Will Second Life still be around 10 years from now?

[Porky Gorky]

SL won't even be around in 2014 imo

[Orca Flotta]

Ugh Porky, you're too negative. When I joined SL in 07 I heard many ppl say that SL won't make it further than 08. Then the same was said about 09, 10 and so forth. What we really got is a slowly (very slowly) but steadily improving SL. Is it all good? No, feck no! So many blunders and nearly show-stoppers are still what we have to suffer on a daily basis. For example having an asperger-suffering guy with zero people skills as the quasi-spokesperson, as SL's most public employee. Or that unspeakable Rod Humble, a gaming expert, as CEO. What nonsense. :smileymad:  I heard from ppl working with Humble that he's the most incapable manager ever, destryoing teams and projects left and right. Or that uncalled for and still-born project of V2, bad land management, firing of the most skilled employees, the incapability of even defining what the product SL really is, a bunch of wrong managers at the helm, so much stuff going wrong ...

But overall SL is not just still alive, it is much better than it ever was. And I will say the same in 2024.

[Penny Patton]

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

Interestingly enough, I've been hearing the SL death hammer striking for almost 6 1/2 years now.  It must be falling on deaf ears because it is still here. I've been called a LL fangirl for years but you know what, just about everything I've said has come to pass. Instead of doom and gloom for SL, people should be thankful it is here. Imagine the alternatives...

 

Will SL be here in 10 years....let's hope so :matte-motes-wink:

---

Even AOL is still alive and kicking, not that most people would know. I think SL will exist in some form for many years to come. To my mind, it's more a question of will SL thrive, or will it merely cling to existance? Without question it has been very much  the latter for years now.

The number of private estates has diminished, the amount of unowned mainland has grown, active users are on the decline. Linden Lab has always struggled with retaining users and has never been able to manage much success in turning their retention rates around.

 

 Yes, let us imagine the alternatives. SL might be here in ten years, but whether or not any alternatives catch up with our imagination will determine whether or not most of us even care at that point.

 

 It is, for example, entirely possible to create a new appearance editor for SL that is entirely compatible with existing avatars yet makes it much easier and more intuitive for the average user, new and old alike, to create more attractive and more imaginative avatars.

When not constrained to SL's current camera placement and the tendency towards having larger and larger avatars, it is entirely possible to fit four sims' worth of content and detail into a single sim. There are location in SL which demonstrate this.

 There is nothing stopping LL from improving the content creation tools in ways which curb the worst building habits displayed in SL, over time nurturing a grid where framerates increase to double or triple what you're currently used to. If LL had implemented such changes when they introduced mesh, we'd be reaping the benfits right now.

 Likewise there is absolutely nothing preventing LL from introducing improved social and community tools which make it easier to find or spread the word about content which interests us, creating larger, stronger communities within SL and making it so much easier for new users to dive in and find content within SL which will keep them coming back.

 

 If Linden Lab does not do these things then even Open Sim could, given ten years, eventually surpass SL.

 An entirely new alternative, not held back by the baggage of legacy content or retaining some form of compatibility with SL would have even more freedom to introduce improvements

 

Of course, if no such alternatives appear, then I can certainly see SL sticking around for the foreseeable future. Maybe eventually restructuring a smaller mainland, but still around.

[Sidney Deluxe]

Yes, Second Life will still be around & still operated by LL

 

And we'll all still be bit@hing about lag

 

[Deltango Vale]

Will virtual worlds such as Second Life and EVE Online be around in 10 years? Absolutely.

Will Linden Lab be around in 10 years? Doubtful, but Second Life might prosper under a new owner.

In 1992, virtual worlds were a purely theoretical concept. In 2002, they were built. In 2012, EVE Online topped the charts while Second Life hit bottom (basically back to where it was in 2008). To understand why, you must look at the parent companies. In a nutshell, CCP Games is one of the world's most visionary, responsive and well-managed companies. Linden Lab, on the other hand, is one of the world's most myopic, intransigent and poorly managed companies. The difference could not be more stark.

We are in the Model-T phase of virtual worlds. The future is a Formula 1 Ferrari. It's still wide open who will reap the reward and the glory of building the dominant virtual world in cyberspace. Linden Lab gave up years ago.

[Lucretia Brandenburg]

I think a virtual world that is, at its core, a vastly expanded chat room such as SL and a virtual world that is a science fiction MMORPG set in outer space are so different that they really can't be compared next to each other. They don't seem even remotely similar to one another.

[Orca Flotta]

Zacly!

EVE is, in all its glory, still nothing more than a game.

SL is, with all its shortcomings, a virtual world.

Oh, and I for myself refuse to see/use SL as a 3D chatroom. If I wanted to hang out and chat I'd use a chatroom. But chatting is one of the few things I hardly ever do in SL.

[Penny Patton]

---

Lucretia Brandenburg wrote:

I think a virtual world that is, at its core, a vastly expanded chat room such as SL and a virtual world that is a science fiction MMORPG set in outer space are so different that they really can't be compared next to each other. They don't seem even remotely similar to one another.

---

I used to be right there with the "SL is not a game" crowd, however it seems to me that most people take this view to an unrealistic extreme.

 Second Life is very similar, in many respects, to a videogame.

 Yes, there are differences, but there are also parallels that can, and should, be drawn.

 Linden Lab, is, essentially, a videogame studio even if SL itself isn't "merely" a game.  Second Life, like Eve Online, is an aging virtual environment whose experience is delivered largely through visuals and player/user interaction.

 How Linden Lab has developed SL can, and should, be compared to how a studio like CCP has kept a virtual game world like Eve Online relevant over the years.

 How they have handled presentation of their respective products. Eve Online looks amazing, despite being about as old as SL. Sure, there's the difference in that SL is primarily made up of content created by the users rather than professional artists, however LL themselves are responsible for the tools and features, and in these respects they are far, far, far behind the rest of the world. There are things LL has done which actually prevent SL from looking better than it does.

Not to mention that the new user experience (starter avatars, welcome areas, tutorials, infohubs) should all be professional quality and show off SL's possibilities. Instead they often represent the worst of SL, creating a new user experience that is extremely unappealing in terms of visuals.

 Game worlds like Eve Online often expand the capabilities of their game worlds over time, adding new features and capabilities to keep things fresh. By contrast, SL's feature set, what we're able to do in terms of crafting experiences within SL, has remained pretty much the same for over 10 years now. You'd think LL would have even more incentive to provide us the features which would allow us to create "must-see" content in SL.

[Porky Gorky]

Second Life is a game....and it is not a game. It all depends on the users application and viewpoint. But it can easily be both at the same time due to users ability to define their own experience here.

The same is true of EVE. I have been on EVE for over 8 years and it ceased being a game to me 3 or 4 years years ago. Now it is just a platform for making real money. Just like SL.

[Deja Letov]

---

Toy String wrote:

IMHO the technology is dead, at least for now. Just go to a really crowded place, you won't even be able to move.

---

This is just my 2 cents...but I think part of the problem is not just outdated technology. Sure it could be better but I hear so much talk about lag and not being able to move...and everyone loves to just throw the blame on the SL client or whatever, but none on their own system. Why does nobody ever consider the issue that maybe the technology to run things just fine is there but everyone's systems are getting out of date and can't handle the technology they are introducing. I have a top of the line gaming computer at home because I game...A LOT. Since I got this machine 2 years ago, I have yet to go to a sim that lags me out and I've been to some very crowded sims. I still face download times of textures when I go into a new sim yes...but lag...I don't experience what others are describing. Maybe to a small degree sometimes, but nothing that I really take notice of. Now, if I log in at work on that old thing...yes I lag out even on my own sim, but this thing is 5-6 years old with no real graphic capabilities. But if some machines run SL just fine and older ones don't can we really put all the blame on SL? It's not like this is a game where all assets are already pre-installed on your machine from a disk so it can be loaded immediately and therefore have no lag. This is real time viewing and downloading happening every second we are logged in. I'm not saying anyone should go out and replace their machine every 2 years, that's a personal choice, but obviously having the latest and greatest does give you more freedom to enjoy Second Life the way the developers probably intended it to be.

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Porky Gorky wrote:

SL won't even be around in 

2014

 imo

---

That was the post I referenced earlier.  :matte-motes-wink-tongue:

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Penny Patton wrote:

 

Even AOL is still alive and kicking, not that most people would know. I think SL will exist in some form for many years to come. To my mind, it's more a question of will SL thrive, or will it merely cling to existance? Without question it has been very much  the latter for years now.

---

Good point.  I realize Everquest is an MMORPG and not a virtual world, but I recently received an email announcing that EQ was celebrating its 14th anniversary.  New content and expansion packs have been introduced regularly, the graphics are amazing as compared to its inception in 1996, the avatars were updated to be more realistic-looking, being able to own a home and live in a specific "neighborhood" was introduced last year, etc.  In the meantime the number of users has declined, servers merged so that players wouldn't find themselves alone most of the time and, last year, EQ went from a pay-to-play monthly subscription to offering an option of free-to-play, although the free version is very limited in many ways.

Yet, EQ is hosting events, new game items, etc., etc. 14 years later and this in the wake of more current games such as WoW, Diablo, SWLR, etc., etc.  I suspect we might see something similar with SL, ie. a declining user base but also a core of residents who will be here until the lights are turned out.

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Lucretia Brandenburg wrote:

I think a virtual world that is, at its core, a vastly expanded chat room such as SL and a virtual world that is a science fiction MMORPG set in outer space are so different that they really can't be compared next to each other. They don't seem even remotely similar to one another.

---

I disagree that SL is solely "a vastly expanded chat room."  Virtual worlds are many things to many people.  I know builders who are still in the same avatar and clothes they had in 2007 or prior, rarely "chat" but love to build, create, experiment with new building tools, etc.  Although I do have some friends with whom I chat in SL, I am a bit of a hermit in that I can log into my SL home and spend hours/days organizing inventory (yes, I'm weird, I find that fun and relaxing), enjoy watching my virtual pets, thinking of ideas for new products to offer in my store, etc., etc.  By definition, if I logged into, let's say my old haunt of IRC, a text-only medium, if I'm the only person in a given channel, there is literally nothing to do until and if another person enters.  OTOH I can, and have, spent hours enjoying SL without talking or even encountering another person.

Now if SL *is* primarily a "virtual chat room" for others and without people with whom to talk to and/or spend time (many of whom we see posting regularly in the "Looking for Friends" and "Relationship" SL sub-forums) SL is "boring" - then the analogy is a bit more accurate but again, since there *are* so many things to do in SL beyond simply chatting, comparing virtual worlds to "...an expanded chat room" is "...so different that they really can't be compared next to each other."

[Orca Flotta]

I used to be right there with the "SL is not a game" crowd, however it seems to me that most people take this view to an unrealistic extreme.

Unrealistic extreme? Penny, I know and honour your technical expertise but I guess the quoted statement was a misconception. SL wasn't invented as a game, it never became a game and it still isn't a game. Of course SL shares a lot of its infrastructure with games but it differs vastly in the more important departments: philosphy and userbase.

Examples? Ok:

I stated repeatedly that I'm not a gamer, stil I'm in SL. Same as most my friends. They are not gamers but loving SL.

I once registered on EVE Online. Only for the reason to create an avatar with their really cool avatar making module. Never went into playing. It was too complicated to steer that spaceship thru the endless space of a mostly just black screen and nothing to do. Kinda unappealing. Sooner or later I found a space station and docked my ship there. And now what? Your avie can't even leave the ship and walk around, I don't even know in what part of the ship my avie was sitting. Pretty stupid game I thought, logged off and never returned.

Now SL: do I have to collect points?  Do I need to level up, collect powers, weapons, save the princess, kill aliens, brew magic potions, make my plumber jump? No. Not a game if you ask me.

We can play games inside SL. Show me any game in which the players have so much spare time as to get bored or being able to play games inside the game. Won't happen.

The users, mostly the younger ones (the ppl growing up with games), don't even have the needed machines to display SL in a satisfactory way, so how do they translate into your gaming philosophy? Right, they don't. You know what they want; connecting to SL with tablets and even cellphones. They wouldn't dare coming up with such stupid ideas if SL was a game. Ever seen anyone trying to pull such stunts on EVE, WoW, Skyrim ...?

 

Calling SL not a game is neither unrealistic nor extreme. It is a "creative platform" (LL's own definition), it is "Your world, your imagination" (also LL's own definition). That was what peaked my interest, made me curious to try it out. If it was announced as a game I'd never subscribed to SL in the first place.

And LL is not a video game studio, they are merely a server hosting company. If they were a gaming company, oh boy, what a fail.

[Lucretia Brandenburg]

Czari, I didn't say SL is solely a vastly expanded chat room, I said at its core. And I agree that virtual worlds are many things to many people. I don't know of any statistics about how many people do what in SL, but I do know that I have met a fair number of people in SL who are over a year old and do not know how to create a plain prim or snap a photo, let alone build anything. People who come to SL to shop, go clubbing, find romance, go to live music venues, enter contests, join inworld groups of like minded shoppers, clubbers, romantics, music fans, etc. to me, are using it as what I termed a chat room. I don't think, at its core it is a game, there are no goals, no rules regarding how to play (just what not tot to do to keep out of trouble), no stated prizes, no one against whom to compete (unless we're talking user generated content a.k.a. drama).

Without content creators, people wouldn't have houses to live in, dance balls to animate them, pets, hair, clothes, vehicles or anything else, and then there'd be nothing to chat about ... content creation would be the "vastly expanded" part of my statement.

Games like Eve Online, Everquest, Guild Wars, etc have a world view that is limited. Eve Online is science fiction, the others are fantasy. If science fiction doesn't appeal to someone, and Elven/Medieval/Sword and Sorcery based fantasy worlds don't appeal to someone, if they don't want to meet goals/rack up points, or compete, if they don't want to create content in those games, then they won't play them, they're very limiting despite better, professional graphics.

Despite shrinkage, and some really awesome sims closing, there is still a lot more variety and room for imagination and exploring diverse interests in SL than in a MMORPG. If you look at the destination guide and events listings, you can see that.

Oh, and I LOVE sorting inventory too! We should compare notes sometime, everyone has their own method of doing it, its always interesting to me to hear how other people do it.

[Ted McGregor]

---

Deja Letov wrote:

---

Toy String wrote:

IMHO the technology is dead, at least for now. Just go to a really crowded place, you won't even be able to move.

---

This is just my 2 cents...but I think part of the problem is not just outdated technology. 

But if some machines run SL just fine and older ones don't can we really put all the blame on SL? It's not like this is a game where all assets are already pre-installed on your machine from a disk so it can be loaded immediately and therefore have no lag. This is real time viewing and downloading happening every second we are logged in. I'm not saying anyone should go out and replace their machine every 2 years, that's a personal choice, but obviously having the latest and greatest does give you more freedom to enjoy Second Life the way the developers probably intended it to be.

---

We disagree ( Just another user here, not a coder ).

I think SL as coding technology should still be critically observed and improved, no matter what hardware configuration and mishaps of user configurations. Connectivity issues aren't as heavy on it's use as much as proper effective rendering is.

SL can be compared to software ( games mostly ) of comtemporaries which also include multi-user virtual environments, texturing-on-the-fly, first person perspective and a running 'physical' engine. My point of view is that the company certainly falls short on that front. I wish their current CEO could solve these bottlenecks or had a headstart in fighting those for the better.

I believe SL could be, technically speaking, much better than it is now. I even believe it's not on par with said contemporary software. Improvements on these fronts will lengthen it's sustainability imho.

( Stubbornly sticking to my previous Half-Life / Black Mesa - comparison.)

 

 

[Dartagan Shepherd]

Random bits directed at no one or opinion in particular.

A starting point and a good related theraputic rant after my own heart: http://cityofnidus.blogspot.com/2013/03/stockholm-syndrome.html

While "virtual world" was well understood in the niche before SL came onto the scene as a definition, it was the higher level of commercialization than previous efforts and an influx of people unfamiliar with what a virtual world is that raised the question of whether or not it's a game I think.

Particularly since Rod Humble came on board, seducing Will Wright and some EA talent to join the fray and increasing game industry hires since then as shown on http://www.lindenlab.com/about and the type of talent they're currently seeking on http://www.lindenlab.com/careers.

The bulk of the focus is on new game products. Sandbox games are the term of the moment, as well as dusting off the interactive fiction of the 80s.

Original LL employees used to be hired for their skill sets but not their game industry experience. Most of them had no experience in the game industry whatsoever, although game industry talent is close in technology to virtual worlds.

It could be said that it's becoming clearer that LL has or is transitioning from a virtual world company to a game company trying to cash in on the "creativity" niche that made SL successful.

While SL sort of loses it's way, managements understanding of the magic that makes a virtual world lessens and they tend to dip more into user income and compete more for user generated dollars with increasing sinks, advertising, things like Linden Realms, Linden Homes, themed sims, and lately a rash of L$ "oops" moments and a seemingly increasing friction with PayPal.

During a slow measurable decline (which most never claimed to be a sky is falling moment) we're basically now gambling with consumer money from SL on the transition to a sandbox game studio, which is more risky than scaling down SL in an effort to  recover or slow the decline.

Personally I think we're following the same path that M Linden went down, increasing spending and getting too far off track from the core product with Rod Humble.

A CEO that overspends and loses 13% of regions in the last year is a good reason to yet again refocus on SL and get a new CEO or to bring the original back. In the way that M left and Phil Rosedale came back for 3 months to say that we need to tear down the walls that make up the pain points in SL and focus on doing more with less. A seemingly good plan that didn't get implemented as a new "Fast, Easy and Fun" era.

Time will tell, but I think they need to focus and learn to make do with what they have in order to halt the decline. It just isn't going to be a millions and billions type of company no matter how hard they try unless the core product is better than it is and the level of buggery lessons.

For all the improvements they push just as much new pain into the experience as the old pain.

None of this is so far indicating a turn-around moment for LL.

[Perrie Juran]

The question for me is whether or not Virtual Worlds will be around in ten years?  And I absolutely think they will be.  Whether or not Second Life / Linden Lab will be around is anyone's guess. 

I am not in the doom and gloom club even though I puzzle about some things LL does.  We do still see a disconnect between LL and the Residents* and at least in my opinion it causes them a lot of harm and hurts the growth of SL which is something that Rod has at least payed lip service too.  If he has really made a personal commitment to the furthering of Virtual Worlds I'd think we'd be seeing better results.  But I do understand his first responsibility is to the investors......to make them money.

The one issue that any one developing a Virtual World will have to address is scalability.  That may be the single biggest hindrance to growth.  This is an excellent article on the subject:  Scalability for Virtual Worlds.  Googling the subject will bring up other good discussions.

Because SL is built on so much so called "old technology," much of which was the best at that time, we have a situation today where many improvements feel more like "patches."  Patch upon patch upon patch.  I've heard some people propose that to really do it right what is really needed is to rebuild the SL platform from the ground up.  The big problem with that is not breaking all the content that makes Second Life what it is today.  So there may be no easy solution.

 

*Regarding this disconnect, I made a comment in the CHUI JIRA that sometimes I think the Devs need to sit down with some residents and watch over our shoulders as we go about our daily Second Live's in order to really see how we live and use Second Life (that is the Viewer).  We are oft times left with the impression that most of the Devs don't have a Second Life.

 

 

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Lucretia Brandenburg wrote:

 

Oh, and I LOVE sorting inventory too! We should compare notes sometime, everyone has their own method of doing it, its always interesting to me to hear how other people do it.

---

I've found my "SL Twin-Separated-at-Birth!!"  When I say I enjoy inventory sorting to most people I generally get one of two reactions:

1. OH!  I wish you could sort my inventory.

2.  Backs slowly away from the "supposed" looney. :matte-motes-wink:

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Dartagan Shepherd wrote:

 

Personally I think we're following the same path that M Linden went down, increasing spending and getting too far off track from the core product with Rod Humble.

 

A CEO that overspends and loses 13% of regions in the last year is a good reason to yet again refocus on SL and get a new CEO or to bring the original back.

In the way that M left and Phil Rosedale came back for 3 months to say that we need to tear down the walls that make up the pain points in SL and focus on doing more with less. A seemingly good plan that didn't get implemented as a new "Fast, Easy and Fun" era.

 

Time will tell, but I think they need to focus and learn to make do with what they have in order to halt the decline. It just isn't going to be a millions and billions type of company no matter how hard they try unless the core product is better than it is and the level of buggery lessons.

 

For all the improvements they push just as much new pain into the experience as the old pain.

 

None of this is so far indicating a turn-around moment for LL.

---

(Bolding mine)

I couldn't agree more!

[honerken]

---

Deja Letov wrote:

---

Toy String wrote:

IMHO the technology is dead, at least for now. Just go to a really crowded place, you won't even be able to move.

---

This is just my 2 cents...but I think part of the problem is not just outdated technology. Sure it could be better but I hear so much talk about lag and not being able to move...and everyone loves to just throw the blame on the SL client or whatever, but none on their own system. Why does nobody ever consider the issue that maybe the technology to run things just fine is there but everyone's systems are getting out of date and can't handle the technology they are introducing. I have a top of the line gaming computer at home because I game...A LOT. Since I got this machine 2 years ago, I have yet to go to a sim that lags me out and I've been to some very crowded sims. I still face download times of textures when I go into a new sim yes...but lag...I don't experience what others are describing. Maybe to a small degree sometimes, but nothing that I really take notice of. Now, if I log in at work on that old thing...yes I lag out even on my own sim, but this thing is 5-6 years old with no real graphic capabilities. But if some machines run SL just fine and older ones don't can we really put all the blame on SL? It's not like this is a game where all assets are already pre-installed on your machine from a disk so it can be loaded immediately and therefore have no lag. This is real time viewing and downloading happening every second we are logged in. I'm not saying anyone should go out and replace their machine every 2 years, that's a personal choice, but obviously having the latest and greatest does give you more freedom to enjoy Second Life the way the developers probably intended it to be.

---

 

I have a 2 computers with a gtx 680, and I can turn draw distances down, and I still lag like the dickens in crowded places.  It's definetly not my computers.

[soultrain0217]

From a technical and gaming background, SL needs to do one thing to stay viable - constantly improve. They need to continually upgrade and polish both the world rendering engine and the toolsets for the residents.  

They also have to maintain most (if not full) backwards-compatibility while doing this.  Otherwise builders, scripters, and users will be forced into their own upgrade cycle, and that will drive them away if it requires too much time and money.

This... is a tall order.  But I think Linden Labs can manage it, especially if they leverage code from projects such as Kirstens/Nirans viewers, or release rendering, 3D design, and inventory management tools to go along with the viewers.  There's LOTS of third parties doing this already - writing code to display SL on smartphones and tablets, or compile and test LSL scripts offgrid.  

Full-immersion cyberspace has yet to occur, but we are getting closer and closer.  I would HOPE that LL would be one of the first few destinations that offer full-immersion, and not lose out to some game franchise like Call of Duty or World of Warcraft.

[161488303349]

---

Dartagan Shepherd wrote:

 

 

Personally I think we're following the same path that M Linden went down, increasing spending and getting too far off track from the core product with Rod Humble.

 

A CEO that overspends and loses 13% of regions in the last year is a good reason to yet again refocus on SL and get a new CEO or to bring the original back. In the way that M left and Phil Rosedale came back for 3 months to say that we need to tear down the walls that make up the pain points in SL and focus on doing more with less. A seemingly good plan that didn't get implemented as a new "Fast, Easy and Fun" era.

 

Time will tell, but I think they need to focus and learn to make do with what they have in order to halt the decline. It just isn't going to be a millions and billions type of company no matter how hard they try unless the core product is better than it is and the level of buggery lessons.

 

For all the improvements they push just as much new pain into the experience as the old pain.

 

None of this is so far indicating a turn-around moment for LL.

---

i think it be fair to say that the difference between M and Rodvik on excess spending is that M spent it all on SL according to the then BoD directive/brief. and SL didn't grow. Rodviks excess spending is on other products to add to the LL company portfolio

is not quite overspending this. is excess spending. spend some of the profits than would be spent otherwise. is quite a big difference between the two spending programs

+

i think that was why Rodvik was hired by the BoD. continue to improve SL but to also spend money building a portfolio of other products. which is different from BoD directive/brief given to M when he was hired

how well this is going for LL we don't really know. they not telling us how well their sales of the other games are going. i hope that they going well. for their sakes and ours

+

in terms of the SL technicals then can say that the LL team under Rodvik are going great guns. they are monstering the backlog of bugs and little fixes that been laying round since for ever. they re-architecturing server side and refactoring the viewer as well. at a blister pace. compare to the previous years

they had a rocky start to their relationship with TPV teams. but is quite settled now. the LL and TPV dev teams got respect for each other now. the script kiddies have dropped out of TPV dev these days. the ones that havent dropped out have grown up while still holdoing on to their enthusiasm. which probabaly a great relief to the other TPV grownups. bc thats what you have to do to play in the big leagues. grow up

is same on the LL dev side. LL let go of their devs who not want to play the coding game as a team

+

LL still need do lots of work on the customer relationship side. but i think for now (it seems to me anyways) that they don't want to talk about what they going to do anymore. not talk meaning not make promises they end up not keeping. so they putting their heads down at this time and cranking it

LL got a long bad history of promising good ideas, half delivering on them and then abandon. seems to me that Rodvik and the senior management recognized this. so change from that way. so for now its heads down people and get stuck in. lets earn some trust and respect back by doing. and less of the verbals over-promise under-deliver

+

the return of the Police Blotter is a nice touch about mending fences by doing. also don't know if anyone else has noticed. but lately when someone writes on here or over SLU about something that's not happening in terms of support then it gets fixed. so Somebody Linden is monitoring how the interwebz for how the Support team is going. somebody who got authority to fix it ... now. right now. today

+

so i think they going ok. don't know if SL will be here in 10 years. hope so tho. and if is then wont be anything like it is now. bc of the techs and hardwares that will come consumer side. like realtime physics for oceans and weather. avatar animation that's not phantom. fully rigged everything. kinetics. augmented and immersive techs.stuff like that

 

[Penny Patton]

---

Orca Flotta wrote:

Calling SL not a game is neither unrealistic nor extreme. 

---

I never said calling SL not a game was unrealistic or extreme, I still very much agree that SL is not a "game" in the traditional sense (I would however consider it firmly in the realm of "electronic entertainment"). I specifically said that there are many who take that idea to an unrealistic extreme and declade that there are absolutely no comparisons to be drawn between SL and a videogame.

I'd also say that while "hosting service" is a large part of LL's role, like a videogame studio they also provide the engine and the creation kit. They are also tasked with crafting a new user experience aimed at getting people to stick around and keep coming back. Like a publisher, they handle advertising for their products.

 

[Suspiria Finucane]

---

Penny Patton wrote:

(I would however consider it firmly in the realm of "electronic entertainment")

 

---

 Well put!