Wulfie Reanimator

Your definition falls apart right here. "Thinking hard" is not a requirement for games. There are games that are simpler to play than knitting. Machines can play games.

See, I don't understand that either. Second Life is a game by every metric. Why do you think me thinking that affects how I interact with other people? Do you think you can't have serious inter-personal relations in a game? That seems psychotic or at the very least sociopathic to me. Edit: Re-reading the question a bit. Those people exist in real life too, you're just a game to them regardless of whether or not there's a game between the two of you. I repeat what I said above. It's generally very easy to tell what someone's attitude to Second Life is. I don't know how you can interact with someone for so long (or quickly) that you fall for them without realizing that they're just roleplaying the entire time. That kind of communication problem seems entirely self-inflicted.

Genuine question: Are puzzles not games? Regardless, when people call Second Life a game, it's shorthand for "video game" which has a more specific scope than just "any game" so making comparisons to completely unrelated things is only going to confuse you further. Once you start seeing enough games (read: video games) in your lifetime, it becomes pretty intuitive to recognize what types of software fall into that category within seconds of looking at it. Believe it or not, but there are games exactly like Second Life that are considered to be games by all. "Garry's Mod" for example. You start the viewer, pick a region, and you rez into it as an avatar. There is no goal or a way to "win" unless you make it so, like in SL. You can change your avatar, build stuff with prims and add scripts to it, upload and share your own content, teleport to a different sim, etc. It's a sandbox game and no one in history has seriously tried to claim it's not a game. There are also "simulation games" in which your only goal is some mundane real-world task, such as farm work or conducting a train. There are also games that are seriously pushing the boundaries of what we would traditionally call "games." Games like "Gone Home", "What Remains of Edith Finch", and "Life is Strange" are often called "walking simulators" because that's pretty much all you do. You control a character and experience a story, sometimes without even interacting with anything (or anyone) directly. Sometimes even the direction to which you're supposed to walk isn't given to you, so these games can be less than "interactive movies" but they still have most of the core parallels of what makes a video game. Video games are more than the sum of their parts, so you're not going to be able to define them with some neat one-liner such as "a game must have a goal" because for any simple definition you can come up with, I can find an example that doesn't fit. I don't quite understand this aversion to calling SL a game. Why does that classification bother you? Does it take away from it? Do you not want to be mistaken for a sweaty gamer? Are you upset that someone's not reading The Dictionary like a bible? I do like the point that sometimes comes up that "everything is a game" though, because everything can be reduced or twisted to something that fits the dictionary definitions of "game," regardless of which definition you want to use.

They're different tools for different parts of the same workflow. Marvelous Designer is "easier" or at least more intuitive when it comes to designing clothing, but "high quality clothing" doesn't just mean that it looks pretty. Well made clothing should at least try to be efficient, which the mesh from Marvelous Designed really isn't. Marvelous Designer needs a lot of information to make the fabric simulation natural and accurate, but Second Life doesn't work the same way so it should be simplified afterwards. This is where Blender comes in. Blender can be used to clean up your mesh from Marvelous Designer, as well as unwrapping and rigging it. There are other tools that can do these things too, but really, the answer is "both." You can't (well, you can, but shouldn't) just make clothing in Marvelous Designer and put it straight into SL and call it "good."

The "VR viewer / project for SL" was dead and buried years ago.

Same idea as Rolig, but if you want to have separate objects for each button (my preferred method), you can use a single script and llDetectedLinkNumber to figure out which button was touched. default { touch_start(integer n) { integer link = llDetectedLinkNumber(0); string button = llGetLinkName(link); if (button == "cool button") { // stuff, llSay or llWhisper } else if (button == "boring button") { // stuff, llSay or llWhisper } } }

If you're wearing a physics layer that gives your boobs some (or a lot of) bounce and don't want that to happen when you're clothed, you have two options. Take off the physics layer when you put on the clothes, or Replace the physics layer with a different one when you put on the clothes That's all there is to it.

You can't show Second Life on Twitch because Twitch doesn't allow it. Twitch doesn't care where their streams are being watched, nor does Linden Lab care.

Join the club:

The economy didn't halt while Casper was down, not for products nor services (like rentals). Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed like money was still changing hands, just the "other half" of the transaction wasn't working, AKA product delivery. There would be no "unpaid land" trouble for landlords/barons. It's slightly odd that there isn't(?) a refund option available in the case of their server being down at the time of the purchase, but, having a separate system for storing them until the servers come back up is quite a sophisticated (and commendable) solution. I think Casper did fine considering the circumstances, just nobody else (merchants) was expecting this either and didn't know how to prepare or handle it. (Like not joining the announcement-group for the one service your business literally relies on...)

Which one? I can easily double-check. Edit: Oh, Blueberry has always (and still does) use texture swaps for clothing. Not sure what product you were looking at.

Why? There's rarely ever a need to restart the whole script every time it's attached or detached. Considering the simplicity of what's being done, everything could be done in a single attach event (or formally with the help of run_time_permissions). default { attach(key avatar_uuid) { if (avatar_uuid != NULL_KEY) { llRequestPermissions(avatar_uuid, PERMISSION_TRIGGER_ANIMATION); llPlaySound(" --SOUND UUID1-- ", 1); llSleep(15); llPlaySound(" --SOUND UUID2-- ", 1); llSleep(30); llPlaySound(" --SOUND UUID3-- ", 1); llSleep(20); llStartAnimation(" --Inventory Animation-- "); llPlaySound(" --SOUND UUID4-- ", 1); } } } Each time the script is attached (avatar_uuid is not set to NULL_KEY), the sequence will begin. llRequestPermissions is made for the current owner and PERMISSION_TRIGGER_ANIMATIONS will be automatically granted because the object is attached.

No, only objects that exist in the world can have running scripts. Scripts in your inventory, or in objects within objects, can't run.

Yes, it can simply be left out. Your second bit of code has two big problems. You can't put an event inside of another event. Move touch_start out of state_entry. if (on = FALSE) is an assignment, not a comparison. You are always assigning a false value to "on" and the test will never pass. All variables are initially set to zero, or an empty string/list. It's not necessary to give them that value, but it helps with clarity. "on = FALSE" is an assignment. It gives a value to "on". "!on" is an expression. It does something that results into some value. "!" is the logical "not" operator. It switches any nonzero ("true") value to zero ("false"), and vice versa. The value is not assigned to anything, so the value of "on" does not change.

Personally speaking, I don't mind if someone is unhappy with my product because it doesn't work after the user has edited it. Either the edits they're doing is something I can't reasonably expect, or what they're trying to do is simply more complicated than what I intended (and I'm not obligated to fill their needs), or the product is actually flawed or poorly designed (and it's up to me to improve the product as a whole). Could you clarify what you mean by "they wanted a mod version ... and I didn't want to do a custom job?" It sounded like that other person was going to be the one doing the work, or did you mean changing the permissions? Sure, it can be tedious to re-perm an object (I often just can't be bothered to fill random requests while I'm in-world) but tedium aside, what reason was there for the object to be no-modify to begin with?

Multiply time by some value. float time = llGetTime(); // 100% speed float time = llGetTime() * 2; // 200% speed float time = llGetTime() * 0.25; // 25% speed

Works on mobile too. Tap and hold. @Marianne Little Long quotes are automatically shortened and can be "closed" to save even more space. (You'll see that if you quote my post, because of the long image.) You can add a quote (without actually quoting anyone) with this button:

I mean, you can do it like that, but to what benefit? In my opinion that's just overcomplicating the problem.

I still don't understand. The only reason why you'd use two scripts is to have the infinite loop part in the second script -- and nothing else: default { state_entry() { while (1) { float time = llGetTime(); rotation r = llEuler2Rot(<time,0,0>) * llEuler2Rot(<0,time,0>) * llEuler2Rot(<0,0,time>); llSetLinkPrimitiveParamsFast(LINK_THIS, [PRIM_ROTATION, r]); } } } And then you have the main script that does everything else, including llSetScriptState to control the above script. There would be no "stopping the loop to receive commands."

No, OpenGL (and any other well-established graphics API) is able to support any arbitrary size image. It's completely trivial in principle, but there are probably some kind of technical reasons (such as optimizations) for LL to limit texture sizes to a set range.

What do you mean by "stutter" exactly? Can you demonstrate? Also, llSetScriptState should not be confused with llResetOtherScript. llSetScriptState will simply "suspend" the script the same way as the sim would when it's put into a schedule to wait for its turn to run. When the script continues, it will continue exactly from where it left off (mid-loop) as you'd normally expect. I'd appreciate it, it looks very cool! I'll send some lindens your way as a thank you when I get it. If I remove the llSleep and run your script, it rotates as smoothly as the script I used in my video, so the problem is probably just the sim you're in. Not much you can do about that. (Well, besides attempting to get KFM working, but that'd require unlinking parts of your object.)

You can also use llSetScriptState instead, to not spend time polling for external data.

It's hard to make any definitive conclusions without seeing the involved code, but most likely, exchange_curr is not actually set correctly. Functions can't know whether they've been given a variable or its data, there's no distinction in LSL. This works, for example: string json = "{\"rates\":{\"USD\":1,\"AED\":3.67,\"ARS\":78.93,\"AUD\":1.38,\"GBP\":0.761,\"GTQ\":7.78,\"HKD\":7.75,\"HRK\":6.37}}"; string exchange_curr = "GBP"; llOwnerSay(llJsonGetValue(json, ["rates", exchange_curr]));

If your original work is 4:3, it'll be reduced to 4:2 on upload, but you can still create a 4:3 surface to display it on. This will essentially "stretch it back" into its intended dimensions. The only thing you lose is quality -- but that will happen even if your original work is exactly 1024x1024 (for example). It's just the nature of SL's texture format.

No, a script cannot process new events until the current one ends. An event can't end before the loop ends. And infinite loops... The smoothness is affected by script lag in the region. You could show your script just in case. Also, is that thing you showed available inworld somewhere?