Jump to content

What would YOU do if you were Linden Lab?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1707 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

My point is that $122K in San Francisco isn't the same as $122K in Kentucky or Oregon. The cost of living is significantly different. 

I'm not ignorant. The cost of living in Oregon isn't any lower than California. It may well be higher in some cases. Mostly because of all the Californians moving to Oregon years ago.

Edited by Selene Gregoire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

I'm not ignorant. The cost of living in Oregon isn't any lower than California. It may well be higher in some cases. Mostly because of all the Californians moving to Oregon years ago.

I never said you were ignorant, Selene, but no one knows everything. I certainly don't, anyway. 

According to Google, Portland is the most expensive city in Oregon to live in. Here's a comparison between Portland and San Francisco cost of living: https://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/seattle-wa/san-francisco-ca/115000

It is remarkably different. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

I'm not seeing anything under $122,000US. Must be nice to be able to earn that high of a salary/wage.

For San Francisco though, 122K is a somewhat low salary. Many folks could not live within San Francisco proper on that salary alone - which is actually why tons of people live outside the city limits and commute in, or live with someone else that is contributing to the household finances.   Super high cost of living there.  In that city, the only way anyone could probably live on 50K is if they are living with 5 other people all making at least the same or more.  :(

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

I never said you were ignorant, Selene, but no one knows everything. I certainly don't, anyway. 

According to Google, Portland is the most expensive city in Oregon to live in. Here's a comparison between Portland and San Francisco cost of living: https://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/seattle-wa/san-francisco-ca/115000

It is remarkably different. 

That link is Seattle to San Fran.  Here is the Portland to San Fran comparison

https://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/portland-or/san-francisco-ca/50000

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎6‎/‎3‎/‎2019 at 5:49 AM, Theresa Tennyson said:

Why would people pay for in-world advertising that would appear in limited locations and show up slowly when they can use Facebook, Flickr, and out-world blogs much more cheaply or for free?

That's a good question.   People ARE using Flickr, Facebook, and blogs just as you said.   But there should be a way to advertise IN Second Life as well.  For as many blogs as there are out there I have to admit to following or reading very few of them.  And while Flickr and Facebook are nice to provide visuals  of new products for my favourite SL brands, I can't actually buy or interact with the items by visiting those sites.   I shop and spend Lindens in SL therefore it is in SL where the advertising should be done.  

I don't think that this is something Linden Labs can change.  It has to be something community driven but not just tacking up a billboard and calling it a day.   Billboards are eyesores because they are (many times) out of place with the environment they are in.   The other drawback as you said is that they are fixed in one location where people may or may not see them.  People can't buy things  they don't know about.  If Linden Labs can't, won't or are unable to do this for us, then people need to work together on advertising.  

This can be as simple as Stores A and B that sell related products or services to agree to mutual promotion in each others stores (like a small sign with their logo and a landmark giver).  Sort of quid-pro-quo situation where people work together to increase the business of any parties involved.  For example: a skin store could advertise in a shape store and vice versa or an accessory store advertising in a shop that exclusively sells clothes.   The items are related and would not be the least bit out of place.  Advertising then becomes a social project that still involves networking but in a more impactful way than just putting up a billboard in a random location.  I shop a lot and I don't see enough of this kind of thing.

People could also combine sales events.  Let's say store A is having a sale but they often use items from Store B in their ads.  What is to stop those store owners from telling their respective groups that they are having are all having a sale and provide links in a group notice so they all could find those shops easier?   It doesn't have to be a big event - even 3 stores working together could find success.   I have seen those done in the past and thought they were a neat way to do promoting.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/23/2019 at 5:39 AM, greek Wingtips said:

Its simple Chic, if you going to up the price then give  paying members more for their money, either more land space for  same payment in Tiers or lower tiers, price increases  with nothing in return will only cause paying members to downgrade or leave

So what you are saying is they should have raised the fee back when they doubled the amount of sqm allotted to premium accounts. I totally agree. Maybe we should pay them retroactively by your reasoning.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer the OPs question - If I were LL I would stop trying to placate the very vocal minority who are constantly complaining and crying about how unfair they are being treated and do what is best for the company, which in turn is what's best for all residents of Second Life.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎5‎/‎29‎/‎2019 at 9:04 PM, Chic Aeon said:

I see a ton of folks b****ing and moaning over the new changes.  I am not thrilled either as I will be paying about $150 more each year. BUT personally I don't see a better plan.

So what EXACTLY would you do if you were The Lab to "balance the spreadsheet" so to speak?

Decisions that impact one set of people don't impact another. Is it fair for one group of people to take on the new burden and not the others?

If you have some stellar ideas --- let The Lab know. Maybe they will take that into consideration in the future. Remember Linden Lab is a BUSINESS. It needs to make a profit or it just disbands. So the "give me 500 lindens stipend now" and the "give alts a discount on costs" topics just aren't going to cut it.

 

Personally, while not excited about new plan I can see MANY other alternatives that would be worse.

So give it your best shot --- or maybe just be quiet.

 

Always choices. 

I am not overly affected by anything that Linden Labs does or any recent changes they have made.  Since the question was "how would we balance the spreadsheet?" and also increase revenue I have given it some thought as a non-Premium member.    I asked myself "What would get me to subscribe?"   Right now there is no incentive for me to do so.  The present stipend is a joke as you really can't do much in SL with only 1200L.  I don't need a premium membership to buy land.  The Linden Homes do not have enough prims or space.  I am not at my group limit now and many of the groups I am a part of I could leave to be under the new limits with no real hardship.  I don't usually do anything because there is a free gift involved and gifts are only good if you like them (which is hit or miss for every single group I am a part of).  Getting into events faster isn't really a big deal because there are resident created gadgets to help with that.  I very rarely need any customer support and when I do it has always been available even if I don't subscribe.  So the answer for me was (and some will hate it I'm sure) that there has to be imposed limitations. 

Limit how much land I can own without a premium membership. (Limit 8192 maybe - still a good size property to do most things.)

Limit how many Lindens I can buy in a 24 hour period. (Can still buy them but not all at once).

Limit how many Lindens I can spend in a 24 hour period (Considering I am a gacha junkie this would be a hard one)

Limit inventory size.  (My avatar is almost 10 years old and I am a packrat.  So far I haven't had many performance issues but I am sure there is a ton I could get rid of or box up if I had to).

Override the chat rules for groups so that they are read only for non premium members. (Can still get the news but can't talk about them.)

To just name a few things. 

The penalties aren't really massive to me, but they would definitely be an inconvenience.  That's not a bad thing if a subscription could solve them or at least mitigate them. Land usage and inventory uses resources that I am not directly paying for.   Though I do love to shop, and still would even with limitations, I would have to spread out over a few days instead of taking a single day to visit events and I would have to work harder at keeping my inventory in order.   While it would be annoying not to be able to respond to people in groups there are some that are already "read only".  

I like the ideas people have shared about having various subscription plans available with different options and I think they could be good for giving people incentives to subscribe.   Lets say they have a 5 tier subscription model.  The perks could include upload fees being reduced or getting a certain amount for free based on what you pay per month, discounts or bonuses when buying Lindens, number of groups you could be a part of, increases to inventory size, reduced limitations on spending, and so on.  You can pick and choose what perks you want based on your personal activities in Second Life.  I also don't know what all people do in SL that Linden Labs could modify on their end to give a perk or limitation to.   I also don't know what they themselves are limited in doing.  Some things might be beyond them to do anything about especially considering they are 16 already.   I do know that I am not averse to having a game company like Linden Labs make money on their product. 

I have to admit though that I don't like it when people say "Get rid of the non subscribers".   Many non-Premium members like myself support Linden Labs indirectly by supporting businesses and renting property and sometimes we spend far more in a month than the monthly fee would cost us.   We ARE contributing too.

 

Edited by Yhishara Cerise
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/3/2019 at 8:25 PM, CoffeeDujour said:

Fiddling with avatar dress up rules and tinkering with VRAM use for the current render engine is not going to cut it

I posted this in the Building and Texturing forum because I figure that's where most of the forum using content creators might see it, but it's worth repeating here because whenever we talk about content optimization you and a lot of other people really downplay what effect unoptimized content has on Second Life, so I want to illustrate it in a way that should make sense to everybody.

I tested two computers in Second Life, putting them through the paces in some of the most detailed, yet optimized environments in Second Life. Environments that look like these:

i9HsU7F.png

g6i3s8m.png

ceRT0fl.png

The first computer is my 10 year old desktop. It's videocard, which was upgraded in 2014-2015, is an nVidia 960 GTX.  In these environments I enjoyed a constant 30+ FPS at all times. Running it at the near ultra settings you see here. Deferred rendering, shadows, projected lights, the works. At no point did I experience any texture thrashing, freeze-ups, or any other graphics related issues. And the scenes all loaded lightning fast. Second Life runs like a dream in these locations.

The second computer is my Surface Book from 2015. No videocard, just onboard graphics. The Surface closer to a tablet than a true laptop in terms of performance, especially when it comes to 3D applications. I was still able to get 40-60fps in these environments on low settings. I was able to turn on shiny, glow, bump mapping, local lights, essentially SL at max graphics settings before deferred rendering was introduced and I was still getting a respectable, and consistent, 20-25fps. Still no texture thrashing, no freeze-ups, and no other graphics related performance issues. And even on the laptop's wifi connection everything still loaded fast.

 Two underpowered computers, both getting a better Second Life experience than probably most people on this forum with comparable hardware have ever managed to experience firsthand. 

 You can read more about it on my blog where I go into more details, including links to optimization tutorials. None of it is super restrictive. Primarily, it's just about not being wasteful. Like packing a dozen mostly blank 1024x1024 texture maps onto a model that would look identical if you compacted them all into a single 512x512 because the creator didn't bother to take a few minutes to adjust the UV mapping.

 I agree that Linden Lab should dream big. And, again, I agree with all of the suggestions you make about better tools for us to create more game-like experiences. I even agree on changing how physics work so we can have better vehicles. (Which, incidentally, would break far more content than anything I've ever suggested would. Just sayin'. Because, again, the way I keep saying LL should tackle the unoptimized content issue wouldn't break anything.) If LL wants to dream big like that, making SL "Steam with avatars", reigning in unoptimized content has to be a part of it. Because if LL did that, then SecondLife would run great for practically everybody. Even the people using toasters to log in.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Yhishara Cerise said:

I am not overly affected by anything that Linden Labs does or any recent changes they have made.  Since the question was "how would we balance the spreadsheet?" and also increase revenue I have given it some thought as a non-Premium member.    I asked myself "What would get me to subscribe?"   Right now there is no incentive for me to do so.  The present stipend is a joke as you really can't do much in SL with only 1200L.  I don't need a premium membership to buy land.  The Linden Homes do not have enough prims or space.  I am not at my group limit now and many of the groups I am a part of I could leave to be under the new limits with no real hardship.  I don't usually do anything because there is a free gift involved and gifts are only good if you like them (which is hit or miss for every single group I am a part of).  Getting into events faster isn't really a big deal because there are resident created gadgets to help with that.  I very rarely need any customer support and when I do it has always been available even if I don't subscribe.  So the answer for me was (and some will hate it I'm sure) that there has to be imposed limitations. 

Limit how much land I can own without a premium membership. (Limit 8192 maybe - still a good size property to do most things.)

Limit how many Lindens I can buy in a 24 hour period. (Can still buy them but not all at once).

Limit how many Lindens I can spend in a 24 hour period (Considering I am a gacha junkie this would be a hard one)

Limit inventory size.  (My avatar is almost 10 years old and I am a packrat.  So far I haven't had many performance issues but I am sure there is a ton I could get rid of or box up if I had to).

Override the chat rules for groups so that they are read only for non premium members. (Can still get the news but can't talk about them.)

To just name a few things. 

The penalties aren't really massive to me, but they would definitely be an inconvenience.  That's not a bad thing if a subscription could solve them or at least mitigate them. Land usage and inventory uses resources that I am not directly paying for.   Though I do love to shop, and still would even with limitations, I would have to spread out over a few days instead of taking a single day to visit events and I would have to work harder at keeping my inventory in order.   While it would be annoying not to be able to respond to people in groups there are some that are already "read only".  

I like the ideas people have shared about having various subscription plans available with different options and I think they could be good for giving people incentives to subscribe.   Lets say they have a 5 tier subscription model.  The perks could include upload fees being reduced or getting a certain amount for free based on what you pay per month, discounts or bonuses when buying Lindens, number of groups you could be a part of, increases to inventory size, reduced limitations on spending, and so on.  You can pick and choose what perks you want based on your personal activities in Second Life.  I also don't know what all people do in SL that Linden Labs could modify on their end to give a perk or limitation to.   I also don't know what they themselves are limited in doing.  Some things might be beyond them to do anything about especially considering they are 16 already.   I do know that I am not averse to having a game company like Linden Labs make money on their product. 

I have to admit though that I don't like it when people say "Get rid of the non subscribers".   Many non-Premium members like myself support Linden Labs indirectly by supporting businesses and renting property and sometimes we spend far more in a month than the monthly fee would cost us.   We ARE contributing too.

 

Yeah do all that and watch the population drop like a stone. Some of your suggestions don't even make sense such as limiting land. You do realise that most  of the money you spend in rent ends up in the lab account.

Short answer if the lab tries to coerce people  into subscribing I suspect most pepole will go bye 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Blush Bravin said:

So what you are saying is they should have raised the fee back when they doubled the amount of sqm allotted to premium accounts. I totally agree. Maybe we should pay them retroactively by your reasoning.

Joking aside, I think this is important. The Lab waited until the economy started heating up following the improved value of Land products (more Premium "bonus" tier, lower Estate fees and Mainland tier), and only then made the corresponding adjustments to merchant fees. As a result, we get the whining of once-successful creators who just aren't keeping up with the times -- or aren't willing to acknowledge that they're enjoying the same boom so many other creators are feeling, instead addicted to feeling sorry for themselves.

I guess it's not only national politics that celebrates self-pitying victimhood. Maybe we should get some red hats for the petitioners.

  • Like 3
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KanryDrago said:

Yeah do all that and watch the population drop like a stone. Some of your suggestions don't even make sense such as limiting land. You do realise that most  of the money you spend in rent ends up in the lab account.

Short answer if the lab tries to coerce people  into subscribing I suspect most pepole will go bye 

I was speaking as what would affect my gameplay enough to make me subscribe. 

Unlike most free to play games Second Life never had any limitations on those NOT subscribing as other online games  do.  I can do everything a paid account can do without the obligation of a monthly fee.  So why would I bother?  That actually isn't right - there SHOULD be limitations.  Let me use Lord of the Rings Online as an example.   I don't pay any monthly fees for that game now.  But way, WAY back when it first launched I paid $200 to become a lifetime member.  They made their money and I paid for the privileges and perks I have in that game today.   Implement those things I listed above for Second Life and it would either make me modify my game play or begin paying a subscription (and I probably would pay). For some people though - the limitations that would make me subscribe wouldn't affect them at all. 

You are right.  Linden Labs gets their money either way regardless of who owns a region. So let me explain this scenario I find myself facing at this moment. I have always wanted a private island.  In order to buy it from Linden Labs I have to pay  huge start up fees.  As that is a deterrent for me I can't/won't pay Linden Labs to do that.  That leaves the option of renting it from another player. There are a few companies out there that would let me do that and all without a subscription.  So no problem.  They have a renter and I have my island. 

But limit me on how much land I can rent without a subscription - then I have a choice to make.  I can pay the $12.00 a month to be able to rent that huge parcel of land (meaning extra revenue for Linden Labs) IN ADDITION to them receiving tier from the actual owner of the parcel OR I can make do on a smaller parcel but without having to pay anything except tier but that means not having as much land as I want to have.  Considering how much it already costs rent wise - an extra $12.00 is NOT going to make much difference.    

As it's a  penalty / limitation I am willing to accept I can safely say I would stay in Second Life if they did impose those kinds of things. (And part of me thinks that Linden Labs have given many of us a free ride without that initial membership cost that LOTRO did that it is about time that they started charging us for things. I know that is an unpopular opinion as well.)

Edited by Yhishara Cerise
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Yhishara Cerise said:

Unlike most free to play games Second Life never had any limitations on those NOT subscribing as other online games  do.

Maybe that's because Second Life is not a game. Comparing SL to games is like comparing apples and tomatoes. Games aren't even remotely in the same ballpark as Second Life.

 

3 minutes ago, Yhishara Cerise said:

Linden Labs ...

That's Linden Lab. Singular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ThorinII said:

Maybe that's because Second Life is not a game. Comparing SL to games is like comparing apples and tomatoes. Games aren't even remotely in the same ballpark as Second Life.

 

That's Linden Lab. Singular.

game1
/ɡām/
noun
noun: game; plural noun: games
  1. 1.
    a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.
     
    Second Life is a game - it is a form of play (because I enjoy myself when logged in and it is a form of relaxation for me just like any other form of game)  we do have to play by the rules that Linden LAB set up,  it is decided by skill in that people are using their creative SKILLS to be creative in many aspects of Second Life (building, styling, photography, music, entertaining, sim building etc).    It is also competitive because if your abilities are not good enough you will not stay in business for very long - regardless of how you are making money. 
Edited by Yhishara Cerise
Adding Competitive
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Yhishara Cerise said:

 

But limit me on how much land I can rent without a subscription - then I have a choice to make.  I can pay the $12.00 a month to be able to rent that huge parcel of land (meaning extra revenue for Linden Labs) IN ADDITION to them receiving tier from the actual owner of the parcel OR I can make do on a smaller parcel but without having to pay anything except tier but that means not having as much land as I want to have.  Considering how much it already costs rent wise - an extra $12.00 is NOT going to make much difference.    

 

You forgot "Or I stop playing sl and the labs lose the 30$ a month they currently get from me" Which is what would happen. The subscriber base then falls dramatically and creators sell less. Landlords need less land and drop tier and the lab loses money

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, KanryDrago said:

You forgot "Or I stop playing sl and the labs lose the 30$ a month they currently get from me" Which is what would happen. The subscriber base then falls dramatically and creators sell less. Landlords need less land and drop tier and the lab loses money

I think that regardless of what Linden Lab does or does NOT do we will always have those people that throw a fit and walk away.   The topic of this thread was to ask what we would suggest to increase revenue for Linden Labs.  Right now I am not paying Linden Labs a subscription fee.  I looked at it and thought about what would make me subscribe.  I can't and won't speak for anyone else so I wrote in what would have that result for ME.  In other words - I am NOT part of the group you are talking about that would turn tail and run away because Linden Lab decided to charge fees for perks I have in world.  As I said before, I have all the perks right now but without paying a thing extra to Linden Labs even though they keep the Second Life world running.   Though I suppose I am also not one of the people that the original poster was directing the question to because I am NOT complaining about Linden Lab apart from thinking the fees to set up a homestead are far too high.   That's pretty much it for my complaints lol.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Yhishara Cerise said:
game1
/ɡām/
noun
noun: game; plural noun: games
  1. 1.
    a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.
     
    Second Life is a game - it is a form of play (because I enjoy myself when logged in and it is a form of relaxation for me just like any other form of game)  we do have to play by the rules that Linden LAB set up,  it is decided by skill in that people are using their creative SKILLS to be creative in many aspects of Second Life (building, styling, photography, music, entertaining, sim building etc).    It is also competitive because if your abilities are not good enough you will not stay in business for very long - regardless of how you are making money. 

Second Life is a creative platform where your imagination is your only limit*. SL is not a game Never has been, never will be.

 

*within the ToS

Edited by Selene Gregoire
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Selene Gregoire said:

 SL is not a game Never has been, never will be.

Some definitions - both in dictionaries and even some country's legal ones might disagree.

Before we can unite behind a single binding definition of the abstract concept "game" it's moot do discuss wether something is one or not.

Edited by Fionalein
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

Joking aside, I think this is important. The Lab waited until the economy started heating up following the improved value of Land products (more Premium "bonus" tier, lower Estate fees and Mainland tier), and only then made the corresponding adjustments to merchant fees. As a result, we get the whining of once-successful creators who just aren't keeping up with the times -- or aren't willing to acknowledge that they're enjoying the same boom so many other creators are feeling, instead addicted to feeling sorry for themselves.

I guess it's not only national politics that celebrates self-pitying victimhood. Maybe we should get some red hats for the petitioners.

I haven't visited this thread in awhile (Johnny Apple Seed type and I "sow" and move on) but I wanted to say that in general I agree with your sentiment.  But I take issue with the statement that creators in general are in "boom" times. I do not personally know any creators (H and G, clothing, jewelry etc) that feels they are in BOOM TIMES LOL.   I am sure there are some out there --- just saying that as far as I can tell that is NOT the norm. 

Personally, 2018 was my best money year ever, but 2019 definitely took a downturn. Lots of high profile events are on their last legs or have already closed, and the ones that are still going are (in general) not as good as they once were. New ones popped up of course and many disappeared after only one month.  It is a chicken and egg problem. Creators make less money and so they aren't excited about going to the work to do an event -- the event moves a bit further down the interesting scale, less customers arrive, less sales happen, more creators leave etc. etc.   

 

This has nothing to do with any move The Lab made -- at least "I' can't see it, but it does give many creators less money per month at Paypal. My current take  per month in 2019 is still less than half of what it was during my best months in 2018. I have dropped most events as the work involved did not balance with the money earned -- when it had previously. I know that many creators just try and break even on events and consider them advertising. Some keep appearing in events simply to force themselves to make new things even as they lose money.

 

Personally another 2.5 percent isn't a big deal after a 50 percent reduction that happened "naturally".  To be VERY FAIR, I am still making more than I did for many premesh years and I am fine with that. I am not trying to put kids through college or pay the cable bill. We all knew when we began creating in Second Life that there would be ups and downs here just like in all businesses. And sometimes business costs increase. Being self-employed has always had it advantages and disadvantages. 

 

My CURRENT "what I would do if I was Linden Lab" move (as mentioned on another thread) would be to take another look at mainland. It's been fifteen months since tier went from 512 to 1024. My shop is once again sitting amid large plots of abandoned land. It seems obvious that construction cannot keep up with demand for the new Linden Homes. Maybe some adjustment to make mainland more popular is in order again.  More land, more shopping, more parties, more party clothes ----  more money in the pockets of the folks working hard to make things for the world. 

 

 

 

Edited by Chic Aeon
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

Some definitions - both in dictionaries and even some countrie's legal ones might disagree.

Before we can unite behind a single binding definition of the abstract concept "game" it's moot do discuss wether something is one or not.

I'll let you argue that with Philip Rosedale since he is the one that made that determination.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1707 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...