Once the models are loaded then its just a matter of transmitting coordinates of movements and events. The level of detail would of course be up to the client software and the hardware available to it. It can’t be that difficult as there have been online deathmatch servers since Q1.

I think that the first 3D browser would become as much of a success as the first graphical HTML browser was (i.e. Netscape) for the same reasons: there is no other and its cool.

The only draw back I see is that 3D content is harder to produce than Text 2D images. It requires special tools for content authoring, talented people to make a few sites that get the whole thing kick started and creative teams to do it well. I guess back in the early 1990s HTML content wasn’t SO fantastic ether.

X3D may be the HTML of the future, but until I see X3D browsers reach the performance level of Quake 3 or even Quake 2 I am skeptical. Even today in our hi-bandwidth world XML wrapped data tends to hog bandwidth. Applications processing data in real time, even with quad processors and graphic card arrays I believe will fail to reach that near reality looking world that would become the metaverse if they are processing data from a bloated pipe. Quake 3 and the Unreal Tournament engines are able to reach their peformance levels because the maps are all pre-compiled and the data is streamed with very little meta data and often in a binary format. Maybe X3D would work if data is transmitted with a binary serializer to take the bloat out of the data pipe. Maybe large chunks of static X3D worlds/display areas could be compiled down to the bit level before transmission to the end clients so objects load and display faster. I believe there is already work being done on this, so maybe things aren’t that far off. If this would happen I think X3D would fly.

Even with the above other software engineers will take different approaches and create different products. HTML became a standard because of a set of unique circumstances that I’m not sure exist in the 3D virtual world market. I will tell you this, having one standard would be great and I’m all for it. I’m not anti-X3D at all, I’m just not at the point were I see it as the contender for the global standard of the 3D web yet. It would be nice if it became that, but I don’t think this can be forced. Adoption of X3D at this point is slow, until that changes all bets are off.

This is my opinion only, which is semi informed I guess. Take it or leave it :)

(besides, you could turn off ‘textures’, reduce models polygon complexity etc to reduce bandwidth requirements). Back to the point…

Cliffordb: When your talking about ‘different needs for different groups’, HTML tackles this problem and in a similar way X3D will do the same. What I’m really saying in this post is that X3D will replace HTML in the ‘3D Web’, so it will be open to plugins like FLV steaming, maybe even embedded Flash in X3D, so surfaces that are fully interactive Flash!

As for the interactivity, avatars etc thats an open question. I guess that would be up to the ‘web developers’ like it is on web forums today (i.e. weather you can see the other people currently logged in, send them a message, see avatars from other who have posted etc).

I’m not sure what you are talking about with this ‘metaverse’ business…? Please elaborate.