Linden Lab Acquires Game Studio LittleTextPeople

[161488303349]

i pretty much agree with this

i think that since inception sl has always been about the tools. easy enough for most ppl to learn the basics. then the linden emphasis on tools start to lag behind what ppl wanted to do

i think skins was the first big example. when ppl like chip midnight and them others at the time worked out the avatar template allowing ppl to use more advanced tools outside of sl to make skins then linden not recognise the importance enough to put resources into modding the avatar editor to be able to craft textures at least for avatars to start with and then as a general texture editor for other things i think linden did understand the importance but just not enough to put resources into it

same thing happened with animations and then sculpts. no animation editor or sculpt editor. same again now with mesh. much of the resources put towards tools, since forever really, has been poured into programming functions. realms tools being latest example of this. is cool all this stuff. just think that building and crafting tools been a bit neglected by comparison

+

i think is ok that linden looking for a way into light devices. is a growth market this so linden would be silly to not have any presence in it. some of the story line story board stuff is quite good and linden will learn things in doing this. maybe some will carry over to sl

i think the main thing is will linden make tools for this and will they allow us to make and put stuff for sale on existing marketplace or make another one. Qie in other post ask question why linden not merge marketplace search with inworld search. i wonder about that a lot as well. maybe this acquistion and direction is why not

other things is that if we are able to make and sell stuff on this thingy then; will it be denominated in L$? will our existing SL accounts be automatic in system or will we have to make new and separate accounts for it? i hope so for both

[161488303349]

fyi. rodvik linden post this on other blog....

"Hey Hamlet. Just by way of clarification this team is working on product 3.

I first started to talking to them December (although I have known them personally for longer).

When we chatted about IF/Adventure a few months ago it was in relation to product 2, which is also still in production, not this product

Hopefully things will become less opaque in the near future but yes this team is working on a separate product (one of several we have in development).

Sorry for the cloak & dagger stuff, shouldnt last to much longer."

[Charolotte Caxton]

---

16 wrote:

fyi. rodvik linden post this on other blog....

"Hey Hamlet. Just by way of clarification this team is working on product 3.

I first started to talking to them December (although I have known them personally for longer).

When we chatted about IF/Adventure a few months ago it was in relation to product 2, which is also still in production, not this product

Hopefully things will become less opaque in the near future but yes this team is working on a separate product (one of several we have in development).

Sorry for the cloak & dagger stuff, shouldnt last to much longer."

---

link?

[Ciaran Laval]

He's posted at new World Notes:

http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2012/02/linden-lab-buys-adventure-game-studio-ai-innovator.html#comments

[Charolotte Caxton]

---

Ciaran Laval wrote:

He's posted at new World Notes:

http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2012/02/linden-lab-buys-adventure-game-studio-ai-innovator.html#comments

---

Oh cool, thanks.

[Ceka Cianci]

oh those guys made black and white?

i used to goof around on that game when i was bored..it was pretty fun..i never did the online stuff..but it was fun just running around that world lol

[Medhue Simoni]

---

Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

Medhue Simoni wrote:

"This is all symantics. The bottom line is the writer is not too far off base and get's to the core, rather than babbling on about symantics. His readers do not care about all that, and the monetary base is the exchange rate.

..."

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay maybe it is symantics.  But the statement is decieving.  Linden Lab actually used to use the same "sales pitch" to entice members to join SL.......they stopped that a few years ago because it does imply something that is not exactly true.  If you read Answers much you might have noticed a recent increase in threads asking how to "make real money" in SL......in the past few days there is one user who has asked the question, in one or another, at least 5 times.  The user has the notion that he/she can make things and sell them for real money.  No matter how many times someone tries to tell the person that real money can not be exchanged for items someone might sell in SL.........only linden dollars have to be exchanged and then one can "cash" those linden dollars out in exchange for real money using one of the Linden Lab sanctioned currency exchanges.  We used to get those questions daily back when LL used the "make money creating" sales pitch..........the subsided greatly until very recently.  Statement like the writer of this article made foster that misconception.  The writer, through ignorance (and I don't mean that as a slam), made an oversimplified statement that borders on untrue.  A little research on the writer's part would have been nice.......but that research was obviously not done.  The statement could have said the same thing without giving the wrong impression of how one could turn their linden dollars into real life money  Something like;

"Second Life, in part, revolves around its ability to let users create virtual objects and sell them for the in-world currency Linden Dollars.  The Linden Dollars can be exchanged for real money using one of Linden Lab's sanctioned currency exchanges".

One more sentence added to the article and replacing the incorrect use of "real money" to the correct use of "in-world currency".  It doesn't require a lot of confusing details (which exchanging $L for $ is full of).  It just takes a little research.  And since the wrtier did not even do that little bit of research I tend to question most everything else in the article.  The writer is, at least, a semi-pro..........he/she should have done the work before writing the article.

---

 

I understand what you are saying, but I think the problem has more to do with what people think "real money" is. For any1 to think that the dollar is more real than the linden, that is just pure propaganda. In actual reality they are both as real as people preceive them to be. In purely technical term, only gold and silver are "real money". Everything else is fiat money, including the linden.

If some1 wants to think about "real money" deeply, then ask yourself why governments around the world changed the metal in their legal tender coins. Before 1965, in the states,  all quarters, nickels and dimes were 99% silver. Back in 1964, a gallon of gas cost less than a quarter. Today, if you had that same quarter, it would still buy you a gallon of gas. So, relative to silver, gas prices have not raised at all, we have just lost tons of value in the dollar, since it's decoupling from gold or silver.

[Ann Otoole]

Apple corp recently got a patent approved that could potentially end all facebook games as well as almost all games/systems in which virtual currency (tokens) can be cashed out to real money. I think the time is approaching when we will need to raise a mass effort to ban software patents and eliminate all standing software patents because they harm the economy and stifle innovation. As with content creation, companies must be forced to continually innovate and improve to survive. The ones that want to sit back and be a parasite like a tick sucking blood from others need to fade away and go out of business.

[Ceka Cianci]

---

Ann Otoole wrote:

Apple corp recently got a patent approved that could potentially end all facebook games as well as almost all games/systems in which virtual currency (tokens) can be cashed out to real money. I think the time is approaching when we will need to raise a mass effort to ban software patents and eliminate all standing software patents because they harm the economy and stifle innovation. As with content creation, companies must be forced to continually innovate and improve to survive. The ones that want to sit back and be a parasite like a tick sucking blood from others need to fade away and go out of business.

---

i don't know why..but this reminded me of these old commercials  when the internet was just about to really expand..

i had so many free internets back then lol

then highspeed came along..

[Medhue Simoni]

I completely agree, not just in software tho. Patents are now becoming simply a way for large corporations to control and dominate markets. Even if they don't create the innovation, they'll just buy it.

See, when you look far down the technology road, once the technology reaches a certain point, corporations are no longer needed. The only real way most will be able to survive is by owning all the patents and licensing everything out. It is quite ironic. Actual people come up with the real ideas, but formless corporations will own them all. Technology reverses that tho, and the only counter the corporations have is to write laws and twist morality to quell the natural progression.

Patents as a concept goes against nature. 1 monkey can not say to another that they can't use a stick to get ants to eat. This is like a basketball player saying, "you can't dribble with your left hand cause I did it first". It's illogical, but these people have somehow convinced the world that 1 person thought of something, and that no1 else should be able to replicate it because that person must be a genius and always profit first, irreguardless of his business mind. People will innovate no matter the profit potential. Do you really think the plow was created strickly for greater profit?

Sorry, I'm just rambling now.

[Dillon Levenque]

---

Ciaran Laval wrote:

I agree, although to be fair to Linden Lab they have been talking about additional projects for a while, the actual concept sounds like it could add value to Second Life itself.

---

 

Would you (or Medhue) mind explaining how you think it might add value? I read your blog post as well as the one at Digital Romance Lab but I still don't see exactly what the benefit to SL would be, other than to help keep LL solvent if it proves profitable. I have never gotten involved in any RP sims here so perhaps that's what I'm not seeing. Don't bother if it would mean a dissertation—I'm just indulging my curiosity—but if it could be explained with a note or a link I'd appreciate it.

[Peggy Paperdoll]

Dillon asked:

"

---

Ciaran Laval wrote:

I agree, although to be fair to Linden Lab they have been talking about additional projects for a while, the actual concept sounds like it could add value to Second Life itself.

---

Would you (or Medhue) mind explaining how you think it might add value?

..."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's my question too.  We, as residents, are constantly wanting features or additions to SL the "enhance" our, very personal, experience while in SL.  But, really, does it enhance SL for enough residents that it's worth the time it takes to add the feature or is it worth inflating the overall size of the software?  The SL viewer is already horrendously large (in my opinion) for how I use SL.......to me, it's full of "bloatware", some of which I'll never even use and most of which have absolutely no value for me.  For instance, voice (and the related voice morphing) are a waste of time.  It's worthless for me.  But, I'm not the only user of SL........for some users voice is one of the most valued features in SL.  Along that same line I see requests for things like video chat.........another completely useless feature (if it were to be incorporated into SL).  Linden Lab has to wiegh what the additional features would add to the users' experiences in SL and is that addition worth the time, effort and program's performance.......it's a guessing game.  When LL announces some new feature in the thinking about it stage we always get thoughts and comments from both sides.......the people who want it and the people who don't want it.  We never get a true feel for what it is really worth to the overall user base.  Most users of SL don't really care as long as SL does what they want it to do with what SL offers at the moment.  Some, if something new is given to them, will use it and maybe even fall in love with it........some won't. 

I have a hard time getting all excited about someone's assertion that a new feature would "enhance" SL.  It would enhance SL for them............but what's important is will it enhance SL for enough users to make it worth it?  Programs can be too many things for too many people.  Programs like that often become much too complicated, too buggy, or just plain confusing.  LL has to think of all that and make their best guess whether or not to go with the idea.  That cloud version is an example.......great idea that was dropped (probably because it just wasn't worth it for the overall SL experience...but we'll probably never know the "facts").

[Ciaran Laval]

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

 

Would you (or Medhue) mind explaining how you think it might add value? I read your blog post as well as the one at Digital Romance Lab but I still don't see exactly what the benefit to SL would be, other than to help keep LL solvent if it proves profitable. I have never gotten involved in any RP sims here so perhaps that's what I'm not seeing. Don't bother if it would mean a dissertation—I'm just indulging my curiosity—but if it could be explained with a note or a link I'd appreciate it.

---

There are two issues, this acquisition is nothing to do with Second Life, I find it encouraging that Linden Lab are developing new products as it's a sign, to me at least, that Linden Lab are in a healthy position.

On a more personal level, I think the idea of a more rich chat dialogue interface within Second Life would enhance interaction with NPC's, this doesn't just have to be about gameplay for roleplay, it could be used for information booths, quizzes, treasure hunts etc, the current menu system is a bit clunky and very limited when it comes to presenting information.

[Seven Overdrive]

---

Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

Dillon asked:

"

---

Ciaran Laval wrote:

I agree, although to be fair to Linden Lab they have been talking about additional projects for a while, the actual concept sounds like it could add value to Second Life itself.

---

Would you (or Medhue) mind explaining how you think it might add value?

..."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's my question too.  We, as residents, are constantly wanting features or additions to SL the "enhance" our, very personal, experience while in SL.  But, really, does it enhance SL for enough residents that it's worth the time it takes to add the feature or is it worth inflating the overall size of the software?  The SL viewer is already horrendously large (in my opinion) for how I use SL.......to me, it's full of "bloatware", some of which I'll never even use and most of which have absolutely no value for me.  For instance, voice (and the related voice morphing) are a waste of time.  It's worthless for me.  But, I'm not the only user of SL........for some users voice is one of the most valued features in SL.  Along that same line I see requests for things like video chat.........another completely useless feature (if it were to be incorporated into SL).  Linden Lab has to wiegh what the additional features would add to the users' experiences in SL and is that addition worth the time, effort and program's performance.......it's a guessing game.  When LL announces some new feature in the thinking about it stage we always get thoughts and comments from both sides.......the people who want it and the people who don't want it.  We never get a true feel for what it is really worth to the overall user base.  Most users of SL don't really care as long as SL does what they want it to do with what SL offers at the moment.  Some, if something new is given to them, will use it and maybe even fall in love with it........some won't. 

I have a hard time getting all excited about someone's assertion that a new feature would "enhance" SL.  It would enhance SL for them............but what's important is will it enhance SL for enough users to make it worth it?  Programs can be too many things for too many people.  Programs like that often become much too complicated, too buggy, or just plain confusing.  LL has to think of all that and make their best guess whether or not to go with the idea.  That cloud version is an example.......great idea that was dropped (probably because it just wasn't worth it for the overall SL experience...but we'll probably never know the "facts").

---

It was my understanding that it will be a new product thats only relation to SL will be LL.  

I for one would be worried about the development of seperate products because, depending on their success, SL could quickly become a dead weight for the Lab rather than its sole income generator as it is now.  

[Charolotte Caxton]

---

Ciaran Laval wrote:

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

 

Would you (or Medhue) mind explaining how you think it might add value? I read your blog post as well as the one at Digital Romance Lab but I still don't see exactly what the benefit to SL would be, other than to help keep LL solvent if it proves profitable. I have never gotten involved in any RP sims here so perhaps that's what I'm not seeing. Don't bother if it would mean a dissertation—I'm just indulging my curiosity—but if it could be explained with a note or a link I'd appreciate it.

---

There are two issues, this acquisition is nothing to do with Second Life, I find it encouraging that Linden Lab are developing new products as it's a sign, to me at least, that Linden Lab are in a healthy position.

On a more personal level, I think the idea of a more rich chat dialogue interface within Second Life would enhance interaction with NPC's, this doesn't just have to be about gameplay for roleplay, it could be used for information booths, quizzes, treasure hunts etc, the current menu system is a bit clunky and very limited when it comes to presenting information.

---

That sounds very interesting, the richer chat dialogue interface. Enhanced inworld communication through nuanced gestures and animations would be cool. 

[Dillon Levenque]

---

Ciaran Laval wrote:

On a more personal level, I think the idea of a more rich chat dialogue interface within Second Life would enhance interaction with NPC's, this doesn't just have to be about gameplay for roleplay, it could be used for information booths, quizzes, treasure hunts etc, the current menu system is a bit clunky and very limited when it comes to presenting information.

---

That at least explains why I couldn't see any real inworld benefit. None of those things have much affect on my normal slife (I am well aware that they have a big affect on many if not most residents). A helpful information booth at a store would be cool, though. Thank you.

[Ciaran Laval]

---

Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

I have a hard time getting all excited about someone's assertion that a new feature would "enhance" SL.  It would enhance SL for them............but what's important is will it enhance SL for enough users to make it worth it? 

---

 

Absolutely Peggy, voice actually had very little support when you looked at Jira requests for it, and although I do think it enhances Second Life, there wasn't a great deal of call for it.

The bottom line for Linden Lab has to be, is the effort worth it, we'll all have different ideas about what's the best forward and that's very healthy, but it's upto Linden Lab to evaluate what's worthy.

[Medhue Simoni]

I don't know how it would all work, or how beneficial it would all be, but I do see the product as similar or somehow related to SL, and I don't see why it really needs to be completely separate.

@Peggy, I get what you are saying, but ..... some things are needed. Pathfinding is a very good thing. arbitary skeletons is another big thing. Mesh was huge and will help all users. These things are not really optional. Yes, LL has done lots of other things, but it is in the areas of function and content creation that they slacked on for years. Even just getting crucial bugs fixed took forever and still ongoing.

If you ask me, SL has always suffered from the average Joe walking in and then going, "Ok, what do I do now". Although SL has lots for those who are creative and want to make things, a full game platform it is not. Most of the parts are there, just none of the finishing work. I'm not saying games will solve all of our SL problem, or drive all the traffic in. Nor, do I want to see SL become just a place for games. But..... when you are waiting around for your best SL friend to get online to chat up a storm, it would be cool to jump into a crazy world and take out half a dozen zombies or so. Plus, with SL's other features, it would be quite different than gaming on some other platforms.

[Dillon Levenque]

---

Medhue Simoni wrote:

If you ask me, SL has always suffered from the average Joe walking in and then going, "Ok, what do I do now". Although SL has lots for those who are creative and want to make things, a full game platform it is not.

---

This statement illustrates something. We are all of us opinionated by the way we approach Second Life. To give an example, I'm not at all a creator. I built a pretty decent house after a couple of duds but I've never seriously considered making things for sale and I hadn't rezzed so much as a cube until I'd been here at least six months.

Yet I have never once even come close to thinking "Ok, what do I do now?". Granted, a fair portion of my early months were spent doing things I can't really mention in the forums but even when I was behaving I could barely keep up with the new experiences. After more than three years I'm less easily amazed but I still can't find time to do all I want in Second Life; I can't even get close.

I don't have even a clue of what the way forward is for SL, but I see no reason to make it more attractive to what someone thinks is "the average Joe", even if there's a way to determine just what 'he' finds attractive. I believe most of us stay here because we find something or some things we can't really find anywhere else, because they don't exist anywhere else. There isn't anyplace exactly like this except here.

[Medhue Simoni]

See, I don't see it as any of this is for 1 set of people. Something like MESH helps everyone. It needed to be done. The lag generated by doing things all with prims and sculpts was a big problem. Plus, they were very limited, unless you wanted to use thousands of them. Mesh is not just about better looking content, it is about efficient, better looking content. You can't blame people for not just using the default hair. Do you use the default hair Dillon? If you do not, then you will benefit massively from mesh/flexy hair. This means hundreds less textures for your PC to download, takes up less processing and rendering time. Plus, the more efficient geometry and physics. It is not just techy stuff for us creation geeks, but helps every1 in the most important ways. The end result is the world that you see, working better, faster, and more fun. I think, I just quoted Phillip. lol I'll stop here.

[Dillon Levenque]

I rather liked the default hair, but that's another story. I was just saying that I don't think any one of us or any group of us can say what is best for Second Life. I do not think changing what Second Life is to try to attract what someone in the marketing department thinks is 'the average Joe' is a good idea. I gather from your response that you weren't suggesting that but it did kind of look that way in the post to which I originally replied.

[Charolotte Caxton]

If Second Life is to attract the average person that would care for something like Second Life then it has to appeal to the non average persons. Whether they be creators or socialites or artists or eccentrics, appealing to the masses will be impossible for a platform such as this incredible collaboration. The day everyone is satisfied with what Linden Lab has done will be the last day of Second Life, or even life as we know it. It is the passion and the demand for excellence that I hope will continue to propel our lives forward in this virtual construct and I can only imagine it getting better. 

[Rene Erlanger]

Mesh won't replace prims or sculpties....there;s room for all 3 of them. Don't expect everything to be eventually replaced by Mesh....it won't happen especially with effects to Land prim counts.

[Conifer Dada]

---

Rene Erlanger wrote:

Mesh won't replace prims or sculpties....there;s room for all 3 of them.

 

---

I think mesh might well replace sculpties - at least for new objects.  I've only made simple sculpts and meshes, really just to find out how it's done.  I wouldn't see the point in making something as sculpt if I could make it as a mesh.

I agree there will always be a place for normal prims, as they're the simplest way of making simple objects, like a dancefloor, for instance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Qie Niangao]

---

Conifer Dada wrote:

I think mesh might well replace sculpties - at least for new objects.

---

I used to think that, too, before the Land Impact calculations came out.  As it turns out, if you make a Mesh with sculpty-complex geometry and scale it up (or, God forbid, put a script in it), it's apt to eat most of your parcel's primcount.

Of course, if you're just making attachments, Land Impact doesn't matter... and they've set the scale for avatar weight such that most everybody ranks red anyway, so not much point in trying to be efficient about those.