Jump to content

SLAddict Allen

Resident
  • Content Count

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About SLAddict Allen

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. Sassy Romano wrote: VMware workstation works fine. 30 day trial. In SL you usually need to disable Mouse warp in debug settings. Thanks for this Sassy. I got into 10 via VMWare, but Firestorm is still giving me an error. Will not launch due to video card drivers not installed correctly.
  2. I figured as much. Thank you for trying to help me out Madelaine
  3. So, I am testing Windows 10. We downloaded Windows 10 Technical Preview build 10024. Not comfortable installing this on production computer, and with no backup machine, a virtual machine is our only option. The VM software we are currently using is VirtualBox. Now, with it not being our main OS, we are running SL on Windows 8.1 currently. However, we would like to really test out Windows by putting it through its paces. Having some trouble logging into Second Life, however. We tried it on Build 9926, and got a graphics card error. We tried installing the driver, but could only attempt to insta
  4. fantasywannabe27 wrote: Hello everyone. New to Second Life. Before I actually play the game, i just have several questions. 1) is the game as it says? you litterally play a second life? where it works just like IRL? 2) What is there to do? 3) The main reason why I wanted to get this game is because I heard you can change your character to look like anything. What I really want is to be a furry, with multiple tails, with angel wings, and neko eyes and ears. Then i looked at what there is to offer....You have to pay IRL money to get the costumes. I'm a huge money saver and I HATE spend
  5. Linden Lab wrote: Hi Surfaqua, As each game differs in its operational functions, we are unable to provide opinions of whether a specific game would be subject to our Skill Gaming Policy via this forum. Each creator and operator of games will need to evaluate whether their game(s) would be subject to, and in compliance with, this policy. I'm confused by this answer. You've created a set of rules, yet you are unable to determine what violates them? So if a creator "decides" that what he is doing is in compliance, you are saying Linden Lab will not come saying that he isn't? No
  6. http://www.gridsurvey.com/charts/econ76.png source: http://www.gridsurvey.com/economy.php A slow, steady erosion of the the inworld population that continues. Granted yes, weekends were busier times and that was when you were likely to see those numbers. But times have changed in ways that skew that as well. Take wednesdays for example. SL was OFFLINE COMPLETELY during those days every week. Downtime was much more common during the week, which would help push busy hours towards the weekend. And I don't have to use any data. I use experience. If you choose to dismiss it as a lack of memory,
  7. Freya Mokusei wrote: Daniel Voyager is an entertaining blogger, but he's young and not trained in reading statistics. According to your figures, Second Life had a concurrency of >80,000 on 5 days (out of 365, ~1%) during 2009. This was early in the plateau phase of Second Life's product cycle, where random highs were typical. My own data had 8 days during 2010 which had a concurrency of >80,000, but it's a long, long, long way from being representative. You're still wrong to average out the peak concurrency at "80-90K" during any sampled year of Second Life's operation. I'd skip t
  8. Theresa Tennyson wrote: SLAddict Allen wrote: You wanted evidence, I said I would find it. http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2008/09/second-life-con.html So the evidence you have to back up your statement that concurrency was in the 80,000's,, passing 90 thousand at times, is a statement that the actual cuncurrency peak was just over 70,000? Looks like you've found evidence all right - it just proves you were wrong. That article announced it had hit 70K. Nothing in that article stated it stopped there. It was the highest number I could back up at the time. But I have more now. Second Life
  9. You wanted evidence, I said I would find it. http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2008/09/second-life-con.html
  10. Freya Mokusei wrote: You're backtracking, and this is boring. "its still a fact." Again, you've presented no facts, just anecdotal evidence. Hitchen's Law makes classification of your point easy. "I refer to peak time audience as the most avatars online, generally, in a given day. It used to be 80-90K" So our definitions match and your numbers come out different to mine. Your assumption that they 'used to be 80-90k' ignores the conditions of that environment and allows you to be swayed by false impressions. You're wrong to do this. As stated in my previous reply, only 8 datapoints (of
  11. Freya, Explain it away as typical if you want, its still a fact. Call it what you will, I refer to peak time audience as the most avatars online, generally, in a given day. It used to be 80-90K (backed up by a previous post author), now its roughly 50K, maybe a bit above. I think we can even call 35% conservative math. You took "a few" as three. So your assumption has distorted my facts. Yet you asked me to stop distorting yours. You don't believe old data counts for much. Then this is simply a matter of disagreeing on that. Here is what I was referring to in my last point. Th
  12. Drake1 Nightfire wrote: SLAddict Allen wrote: Freya Mokusei wrote: SLAddict Allen wrote: Its funny how people still dismiss the "I'm leaving" claims of users when peak time concurrency has dropped about 35% or so in the last few years. ... Fair point. But I would argue that even those working on SL projects have technically left, or reduced time online, even if by design of the misguided implementation of Mesh. People draw people. People come now and see 50K online at peak times. People used to come and see that at all times, with peaks of 80K. Which was more attractive and mo
  13. Freya Mokusei wrote: SLAddict Allen wrote: Get past all of the interpretations of christmas and averages and everything else. Look at the beginning of the graph and you'll see a high they never reach anymore and a low at the end of it that is considerably less than the 2011 drop, save for the odd drop in late 2011 that corrected itself. I remember it happening but don't quite remember why. Those highs are clearly never close to being repeated. Your graph clearly shows that the highs of the last few months are similar to the LOWS of 2011, which was a period well inside Second Life's de
  14. Freya Mokusei wrote: SLAddict Allen wrote: Its funny how people still dismiss the "I'm leaving" claims of users when peak time concurrency has dropped about 35% or so in the last few years. ... Fair point. But I would argue that even those working on SL projects have technically left, or reduced time online, even if by design of the misguided implementation of Mesh. People draw people. People come now and see 50K online at peak times. People used to come and see that at all times, with peaks of 80K. Which was more attractive and more likely to draw people in? This hasn't happened.
  15. Parrish Ashbourne wrote: SLAddict Allen wrote: Its funny how people still dismiss the "I'm leaving" claims of users when peak time concurrency has dropped about 35% or so in the last few years. When LL stopped bot farms that dropped the counts for some of the loss, and mesh plays a roll in it to, many content creators now spend most of their time building out side of SL, even just trying to learn mesh will take some one out of world for a long time. So 35% isen't the real % of people leaving SL. Fair point. But I would argue that even those working on SL projects have technically
×
×
  • Create New...