PS3 Home or Minecraft?

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

sirhc DeSantis wrote:

 

At no point did it stop me building in world.

 

---

You're a minority.  Unfortunately, more people did stop creating in SL as the process to create well became harder. 

[Ren Toxx]

I do get the argument now (sorry, morning here, and still on my first coffee, lol). However, I’m still not sure I can agree with it.

You see, I know next to nothing of mesh, certainly not enough to create... I’m rather tech-savvy, but I don’t have the particular talent to model in 3D.

However, I do have at least two talents that can be applied to advanced SL creation: photography & retouching, and scripting. If LL were to curtail any uploading of textures (or, for that matter, any other way in which one could display / use any self-created image), to make sure no photographer could do any more than just “click!”... and if they eliminated altogether creating scripts any more complicated than “hello, world!”... then I would be prevented from doing things I can do in-world. Just because others may not know how to do them.

Actually, make that apply for pretty much anything advanced. Being able to make a relatively complex outfit, in terms of base physical appearance, clothing, adjusting, etc... all gone, because newbies don’t know yet how it’s done. Eliminate SL voice services, to make sure no RL singers be able to show they can sing better than the rest of us. Prohibit SL hunts, because some users are adept to using the more advanced viewer options (or even more advanced viewers!), which gives them an advantage too. And so on and so forth. In fact, remove even the building tools that Pamela for example is well versed with; others aren’t, so better eliminate that too.

 

In the end, are we talking about introducing communism to SL, except in terms of knowledge rather than money? Just so that nobody can feel less talented at anything than others?

Are you sure this is a solid argument?

[sirhc DeSantis]

I have always been a minority as I have only ever been me And no one has ever been prevented from using and learning. I think the post before probably puts it better than I could. But here - from each according to what they are willing to put in...from all we are enriched. )ouch that was mangled)

You think there is no joy left from simply making and being - well - chuffed at what you have done? To take that joy and hone it? Drop in incognito at an NCI 40 minute speed build if you are that jaded. I do even if they run at 04.00 my time.

 

PS Ser Toxx my inworld photography is awful so I will always bow in awe to those who can master it

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

I do get the argument now (sorry, morning here, and still on my first coffee, lol). However, I’m still not sure I can agree with it.

You see, I know next to nothing of mesh, certainly not enough to create... I’m rather tech-savvy, but I don’t have the particular talent to model in 3D.

However, I do have at least two talents that can be applied to advanced SL creation: photography & retouching, and scripting. If LL were to curtail any uploading of textures (or, for that matter, any other way in which one could display / use any self-created image), to make sure no photographer could do any more than just “click!”... and if they eliminated altogether creating scripts any more complicated than

“hello, world!”

... then I would be prevented from doing things I can do in-world. Just because others may not know how to do them.

Actually, make that apply for pretty much anything advanced. Being able to make a relatively complex outfit, in terms of base physical appearance, clothing, adjusting, etc... all gone, because newbies don’t know yet how it’s done. Eliminate SL voice services, to make sure no RL singers be able to show they can sing better than the rest of us. Prohibit SL hunts, because some users are adept to using the more advanced viewer options (or even more advanced viewers!), which gives them an advantage too.

 

In the end, are we talking about introducing communism to SL, except in terms of knowledge rather than money? Just so that nobody can feel less talented at anything than others?

Are you sure this is a solid argument?

---

In the beginning, land impact for decorating a sim was simply prim count. There was no special class of designer who got preferential treatment. With the introduction of sculpties, that changed, and with mesh even more so. Designers who create out-world can make objects with far lower land impact than is available to anyone designing in-world. This makes in-world design relatively less attractive from a cost standpoint. This has nothing to do with talent.

With each further decrease in land impact for out-world creations, in-world creation and collaboration becomes less attractive. What would happen if LI for objects created in Maya were zero? What if those creations could only host scripts embedded in the object via Maya? How happy would you be?

(Yes, I'm making stuff up to make the issue more relevant to you. Sue me! ;-).

 

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

 

 In the end, are we talking about introducing communism to SL, except in terms of knowledge rather than money? Just so that nobody can feel less talented at anything than others?

Are you sure this is a solid argument?

---

You not only don't understand communism, you don't understand the point that Pam was trying to make. 

 

 

Oh, well. 

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

sirhc DeSantis wrote:

 

You think there is no joy left from simply making and being - well - chuffed at what you have done?

---

Not relevant.   I still have joy in SL, as does Pam, and you say you do too.

But, we're the minority now, and at one time we were the majority.

LL has made it harder for people to create in SL.   Thus, fewer people are interested in SL.

It's simple.  But, so many, along with LL, fail to understand.

[Ren Toxx]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote: [...] This makes in-world design

relatively

less attractive [...]

---

“Relatively” being the key word, in my opinion. Yes, optimized external design would give an advantage to those who have the tools and know how to use them. So what? Am I to feel resentful towards them, and demand that LL prevents doing anything that *I* personally cannot do? Wouldn’t that be selfish? Does LL have to dumb down SL to the lowest possible common denominator, to cater to that small segment of the population selfish enough to resent any possibility out of their own reach?

Extending the argument to RL, should any advanced, commercial programs cease to exist, so that no one without the money and/or the talent to use them won’t feel at disadvantage? In fact, should computers themselves cease to exist? You know that not everybody knows how to use one, or can afford one :smileywink:

 

(Yeah, I’m making up stuff too, to make the issue more relevant; we could sue each other, but since I don’t have legal experience nor the money to pay for a good lawyer, I’d rather we didn’t :matte-motes-silly:)

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

sirhc DeSantis wrote:

I have always been a minority as I have only ever been me

And no one has ever been prevented from using and learning. I think the post before probably puts it better than I could. But here - from each according to what they are willing to put in...from all we are enriched. )ouch that was mangled)

You think there is no joy left from simply making and being - well - chuffed at what you have done? To take that joy and hone it? Drop in incognito at an NCI 40 minute speed build if you are that jaded. I do even if they run at 04.00 my time.

 

---

You're not comprehending.   I'm not referring to myself, nor was Pam referring to herself.  We're talking about the tens of thousands of people who used to be in SL....and are now gone.  We're talking about the new SL residents who join up and can't find that joy of creating that Pam and I found when we joined back in 2007.   The reason they can't find that joy is that the basic learning curve is much steeper.   The learning curve was steep to start with, up LL ramped it UP. 

I've spent the last month tutoring a new SL resident, and even though she's probably smarter than the average, she was overwhelmed by the amount of material she needed to learn to do basic things.  It wasn't always like that.  LL has continued to dismantle the BIGGEST attraction that SL has....and that's the ability for everyone to create.  By upping the ante, they've made it harder for new SL residents.   Also, harder for older residents. 

It doesn't matter if you and I still love to create in SL.  What matters for SL to continue to exist, is for enough people to want to log in, to keep the company running.  For that to happen SL needs to stop losing people.   

 

[Ren Toxx]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

 

 In the end, are we talking about introducing communism to SL, except in terms of knowledge rather than money? Just so that nobody can feel less talented at anything than others?

Are you sure this is a solid argument?

---

You not only

don't

understand communism, you don't understand the point that Pam was trying to make. 

 

 

Oh, well. 

---

Enlighten me, then. “Oh, well” sounds cool, but you’re perfectly aware it’s not an argument, and if you just don’t have the time or the patience to keep debating, you should just say so, instead of trying to sound aggravated :smileywink:

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote: [...] This makes in-world design

relatively

less attractive [...]

---

“Relatively” being the key word, in my opinion. Yes, optimized external design would give an advantage to those who have the tools and know how to use them. So what? Am I to feel resentful towards them, and demand that LL prevents doing anything that *I* personally cannot do? Wouldn’t that be selfish? Does LL have to dumb down SL to the lowest possible common denominator, to cater to that small segment of the population selfish enough to resent any possibility out of their own reach?

Extending the argument to RL, should any advanced, commercial programs cease to exist, so that no one without the money and/or the talent to use them won’t feel at disadvantage? In fact, should computers themselves cease to exist? You know that not everybody knows how to use one, or can afford one :smileywink:

 

(Yeah, I’m making up stuff too, to make the issue more relevant; we could sue each other, but since I don’t have legal experience nor the money to pay for a good lawyer, I’d rather we didn’t :matte-motes-silly:)

---

Yes, feeling resent would be selfish. But every resident is selfish. I sure am. If in-world creation becomes relatively more expensive, in-world creation might be expected to decline. If in-world creation was a draw for users, then you might expect a decline in concurrency, which we've been seeing for five years.

I don't think that's why concurrency is falling though. There's a lot wrong with SL and the world is changing around it.

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

 

 In the end, are we talking about introducing communism to SL, except in terms of knowledge rather than money? Just so that nobody can feel less talented at anything than others?

Are you sure this is a solid argument?

---

You not only

don't

understand communism, you don't understand the point that Pam was trying to make. 

 

 

Oh, well. 

---

Enlighten me, then.

“Oh, well”

sounds cool, but you’re perfectly aware it’s not an argument, and if you just don’t have the time or the patience to keep debating, you should just say so, instead of trying to sound aggravated :smileywink:

---

Ren, this isn't a debate.  I've spelled out the point that Pam was trying to make. 

So......at what point do I continue to spend time trying to enlighten you?   If you don't grasp it now....?

 

One last try:

Originally, people started in SL with the same basic tools.  (like the US constitution of all being "created equal")   People were more, or less, talented than others.....and the differences were diverse.  But, all had the initial chance, and started with the same tools.  

Sculpts and mesh made it so all don't have the same tools.  It created an elite class (like royalty)   So, the democratic chance of all being able to create was erased. 

(Note that able is different from being given something.  If one is able, they still need to make the effort, which would differ from communism, where one takes, even if taking from others)

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

 

 In the end, are we talking about introducing communism to SL, except in terms of knowledge rather than money? Just so that nobody can feel less talented at anything than others?

Are you sure this is a solid argument?

---

You not only

don't

understand communism, you don't understand the point that Pam was trying to make. 

 

 

Oh, well. 

---

Enlighten me, then.

“Oh, well”

sounds cool, but you’re perfectly aware it’s not an argument, and if you just don’t have the time or the patience to keep debating, you should just say so, instead of trying to sound aggravated :smileywink:

---

Ren, this isn't a debate.  I've spelled out the point that Pam was trying to make. 

So......at what point do I continue to spend time trying to enlighten you?   If you don't grasp it now....?

 

One last try:

Originally, people started in SL with the same basic tools.  (like the US constitution of all being "created equal")   People were more, or less, talented than others.....and the differences were diverse.  But,

all

had the

 initial chance

, and started with the same tools.  

Sculpts and mesh made it so all don't have the same tools.  It created an elite class (like royalty)   So, the democratic chance of all being

able

to create was erased. 

(Note that

able

is different from being

given

something.  If one is

able

, they still need to make the effort, which would differ from communism, where one

takes,

even if taking from others)

 

---

I'm agreed. But I still wonder if this is the cause for SL's slow death. The slope of the concurrency decline is remarkably linear (after accounting for seasonality). SL is not advertised as a creator's paradise (is it?), so that's not what's attracting people. And the people that do come here don't stay. For every 1000 people that sign up, 1001 leave. What were those new people expecting that they didn't get?

 

[Tari Landar]

 

Sorry I just randomly replied, not directed at anyone specifically, lol Dang insomnia.

I'm not quite convinced the learning curve for creation, or the ability, rather inability, to create is what took those tens of thousands of residents away. Surely, some of them(no, not calling you Shirley ) of course left because creation was no longer something they could do, but, really, that is to be expected. Well, I expected it, but perhaps my expectations are skewed. I don't want to seem like I represent anyone but myself here, so I apologize if I come across that way in advance.

I believe the leaving residents are a result of a culmination of things gone wrong, and, in my opinion(I can only offer anecdotal evidence, so I can be completely wrong here too) most of those people did not leave for reasons related to the ability or inability to create...well, create "more easily"(I say more easily because I believe that is the direction of this conversation).

Take me for example. I still create too, so I am still getting that thrill and enjoyment of building. In fact my joy and skill has only gone up. When I first joined sl, originally, I had no interest in creation, because I was horrid at it, even with just basic prims(which is all that existed in 2004). Fast forward to my second appearance, in 2006...same thing. Although it intrigued me, I was terrible, despite the fact that web and graphic design, at the time, was my business. It just didn't  quite translate entirely to sl for me. When I chose to stay, permanently, in 2008, we had more tools, better tools and the learning curve for all of sl had grown tremendously. Yeah, I got frustrated, there was a lot I couldn't do, and I could have been one of those folks that said "welp, I can't create, so, I don't want to stay". Although creation was , and is, a huge draw for a great many people, I don't believe it is *THE* only draw now. Now, I compete with folks who can do mesh....Sigh, mesh. Mesh and I are frenemies. I just struggle so terribly, and not because I don't understand how, but because I have limitations with vision that make any creating in sl extra difficult. Mesh requires much better vision than I possess, so, while I will continue to mess with it, I will probably never be a mesh creator. Or, by the time I do finish something superb, we'll have some other thing to contend with as far as creating is concerned.  

I don't necessarily blame sl for the learning curve related to creation. I, in fact, commend them, regardles of how terribly they may implement things, because it's progress and progress is the one thing that could help retention. Progress happens in every aspect of life, so I can't be angry at the fact that LL implemented mesh. I can be irritated with them for the manner in which they implement things, but I can't be mad at them for believing that offering better creation options will ring in more people, or will somehow, some way, help sl. I just can't find fault in that line of thinking. I can find fault in the implementation, just not the desire, or necessarily the thought process behind the desire. 

Sl has all kinds of things wrong with it, and creation, or the ability to create, I do not personally believe is super high on that list. This is why I do not believe the new creation tools, or options, are the reason folks leave in droves. Some, yep, most, absolutely not.

I'm glad other folks are better at me, in loads of things, because I can learn from them. More importantly, for me, I can use their products to help enhance my own. I felt the same way about sculpt creators, even when I was still building with prims. I am by far, not the greatest creator on the planet, I'm a hobbyist that just likes to build in sl. I can't build super fancy things. I'm not superb at any aspect of creation. I can texture, I can build, I can script(some)..and then I can take those "I cans" and put them together to make stuff. That stuff, despite not being superb or on par with many other creators, helped house, feed and clothe my family for a while. So...yeah, I can't be mad that someone wants to give me more options, so that I can do better, learn more, and in the end, earn more. Granted my creations no longer do those things they previously did, ebcause I don't rely on my sl sales for anything but sl. But, for me, it is nice to know, said option exists. Which is why I don't mind the rough learning curve, even if I have to crash and burn lots, and lots and lots of times. I have seen far too many people come and go in sl, hobbyists and business minded folks alike, to believe I am in that small of a minority. Even if those folks aren't using their sl sales for rl income...they are enjoying what they do...there are new creators all the time...new stuff is getting added inworld and on the MP all the time...So...we folks who aren't so mad about the advances in creation options aren't likely the minority here. Sure I wish it were easier, for me, to create, but that's just a pipe dream. As my vision fades, so does my ability to create. I'm honestly hoping I'm long gone from sl before it goes black..because then I'd feel dreadful..I enjoy sl that much...quirks and all..even if I don't always like LL.

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

I'm agreed. But I still wonder if this is the cause for SL's slow death. The

slope of the concurrency decline

 is remarkably linear (after accounting for seasonality). SL is not advertised as a creator's paradise (is it?), so that's not what's attracting people. And the people that do come here don't stay. For every 1000 people that sign up, 1001 leave. What were those new people expecting that they didn't get?

---

Maddy, SL's slow death was a myriad of things, (I mentioned some in comments in this thread).

The point is that BILLIONS of investor dollars were put forth for a creation platform.     People with big money recognized,  the draw.   (the draw being the ability for everyone to create, and collaborate while creating)   Yet, even while LL has that kind of draw, they've done everything they can to kill it.

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

I agree Tari. I don't think most people come here to create. And they leave again shortly because they didn't find what they were looking for. And that's the question! What where they looking for?

I just looked at the SL home page (I rarely do that) and it is now more focused on creation. For quite some time, it looked like it was focused on romance. When did that change?

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

I'm agreed. But I still wonder if this is the cause for SL's slow death. The

slope of the concurrency decline

 is remarkably linear (after accounting for seasonality). SL is not advertised as a creator's paradise (is it?), so that's not what's attracting people. And the people that do come here don't stay. For every 1000 people that sign up, 1001 leave. What were those new people expecting that they didn't get?

---

Maddy, SL's slow death was a myriad of things, (I mentioned some in comments in this thread).

The point is that BILLIONS of investor dollars were put forth for a

creation

platform.     People with big money recognized,  the draw.   (the draw being the ability for everyone to create, and collaborate while creating)   Yet, even while LL has that kind of draw, they've done everything they can to kill it.

 

---

Yeah, but did investors recognize a draw that wasn't really there? Collaborative creation sounds fantastic to you and me, but does it resonate widely? Is collaboration more attractive than creation? The other way round? I simply don't know. What distinguishes Minecraft from SL? Is it that there are goals from day one? (Don't let the monsters get you? I'm ignorant of the game and got that from their home page.)

I agree that SL's death march is the result of a myriad of things, and with experience only with SL, I'm probably ill-equipped to understand the market. But I think there's value to curation. And maybe that's why Ebbe's vision allows for that by the experience creators he hopes will deploy their visions on the new platform. I think people like to create, but many need a little pull in some direction, any direction. SL currently provides none.

 

[Ren Toxx]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote: Ren, this isn't a debate.  I've spelled out the point that Pam was trying to make. 

So......at what point do I continue to spend time trying to enlighten you?   If you don't grasp it now....?

---

Sorry, I was under the impression that it was a debate... or, at least, an issue open to debate, as if often the case in these forums where so many things are discussed from our different points of view. But since you say it isn’t (even though you keep arguing from your side, as if it was indeed one as far as you’re concerned), and anyway you also seem at the end of your patience, I won’t insist; I’ll just let you and others debat... er, I mean, talk :smileywink:

[Pamela Galli]

Well  you at least do not only understand what I am saying perfectly, Celestial, but have explained it far better.  Will you be my forum ghost writer?

:heart:

[Pamela Galli]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

I'm agreed. But I still wonder if this is the cause for SL's slow death. The

slope of the concurrency decline

 is remarkably linear (after accounting for seasonality). SL is not advertised as a creator's paradise (is it?), so that's not what's attracting people. And the people that do come here don't stay. For every 1000 people that sign up, 1001 leave. What were those new people expecting that they didn't get?

---

Maddy, SL's slow death was a myriad of things, (I mentioned some in comments in this thread).

The point is that BILLIONS of investor dollars were put forth for a

creation

platform.     People with big money recognized,  the draw.   (the draw being the ability for everyone to create, and collaborate while creating)   Yet, even while LL has that kind of draw, they've done everything they can to kill it.

 

---

Yeah, but did investors recognize a draw that wasn't really there? Collaborative creation sounds fantastic to you and me, but does it resonate widely? Is collaboration more attractive than creation? The other way round? I simply don't know. What distinguishes Minecraft from SL? Is it that there are goals from day one? (Don't let the monsters get you? I'm ignorant of the game and got that from their home page.)

I agree that SL's death march is the result of a myriad of things, and with experience only with SL, I'm probably ill-equipped to understand the market. But I think there's value to curation. And maybe that's why Ebbe's vision allows for that by the experience creators he hopes will deploy their visions on the new platform. I think people like to create, but many need a little pull in some direction, any direction. SL currently provides none.

 

---

I have not actually played Minecraft but there are no monsters, no "levels".  There is only one thing: creation. That it can be collaborative makes creation even more enjoyable. 

 

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

 

 In the end, are we talking about introducing communism to SL, except in terms of knowledge rather than money? Just so that nobody can feel less talented at anything than others?

Are you sure this is a solid argument?

---

You not only

don't

understand communism, you don't understand the point that Pam was trying to make. 

 

 

Oh, well. 

---

Enlighten me, then.

“Oh, well”

sounds cool, but you’re perfectly aware it’s not an argument, and if you just don’t have the time or the patience to keep debating, you should just say so, instead of trying to sound aggravated :smileywink:

---

Ren, this isn't a debate.  I've spelled out the point that Pam was trying to make. 

So......at what point do I continue to spend time trying to enlighten you?   If you don't grasp it now....?

 

One last try:

Originally, people started in SL with the same basic tools.  (like the US constitution of all being "created equal")   People were more, or less, talented than others.....and the differences were diverse.  But,

all

had the

 initial chance

, and started with the same tools.  

Sculpts and mesh made it so all don't have the same tools.  It created an elite class (like royalty)   So, the democratic chance of all being

able

to create was erased. 

(Note that

able

is different from being

given

something.  If one is

able

, they still need to make the effort, which would differ from communism, where one

takes,

even if taking from others)

 

---

For someone who talks so much about freedom, your idea of what Second Life should be smacks of the world of Harrison Bergeron.

You can build exactly the same things now that you could have built in 2003. The difference is that the upper limit of what has been possible has been raised.

Incidentally, SL residents never "all had the same tools" - there's no texture editor in the viewer so if you wanted to make anything other than a bucket-colored object you needed to use an outside program to make textures.

 

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

The point is that BILLIONS of investor dollars were put forth for a

creation

platform.     People with big money recognized,  the draw.   (the draw being the ability for everyone to create, and collaborate while creating)   Yet, even while LL has that kind of draw, they've done everything they can to kill it.

 

---

I though the big draw for the bubble phase of SL was not the ability to create, but the ability to make money from your creations. SL didn't really take off until the magazine cover of Anshe Chung proclaiming her a millionaire. And then came the absurdity of trying to sell RL clothing by showing it as system clothing painted on our beloved onion-bag avatars and RL cars by making bad models of them and having them test-drive them in the horrible driving environment of Second Life.

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

---

---

I have not actually played Minecraft but there are no monsters, no "levels".  There is only one thing: creation. That it can be collaborative makes creation even more enjoyable. 

 

---

Then you should perhaps become more familiar with Minecraft before you talk about it. In Minecraft there's a game mode where you have to work for your resources, and there are monsters. There's also an open sandbox mode, mind you, but it isn't a pure building platform.

[Pamela Galli]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

---

---

I have not actually played Minecraft but there are no monsters, no "levels".  There is only one thing: creation. That it can be collaborative makes creation even more enjoyable. 

 

---

Then you should perhaps become more familiar with Minecraft before you talk about it. In Minecraft there's a game mode where you have to work for your resources, and there

are

monsters. There's also an open sandbox mode, mind you, but it isn't a pure building platform.

---

So you think it is the monsters and games that are the great appeal of Minecraft, not the ability to create?

 

Odd that never once before have I heard mentioned the monsters and games, only the building. 

[Pamela Galli]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

 

 In the end, are we talking about introducing communism to SL, except in terms of knowledge rather than money? Just so that nobody can feel less talented at anything than others?

Are you sure this is a solid argument?

---

You not only

don't

understand communism, you don't understand the point that Pam was trying to make. 

 

 

Oh, well. 

---

Enlighten me, then.

“Oh, well”

sounds cool, but you’re perfectly aware it’s not an argument, and if you just don’t have the time or the patience to keep debating, you should just say so, instead of trying to sound aggravated :smileywink:

---

Ren, this isn't a debate.  I've spelled out the point that Pam was trying to make. 

So......at what point do I continue to spend time trying to enlighten you?   If you don't grasp it now....?

 

One last try:

Originally, people started in SL with the same basic tools.  (like the US constitution of all being "created equal")   People were more, or less, talented than others.....and the differences were diverse.  But,

all

had the

 initial chance

, and started with the same tools.  

Sculpts and mesh made it so all don't have the same tools.  It created an elite class (like royalty)   So, the democratic chance of all being

able

to create was erased. 

(Note that

able

is different from being

given

something.  If one is

able

, they still need to make the effort, which would differ from communism, where one

takes,

even if taking from others)

 

---

For someone who talks so much about freedom, your idea of what Second Life should be smacks of the world of Harrison Bergeron.

You can build exactly the same things now that you could have built in 2003. The difference is that the

upper limit

of what has been possible has been raised.

Incidentally, SL residents never "all had the same tools" - there's no texture editor in the viewer so if you wanted to make anything other than a bucket-colored object you needed to use an outside program to make textures.

 

---

Celestial is correct. No one has ever had to make his own textures.  Plenty are for sale in SL. 

The differences in Minecraft creations depends entirely on the difference in the builder's aptitude in building with Minecraft tools.  Professional 3D modelers do not have any particular advantage. People who know how to use 3D programs to create or to rip 3D models from the internet do not have an advantage.

Second Life used to be like that, and IMO whatever benefits have accrued from making SL look more like "other games" do not outweigh the cost. Certainly there has been no indication that such a massive investment of time and money involved in converting to mesh has increased retention. 

 

 

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Ren Toxx wrote:

 

 In the end, are we talking about introducing communism to SL, except in terms of knowledge rather than money? Just so that nobody can feel less talented at anything than others?

Are you sure this is a solid argument?

---

You not only

don't

understand communism, you don't understand the point that Pam was trying to make. 

 

 

Oh, well. 

---

Enlighten me, then.

“Oh, well”

sounds cool, but you’re perfectly aware it’s not an argument, and if you just don’t have the time or the patience to keep debating, you should just say so, instead of trying to sound aggravated :smileywink:

---

Ren, this isn't a debate.  I've spelled out the point that Pam was trying to make. 

So......at what point do I continue to spend time trying to enlighten you?   If you don't grasp it now....?

 

One last try:

Originally, people started in SL with the same basic tools.  (like the US constitution of all being "created equal")   People were more, or less, talented than others.....and the differences were diverse.  But,

all

had the

 initial chance

, and started with the same tools.  

Sculpts and mesh made it so all don't have the same tools.  It created an elite class (like royalty)   So, the democratic chance of all being

able

to create was erased. 

(Note that

able

is different from being

given

something.  If one is

able

, they still need to make the effort, which would differ from communism, where one

takes,

even if taking from others)

 

---

For someone who talks so much about freedom, your idea of what Second Life should be smacks of the world of Harrison Bergeron.

You can build exactly the same things now that you could have built in 2003. The difference is that the

upper limit

of what has been possible has been raised.

Incidentally, SL residents never "all had the same tools" - there's no texture editor in the viewer so if you wanted to make anything other than a bucket-colored object you needed to use an outside program to make textures.

 

---

Celestial is correct. No one has ever had to make his own textures.  Plenty are for sale in SL. 

The differences in Minecraft creations depends entirely on the difference in the builder's aptitude in building with Minecraft tools.  Professional 3D modelers do not have any particular advantage. People who know how to use 3D programs to create or to rip 3D models from the internet do not have an advantage.

Second Life used to be like that, and IMO whatever benefits have accrued from making SL look more like "other games" do not outweigh the cost. Certainly there has been no indication that such a massive investment of time and money involved in converting to mesh has increased retention. 

 

 

---

Where exactly do you think those textures that were for sale came from - did people pick them off of magical texture trees? And what is the difference between buying a texture that someone else made versus buying a sculpt or mesh that someone else made?