Jump to content
SLtesterL2

SECOND LIFE IS DYING...

Recommended Posts

Just now, Love Zhaoying said:

Hmm..perhaps in time they will realize that it is dying sooooo slowwwwwwly that they can maybe erm, chill? lol! Enjoy life!

That's what we're trying to tell them ^_^

But no matter what the reality of the situation is, it is quite understandable that some people who have come to love Second Life worry about its future. We can't hold that against them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ChinRey said:

That is a very good point but how about the people who are worried about SL dying because they are happy to be there and want to stay?

That's exactly what I thought when I read the previous post in my Summary list.

There are one or two people who are more than happy to shout that SL is dying, because that's what they want to happen, but I think most people say it because they want something to happen that will turn it around.

Me? I'm neutral :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ChinRey said:

That's what we're trying to tell them ^_^

But no matter what the reality of the situation is, it is quite understandable that some people who have come to love Second Life worry about its future. We can't hold that against them.

Personally, I would be more bitter about the monetary loss. But since I spent years, months, weeks away from SL anyway, when I don't even think about SL..I will get over it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second Life is dying because it's not geared toward the correct generation. And there's no incentive for premium. And the new comer areas are primmy and not attractive at all. First impressions matter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Chrismaky said:

Second Life is dying because it's not geared toward the correct generation. And there's no incentive for premium. And the new comer areas are primmy and not attractive at all. First impressions matter. 

Which generation is the "correct generation" in your opinion? Frankly speaking it seems to me that you may well mean the generation that insists everything be compatible with their mobile devices, that demands their video games be released right now and complains bitterly when there is even the smallest delay. An entire generation that believes Generic First Person Shooter MCMXIV is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

That generation simply moves from fad to fad without a second thought.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Arkanus Andel said:

Which generation is the "correct generation" in your opinion?

The one with the most disposable income.  That would be the 30 to 45 age range.

I am not in that range, BTW.  However I do know where the loose money is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... I don't see where SL is dying?

Sure, there are less people logging in daily in SL but does it really mean that SL is dying? Or does it mean that SL has reached its average userbase ratio?

I don't believe there are so many geeks, which is also why I don't believe Sansar will be more successful than SL. The few vids I saw about Sansar are terribly boring : bunch of geeks hanging out and doing... nothing.

I believe also that the loss of SL population is a lot more related to outside events (economy, social medias) rather than inside SL. So I don't see any form of death in it, but just a normal readjustment based from external factors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Morgan Rosenstar said:

Hmmm... I don't see where SL is dying?

Sure, there are less people logging in daily in SL but does it really mean that SL is dying? Or does it mean that SL has reached its average userbase ratio?

I don't believe there are so many geeks, which is also why I don't believe Sansar will be more successful than SL. The few vids I saw about Sansar are terribly boring : bunch of geeks hanging out and doing... nothing.

I believe also that the loss of SL population is a lot more related to outside events (economy, social medias) rather than inside SL. So I don't see any form of death in it, but just a normal readjustment based from external factors.

Ever been in a busy department store in Oxford St, in London during the Boxing Day Sale?

Then go back in oh, early March...

"Oh Noe! Harridges Department Store, Establisehed 1910, is DYING! Woe! Woe! Wait... HOW much profit did they report last financial year? OMFG! Where can I buy shares!"

Most of the "SL is dying" claims are based almost exclusivly on the fact that during the 2nd Wave Lastnamer influx, 20 odd million people all rushed in, mostly for the wrong reasons, ran around like mad things for a couple of years, then disappointed, rushed out again...
 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

Ever been in a busy department store in Oxford St, in London during the Boxing Day Sale?

Then go back in oh, early March...

"Oh Noe! Harridges Department Store, Establisehed 1910, is DYING! Woe! Woe! Wait... HOW much profit did they report last financial year? OMFG! Where can I buy shares!"

Most of the "SL is dying" claims are based almost exclusivly on the fact that during the 2nd Wave Lastnamer influx, 20 odd million people all rushed in, mostly for the wrong reasons, ran around like mad things for a couple of years, then disappointed, rushed out again...
 

Also, the bot exodus.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

(...)

Most of the "SL is dying" claims are based almost exclusivly on the fact that during the 2nd Wave Lastnamer influx, 20 odd million people all rushed in, mostly for the wrong reasons, ran around like mad things for a couple of years, then disappointed, rushed out again...
 

I can't speak for them but yes, it does sound like they're comparing numbers out of context.

And this doesn't mean I don't want more from SL or I don't have things to rant and complain about SL, lot of things I believe that could be done to make SL a lot more user-friendly.

There are so many bugs, SL is never stable. One day this works, next update/maintenance it doesn't work anymore. In another context, a product with such a high fail/bug rate would certainly had been shut down a long time ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Morgan Rosenstar said:

In another context, a product with such a high fail/bug rate would certainly had been shut down a long time ago.

Hell no...

I know of a 3d app, that glossed over 15,000 outstanding bug reports when they launched 'Retail release v 1.0', and which used a bug tracking and reporting system that meant any bug glossed over, could NEVER be reopened again, there's bugs in the app that are 10 years old.

I know of an MMO who regularly, indulge in a 6gb 'new seasopn prepatch' system, where every time you log out in the week before the new season update, it tries to download and install a 6 gb pre-patch, over the same limited company bandwidth that people are playing over, which causes massive lag that logs people out and initiates 6 gb pre-patches which uses bandwidth that causes lag that logs people out and initiates... Worst thing is... the pre-patch isnt even for the right season, so you STILL have to download the 6 gb season patch when its released.

I remember a game where the developers, reluctantly forced to release the game by the publishers because it was over due and over budget, shipped out a 'v1.0 retail release' that when actually launched, revealed its self to be a 0.2 alpha, they then told the angry publishing house and the users that 'oops we dont know where the finished game went, goblins must have broken into the office and stolen it in the night' and promised a hotfix patch to v1.0 on monday when they got back from a games industry convention. A year later, with the game hotfix patched on a daily then weekly basis, they announced it was now finaly back at v1.0 release standard that the 'goblins stole', despite 20% of the UI not working at all, and it still being an obvious beta wish major internal flaws. I'm just glad i got my copy for $5 in a clearance sale instead of $60 ( I bought it because it was supposed to be a sequel to a really good game I'd played and enjoyed).

In point of fact, buggy software is now the norm, the idea of constant mega broadband connections and 'auto-updates' means its common to ship out defective crap and just spend a year or three patching the hell out of it before selling the next major rewrite.

SL is stable as hell compared to may software products on the market these days.

 

Edited by Klytyna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rhonda Huntress said:

The one with the most disposable income.  That would be the 30 to 45 age range.

Is that really the age group with the most disposable income?  I would have guessed older since the 30-45 range likely still have kids at home (maybe not the upper part of that range).  I was thinking a bit older, folks whose kids are grown and out, yet folks that are not yet retired.

Edited by LittleMe Jewell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen too many nice mmos that closed after too many unresolved bugs turned the players away. and then there are games still active despite being bugged in every corner. What I was trying to point is that the context can make a huge difference.

14 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

(...)

In point of fact, buggy software is now the norm, the idea of constant mega broadband connections and 'auto-updates' means its common to ship out defective crap and just spend a year or three patching the hell out of it before selling the next major rewrite.

SL is stable as hell compared to may software products on the market these days.

 

I joined SL only in 2010 so I can't tell if it was a defective crap from the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Morgan Rosenstar said:

I've seen too many nice mmos that closed after too many unresolved bugs turned the players away. and then there are games still active despite being bugged in every corner. What I was trying to point is that the context can make a huge difference.

I joined SL only in 2010 so I can't tell if it was a defective crap from the start.

2006 here and while it had bugs I wouldn't call it defective.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Klytyna said:

 

SL is stable as hell compared to may software products on the market these days.

 

And this is one of the things I actually like about SL, bugs and all. I'm a bit odd, in that bugs and glitches don't tend to annoy me nearly as much as they do others..or probably should bug me too. Probably because there are far, far, far worse bits of software, hell even just code and bits of programming that are so damn buggy-and most people either never realize it, or never get to feel it. I get to see the backend of software, code, apps, etc..and if people truly understood exactly how buggy these things really are-especially in today's world...they might see the bugs and glitches SL has in a totally different light, lol.

One of the bits of software I have been working on for the better part of the last 6-ish years is so absolutely fubar'd from the backend, if people ever truly knew...I don't think anyone would use it. It's still functional on the front end, obviously, it's an extremely popular program, but it's constantly getting patched and updated(more often than not, without the users even realizing exactly what we changed, or, really, fixed, because new *additions* are put in with every patch/update that seem to blind people from seeing the bits that were really broken and fixed) and has far more wrong with it than it does right. It's a hot mess, but a very popular hot mess, and that equals revenue, so it remains. Eventually we may get it a lot less fubar'd, but right now,that ain't happening. Most video games, regardless of platform, are the same way-people just don't know it(they think they do..but most of them are wrong, lol). I've worked on quite a few of them as well. They're just as fubar'd most of the time, it's just quite often barely detectable on the front end-or insignificant for most gamers/players anyway. 

I think most people would prefer NOT to know what's wrong with the programs and software they use..as long as it does the majority of what they want it to do, they're cool with it. That may not be the best way to look at it, but honestly, it's how MOST bits of software and programming work today. People think patches and updates are typically minor, or just adding new features.,etc.. when most of the time it's actually designed to fix something major end users probably can't see(or notice anyway). 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Morgan Rosenstar said:

I joined SL only in 2010 so I can't tell if it was a defective crap from the start.

It wasn't. It wouldn't have survived for 14 years if the fundament hadn't been solid. Besides, the fact that they could get it to work at all as early as 2003 is proof enough.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ChinRey said:

It wasn't. It wouldn't have survived for 14 years if the fundament hadn't been solid. Besides, the fact that they could get it to work at all as early as 2003 is proof enough.

If you go to the SL Historical Museum, Phobos (224, 160, 32) you can read the release notes.

There were twenty-three separate releases of the Second Life software between 1.0.0 on June 23, 2003 and 1.1.10 on December 8, 2003. There may have been more but that's when they stopped including dates in the notes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Personally, I would be more bitter about the monetary loss. But since I spent years, months, weeks away from SL anyway, when I don't even think about SL..I will get over it!

Monetary loss? If the movie theater you frequent in RL closed, would you be out any money? You have enjoyed the items you have paid for. You would be out nothing but time, and time spent doing something you enjoyed is not time lost. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   SL is and has proven to be more stable than anything else out there that has tried to be like it. It is more stable than it used to be. It has gotten better in so many ways.

   Everything changes. If the day comes that this place is no longer marketable or fiscally feasible and is closed, then the wild ride will be over. The lights will go out and the gates will close. I for one will have been glad to have exchanged my tickets for the ride, glad to have stood in line to get in.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Data from Gridsurvey ( http://www.gridsurvey.com/ ) clearly shows that Second Life is shrinking. Take a look at the following data:

On mainland, non-Linden owned land has decreased by 20% in one year http://www.sluniverse.com/php/vb/virtual-business/122251-mainland-census-january-2017-a.html .

The number of private regions (sims) also seems to drop with an average of 10% every year http://www.sluniverse.com/php/vb/virtual-business/8523-new-sl-sims-past-week-97.html#post2355279

Based on this and other data from Gridsurvey, I estimated in 2016 that in 10 years, Second Life will shrink to about 20% of what it is now. At that time, it probably will no longer will be a feasible business and LL might close it.

However, now, with Sansar opened, I make another prediction, that Second Life will survive 5 years from now. Many people will move to Sansar. People who love mainland (sailors, pilots, train engineers, drivers, horse riders or people who love walking long distances) will prefer the environment of Second Life. But, the vast majority are here enjoying their virtual lives on an isolated private sim roleplaying, living on a tropical beach or whatsoever. For them, Sansar is a better option.

Some time ago, I started the Second Life Geography project, first under the form of articles on the SL Wiki, then, after some griefer attacks, on a new wiki, the SLGI Wiki. I stopped the work there for two reasons. The first reason is that I was busy in RL (with 4 kids to grow, it is hard to do other things). The second reason is that SL is really dying. As I made last week a small survey, I found out that from 11 private-owned continents ( http://slgi.wikia.com/wiki/List_Of_Continents ) , now there seems to be only two (a continent must have 30 or more sims connected one to the other).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Anaimfinity said:

But, the vast majority are here enjoying their virtual lives on an isolated private sim roleplaying, living on a tropical beach or whatsoever. For them, Sansar is a better option.

It may well be that a fair number of SL island-only users will find that Sansar is preferable, but I think you are forgetting something. Those people can use SL for very little money (I'm not talking about island owners), whereas the owners of Sansar experiences will need to charge for entry. Maybe a monthly fee, or a per-entry fee. They will be paying LL for their experience(s), and they are most likely to want to at least break even.

I can't see anyone other than experience owners wanting to use Sansar exclusively. I can envisage some people finding experiences there that they really like, and spending time there, but not exclusively. I doubt that many people will quit SL in favour of Sansar. Apart from everything that's been pointed out about Sansar as we see it today, SL has a relatively huge 'map' for users to be in, whereas Sansar is limited to the size of each experience.

That's my vision of the future, but it may be way off the mark.

As for SL dying, of course it's dying. Everything in existance is dying. I was dying from the moment I was born - my days were numbered, and there's nothing I can do to change it. Just because I look 30 years younger than I actually am, doesn't mean I'm not dying :) Computer programmes, such as SL, always die. It's the way of life/existance.

Edited by Phil Deakins
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/08/2017 at 1:42 PM, Love Zhaoying said:

Personally, I would be more bitter about the monetary loss

I shouldn't worry about that. The money you've put into SL has paid for your pleasure in using SL. It's no loss. Even the time you've spent in SL isn't a loss. In fact, it's a gain. By doing it, you've filled some of your time in a pleasurable pursuit, and that's always a gain :)

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...