LL Could Consider On-Demand Parcels/Worlds/Lands

[Gabriele Graves]

2 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:

We've been messing with some ideas for nicer looking banlines in Catznip .. probably going to need to do 2 sets with different rendering behaviors, which punted the project behind all the more important pressing work

One subtle for people who just don't want to see them, and one super crazy obvious for "explorers" to avoid, maybe we can get the viewer to make an educated guess about which to show when

Something I have wished for on many occasions is the ability to selectively hide banlines for some parcels but show them for all other parcels and have the viewer remember that.   This way banlines could be set to not display for parcels you live near (because they ugly) but could still have them on for travelling around exploring where you might want to be more aware.

[animats]

On 5/21/2022 at 11:44 PM, Mollymews said:

At the moment the viewer doesn't receive information about a banline til we are pretty close to it.  Coffee Catznip has talked about this quite a lot, about how it would be good for the viewer to get parcel access/banline info at the same time as it can get the other parcel information.

That's a good idea. On a related note, I have a JIRA request in for llEntryDanger. This would be like llScriptDanger, which tells you if a given position is in a parcel with scripts disabled. llEntryDanger would tell you if your current avatar/vehicle/object combo can enter.

Security orbs have to ask for PERMISSION_RETURN_OBJECTS before they eject things. It would be useful to be able to tell if anything in a parcel currently has PERMISSION_RETURN_OBJECTS. Then security orbs become detectable and mappable.

Showing all the keep-out areas on the SL map would be useful. That would make flying around much easier.

For ground vehicles, hitting a ban line isn't a big deal. All it does is turn physics off. My motorcycles back the vehicle out a bit, zero the velocity, and turn physics back on.

The bad case is when the avatar can't get in, but the vehicle can. The avatar gets ejected, the vehicle gets left behind cluttering up the place, and the avatar is left in a partly broken state where moving around doesn't work until you sit on something or teleport to clear the "take controls" state.

In terms of improving privacy, a simple change would help. Require line of sight from avatar to seat for a sit. (At least for parcels where the "no peeking" option is set.). This prevents camming through a wall to find a sit target. It makes doors provide actual protection. If your doors are closed and locked, the physics model of your house is solid, and your teleport landing point is outside the house, this would prevent anyone getting in. This is a good solution from an immersion point of view, because it works like the real world.

[Coffee Pancake]

1 hour ago, Gabriele Graves said:

Something I have wished for on many occasions is the ability to selectively hide banlines for some parcels but show them for all other parcels and have the viewer remember that.   This way banlines could be set to not display for parcels you live near (because they ugly) but could still have them on for travelling around exploring where you might want to be more aware.

We're tossing back and forth some accessibility ideas for users with vision difficulties based around treating things in the viewer and SL differently depending on avatar context (as much as we can imply that from received inputs & avatar motion etc). So this might be something to add to that pile.

Say you're on a parcel you own or walking or camming, there is no need to render a ban line till your face is right up against it. Do the opposite for flying or in motion over a certain speed. Likewise this could be extended to factor in angle of approach, if you're passing a parcel with banlines .. do you really care?

Ideally we want to avoid manual controls or settings beyond enabling the feature (if we even add that singular option). The trick is having the viewer make an appropriate decision the vast majority of the time, but as this is SL, there is a lot of scope for \edge cases and accidentally triggering abrupt changes in perceived state.

[Love Zhaoying]

4 hours ago, Rowan Amore said:

I have them turned off.  I don't wandering off-road that often but if I do and bump into one, no harm done.  I think @Silent Mistwalkersuggested a fence looking banline.  Anything besides the crime scene tape look would have to be better.

Fences make good neighbors!

[Love Zhaoying]

41 minutes ago, animats said:

If your doors are closed and locked, the physics model of your house is solid, and your teleport landing point is outside the house, this would prevent anyone getting in. This is a good solution from an immersion point of view, because it works like the real world.

I like this a lot!