Fees are too high!(?)

[Silent Mistwalker]

21 minutes ago, Orwar said:

   Blasphemy! 

Forgive me Father, for I have sinned.

[Alwin Alcott]

2 minutes ago, Antonioo Giano said:

You disagree? Fine. But let's talk about the same thing at least

thought we talked about costs?
 

Quote

 SL is not adapting to the new things, is not giving anythign new to make people stay, to bring the interest of the "youngsters".

as said earlier... the land costs are significantly lower as ten years ago!

Edited June 12, 2022 by Alwin Alcott

[Silent Mistwalker]

19 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

Right?! I've recently teleported places and stopped and stared like damn...windlight is straight up gorgeous sometimes. That happened at a cyberpunk store that was pitch black outside with neon signs and lights reflecting all over the place - the pavement, the building, the metal railings, my own leather pants!!! I think SL is so so much better than it used to be - both visually and "stuff to do" wise.

As for real life companies making an appearance, well, count me among those who aren't into that at all. I hated it when they all piled in simultaneously back in 2006 or 2008 or whenever it was. It seemed so...forced.

A lot changes in 20 years. Even more in 40/60 years. That's about how long it takes to come to the conclusion you no longer want to live forever or even a couple of centuries. Seeing the way the world has gone the last 40 years alone is more than enough to adjust the attitude.

[LittleMe Jewell]

9 minutes ago, Antonioo Giano said:

Just admit the mistake and move on.

You should practice what you preach.

Your OPINION about whether something is too high or affordable is simply YOUR OPINION as it relates to YOU and only YOU.  Whereas, I actually did state facts about people's RL finances.

[Coffee Pancake]

As an entertainment platform - which is what this is - SL is a VERY expensive hobby.

[Antonioo Giano]

5 minutes ago, Antonioo Giano said:

I try to resume my point of view because is a bit "annoying" to get answers that are not related to what I mean.

My problem is not personal. Thankfully I'm in a good financial position (for my country) and I would be able to afford a Sim (or a region if you don't like to call Sim) a parcel or anything else I want in Second Life.
So is not about me wanting to pay less to get my SL home. I'm talking about looking at the "bigger picture"

Making lands more affordable > Making people create more interesting stuff in SL > Bringing more people that are willing to stay instead of logoff and leave forever because they get bored > Increase the userbase > Marketing more with your big numbers > Get Real Life big companies interested into SL again > Attention and money from big companies brings even more people in  AKA adapt your business because SL is going down in numbers and interest.
Then the fact I can sail, I can go to a club or date someone tomorrow in SL... is not the point. I talk looking longer term, SL is not adapting to the new things, is not giving anything new to make people stay, to bring the interest of the "youngsters".

Do you disagree? Fine. But let's talk about the same thing at least

Let me quote myself to the new page. Because I'm not going to answer to those quoting me answering not getting the point of what I'm writing.

[Ceka Cianci]

7 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Forgive me Father, for I have sinned.

I have spoken to him..

He said, Go in peace child, without SIM.

[Ayashe Ninetails]

23 minutes ago, Antonioo Giano said:

"As for real life companies making an appearance, well, count me among those who aren't into that at all. I hated it when they all piled in simultaneously back in 2006 or 2008 or whenever it was. It seemed so...forced."

I agree and I personally don't even care to have my Adidas shoes in SL.
But nowadays we are going always more and more into a world that is moved by big companies. Adidas is going into theSandbox (just an example, is full of companies going into thesandbox and decentreland) which is an ugly "metaverse" not even ready with block graphics. For Adidas would be way better to make cool shoes in SL but since SL didn't update things to how the "web 3" is going to be (or how the big techs want to it to be) they go there and not in SL.
Now if I personally like or not.. is not the point. I talk more in a business-oriented way. Maybe is because I'm a business owner also RL so my head goes more in that direction if we talk about something where money are involved (like in SL) and that needs money to work.

I understand where you're coming from, but I just don't believe that's the right way to go on this platform. I can't speak for everyone, of course, but turning Second Life into a corporate playground (again) is the fastest way to get me to leave permanently. I can't tell you how fast I run away from games (I knowww guyyys I know it's not a game *beeps all of your noses*) and developers that start promoting NFTs and real-world advertisements/branding. SL is my refuge away from all that shenanigans.

 

[Love Zhaoying]

15 minutes ago, Antonioo Giano said:

I try to resume my point of view because is a bit "annoying" to get answers that are not related to what I mean.

Annoying how?

[Scylla Rhiadra]

24 minutes ago, Antonioo Giano said:

I try to resume my point of view because is a bit "annoying" to get answers that are not related to what I mean.

My problem is not personal. Thankfully I'm in a good financial position (for my country) and I would be able to afford a Sim (or a region if you don't like to call Sim) a parcel or anything else I want in Second Life.
So is not about me wanting to pay less to get my SL home. I'm talking about looking at the "bigger picture"

Making lands more affordable > Making people create more interesting stuff in SL > Bringing more people that are willing to stay instead of logoff and leave forever because they get bored > Increase the userbase > Marketing more with your big numbers > Get Real Life big companies interested into SL again > Attention and money from big companies brings even more people in  AKA adapt your business because SL is going down in numbers and interest.
Then the fact I can sail, I can go to a club or date someone tomorrow in SL... is not the point. I talk looking longer term, SL is not adapting to the new things, is not giving anything new to make people stay, to bring the interest of the "youngsters".

Do you disagree? Fine. But let's talk about the same thing at least

I think your overall point is entirely legitimate. And yes, I get that this isn't about you, and your SL experience.

I don't think, to be honest however, that cheaper land is the magic bullet here. There is already, now, under current financial and economic conditions, a great deal of amazing content in SL in terms of regions and sims that have been lovingly crafted by people who want others to share their experience. There's far, far more than I could ever manage to see comfortably. And what there is caters to a really wide range of tastes and interests. For instance, there is a lot of science fiction and fantasy in SL -- neither of which really interests me at all. But that's fine, because there are also a great many sims and regions that do feature things that I enjoy.

I think LL could do a much much better job of marketing what is currently available. They could cast a spotlight on a new and different interesting region or parcel probably ever couple of days, and never run out of new content to feature. But, LL has . . . problems, with marketing.

It would be lovely if land costs were cheaper. I'd love a really large expanse of land to build an historically-themed parkland on (imagine St. James's Park, or Villa D'Este, or Vaux Le Vicomte in SL!). But that's not feasible given LL's business model. And, ultimately, I don't think that's the route to attracting more people in any case.

What they need to do mostly, I think, is focus on the details of how SL is experienced and employed in a more personal way. The new user experience needs to be made better. The UI needs to be made more intuitive. The system for avatar customization, in particular, needs to be simplified and tidied up (it's a disaster as is).

People don't pop into SL for the first time and immediately ask to visit a recreation of Rivendell. At least, most don't. They want to know where to find people, and how to make their avatar look better. Once they are comfortable in their own skin, and feel at "home" here, they are more likely to be attracted to the diverse range of places to visit.

Edited June 12, 2022 by Scylla Rhiadra
Typos

[Antonioo Giano]

8 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

I understand where you're coming from, but I just don't believe that's the right way to go on this platform. I can't speak for everyone, of course, but turning Second Life into a corporate playground (again) is the fastest way to get me to leave permanently. I can't tell you how fast I run away from games (I knowww guyyys I know it's not a game *beeps all of your noses*) and developers that start promoting NFTs and real-world advertisements/branding. SL is my refuge away from all that shenanigans.

 

Totally understandable. Many players hate/dislike the NFT stuff for classic gaming and it applies also for SL. Is a point of view that I respect and I understand. The problem is if the web3 moves in that direction (it will depend if Meta will succeed or not) for SL not adapting could end badly.
Is a bit like living in a small city where you know your local farmer, or in a big city where all the big corps. are in and you can buy food from Amazon grocery shops without cahsiers? Some people prefer the first some the second option. Both are right. The problem is if the small city and the small farmer can make it in the long run.

[Orwar]

35 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Forgive me Father, for I have sinned.

   Clears throat. Yeah, no - don't. Not here, anyway. 

[Antonioo Giano]

11 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I think your overall point is entirely legitimate. And yes, I get that this isn't about you, and your SL experience.

I don't think, to be honest however, that cheaper land is the magic bullet here. There is already, now, under current financial and economic conditions, a great deal of amazing content in SL in terms of regions and sims that have been lovingly crafted by people who want others to share their experience. There's far, far more than I could ever manage to see comfortably. And what there is caters to a really wide range of tastes and interests. For instance, there is a lot of science fiction and fantasy in SL -- neither of which really interests me at all. But that's fine, because there are also a great many sims and regions that do feature things that I enjoy.

I think LL could do a much much better job of marketing what is currently available. They could cast a spotlight on a new and different interesting region or parcel probably ever couple of days, and never run out of new content to feature. But, LL has . . . problems, with marketing.

It would be lovely if land costs were cheaper. I'd love a really large expanse of land to build an historically-themed parkland on (imagine St. James's Park, or Villa D'Este, or Vaux Le Vicomte in SL!). But that's not feasible given LL's business model. And, ultimately, I don't think that's the route to attracting more people in any case.

What they need to do mostly, I think, is focus on the details of how SL is experienced and employed in a more personal way. The new user experience needs to be made better. The UI needs to be made more intuitive. The system for avatar customization, in particular, needs to be simplified and tidied up (it's a disaster as is).

People don't pop into SL for the first time and immediately ask to visit a recreation of Rivendell. At least, most don't. They want to know where to find people, and how to make their avatar look better. Once they are comfortable in their own skin, and feel at "home" here, they are more likely to be attracted to the diverse range of places to visit.

Maybe my mistake was pointing the focus to the high costs of lands.
The problem for me is more the fees themselves. If people are used more to get "digital ownership" of stuff and not pay monthly fees, if SL keeps this model, the longer term, will fail.
The "new model" (that could totally fail too) is that you put digital ownership on the blockchain and LL would earn from fees people pay buying/selling their lands.

Then yes. When there was the metaverse FOMO I didn't see LL doing anything to get the attention. SL is the best metaverse around. There aren't other metaverse with these graphics (for this genre) but still.. try to check posts about SL online. Everyone thinks that SL is a dead thing of the past. This is because they didn't advertise it at all.
All the points you touched are correct, my thing about the prices is because is just the quickest thing that can give some appeal to people to come(or comeback) here.

[Rowan Amore]

1 hour ago, Antonioo Giano said:

How renting is cheaper if the owners needs to pay the fees himself?
It can be cheaper just if the owner has a GF SIM (ops.. region) but whatever.

A homestead costs $109 Non GF.  Right now, I could rent one from a large land company for $106.21 for 4 wks.  That's not a lot of savings but I can also pay per week or bi weekly or monthly.  There is also no set up fee nor do I need to own a full region to rent a homestead.  5000LI would be plenty for most people who want to 'create' anything.  

[Scylla Rhiadra]

5 minutes ago, Antonioo Giano said:

The problem for me is more the fees themselves. If people are used more to get "digital ownership" of stuff and not pay monthly fees, if SL keeps this model, the longer term, will fail.

I don't think this is at all the case -- except perhaps for cryptocurrencies and NFTs, and, at the moment, they're looking like a pretty poor model to follow. It may be, long long term, that land in a blockchain-based model is "cheaper," but no one is building there, because the economic model in place is about land speculation, and not about creating content. Right now, people are investing in SL land, on the mainland, and in estates, to build wonderful things because the startup money is, relatively speaking, much more reasonable here.

People ARE more and more used to paying fees for things -- for software, for games, for streaming platforms. I think LL is right in line with that.

And, again, I don't think land is the key to increasing SL's popularity and retention rates.

[Arielle Popstar]

1 minute ago, Antonioo Giano said:

Maybe my mistake was pointing the focus to the high costs of lands.
The problem for me is more the fees themselves. If people are used more to get "digital ownership" of stuff and not pay monthly fees, if SL keeps this model, the longer term, will fail.
The "new model" (that could totally fail too) is that you put digital ownership on the blockchain and LL would earn from fees people pay buying/selling their lands.

Then yes. When there was the metaverse FOMO I didn't see LL doing anything to get the attention. SL is the best metaverse around. There aren't other metaverse with these graphics (for this genre) but still.. try to check posts about SL online. Everyone thinks that SL is a dead thing of the past. This is because they didn't advertise it at all.
All the points you touched are correct, my thing about the prices is because is just the quickest thing that can give some appeal to people to come(or comeback) here.

Your mistake is in ignoring S/L's closest platform competitor. There is easily accessible land that can be had a fraction of the price, if not free, for anyone so inclined as I have I already pointed out. The Lab hasn't let that affect their continuing with the fees that they charge, begging the question whether they actually see lowering land costs as something that will gain them more income. Considering the Land Barons and how that all works, I suspect not. The way they have it setup now provides them with a good, steady income stream that serves their purpose. As Scylla already pointed out too, if they wanted higher concurrency, they would be better off making the viewer and marketplace a more user friendly experience. That, more then cheaper land prices would entice people to stay.

[Candide LeMay]

I don't see LL lowering the land fees (mainland or private regions) but I also don't see LL raising them either. So with the current high inflation that's going on worldwide the fees are getting "cheaper" (in real money terms) each month.

[Antonioo Giano]

3 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I don't think this is at all the case -- except perhaps for cryptocurrencies and NFTs, and, at the moment, they're looking like a pretty poor model to follow. It may be, long long term, that land in a blockchain-based model is "cheaper," but no one is building there, because the economic model in place is about land speculation, and not about creating content. Right now, people are investing in SL land, on the mainland, and in estates, to build wonderful things because the startup money is, relatively speaking, much more reasonable here.

People ARE more and more used to paying fees for things -- for software, for games, for streaming platforms. I think LL is right in line with that.

And, again, I don't think land is the key to increasing SL's popularity and retention rates.

Infact I'm not taking others as examples to follow. For me Decentreland and TheSandbox are just bubbles.
I said that this model will work if Meta (ex Facebook) will make a thing, as they did with Social Networks.
So is of course an IF. The fact that LL didn't take "advantage" of the "momentum" instead is a fact.

[Ayashe Ninetails]

15 minutes ago, Antonioo Giano said:

Totally understandable. Many players hate/dislike the NFT stuff for classic gaming and it applies also for SL. Is a point of view that I respect and I understand. The problem is if the web3 moves in that direction (it will depend if Meta will succeed or not) for SL not adapting could end badly.
Is a bit like living in a small city where you know your local farmer, or in a big city where all the big corps. are in and you can buy food from Amazon grocery shops without cahsiers? Some people prefer the first some the second option. Both are right. The problem is if the small city and the small farmer can make it in the long run.

You've got a far more optimistic view of NFTs than I do! I'm still waiting to be convinced (in general, not by anyone here of course) that it's anything more than a scam. And I definitely don't have to tell you how deeply unpopular they are in the gaming universe in general as I'm sure you've already seen how THAT goes firsthand!

Hey u guyz, check out mah new game with NFT... *tons of unfollows, Reddit threads, thinkpieces, and a few Kotaku articles later* Hey u guyz, I hear you and I'm pulling the NFT portion of my project... 😂

As for SL retention and draw, I agree with Scylla - getting people into the world and fully dressed is the biggest hurdle as of right now methinks. I didn't even think about land for a loooooooong time when I first joined.

[Antonioo Giano]

1 minute ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

You've got a far more optimistic view of NFTs than I do! I'm still waiting to be convinced (in general, not by anyone here of course) that it's anything more than a scam. And I definitely don't have to tell you how deeply unpopular they are in the gaming universe in general as I'm sure you've already seen how THAT goes firsthand!

Hey u guyz, check out mah new game with NFT... *tons of unfollows, Reddit threads, thinkpieces, and a few Kotaku articles later* Hey u guyz, I hear you and I'm pulling the NFT portion of my project... 😂

As for SL retention and draw, I agree with Scylla - getting people into the world and fully dressed is the biggest hurdle as of right now methinks. I didn't even think about land for a loooooooong time when I first joined.

I have to admit that I earned good money from NFTs, but I'm totally aware that is pure speculation and as I said I'm aware how they are "hated" by the gaming community. But people, in general, hate any new thing that they don't understand and that can change stuff they "love" or they are "used to". People hated and many still hate social networks but look at Meta numbers and now also at TikTok numbers
As I said if Meta makes a thing (not the bubble that was last year) that is the direction we will go in a world that is moving towards being more "digital" than it was back in time.

[Ayashe Ninetails]

Just now, Antonioo Giano said:

As I said if Meta makes a thing (not the bubble that was last year) that is the direction we will go in a world that is moving towards being more "digital" than it was back in time.

I'm not convinced, really. Half because I don't believe "Meta" is going to influence that much overall as their reputation is so far in the toilet at the moment and half because they haven't even really articulated what their ideas even are yet. 

What are they planning to do? All I've seen are some low-budget looking VR platforms with half-bodies floating around in personal space bubbles because lol what is moderation. What's the grand idea here that's going to change how the entire world does business (I'm asking them more than I'm asking you, don't worry!)?

And yes, I've seen the videos they've posted on their socials about mixed reality and all that. If all of this requires VR, that's me absolutely out.

[Solar Legion]

A few things, not aimed at just one segment either:

1. There are times when there is no need whatsoever to waste the time it takes to type up a response to utterly ridiculous things
   1. If you cannot handle this, that is on you
2. On finances, speak only for yourself - do not even attempt to speak for anyone else
3. There is no reason whatsoever to bring NFTs and such into Second Life
4. Pricing has gone down for Tier over the years
5. OS is not a "competitor" to SL - it is a clone with additional steps that struggles to remain relevant enough to have a decent population across its many shards

[Antonioo Giano]

16 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

I'm not convinced, really. Half because I don't believe "Meta" is going to influence that much overall as their reputation is so far in the toilet at the moment and half because they haven't even really articulated what their ideas even are yet. 

What are they planning to do? All I've seen are some low-budget looking VR platforms with half-bodies floating around in personal space bubbles because lol what is moderation. What's the grand idea here that's going to change how the entire world does business (I'm asking them more than I'm asking you, don't worry!)?

And yes, I've seen the videos they've posted on their socials about mixed reality and all that. If all of this requires VR, that's me absolutely out.

This was a car in the 1900.
Back in time there was someone saying that having a car was useless, they had horses already.
The point is people always look short term and can't see in the "future". This is also what makes difference between those making money and those working their whole life (investing, also in stocks, is also about being able to "see" in the future while being able to analyze and evaluate companies).

Meta "reputation" is very questionable. Facebook broke completely the internet and how we use it. Now is starting to go "bit down" (for the first time in their last quarterly report they reported a lower number of users compared to the previous quarterly report).
They are then working on this, but is the very beginning. How it will develop is probably still not understandable from us like any other big thing that came into our life. I'm myself 50-50 in this. Like I'm not sure if will work or not and if will be Meta or not to make it work. But when Meta introduced it there was a huge spike of interest (so yes, Meta is very influencial) everywhere, in the stock market anything that was even remotely related with the "metaverse" spiked, lots of metaverse projects popped up (there are tons.. most will just fail). Now things moves pretty quick and I talk about stuff I know and I follow personally, is not personal feelings or reading some angry guys writing bad stuff about NFTs.
For me is a no-brainer that using the blockchain technology to own stuff is way better than having everything into private servers. If I was a Fortnite user (I take it as example since is one if not the most succesful multiplayer game online) I would be happier to be able to sell in future my skin than have it forever stuck in their server, but people still didn't get that and if you mention nfts they think more about the guy that bought the first tweet for 2.8million or moneky jpgs.

This said.. I'm not here to try to convince anyone. Especially if here there is a mix of older people in SL the average age is pretty high and gamers that for some reason hates NFTs, so I know would be useless to even try to explain things, plus as I said I'm myself "50-50" like I can't know if will work or not. But for sure I'm pretty open minded to consider that it could work and if will work I'll be ready to adapt instead of complain that the world is going in that direction.

Edited June 12, 2022 by Antonioo Giano

[Silent Mistwalker]

1 hour ago, Ceka Cianci said:

I have spoken to him..

He said, Go in peace child, without SIM.

*clutches her SIM behind her back, "Thank you Mother Superior, thank you." *scurries off before the ruler comes out*

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Orwar said:

Clears throat.

That forgiveness stuff is..hard to swallow?