Jump to content

Ebbe Linden

Lindens
  • Content Count

    150
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

2 Followers

About Ebbe Linden

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Gavin Hird wrote: Ebbe Linden wrote: Gavin Hird wrote: Ebbe Linden wrote: Gavin Hird wrote: Bobbie Faulds wrote: There won't be land, per se, not like the SL model anyway. You'll pay a yearly fee for a domain and host your land yourself. That was exactly what I did for Highfidelity. I have said it before, the new platform is codeveloped with HF, and there will be some changes that sets it apart, but technically very much the same. No, it's not codeveloped with HiFi. Two different companies. It is only that every time I read or hear something you have said, or others have said (who think they are in the know) I get deja vús about what I see in HIghfidelity. – Which I think is not very good (neither from a technological or marketing perspective.) There are similarities as we're in a similar category (VW, VR). There will be many...just like any other interesting category. We have different approaches though. That's not the spirit Ebbe. It needs to be 'There will be many, but they will fight over the scraps as we take the lead!' You really need to stand out, and you need to enter the mobile space and leave the PC behind (for the mass market) Take the lead?
  2. Gavin Hird wrote: Ebbe Linden wrote: Gavin Hird wrote: Bobbie Faulds wrote: There won't be land, per se, not like the SL model anyway. You'll pay a yearly fee for a domain and host your land yourself. That was exactly what I did for Highfidelity. I have said it before, the new platform is codeveloped with HF, and there will be some changes that sets it apart, but technically very much the same. No, it's not codeveloped with HiFi. Two different companies. It is only that every time I read or hear something you have said, or others have said (who think they are in the know) I get deja vús about what I see in HIghfidelity. – Which I think is not very good (neither from a technological or marketing perspective.) There are similarities as we're in a similar category (VW, VR). There will be many...just like any other interesting category. We have different approaches though.
  3. Gavin Hird wrote: Bobbie Faulds wrote: There won't be land, per se, not like the SL model anyway. You'll pay a yearly fee for a domain and host your land yourself. That was exactly what I did for Highfidelity. I have said it before, the new platform is codeveloped with HF, and there will be some changes that sets it apart, but technically very much the same. No, it's not codeveloped with HiFi. Two different companies.
  4. Bobbie Faulds wrote: Here's what I know from my housemate that's done some scripting for one of the Alpha testers. LSL won't be used at all...currently all the designing for stuff is usins Maya, a rather expensive program that produces a different kind of map than Blender, which most people use. There won't be land, per se, not like the SL model anyway. You'll pay a yearly fee for a domain and host your land yourself. Since the new platform won't be sharing the inventory server with SL, the stuff you have isn't going to trasfer over. As long as SL continues to be a viable, money-producing platform, there are no plans to close it down. With the model the way it is for the new platform, it won't be for casual users like SL is. There are no Alpha users now. Yearly fee for a domain? You must be confusing us with HiFi. We're not doing that. Since I don't think you know the model of this new platform I don't think you can assume it won't be for casual users over time. But you're right that we have no plans to close SL down.
  5. BobbyGeorge wrote: I just can't see the NGP working. And I'm not a harbinger of doom, but LL's business practices never cease to baffle me. For a start, SL has never produced a clear vision of what it's meant to be, other than 'Your world, your imagination'. Clearly, that can be interpreted in myriad ways. When it comes to enforcing 'the law', though, LL has always, weirdly, come down in favour of one side. Namely, the older users who want to manage a virtual holiday home and dress up their dollies, rather than push the platform's physics to the limit. >> But SL still has managed to be the most successful VW ever, to this day. For people immersed in the game, it's worth pointing out: SL means next to nothing to the majority of the world's population. This is an extremely fringe platform; I'm sure that some whacked-out conspiracy forums get more genuine traffic. In a way, LL's decisions have killed off a lot of the potential for immersionism, to its detriment. SL or Sansar or whatever will never compete with FB; it's an entirely different dynamic. LL seem to have disregarded its ideal, target market with a series of dim decisions and futile attempts to 'be' something it can't. >> Seems like you have a better idea for what SL should be. Want to tell me? 'Sansar', IMO, is ultimately a forgettable name. Won't register or strike a chord with most folk. >> That's fine since it's just a codename and not the final name. You won't be able to transfer most (or any) of your inventory; retaining AV names is still a moot point (I still haven't seen any clarification on the issue of names); it seems it will be a completely different beast altogether. I think SL as we know it will grind on for a while, but why on earth would a company looking to make profits invest in a dead horse? SL will probably become like Inworldz for a couple of years and then fizzle out altogether. As for Ebbe as an individual, I've yet to encounter a more wooden, dry and evasive public face for any company. His distinct lack of enthusiasm alone makes me wonder why he's been appointed to take forward a platform that's supposedly meant to stoke personal creativity. >> Maybe it's because I'm a Swede... Part of SL's amazing, initial dynamic WAS that clash of cultures and user intent. To have a grid that hosted educators, Gorean women on dog leads, genius scripters and redneck C&W DJs alike. It created an interesting frisson, at least. LL has now weighed in on the side of a vague 'nothingness', some undefined 'typical' user who doesn't exist, and has ignored/ deterred a lot of the dedicated obsessives and geeks who made SL what it was - and who would (probably) have clung on to become core customers in the long run. I really can't see Sansar attracting anyone other than current SL users. Likewise, I can't see SL still running by the end of the decade.
  6. Jo Yardley wrote: Ebbe Linden wrote: Jo Yardley wrote: I know LL is thinking about changning the region options in SL, wanting to offer more different kinds of region to buy in stead of just one giant one. I would like to know if you're thinking about lowering or removing the setup fees for regions and homesteads. I know 1000 bucks is a lot of money to let users keep but I am sure it would also encourage more people to buy (new) regions. In general we will lower the cost of land. In SL? For Project Sansar. We continue to look at optins for SL but I can't promise any changes there.
  7. JPG0809 wrote: Thank you for starting and answering in this thread! -Has the lab thought about prepaid cards? If I remember correctly, I believe LL decided on accepting teen users. Though I do believe some may have credit cards, I don't think many do and the those that do would'nt be comfortable giving their info out. I remember for certain MMOs, instead of using my credit card, I would pay $10 or $25 on a prepaid card for a certain game company and on the back of the card was a code you would type in on their site to redeem in-game credit. Though I don't think the traditional way of buying currency with a credit card is a bad idea, I do think that maybe buying Lindens this way may help those who would like an alternative though I'm not sure if Sansar will even have the same currency or a fluctuating economy and how that would all work. Not sure. Too soon to tell. -Will Sansar support wireless more efficiently rather than relying heavily on a wired set-up for Internet connection? Yes, Sansar will be more efficient over the network.
  8. Jo Yardley wrote: I know LL is thinking about changning the region options in SL, wanting to offer more different kinds of region to buy in stead of just one giant one. I would like to know if you're thinking about lowering or removing the setup fees for regions and homesteads. I know 1000 bucks is a lot of money to let users keep but I am sure it would also encourage more people to buy (new) regions. In general we will lower the cost of land.
  9. Cerise Sorbet wrote: I've got the impression that the whole idea of region crossings would be alien to this new platform. That is probably where some of the anxiety about a mainland kind of experience comes from. While seamless crossings have obviously been too problematic to try again any time soon, some kind of way to smooth over the edges, something like a fog or tunnel you can walk (or riode a vehicle) through to get between experiences that want to allow that, might go some way toward keeping that kind of imersion alive. Will Sansar be able to suport something like that? Something like this is what we have in mind.
  10. Mike Denneny wrote: Ebbe, I see you answered her addtional questions, but the main focus of her post was around if linden lab is interested in sponsoring projects that provide "non business" related fun experiences. Currently sims that want to create games need to create revenue and often face financial issues because of this. I'm also interested if this is a path linden lab would want to go down to promote new user engagement and logitivity of experiences that retain users. Mike We're thinking of cheaper and larger land supporting more scalable experiences. This will make it easier to create and successfully operate these types of experiences.
  11. seanabrady wrote: Thanks for all these continued responses. On Second Life, I think that the changes over the last several years have been fantastic and I look forward to the new things which have been mentioned. I dont know that there is much more to say other than to continue to do the best you can with the platform. I have a couple of questions on Sansar though. 1) Will the land/terrain system be sufficiently advanced to allow for the creation of caves? Yes. 2) Will there be better tools for managing and visualizing inventory? One of the biggest challenges in SL today is effectivly organzing an inventory you cannot quickly see. I would love to see transaction data fed into a web based inventory management system when purchases can be visualized, sorted and tagged. We need more time to figure this one out completely. In the idea of Mainland, while I can apprciate the ideas behind mainland and thing that the community and especially the vehicle aspects are exceedingly important, as a landowner I simply don't want to compete with LL. I think that mainland type communities should be enabled, and that different landowners should continue to feel free to connect distributed regions into a larger whole. I would prefer to see this done without the direct invovlement of land payments to LL. Priced right, with sufficicient size I can see small groups coming together to create realms like the Blake Sea. In fact, I can envision the new regions being modern enough to allow for vast amounts of sailable/flyable water without greatly increasing the processing power needed. Sounds great to us. Thanks again for taking the time to answer these...and hope I am not to late.
  12. Tyr Rozenblum wrote: Hi Ebbe and your fellow Lindens! So two questions, I spoke with fellow creators and a few others with invested interest in sl like me! We were working out ideas (think of it like fantasy football with out all the sportsing) for things that might be beneficial to boost the amount of land purchased in SL. I know our current system is hugely flawed, and its probably hard to change it because it's been so ingrained now for 12 years. But would the lindens consider ever offering a fourth type of sim? one that was considerably cheaper and could be purchased as both mainland and private? The idea was a social sim, the same prims as a regular sim, with the caveat that no business, gaming, or residential could be on it. It would be a sim purely for emmersive roleplay, parks, art, and other social settings. While privately owned and ran (think of how current rp sims are managed), they would have to stay totally open to the general public. I know the idea is kind of simplified, for lower cost, in addition to business, skill gaming, and residential sims, we could see a lot more fun sims to add to the experience. As it is now, a lot of these sims are short lived, or they have to be attached to a business. My other question was about project sansar, first let me say I love the idea of a tax, and lower land for residents and new users. I want new users to have a more affordable experience that will keep them around longer. But I was told a lot of quotes from reddit ar actually wrong about the 5% tax. I was curious if you guys know the number yet? I'll admit I'm alittle afraid of Sansar going the route of IMVU and gauging too high for it to be profitable for both creators and LL. Thank you for reading Tyr Rozenblum ADDED: 1. I was curious also about the possiblity about morphs and head sliders. With the growing popularity of mesh bodies and heads, I was wondering if we would ever get to use the head morphs/sliders in the future? It would probably benefit head creators, as well as those wishing to have a little more HD experience. We will build a highly flexibly avatar system. Not clear that user created avatars will be able to take advantage of our simple avatar customization UI. It's something we would like to find solutions to but is a very hard problem. 2. Animated mesh: I know that I have helped contribute to many users fall im frame rate (sorry guys you know ILU), doing mesh creatures with my partner Nina. The problem is saving frame for frame and over lapping mesh using alpha is just, not a responsible way to do things. Yes we still do it, but its the only way to have any kind of animated pets and animals via mesh. Is there plans in the future to add ACTUAL ways to do animated creatures? You know without killing your friends and loved one's frame rate. Yes, we plan to support custom skeletons.
  13. ChinRey wrote: Ebbe Linden wrote: Sansar will have a new marketplace with new tech and user experience. That of course brings up the question what will happen to the Second Life Marketplace. Are there any plans to upgrade it to modern standards with better search listing ranking, grouped listings, a more user friendly merchant interface, autmatic removal of expired listings, and better protection against illegal, TOS violating and unethical wares and marketing practices? It will be improved but we'll have to wait on more details here. Ebbe Linden wrote: Yes, we have support for physically based materials with spec, smoothness, "metalness" and normal maps. Will there be support for displacement maps? When the plans for Sansar were first made public, there was quite a lot of talk about voxels. Have these plans been abandoned? Yes, we will support displacement maps. We continue to experiment with voxels... Jo Yardley wrote: When will we get the 24 hour day cycles? Sorry, couldn't resist Oh no, we don't want that! With four hour days we get six times as many of them so we all get six times as much done! Ummm... or... am I getting something wrong here? The idea is that you can set your own cycle for your own region. Some want 24, some want 3.
  14. BlueTrianon wrote: I'm so sorry, but I just would like to confirm that it is substances as in Allegorithmic's Substances that will be supported? If so, this is very exciting news. We intend to support the idea of substances in regards to rendering physics and audio in some way. We have not ruled out supporting that product and are fans but may solve it some other way.
  15. Cathy Foil wrote: Will Project Sansar have its own Marketplace site or will the current Marketplace be used for both? Personally I don't think SL's current Marketplace should be used for both because it would just cause confusion for new users of both SL and Project Sansar. If Project Sansar does have its own Marketplace will it follow the same rules and restrictions as SL's Marketplace? The way I see it a new virtual world can have new rules which gives LL the opportunity to make changes to avoid some of the pitfalls we have experienced here SL. Sansar will have a new marketplace with new tech and user experience.
×
×
  • Create New...