Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Medhue Simoni

Look!!! LL is letting the FIC into Sansar

Recommended Posts

Don't ask me why they need to announce this, but here it is.

http://www.lindenlab.com/releases/linden-lab-invites-first-virtual-experience-creators-to-project-sansar-testing

As I have stated before, LL's choice to only allow Maya users into Sansar is an arbitrary 1. All the Maya user is doing is creating an FBX to upload, which all 3D programs can do. The only reasonable reason they are only letting Maya users in, is so that LL's friends have a jump on everyone else, or their friends will help shape how things will work in Sansar. Yes, the same people that advised LL on SL development are also dictating the Sansar development. We all know how the SL development has worked out, with creation bugs that are now 8 years old.

See, an FBX is just an FBX. The format doesn't care what program created it. The same FBX I import into Unity, can also be uploaded in Unreal, HiFi, or even SketchFab. I've made a number of animals and avatars for Unity and the rest, as have many other people. If these do not work in Sansar, it will be because LL did something wrong. Of course, we won't know that until LL let's the general public in. What bothers me the most about this exclusivity that LL is engaging in, is that they are setting up a situation where they won't really know the issues with Sansar until it is too late.

Sketchfab has let me into their beta testing of their 3D viewer, which now allows you to view animations. Again, this uses FBX. I simply took my Lycan Avatar, and exported him to the FBX format and uploaded him to Sketchfab. This is the exact same avatar that I sell in SL, just exported as an FBX. Some of the speeds of the animations are too fast, but I haven't looked to figure out why. It could entirely be my fault.

https://sketchfab.com/models/a3a5078fd254463eaff8725c2b98beda

Here is another SL avatar, that I just created, uploaded to SketchFab in FBX.

https://sketchfab.com/models/af456ee3da95444e96d646700ecaafcc

 

My point of showing this is that FBX just works, and in every platform that accepts FBX, they just work. They don't need to be made in Maya. Maya has no special features that would make the FBX files different. Like I said, LL's decision to only let Maya users in, is completely and totally arbitrary, or they are simply doing it to give their friends advantages in Sansar. I'll also point out, that none of those Maya users come to the forums to help anyone, unlike the rest of us. If you ask how to do something in Maya, here in the forums, you'll be lucky to get a reply from anyone. Are these really the people we want in Sansar first? How much are any of those people going to help the community?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm it actually makes sense to me what LL are doing regarding Maya. They need to validate content against a known file format and while I understand your sentiment towards it all being FBX, the same could be said about DAE as an import format for SL.

 

It's more efficient from a development perspective to reduce the number of variables when dealing with any root causes of potential unknown causes of error. It wouldn't be much fun to find that their importer struggled with a peculiar but non compliant FBX file, so they'll just constrain the output source.

 

As to who they've chosen... *shrugs*.

 

I'm less excited about it being optimised for oculus rift. That niche, development only kit that has been superseded by far cheaper alternates. I remain to be convinced as to whether OR as a standalone product will even ever end up being a commercial offering.

 

Actually, I'm not excited about it at all unless the avatar motion is real time animated from a motion capture input. Simply looking at higher quality 3d content via a headset, is that actually what will drive the next environments?

 

LL can't articulate who their current customer is and what that target customer wants so I'm not exactly confident that they have a clue as to what's wanted next but I'm sure the devs are living the dream playing with cool stuff but there's so much marketing bull in that part of LL's, it's hard to find out what it's actually all about.

 

I'll watch with passing curiosity but I guess my enthusiasm has mostly waned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think many SL creators are delusional about this. Project Sansar is not for us. LL does not care whether any SL users ever try Project Sansar. Frankly, it would be pathetic for them to base business decisions on we few stragglers still using or creating for SL now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Sassy Romano wrote:

Hmm it actually makes sense to me what LL are doing regarding Maya. They need to validate content against a known file format and while I understand your sentiment towards it all being FBX, the same could be said about DAE as an import format for SL.

 

It's more efficient from a development perspective to reduce the number of variables when dealing with any root causes of potential unknown causes of error. It wouldn't be much fun to find that their importer struggled with a peculiar but non compliant FBX file, so they'll just constrain the output source.

 


The problem with this thought process, is that you don't know that you are getting compliant FBX files that work on every platform. All you know is that you are getting FBX files from Maya. You have no clue whether those FBX files are standard FBX files. If you design the importer to only handle those from Maya, then you will likely have issues with other FBX files. As I have said before, Maya rigs aren't always compliant with other software. On the other hand tho, all Blender rigs are compliant with Maya.

 


Sassy Romano wrote:

 

As to who they've chosen... *shrugs*.

 

I'm less excited about it being optimised for oculus rift. That niche, development only kit that has been superseded by far cheaper alternates. I remain to be convinced as to whether OR as a standalone product will even ever end up being a commercial offering.

 

Actually, I'm not excited about it at all unless the avatar motion is real time animated from a motion capture input. Simply looking at higher quality 3d content via a headset, is that actually what will drive the next environments?

 

LL can't articulate who their current customer is and what that target customer wants so I'm not exactly confident that they have a clue as to what's wanted next but I'm sure the devs are living the dream playing with cool stuff but there's so much marketing bull in that part of LL's, it's hard to find out what it's actually all about.

 

I'll watch with passing curiosity but I guess my enthusiasm has mostly waned.

IMHO, VR is another gimmick. It will not become mainstream. There are still far too many obstacles, and the biggest being having to wear those headsets. Hololens tho, is something that could very easily be mainstreamed, and only require a set of glasses, not a whole head set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Qie Niangao wrote:

I think many SL creators are delusional about this. Project Sansar is not for us. LL does not care whether any SL users ever try Project Sansar. Frankly, it would be pathetic for them to base business decisions on we few stragglers still using or creating for SL now.

Why is it not for us? Few stragglers? Well, I sell a set of Fitted Mesh, and Classically weighted bodysuits for clothing creators in SL. I sell, on average, a few of those every single day. I really didn't expect to sell that many. As of today, the total is getting near a thousand, and the product has only been on the market for a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Qie Niangao wrote:

I think many SL creators are delusional about this. Project Sansar is not for us. LL does not care whether any SL users ever try Project Sansar. Frankly, it would be pathetic for them to base business decisions on we few stragglers still using or creating for SL now.

I found it curious that Ebbe, although he looked at  MY THREAD when I stated this that he never actually addressed what was being said.  We are left with the idea the few things that have been said about the NGP have simply been to placate us.

I don't think many of us would say that a whole new bright and shiny platform is needed if SL is to move into the future.  But the entire model for the NGP is nothing like what SL was and  is.

But on another note, I'm really wondering what in the world is meant by "Project Sansar will democratize virtual reality as a creative medium?"

Reading the rest of the paragraph I think what was really meant is that "Project Sansar will allow people to capitalize (on their investment) in the NGP. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when making something then have to start somewhere. With someone

i think the clue for why Maya at this stage in the project, is where Ebbe has said that the invited alpha parties also includes some who are not current SL creatives

indicates to me a professional company (or companies) on the invite list which use Maya as their main inhouse modelling toolset

from objective POV then I would only involve these people as well, given that is only about alpha testing at this stage. Employees of professional companies (of any profession) dont mess round. They just crank stuff out, quick clean and fast. They are not wedded to what they make, which is often the case with highly talented indies and hobbyists

+

as Ebbe has said also

they are going to be breaking a lot of stuff during this stage (which is pretty normal to happen in this stage of pretty much any project) so need people who have calm temperaments and professional attitude who can work easily and efficiently and quickly in this environment   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know any professionals that do things for free, with no incentive at all. You act as if people are just sitting around doing nothing, and waiting for LL to call. I pretty much guarantee you that nobody is in the alpha testing without some kind of interest in it, even if that means the joy of playing around in it.

Personally, I don't understand, at all, why they even told anyone there would be an alpha with only hand picked creators, nor why they announced the program they would use. If this is what they were going to do, there was no reason to say it. The logic of anouncing it all escapes me.

SL is not a game, and neither is Sansar. They are engines. Engines are always in Alpha or Beta stage, permantly. In the case of SL, or Sansar, they are engines that require artists to form. People that understand, not just the creation process, but also what makes a good system, for both users and creators. LL has never proved they have these people. Maybe in the beginning of SL, but definitely not in the pass 6 years. If they did, then Fitted Mesh would not work the way it does. The animation system would not have been broken for most of SL existence. We would have gotten custom skeletons in SL. There would have been restrictions on avatars. I could go on and on. What LL has shown, is that they are perfectly willing to ignore good advice just to spite people. They have shown they don't give a crap about the artist's time, nor whether the artist can profit at all(another reference to Fitted Mesh). What LL needs, is as much help as possible, not selective people who will confirm their own biases. LL needs people who are going to fight for the artists and the consumers.

The last point I'll make, is that professionals, who don't sell their creations in markets, don't really know how to make things for markets. I work with a number of "professionals", and most of them have no idea what would sell in an open and free market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have mentioned before, I believe that the real customers of Sansar will be the professional "experience creators."  It will be up to those creators to draw their own customers to their own creations.  I don't believe LL will be providing much if anything for causal users.  It is just the feeling I get from their descriptions.  I think they want a lot more hands-off and not have to deal with the daily rigors of a population like they do in SL.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see your point here, if LL are attempting to create yet another 'engine' for pro teams to prepackage these .. experiences. In a way, why not. Having tried a fair few of these they probably can't do much worse after all and they have essayed a couple of tentative steps in small ways with other product attempts (the V thing - name escapes me).

Companies move on after all. There may be a sweet spot where whatever the Lab provides does break in to this mass market thing but how it will differentiate itself is the question. Another platform/engine that delivers games in a browser or whatever - fine, why not. They may even be sitting on the 'killer' (fill in word of the marketing moment as app is a little oldskool)

There are some interesting engines out there that purport to offer this already and they are fun to play with. Which has always been the appeal of SL (and its clones) but its advantage is - people do play. Explore. Experiment. Swear (ok just me personally). The 'democratisation' aspect touted as something new? I've always found SL to have that as a built in.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Medhue Simoni wrote:

I don't know any professionals that do things for free, with no incentive at all. You act as if people are just sitting around doing nothing, and waiting for LL to call. I pretty much guarantee you that nobody is in the alpha testing without some kind of interest in it, even if that means the joy of playing around in it.

...

... Engines are always in Alpha or Beta stage ...

... The last point I'll make, is that professionals, who don't sell their creations in markets, don't really know how to make things for markets. I work with a number of "professionals", and most of them have no idea what would sell in an open and free market.

on the first. We dont disagree

all the people in the alpha have a vested interest in it. For professionals (companies incl. if any) when they can see a potential for earnings for themself in it, then they be in

is no other reason why any professional would do it otherwise.

is the same when Partners get access to Microsoft pre-release programmes, Oracle, IBM, same, etc. Those professionals dont get paid either to be in the early access programmes  

+

on the second

the Alpha/Beta/Release cycle is iterative. They are actual stages in the dev cycle. Fast iteration cycles can give the impression that engines/platforms always seems to be never stationary. Is the non-stationary nature of fast iterations that can give the end-user this impression, that things are always in alpha/beta

+

on the 3rd

at the stage that the project is at, is not about what sells. Is about what works technically

what sells should have already have been worked out. In the design stage which comes before any coding work

what sells from a business design pov, isnt about what we the end-users will sell to each other. Is about we the end-users will buy off the platform owner

if LL havent already worked out in the design phase what it is they are selling before they start coding/building then they in big trouble. Which I dont think they are. Ebbe has been pretty clear about what he envisage for LL in what he said so far. What they have designed for the company

+

when Ebbe said stuff earlier like umm! dunno about that dunno about this. when we asked him questions. He was referring to the technical aspects (like can/will it actually work technically). So dunno. We only just finding that out ourself, by actual code it, is what he was meaning

is my understanding this of how these kinda guys speak. based on sitting in lots and lots of meetings in the RL, and reading lots and lots of tech docs, design specs and funding proposals, for about 4 years now

 

  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless something has changed since I last looked into it, FBX is still the proprietary format of Autodesk, and is without any public definitive specification. So they are free to change it as and when they like, so that compliance can only be defined by them. In those circumstances, it is impossible for anyone else to claim compliance, because there is nothing to comply with. Thus it may be a desire to test only with guaranteed compliant content that leads them to allow only Maya users to participate.

Unfortunately, you are right that this will likely result in irreversible embedding of code that will never work properly with the products of other software. This is absolutely in conflict with the stated objective of "...eliminating the complicated challenges that today limit the medium to professional developers with significant resources...". Instead, quite apart from giving precisely that group the competitive advantage of early access, it will increase that limitation instead of eliminating it.

Of course that is only strange if you take the stated intention seriously. As myself and others have pointed out before, the cause of huge increases in participation, that must be the aim, are probably best served by eliminating the amateur (in both senses) from the creation process. Consequently, I take that intention with a very large pinch of salt. I do not expect Sansar to be a place for people like me, not a professional creator and not a willing consumer. I think there are sufficiently few of these that we don't matter at all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Kenbro Utu wrote:

As I have mentioned before, I believe that the real customers of Sansar will be the professional "experience creators."  It will be up to those creators to draw their own customers to their own creations.  I don't believe LL will be providing much if anything for causal users.  It is just the feeling I get from their descriptions.  I think they want a lot more hands-off and not have to deal with the daily rigors of a population like they do in SL.     

If that is what LL is thinking, they will fail. As a developer, I already have engines to build things on. Sansar would only be part of that equation as a side note, and only if all the content from my original game easily ported over. That is really the key point, that the same thing I make for Unity or Unreal, also works in Sansar.

I tend to think that even if LL isn't catering to the SL user base, the merchants will be, and they will make Sansar a pleasant place for SL users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


irihapeti wrote:


if LL havent already worked out in the design phase what it is they are selling before they start coding/building then they in big trouble. Which I dont think they are. Ebbe has been pretty clear about what he envisage for LL in what he said so far. What they have designed for the company

+

when Ebbe said stuff earlier like umm! dunno about that dunno about this. when we asked him questions. He was referring to the technical aspects (like can/will it actually work technically). So dunno. We only just finding that out ourself, by actual code it, is what he was meaning

is my understanding this of how these kinda guys speak. based on sitting in lots and lots of meetings in the RL, and reading lots and lots of tech docs, design specs and funding proposals, for about 4 years now

 

 

Well, I'm thinking about the complex systems that need to be created. There has been no talk about the animation system. Yeah, there has been talk about possible skeletons, but not about the actual system that drives the whole system. Animation systems are a HUGE deal. It's not something you just think up along the way. How will the avatars interact? I've head nothing about this, but alpha has started. IMHO, that doesn't make any sense, unless you need those creators to help you. This means, whatever they come up with, is what the rest of us have to use. There is actual genius in SL animation system, although never really finished, and riddled with bugs. I seriously doubt LL can top it tho. Heck, Unity's animation system is not as good, in many ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just say that LL have said quite a number of times now that there will be inworld building tools for us the ordinary users when it does open to the public

is actual no point. None at all that makes any sense. For LL to make just another engine/platform to publish games/experiences on

UGC at the level of individual customers, is all LL has going for it. Is its only business experience advantage that LL has over other companies/providers in the market space

+

for sure LL may make the new platform in a way where they can off-source individual customers support to partners. But those partners customers will want UGC tools of some kind, for at a minimum, mounting and modding 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Drongle McMahon wrote:

Unless something has changed since I last looked into it, FBX is still the proprietary format of Autodesk, and is without any public definitive specification. So they are free to change it as and when they like, so that compliance can only be defined by them. In those circumstances, it is impossible for anyone else to claim compliance, because there is nothing to comply with. Thus it may be a desire to test only with guaranteed compliant content that leads them to allow only Maya users to participate.

 

IMHO, Maya has no say, at this point. If Maya tried to change it, and it wasn't magnitudes better, nobody would addopt the new format. Many engines use FBX now, and a major change would break everything in those engines. A new format could be created, but this currect version is fixed, at this point. If LL wants to test content, then all they have to do is test it with Unity stuff. Like I said, the exact same FBX that I bring into Unity, I can bring into Unreal, Sketchfab and more.

 


Drongle McMahon wrote:

Of course that is only strange if you take the stated intention seriously. As myself and others have pointed out before, the cause of huge increases in participation, that must be the aim, are probably best served by eliminating the amateur (in both senses) from the creation process. Consequently, I take that intention with a very large pinch of salt. I do not expect Sansar to be a place for people like me, not a professional creator and not a willing consumer. I think there are sufficiently few of these that we don't matter at all.

 

A world even remotely similar to SL, needs a tons of content. If LL doesn't cater to amateurs, then they won't have enough content. Although not totally similar, Daz, Unity, and Unreal have this same issue. In each 1 of their forums, I tried to explain to them that their decisions to inspect every product, and charge a huge commission, would limit their marketplaces and slow the growth of their businesses. None of them listened, and they are all suffering from a serious lack of content. I tried to tell them that they were creating more overhead for themselve, and making the situation for the artist unsustainable. If you look at any of their marketplaces, they barely have anything. In Unity's marketplace, about the only good stuff are the premade game codes.

I pointed out to Daz, that even though they check every product, most of the content is unusable. As an example, I once was doing a contract job, and the client wanted me to use Daz and the Genesis character with these specific shoes for the character. All of a sudden, it was impossible to animate the character, because something in the scene was slowing everything down. It was the shoes. They were something like a million polygons. I had to bring them into blender, decimate them down to about 1000 polygons, and then everything worked fine. This is with "professionals" at daz checking every product.

My point is, that having a strict marketplaces really doesn't help anyone, especially the company running everything. Yes, SL has it's issues, but these issues are mostly self inflicted. If I want to make a MOD for a game, I get detailed specs and limitations that I have to stick to. There is no reason at all that SL could not have worked that way, or the new Sansar. LL would be shooting themself in the foot if they limited Sansar to only pros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i dunno really what is the point you are making anymore
 
other than it seems that everybody who makes 3D design engines, tools and scene viewers dont seem to know what they doing. Daz, Unity, Unreal, LL, Autodesk, etc
 
can say tho that there is not one software package to rule them all. So maybe thats the challenge for yourself (and your team that you mentioned one other time). to make that
 
+
 
Google had a go at it. Microsoft and Sony and Apple as well. FB getting in on it as well. NVidia, AMD been in it for a long time as well. And none of them have got that one software design tool to rule all complex 3D objects, that anybody can just pick up and start being creative with
 
is not from lack of trying tho, millions of people over the years have had a go. And a zillion indies on GitHub as well have had a go. They cant all not know what they doing. So must be something else
 
+
 
can say that Blender is the one. But it isnt. The Blender UI all by itself, defeats heaps of non-professional amateur wouldbe designers/modellers. Probably more than pretty much all other 3D toolsets combined. Mostly bc Blender is the first goto tool for amateurs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


irihapeti wrote:

i dunno really what is the point you are making anymore
 
other than it seems that everybody who makes 3D design engines, tools and scene viewers dont seem to know what they doing. Daz, Unity, Unreal, LL, Autodesk, etc
 

I didn't say they didn't know what they are doing. I'm stating my opinions of their business models and marketplaces. Economics is a big interest of mine. It's partly why I love SL. It got many things right, and still benefits from those things. They got the concepts of free markets right. SL would not be what we all love without it. Unity got the free software right, and so did Daz, and then Unreal went that way. It's brilliant!! Overtaxing the artists, that choose to spend their precious time creating for your platform, that is just dumb, and there is just no economic term that better describes it. You are engaging in an act that can't really benefit you in the end, and ultimately limits you. They all also check all the products, which sounds like a good thing, but logistically is a nightmare, and adds massive costs that doesn't need to be there. I suggested approving merchants instead. You check their products a few times, and then they are on their own, and you listen to the customers. Checking every product turns into month or 2 month long waits to get something approved, and that is if they don't make you change something. It gets ridiculous. Hence why I sell my products for those platforms on my own site, like many others do.

 


irihapeti wrote:

 

 
can say that Blender is the one. But it isnt. The Blender UI all by itself, defeats heaps of non-professional amateur wouldbe designers/modellers. Probably more than pretty much all other 3D toolsets combined. Mostly bc Blender is the first goto tool for amateurs

Blender is not perfect, but like Neo, it could be the one.

I used to think the same way about the UI. I was constantly trying to make it act like I was used to. It could not be done tho, because I touch too many parts of the program, and eventually the UI change fails. So, then I decided to embrace the Blender UI. When I let go of the old rules, it was then I saw the genius of Blender. Primarily, the fun part is the animation system, especially for me. Every aspect of animating, is a joy in Blender. My background is actually fine arts, and now I'm getting more into modeling and texturing. The more I get used to it, the more and more it feels like I'm using my hands and not keyboard and mouse, especially when you throw a pen into the mix. The only thing I still haven't really touched are the material nodes. Blender even has a game engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing about Blender that drastically changes the professional market, is not just the price, but also the side effect of being free, which is that everyone on your team is using the same program, and version. The most common problem that I see with new studios, or small teams, contracting 3D jobs, is that everyone is using something different, or even just different versions, or the cost for the company to pay for enough seats. I have yet to work closely with a team of people and not have this be our main issue, besides the task at hand. When we are all using Blender, then there are no issues at all. Years ago, Blender wasn't good enough for a pro. Now, I think it is, if not the go to for most now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yes about Blender. and anything else really. We have to put the time into anything to get good returns. So I am agree about that
 
+
 
just about who does know, when it comes to making tools in this field
 
the person who knows is the person who can do quaternion math in their head. Is not many people who can do this
 
designers, modellers, programmers, etc are all important. But they not as important as this person
 
+
 
what defeats most attempts at building 3D tools, is that the tool builder cant do the math in their head, as easy as they can do times tables
 
so they have to do it the hard way. like with pencil and paper. Which takes lots of time to do
 
can get a math program/calculator that can do this, but if dont know how to work out what is the answer ourself then the calculator is not much use at all really
 
so if ever do find a person who can do quaternion math in their head then dont let them run away
 
+
 
what makes this person most important, more than every one else, is that they can tell us immediately if it is actually possible to make a function/feature in our toolset to do what it is we might want it to do
 
they dont have to be a modeller or programmer even. If there is no way to express the problem and answer in math then no computer will ever be able to do it. At all. ever
 
and this person can tell us this. before we spend any time ourself on trying to do the impossible
 
+
 
eta add
 
not every problem for which there is a answer can be expressed in math. So theres that as well
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your point about excessive content control being too expensive limiting the market. I wan't really imagining individual content filtering, but rather the filtering of the creators, as you suggest. Your anecdotes suggest that might still not be effective. I suppose the alternative is indirect control with something like the LI system, but much more effective. It will be fascinating to see what they come up with. I suppose it will need to burden the merchant directly, not just his customer, with the peanalty for "bad" content' Perhaps a LI-equivalent based per-sale tax, so that excesses mean uneconomic prices.

By the way, I thought Ebbe's earliest statements indicated that Sansar would be using an existing engine, and that Unity was mentioned in that context although no decisions had been taken. Indeed it seems highly likely that they would want to reinvent the wheel as far as the underlying technology is concerned. In that case, much more of their efforts will be devoted to the layers above, which, amongst a host of other things, would include controlling content parameters. Thus Sansar would really be a meta-platform. Some contraints would be imposed by the underlying engine. Have we heard any more about that?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of random thoughts here.

1. How true this is I don't know but Ebbe said that one of the reasons for starting out with Maya was it would give them the most ability to stress test what they are doing.  And they do need to start some where.  

 

2.  I'm wondering if we aren't being confused by the terminology that is being used.  When Ebbe says "content creators" if what he is really meaning is (entire) experience creators.  As a simple example a College reproducing their campus in a virtual environment.  

 

3.  If what is really being referred to is Experiences, the 'tax' on content could make a bit more sense.  The fees that LL would charge really would be based on the server loads for that experience.  It could be that within that Experience you could only use content that was made by that experience creator and that is how that creator makes their money.  Now whether or not that would work is another story.  We do know how freebie prone many people are.  But those freebie prone people are not really part of the target audience.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...starting out with Maya was it would give them the most ability to stress test..."

That's what I find most strange. As far cas I can see, excluding other sources cannot possibly increase the range of stresses. Surely the opposite is true - excluding other sources excludes stresses that may be uniquely presented by the excluded sources. So it can only reduce the scope of stresses instead of maximising it. No?

eta: It does. however. mean that they can avoid "invalid" stresses that might arise from "non-compliance" issues. By sticking to those that lrgitimately control what "compliant" means, such issues are definitively sidestepped. Medhu has already pointed out the consequent vulnerabilities that might result when (if?) the platform is opened up to other sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Drongle McMahon wrote:

"...starting out with Maya was it would give them the most ability to stress test...
"

That's what I find most strange. As far cas I can see, excluding other sources cannot possibly increase the range of stresses. Surely the opposite is true - excluding other sources excludes stresses that may be uniquely presented by the excluded sources. So it can oignly reduce the scope of stresses instead of maximising it. No?

eta: It does. however. mean that they can avoid "invalid" stresses that might arise from "non-compliance" issues. By sticking to those that lrgitimately control what "compliant" means, such issues are definitively sidestepped. Medhu has already pointed out the consequent vulnerabilities that might result when (if?) the platform is opened up to other sources.

One of the big issues in SL is lag from unoptimised content.

Maybe LL is thinking they can help alleviate this by forcing creators to work with only certain "compliant" formats.  

Also, after the first round of tests then they can add other formats.  On the current time table they still have a year to go before the "Grand Opening."

Medhue (not to single him out here) is only one Creator in an ocean full of them.  Nothing obligates LL to cater to the formats he or anyone prefers.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a casual builder.  Not a college trained 3D modeler.  I have though run my own business in real life.  I do follow the tech industry in the business world including online "games".  Whatever possessed LL to want to make another virtual world is beyond comprehension with so many struggling with the current world wide economy.  No country is experiencing consistent growth that is increasing disposable income for everyone.  Worker participation rates are at their lowest in several decades.  Disposable income has dropped dramatically in the last decade.  This is not the time to try to reinvent anything.  People just do not have the money to spend.  So in my humble opinion, Sansar will be a tremendous flop.  It will have an initial one time user success, but will be struggling after just 3 months to attract and hold users and creators alike.  Personally, I will not waste my time with it.

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...