Jump to content

Scylla Rhiadra

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Scylla Rhiadra

  1. Ok, I'd be cute. And POWERFUL! But kinda dumb? Of course, there can be advantages to that . . .
  2. Well, as I said, sometimes one can't accommodate the unreasonable, because they are being really unreasonable. An SL example would be those demanding that LL halve the price of tier; that probably can't happen. It's always going to be cost-benefit analysis, right? What do we lose by accommodating the unreasonable, and are those losses worth retaining them? Are some accommodations even going to retain them? The point I was making was simply that businesses can't demand that consumers be "reasonable'; that's just not a criterion that's going to be part of any strategic calculation about changes to a product. Rather, the analysis is going to be something like "what do we gain if we do this, and what do we lose?", regardless of how unreasonable on some levels the final decision might seem. Again, it's about the bottom line.
  3. Reasonably speaking, no, it's not. But, again, it's not a question of what is "asking too much" -- it's a question of how users will respond, whether their response is reasonable or not. "Be reasonable" isn't a great sales pitch. A business that wants to succeed has to do its best (which may not always be sufficient, to be sure) to cater to the reasonable and the unreasonable. And if a healthy proportion of current users shrug and say, "I'm not going to do that," they'll be lost to the platform, and the fact that they were being unreasonable ain't going to fix the dent in the bottom line.
  4. Yes, exactly. And an awful lot of those consumers are focused on playing Barbie. I'm honestly not sure what business model is being proposed to replace it by those who think this is somehow an illegitimate use of the platform. This might be a more profitable focus for future development -- making the UI more usable, and optimizing the current code and environment so it works better on normal computers, rather than super-kewl-OMG! effects that only function on high end ones. The former benefits everyone; the latter is going to appeal to a much smaller segment of the population, and may even exclude some. Yes, this! However you want to define it, and whatever causes it, I think "lag" is by far and away the most common complaint among SL users, and it particularly impacts on those for whom SL is a social experience, because it is especially prevalent at places like clubs. Arguably, too, it impacts upon shoppers, who likely will often use MP rather than shop in-world. I find the MP convenient myself, if only for the search function . . . but surely we want people using in-world stores. I'm a little confused by this . . . I do a lot my in-world shopping via camming around, mostly using the keyboard shortcuts. This doesn't work well for you? I'm sure you're right -- part of the issue here maybe is that non-gamers tend not to be very tech-oriented, and don't really understand what a GPU (for instance) actually does. But those non-gamers, as unreasonable as they might be, still comprise a sizable constituency here. It might not be technically feasible to meet all their demands, but neither is it advisable, from a business perspective, to simply dismiss their complaints. Absolutely; SL has often been at least at the back of my mind when I purchased a new computer. Again, though, some -- probably many -- don't think this way. Maybe they should -- but if they don't, are you willing to shrug them off and lose them?
  5. Yep, for sure, you're right! i think your case is not at all untypical. And that's the point that Gadget and some others seem to be missing -- SL does work reasonably well for people without gaming computers. And it needs to continue to run reasonably well for people who don't have gaming computers, or you'll lose a sizable portion of the resident population, likely without attracting many new gamers to the platform at all in compensation.
  6. I'm sure not. Which kinda makes my point for me: an awfully large proportion of the SL user base is comprised of people who are not gamers (and many of whom don't even know what Steam is). Regardless of whether or not one considers SL a game or not, it is not a game like, I dunno, Fallout or Skyrim or Bloodborn, if only because it attracts a large body of people who would never play games like that. Yeah, no. It isn't. See above. There's an entire demographic of SL users who have never used another MMO, and likely never will. It doesn't matter what you think LL should do. This isn't about "principles" or what SL should be like -- it's about its current user base. And were LL to ramp up the technical requirements of SL to the degree that it made obsolete and useless the cheap off-the-shelf laptops that an awful lot of SL users currently rely on, you're going to lose those people. I recently sent to a friend a pic that I took of his house. His immediate response was "Woah! That's not what SL looks like to me!" because he's using a simple, inexpensive laptop that can't comfortably run at high or ultra. He was impressed by the pic, but it's not going to change the way he uses SL. Ramp up the minimum requirements of SL, and that's one non-gamer among many thousands of others just like him who is simply going to disappear. Really, I wish people would step out of their bubble for a minute, and realize that their experience of, and expectations for, SL are not necessarily everyone else's. LL, fortunately, knows that it needs to keep its platform flexible enough that it works reasonably well for both those with high expectations for graphic rendering, and those who don't care about that, or don't have machines that can take advantage of that. You get how condescending that sounds, right Gadget? Who are you to say that "Barbie Dress Up Facebook" isn't an entirely appropriate way to use SL? Frankly, it's what drives a sizable chunk of the SL economy.
  7. Discussions like this tend to be dominated by calls for technical and graphical improvements to SL, and the underlying assumption is usually that most users of SL are gamers who are used to high quality graphics, and lots of special affordances associated with animation, scripting, and so forth. It's really very difficult to know what "most" SL residents are like, because we all tend to exist within our own little bubbles, but I'm not a gamer, and my own experience suggests that, in fact, "gamers" are something of a minority among the great majority of users here. I know a few, but they are definitely a quite small percentage of my friends -- at least "serious" gamers are. The circles in which I move tend to be filled with people who see SL as more of a social platform. Many of them are using relatively light-weight computers, and a great many of them never have their graphics at even "High," yet alone "Ultra." What they want is low lag, and maybe improved communications tools. They don't actually care much about shadows and depth of field, or even draw distance: they just want to be able to move in crowded clubs without seeing their fps drop to 4. I think that good graphics are important: I am a photographer, so I highly value this element. But I think it's a mistake to believe that most residents care about, or are even knowledgeable enough to be able to judge how well this platform compares, graphically, to triple A games. The other thing that I can guarantee is important to most users is the ability to customize their avatars. Right now, customization is a nightmare. BOM will make things a bit easier down the road, but this is an area that really needs to be a focus in the future -- particularly with an eye to making customization easier and more accessible for new users. Use the games on Steam as a gauge of the kind of computers that we should expect from most users, and you will lose, I am convinced, a huge proportion of residents. A gaming computer is just not the norm here. SL needs to be able to accommodate "power users" who expect good graphics, but that's not the most important task that needs to be done. SL needs to be usable, in a real and practical sense, by people who don't have high-end machines.
  8. No. I'm too ponderous and pompous, too talkative, and too blonde. Oh, yeah, and too female. I can't really imagine what a male version of me would be like.
  9. Oh, where to start? A lot of the time, it depends on mood. Let's see, novelists in the last 100 years or so . . . they're mostly British, although I read a smattering of American and Canadian. Waugh, Woolf, Forster, Wodehouse, Graham Greene, Muriel Spark, Kingsley Amis (but not his annoying son), Barbara Pym. I think my two favourite contemporary novelists are Jeanette Winterson and Julian Barnes. Ian McEwan traumatizes me too much. Nicholson Baker is funny and weird. Neil Gaiman. Andre Alexis and Thomas King (Canadian). I'm actually not a huge fan of Atwood. Pre-1920 is a whole other bag. I'm sure I've missed a ton, but that's a start!
  10. Me too! How very U of both of us! Well, actually, I've only ever read The Pursuit of Love, which I took up many years ago when I was going through a Waugh phase (as one does). I never got to the sequels -- I'm not sure why not. It'll be interesting reading her in ebook format, rather than a battered old Penguin. For some reason, I really associate Waugh and that generation of comic novelists with battered old Penguins. They just seem "right" . . .
  11. I've been slogging through a whole bunch of Henry James recently, and the poems and other bits and pieces of Dorothy Parker. I've decided a need her biography, or perhaps a book about the Algonquin Round Table. I need to be more fabulous and glamorous and witty. (I'm thinking about dipping into Nancy Mitford soon, too. Because I also want to be a Bright Young Person. (Well, one out of three isn't bad.)
  12. I have absolutely no intention of shelling out that much for Legacy (and I'm annoyed with them because they do seem to have demonstrated than mesh body creators can up their prices significantly, and people will still buy), but I am tempted to demo just to see what the fuss is about. I did get the opportunity to see someone nude in Legacy a short while ago, and it looked nice, from a bit of a distance (I thought it impolite to zoom in and cam all over her body). But can it possibly be good enough to justify the extra expense, hassle, and, frankly, risk?
  13. And The Miller's Tale reads like the screenplay for a Seth Rogen film . . . if you like that kind of thing. And if you want to cut right to the chase in Ulysses, you can just skip ahead to Molly's orgasm at the very end of that otherwise interminable (but surprisingly funny) novel.
  14. God YES. SOOOOOO often . . . This is kind of a brilliant idea. I'm going to start doing this! Thank you! The only drawback I can see to it, really, is that I do like BD for photos, but I hate it for normal interactions in SL, so I tend invariably to use FS unless I'm specifically taking a shot. In the case of the pic above, I had just finished taking the Couture pic (Maddy had been fussing about behind me while I was taking it, setting up booby traps all around my skybox, I think), so I was still on BD. Still, FS does take nice pics too. This is definitely worth trying!
  15. This is SL . . . are you even allowed to wear something with a neckline that doesn't plunge down to your navel???? I may have to AR this.
  16. Cinn, don't worry about it. It's really not very important, and I don't think I have a great deal more to say on the subject anyway. Let's just agree to disagree: life's too short (and, right now, dark and weird) to waste time on "tussles," right?
  17. Thanks, Sara, although this is one of the shots that demonstrates again something I've noticed before: sometimes it's the quickest, most impromptu shots that work the best. This was literally a spur-of-the-moment pic, taken while Maddy was telling me about how she created floating dandelion seeds from particles (no, really); I'm not sure she even knew I was taking it.The animations are just the ones on the chairs, and the pic was straight from the viewer without even cropping. All of which contrasts with the hours I spent on the much-less-interesting "Couture" pic (most of which was creating the pose in BD; that was fun!). I'm sure there is a lesson to be learned here . . . like, maybe I need to spend even more time setting up shots!! Right?
  18. OMG, Proust? Well, god knows I suppose a great many of us now actually have the leisure to read something that unfinishable lengthy. Parker is a hell of a lot more fun, though. Although maybe not quite as much fun as your chosen reading material . . .
  19. Dahling, however do you think they became forum legends in the first place? 😉 (Forgive me. I've been reading Dorothy Parker this evening.)
  20. Oh, I'm sure I'm arroganting all over the place. I try not to, but, hey, I'm only human. (That's me being humble!) I actually hadn't said that before in this thread, but you and I have both been around here long enough that I'm sure you've seen me say it before elsewhere, in other contexts. Does this mean that you agree that no one has been asking that the content of this thread be "censored" -- any more than you are trying to "censor" or "shame" me into silence by disagreeing with me now? (And no, I don't think you're doing that. Neither am I.) You have not addressed the second part of my post, in which I tried to distinguish between talking about how LL can profit from this tragedy, and how LL might respond in a socially responsible and generous way to it? Does that seem like a reasonable distinction to you?
  21. Cinn, who has said this? No one that I've seen. Disagreeing with something is (and frankly, I get bored of having to make this important distinction) not the same as wanting it censored, banned, or otherwise obliterated. It just isn't. It's disagreeing. Which is something we do here all the time, and should be able to do civilly. You are conflating two very different things. Imagine two threads. The first is about ways that LL might be able to make Second Life a really helpful refuge for people in self-isolation, or afraid and alone during this time of terrible tragedy and fear. How can LL, or the rest of us, make the experience of employing Second Life for this socially responsible and helpful thing easier and more accessible? The second -- which is essentially the OP of this thread -- asks how LL might be able to capitalize on this terrible tragedy in order to increase its customer base and hence profit margins. What are the things that LL can do that will bring more customers to the platform, and make SL a more financially viable platform? Arguably, both threads might well address many of the same issues, including things we talk about here ad nauseum -- pricing, user retention, the new user experience, interface design, etc. Those are completely appropriate things to discuss, and I expect we'll still be discussing them the day that LL finally pulls the plug. But do you really not see a difference in the focus and tone of these two superficially similar approaches to the subject?
  22. Miranda, this is lovely, and peaceful, and calming, and beautiful. Thank you. 🙂
  • Create New...