 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...