The Otherland Group - Blog

The Ultimate Post on PlayStation Home vs Second Life – Part B

2009-01-20T00:00:51-08:00

If you have read my first post on PlayStation Home you will have realized, how impressed I am with the theoretical potential of this platform and how disappointed I am with Sony's actual implementation and (probably) strategy.

No, I am NOT saying that “Home is doomed” because it seems to be a hangout reserved for testosterone-laden young males (that is the PS3’s main target group, after all) or because it does not offer all the features of Second Life. But the features that are missing clearly show, what makes SL so special and – Yes, I still dare to say this – "successful".

It's User Generated Content, Stupid!
Basically, we are talking about user generated content. Second Life makes it easy, to add content – and monetize it. In Home its is impossible to add ANY form of user generated content without an individually negotiated contract with Sony!

Does UGC (user generated content) make any difference for users not interested in creating their own stuff (because most users aren’t)? You bet!

It is other users who created 99% of the content, which makes up Second Life. The same is true for IMVU and (to a limited extent for There).If you want to know more, about the importance of UGC in gamespace and virtual worlds, please check out this excellent paper! Even the first three or four dozen sims in Second Life way back in 2004 offered more variety, more surprises, more innovation, more entertainment than Sony’s artfully crafted world.

No, I am not exaggerating. Home in its current state is utterly boring after 10 hours max – if you are not interested in harmless chat with fellow gamers; which is probably not a fault of the platform as this might be its intended purpose. If this is not Sony's only intention ... they should implement a few changes (namely: open it up for content creators) or put in a lot more effort into content creation themselves. The story of Google's failed Lively platform clearly shows that it takes more than just some cool 3D scenes and a friendslist to create a sustainable platform!

Technorati Tags: 3d web, advertising, metaverse, second life, web 3.d

Mixed Feelings
The technical platform is nice in many aspects. There is a lot of potential here. I am just not sure, if Sony will be able to fill out this potential and let the platform evolve into more than a 3D chat system. This skepticism has got to do with the tight control Sony obviously wants to keep on everything that is happening here and the typical business models Sony knows from its (console) gaming business.

Sony’s Content Strategy for Home
Sony is obviously following a strategy, where the additional content is expected to come from or is at least licensed from brand partners. The first ones are Red Bull (who sponsors an inworld "air race” game), Ligne Roset (a disappointingly limited line of furniture), Diesel (more streetwear consisting mostly of t-shirts and pants) and game companies. The US Home, for example, already includes two locations themed in the style of the PS3 games Uncharted 2 and Far Cry. Those locations are … well “locations”. There is no interactivity there, not even some simple competition, there are no events, no freebies no … you get it?

This is even more disappointing, as the PlayStation platform lends itself rather well to the implementation of great looking games. Red Bull's 'air race' is a good example. And actually I would have expected Sony to have more applications like this ready, to show off its shiny new platform. It seems that it is not easy, to develop games like this for Home, though. I am afraid, it might be nearly as hard as developing a new game for the PlayStation itself. This would explain the scarcity of interactive applications at launch - and it would be a catastrophe, IMHO. (We tried to get more information about developing interactive apps for Home but did not get any from Sony so far ...)

The strategy to base everything on existing brands and talk about additional content with BIG brands only, is certainly one, which comes from Sony’s experience with games. And it probably worked fine for these. I am not sure, if it will work as well in this new space, though. The next big thing for Home will be a "sports complex" designed and branded by Electronic Arts for example. I am sure this will attract a lot of Home users - but for how long? If Sony wants Home to be more than a chat room – I am not sure of that – it needs more “content”, more variety for avatars (shapes, clothes, skin, hair …), more ways to create interactive offers on a low budget. And UGC is the most efficient way to produce that. But that’s a scary idea it seems.

This concern is understandable, if you are a company trying to be perceived as providing “family entertainment” and, if you believe that user generated content in a virtual world will lead to flying penises. It is especially scary in the US market, where an exposed nipple can result in a state affair. That still seems to be a major issue for many companies contemplating virtual worlds and user generated content. I have to say, though, that in more than a thousand hours spent in Second Life, I still have to see a flying penis :) Legal problems surrounding UGC are a real problem, though. Other platforms, like There and IMVU are working examples, though, how this can be handled and still provide a community with a wide stream of interesting, user-generated, content. As far as I know, Twinity will use a similar approach.

I really wish, Sony would consider this route, too. I guess, everyone would benefit from such an approach (even in the watered-down model of There or IMVU).

Otherwise Home will probably stay very limited, as virtual worlds go. In its current state, Home is basically a relatively small chat platform with a few dozen different “rooms” (which are automatically replicated to a few hundred). You can not do much more than … well ... chat and hang around. The integrated games? They will be boring after a short while.

The Business Model of Home
The business model behind Home has not been discussed much by Sony executives. Watching the first incarnations of Home and Sony’s partnerships gives us some clues, though. It is probably a mix of binding customers to the platform (hard to break that down into hard numbers), selling virtual goods and sponsoring deals.

It will be interesting to watch how the micropayments (virtual goods) will develop over time. The first numbers, which have been circulated, were not too bad. I wonder though, if this will be sustainable. After you have spent some 20 or 25 dollars, you have bought EVERYthing, which you can buy in Home currently. And most of that won’t be too much fun. Actually, for most users, spending a max of 5 Dollars is probably a more realistic number. This might change, IF Sony gets the content pipeline going. More clothes, more variety with apartment types (maybe even some open space), more furniture would certainly help this line of business. It is my firm belief, though, that this will not generate a lot of revenue in the long run, if Sony does not open content production to a wider circle of producers.

Sponsoring deals are a different issue. Just now, I bet that Sony pays the sponsors to participate in Home-based projects (like EA's sports complex featured here). This will only change, if and when the number of regular Home users grows to a substantial number. This is a definite possibility, as every owner of a PS3 (some 20 Million worldwide) has access to home potentially. There has to be some incentive for those PS3 owners to go inworld, though. A classical “hen and egg” problem: PS3 owners won't use Home (a lot) if the entertainment potential of Home is not improved substantially, sponsoring partners are hard to convince to do such a deal, if there are not enough eyeballs to catch.

Then there is the additional question of which eyeballs to catch. Today, the PlayStation 3 is a typical "advanced" or "NextGen" console, which is bought by core or hardcore gamers mostly. In 2007 and 2008 Nintendo showed the world, that - while this target group certainly is not without potential - the high growth markets are elsewhere: within the female population, with younger kids and people well above an age of 30. This is where the Wii and the DS handheld are finding most of their buyers. In these markets you need a different kind of content. You can't attract a lot of women (especially in the generation above 35) with ego shooters, war simulations, car races, group sports etc.

Home as a Market-Extending Platform for the PlayStation3
But you could certainly attract them with "smaller", more casual games, with socializing games, with 3D communities and topics like fashion, household decoration etc. (No, I am not trying to start a sexist flame war ;-) For younger girls a Stardoll-like Barbie game would sell great - and would be much more attractive in a 3D world setting. And what is with a version of SingStar (Sony's bestselling Karaoke game for the PS2) for Home, which works like a MMOG? (Or extend this with avatars and fake fashion shows like you can see them in the Nurien demos). This would not be hard to do at all with the elements already inplace in Home.

Combine al of these examples (more can easily be developed by people more creative than me) and you could create a lot of good "reasons" for many additional PS3 sales outside the current target groups. A PlayStation3, which is a great looking, quiet (!) Blue-ray player, that has software available, which appeals to mom, dad and kids of all ages and genders would be hard to beat in the market. Microsoft's XBox is a hardcore gamers machine, does not have Blue-ray and is loud as hell. The Wii is not well equipped enough to work as a media center and lacks the graphic power you need for hard core games ...

Maybe I am exaggerating. Maybe I am overestimating the potential of the Home platform. But from what little experience I had in Home, I do believe, that this platform could help Sony broaden its market substantially. But to do so, developing for this platform has to be cheap and easy - to ensure a WIDE variety of content for every taste. Let's hope that Sony will realize this (or has realized it already).

Stay tuned for the next installment with some thoughts on Home as a business platform ...

The Ultimate Article on Playstation Home vs. Second Life – Part A

2009-01-15T05:27:33-08:00

Santa brought me a PS3 for Christmas (OK, I admit, I forced him) because I was interested in Sony’s Home platform. It is a great Blue Ray player, too: sleek and very quiet. But back to Home. I finally found a little time to check it out after New Years Eve and spend some 10 or 12 hours inworld over the course of a few days. It was a mixed experience – and a little disappointing all in all.

Home is NOT “Sony’s Second Life” – much less, actually, than you might believe

Many publications (online and offline) could not refrain from comparing Home to Second Life – usually dissing Home with such comparisons, as it s still common wisdom in the journalistic crowd that SL was this huge hype and failure of 2007. Wasn’t it? ;-) Alas, while such a comparison is not without merit (both platforms constitute a virtual world), the conclusions drawn from it are utter bullshit.

The four most important facts in the context of such a comparison:

Playstation Home has a lot less similarities with Second Life than a cursory first look (especially a look at static pictures) will reveal
If Home succeeds this will not be a stamp of approval for virtual worlds or Second Life
If Home succeeds this will be no indication that SL (or virtual worlds) are “doomed”
What is missing from Home might actually be those features, which are most important to the success of Second Life – which leads to some of the most annoying disappointments with Home

Linden Lab revamps pricing for Openspaces, insults residents

2008-10-31T04:58:18-07:00

Earlier this week, Linden Lab (in the person of Jack Linden) announced some "significant" - to phrase it politely - changes to the the pricing of Openspace regions in Second Life. For those, who don't know this product: Openspaces are regions (simulators or "sims") in Second Life which offer an area of some 65,000 sqm of virtual land. They come with a reduced performance compared to "standard" regions (only a quarter of the usual number of objects is allowed and the performance of scripted objects is lower, too). Correspondingly they have been sold at only 1/4 the cost of standard regions.

Prices raised by nearly 70%
Linden Lab now announced their intention to raise costs some 70% for this product. Not only the initial price but also the monthly running costs (so called tier). They announced their intention to implement those changes for ALL Openspace regions: for new ones and also for a few thousand regions sold in the last 4 months. No wonder, many of their customers are crying "bait and switch". As I am of an older generation myself, I can only think of the infamous "Oil for the lamps of China" (also an cheesy novel by Pearl S. Buck).

Jack Linden was citing many different reasons for the price change. The most important one being, that residents were "abusing" those regions by actually building stuff there. He insists, that Linden Lab never intended this product to be used this way and points to an obscure page on the Second Life Wiki, where it is written that these regions are intended to be designed as open sea, forests etc.

Ladies and Gentleman ... this is just plain ridiculous.

There is no widespread "abuse" of Openspace regions. Most residents are using them in a fully responsible way and exactly as Linden Lab has promoted them: "light use" regions.There is a small minority of customers who are trying to implement clubs or malls on these regions - which is NOT always a good idea. But thats a small minority.

Adding insult to injury
If Linden Lab did not intend those regions to be used for building ... one might ask, why the company has doubled the "prim capacity" for these regions just a few months ago. You don't need 3750 prims if all you can do with such a region is to create a large area of open water. Linden Lab is not being honest. They are using Openspaces exactly like that (on the new Nautilus continent, for example.) And they are adding insult to injury, as their spin doctoring is so plump that no one can believe it for long.

In addition: raising prices will never fix the problems they are purportedly experiencing with these regions. The guys which are using Openspace land "intensively" will buy smaller areas and/or use their land MORE intensely now. That's how a market-driven economy works - which always seems to come as a big surprise to Linden Lab decision makers (Oh, we have this product here, which offers a better price performance ratio for a huge part of our target group than our alternative offerings. And now they really buy it in large quantities? How could that ever happen?)

When I read the announcement I was more than a little annoyed. Not because of the new pricing structure. Actually I think an Openspace region delivers more value than 1/4 of a full prim region and should command a higher price. What it tells about a monopolist service provider selling 1000s of them and THEN raising the running costs some 70% is another issue (and has been discussed elsewhere ... )

Incompetency at the Lab in the fields of IT and macroeconomics?
What I found downright hypocritical (please forgive me, Jack) was the fact, that Jack cited "abuse" as one of the main reasons for such an unprecedented price hike. If he had said "Oh, I am so sorry, we have f***ed up again. We did not take into consideration the amount of grid traffic caused by a large number of Openspaces compared to 1/4 of that number in full prim sims ..." that would have been honest. Calling this "abuse" is insulting and utterly unfair.

We at Otherland are renting out more than 100 Openspaces. We do that since 2006 when the first ones appeared on the market. It is the perfect material for our work. The number of problems or complaints about lag or generally low performance, we experienced on this type of region (and we still use some class 4 based ones) is actually LOWER. We get more complaints for our full prim regions. This is because nearly all of land is explicitely sold for RESIDENTIAL use and used like that. On the Openspaces you will rarely find more than 3 or 4 avatars at the same time. The total script time is around (or lower than) one millisecond on most of our Openspaces.

If this constitutes "abuse", I seem to have a totally different understanding of the Englisch language than Jack.

The simple fact is: it is a plain and obvious matter of overall systems architecture of the SL Grid, that 4 Openspace regions will always need more grid resources than 1 full prim sim under similar conditions. This is not surprising and should have been known to every qualified systems architect, when the product was first announced (and then changed to 3750 prims).

As I have said, a small minority of residents is overstressing the resources of this product. But that has been the case with full prims, too, as long as I can remember - especially on mainland. If this was the cause behind the new pricing, mainland prices should have been raised 3 years ago.

It is an insult to everyone in the IT profession with a little understanding of grid architecture, to say that this is a new problem or that this constitutes a surprising and unexpected "abusive" usage pattern.

Every responsible company interested in a partnership relation with their customers (and not in a monopolistic position) would attack this issue with constraining features in the software. Not by an unprecedented price hike.

I am worried, very worried. This move shows not only that Linden Lab does not care about relations to current business partners. The idea behind this move is probably that new customers will be much more important for the company in the long run, so it doesn't matter to much to alienate their current customers. This idea might even be true, unfortunately, but it shows a business ethic, which is more than a little questionable, IMHO. This move also shows an utter lack of understanding about how a market-driven economy works with some of the most important decision makers at Linden Lab. (The "unexpected" success of the Openspace product has been no surprise to anyone in the real estate market). This show of incompetency is scary, more than a little scary.

What can be done?
I do not expect Linden Lab to get through with their intentions. In the nearly 4 years I have spend in Second Life I have never seen such a huge protest of residents. This is no storm in a tea pot. This is a revolution. Alternate solutions to the issue at hand have been discussed on the forums and on many blogs. Linden Lab could implement more severe performance limits for Openspace regions, they could add a third kind of low performance product. They could adjust pricing to actual usage patterns etc. Contrary to the statements in LL's official communication this is no rocket science. The correspending changes to the server code could easily be implemented in the 2 or 3 months until the proposed changes go into effect.

The alternative?
If Linden Lab does not listen to the customers which are filling their coffins (estate land is MUCH larger these days than Linden Lab's own main land), they might have to realize that they are doing themselves a great disservice. All that will happen is, that they drive those customers away to alternate platforms or to alternate grids based on the OpenSim technology. This could be the beginning of the end of Second Lifs's dominant position in the open Metaverse.

I hope that this will not happen, as I still believe in the value of a large connected virtual world as the Second Life Grid delivers today. Let's just hope, that someone at Linden Lab will see the light in the next few weeks. I have not given up hope.

A Brief Tour of WebFlock

2008-08-05T02:13:56-07:00

It's certainly "interesting times" in the Metaverse. As the anti-hype (mostly against Second Life) ends, a flood of tools is appearing on the market, most of them trying to "avoid the mistakes Second Life made" in the opinion of their developers. Three or four weeks ago, with only a few days between the announcements, Vivaty, Lively and WebFlock hit the market, for example, three platforms which all try to integrate a virtual 3D environment into web pages.

Maybe the most interesting of the three newcomers is WebFlock. (More about the reasons below. ) But WebFlock isn't openly available. So I pestered an old friend at the Electric Sheep from SL days long enough, that he felt obliged to give me a short test drive. After that session, I have to say: yes, WebFlock actually is a very interesting competitor in this market.

First, because it was developed by the Electric Sheep, the largest virtual worlds agency of them all. Second, because WebFlock promises to create 3D rooms into web pages without an (additional) plugin. WebFlock is based on Flash, which comes pre-installed with most web browsers these days, while Vivaty and Lively (as well as most other competitors) need an additional PlugIn, which must be installed - something that many users are very reluctant to do. Using Flash places some severe limits on what can be achieved in a 3D world, though. Thats, why I was so eager to explore WebFlock myself.

Technorati Tags: 3d web, metaverse, webflock, second life, virtual worlds, web 3.d

WebFlock basically places a window with a 3D scene into a web page. This scene is limited in size. It usually comprises one or two "rooms", through which an avatar can walk. The scene is rendered in what I would call 2.75D. WebFlock utilizes Papervision 3D to enable 3D rendering with Flash. This opens up more possibilities than with the 2.5D isometric worlds (like Habbo or sMeet) but less than ivaty and Lively or other "big" virtual worlds. Camera movement is severely limited (controlled automatically), though, which prohibits a full threedimensional feeling.

Avatars are 2D "sprites', flat, pre-rendered images of a 3D model, depicting the avatar from 4 or 8 different viewpoints. A WebFlock developer can create these sprites in any tool available. They can be designed with a cartoony or realistic look. Actually, one could probably copy avatars from every other virtual world and use them in a WebFlock room rather easily. Avatars "come with clothing". They can't be modified currently (Thats promised for future versions). Walls and the objects in a room are built with PaperVision, mostly textures placed upon some simple geometric base forms. It is possible, to make objects interactive - of course, we are in Flash and ActiveScript is always available - and to use video, by placing a kind of screen on the walls.

As already mentioned, camera movement is automatic. The camera simple follows the avatar, avoiding walls and other obstacles. This is great for beginners, I guess. Actually, from all the 3D Environments I got to know so far, WebFlock seemed like the platform, which is most easiest to learn. The only drawback of the automatic camera: You can not zoom in/focus onto something that you want to see in more detail (a movie, for example or a specific object). Scenes can be programmed in a way, that avatars get teleported into other rooms when they enter certain regions in a scene. They communicate with each other over chat or IM and can build friends lists, of course :) Future versions will include the ability to "mute" other users, a functionality, which seems to be more important, then I would have thought before starting to use online environments like Second Life.

There is no way for the common avatar, to add content (or to change anything in a room). WebFlock is a developers tool. Everything, that avatars can do is walk around, chat and interact with the objects in a pre-programmed way. There is a lot of interaction possible, of course - the full Flash 9 capabilities are available and interactions can use and influence content on the surrounding web site, of course. The back end functionality (avatar communication andinteraction mostly) is handled by a virtual worlds server software that was developed inhouse with the Electric Sheep. Actually, they started out with the Ogoglio open source platform but later rewrote most of it.

The Electric Sheep will be using WebFlock for their own projects, of course. An updated version of their The L-Word community, based on WebFlock, is already under development. WebFlock is offered as a service to other agencies (or inhouse development by clients), too, though. Such projects are still a while away, though, as the software is still in early alpha and documentation seems to be sparse.

And the verdict?
While it is still a bit early for a final verdict, WebFlock made a much better impression than I had expected. Moving around in the rooms is very easy and intuitive. Avatars are not "realistic" like in Second Life (or Vivaty for example). They don't move with the freedom of Lively or IMVU avatars. They are much more realistic than I would have expected with a Flash based tool (real 3D avatars are impossible with Flash), though and the environment felt quite "immersive" all in all.

WebFlock should not be compared to Vivaty or Lively (or IMVU, sMeet, Kaneva, There, Second Life, Twinity etc. ), directly. It is certainly not a consumer-oriented product but a developers platform - and a rather limited one currently. Vivaty and Lively are both consumer oriented (already have a lot of users) and offer a richer 3D environment, more "lively" avatars. WebFlock's main USP is, that it offers virtual worlds functionalities (lets say ... virtual worldlets) without additional plugins. The Electric Sheeps management is certain, that this (no additional software) will be a decisive factor for the success of any solution or project that utilizes virtual worlds technology and wants to target the mainstream audience. To learn more about this assumption read Sibley Verbeck's latest blog posts here, here and here.

I am not sold on this assumption 100% but I have to admit that this line of reasoning HAS its merits. As Sibley says: the barriers between the web and virtual worlds might be much more important to tear down, than the walls between the different virtual worlds platform. And for customers coming from the web, WebFlock certainly lowers the barriers for entering a virtual world significantly. That is extremely important for nearly all marketing-oriented projects where you usually want to reach an audience as large as possible. The visual fidelity - and the "immersiveness" - that can be achieved with WebFlock is limited, though. This will limit its appeal in some other markets (corporate and adult education for example). But only time will tell, how important this really is in the market. There is not much The Electric sheep can do to improve their product here.

The most decisive factor for WebFlock's success will be its developer's next step, though. They need to get this tool out on the market and they need to transform it into a licensable product/service with support and excellent documentation. The Electric Sheep alone will never be able, to make this a leading platform. That's always the challenge with tools developed inhouse at an agency. And they have to act quick, too. I am fairly certain, that this won't be the last tool which offers web-embeddable virtual wordlets based on Flash technology. The idea is just too appealing.

Second Life at a Cross Roads?

2008-07-31T06:13:32-07:00

For many people outside of the "virtual worlds industry" the terms "virtual world" and "Second Life" are still more or less synonyms. This is especially funny, as many people in the industry seem to have written off Second Life because of many disappointing developments in 2007 and the big negative hype in the press. It is much more en vogue currently, to place your bets on the new kids on the block: Vivaty, WebFlock and especially Lively (by Google!).

It is not a secret, though, that Linden Lab's management and investors still believe that the Second Life technology will be the (or a least "a") corner stone of the future Web3D. Is this totally unrealistic? And would would Linden Lab have to do, to make this come true if it isn't? Making the platform more stable is a simple answer - and certainly a pre-requesite. But what about other decisions? More control? Or less? More openness? Or a tightly controlled product? And a product for which target groups? Based on what business model?

Actually - and for some of my readers maybe surprisingly - I think that Linden Lab has a strategy for the coming years and Second Life's place in the Metaverse.

While I am not sure, that the company's management and shareholders has answers ready for all of the questions mentioned above, it is interesting to read the speech of Mitch Kapor (creator or the first successful spreadsheet software and a major Investor in LL) and the latest blog post of Linden Lab's new CEO, Mark Kingdon. (Check here, too.) Both will tell you, that Linden Lab indeed has a rather profitable business model, is expecting significant growth and is targeting markets way outside the current user base (actually alienating large groups in the current user base). In parallel, it is interesting to see, that Linden Lab created a "Department of Public Works" earlier this year, which is responsible for "beautifying Second Life" - after a long long time, where the company just flooded the market with more and more "land" (servers) which quickly were converted into huge trailer parks.

These activities seem to lead into different directions ... but I believe, that they are all part of a unified strategy to position Second Life as a standard tool for creating and accessing the future Web 3D as well as to position Linden Lab as one - but not the only - important service provider.

Technorati Tags: 3d web, metaverse, second life, v-commerce, virtual worlds, web 3.d

The problem for Linden Lab is, that they target so many dfferent audiences. And it is impossible, to offer all of these audiences ONE single product, a product that will make all of them happy.

I think Linden Lab did the right thing to put some effort into their mainland (the area of Second Life managed by Linden Lab and not by resellers) again. Many new users come to SL and dont trust the resident run "estates". I don't like this (I head one of the largest real estate firms of Second Life ;) but I have to accept that. Some of these users dont like the chaos and the ugliness of the current mainland, too. So - enhancing the mainland is certainly a good idea for this target group.

I still think - egoistically fueled probably - that Linden Lab should not make the owners of private estates pay such a huge penalty for the privilege of hosting their own land. There is no factual reason for this (besides: "we can do it") and this does not benefit the development of the (SL-based part of the) Metaverse. Providing quality solutions would be much easier (economically), if private estate land were not 50% more expensive than mainland. This pricing reflects the short term financial goals of LL and is not really good for the long term development. But most companies are ruled by short term goals :)

Emphasizing rules and governance - which happened a lot over the last 18 months - is certainly not a bad idea, either. If the core product of Second Life is seen as an lawless anarchy, many potential customers won't like that - and governments CERTAINLY don't like that and would give Linden Lab a hard time. It is a difficult balance ... not to piss of the important subcultures and soothing the mainstream audience and the authorities.

But, comparing SL to "The West" (as Mitch Kapor did it in his birthday speech), please consider: not all of the important groups and personalities in the American West of the 1840s or so would be well respected citizens in the California of 2008 :) Times change ...

And a second important audience, Linden Lab is targeting, too, is the corporate audience, the educational institutions, etc. Despite Linden Lab's propaganda, this is a very small market today (the majority of earnings comes from consumers) but it is growing. This audience needs more "control & security". If Linden Lab wants to succeed in these markets, they have to provide that - not only on seperate estates, because the vast society of Second Life CAN be an interesting aspect for some of these projects, too :) Not all of them work best in a walled garden.

For those who want a walled garden, I am sure, that Linden Lab will soon offer some options which go well beyond what is possible on private estates. It will be possible to host closed sub-grids in Linden Lab's data centers in 2009. I am very certain of that. :) And I hope, we will have a viable competitor with OpenSim, too. Just now this "product" is not fit for consumer solutions and just barely useable for other target groups. In all honesty, for most projects I can imagine right now, Linden Labs servers, which cost 295$/month deliver better value for money than the 30$ sims on 3rd party grids. But this will change ... The prices, too :)

So ... like in the internet, we will have a lot of diversity in products based on SL technology in 2009: there will be clean (puritan) environments. Linden Lab will offer one. Others will do that, too. There will be "adult grids" (they are already being built). There will be grids for many, many sub-cultures and those will certainly not have the same set of rules like Linden Labs SL has (now or then). And there will be corporate "Intraworlds", educational and marketing grids, tightly controlled and partly or fully closed off to the public.

I guess, Linden Lab feels the need to support ALL of these directions. And face the risk - no: certainty -, that any new feature which is good for one target group is considered by another as damaging or superfluous.

The Metaverse is growing rapidly this year - and growing more diverse. New solutions like Vivaty, Lively, tools like Multiverse, Project Wonderland, WebFlock, Metaplace etc. expand the metaphor of what is "a virtual world". They attract new audiences and might lure away some old customers. Linden Lab has to succeed in this ever growing and changing market. I am afraid, this wont be possible by focusing on the current user base, alone.

And contrary to public opinion, I think they have at strategy ready (probably only as a rough outline) to stay one of the major platforms to consider for many projects in virtual worlds.

Google's Virtual World Lively, the Second Life Killer

2008-07-09T04:10:06-07:00

Today, Google released the long awaited (and rumored) "Google Virtual World": Lively. Lively can be described best as a kind of IMVU in a web page. You can create yourself an avatar and can create and decorate your "room" (which does not have to be a "room" but can be an outdoor scene, too), where you meet with other avatars. The avatars kind of look like a cross breed of THERE and IMVU avatars and the visual quality is rather good. A plugin is needed, to integrate your room into a web page (which is only available for the Windows platform).

And of course, the web is already overflowing with head lines saying "The Second Life Killer is finally here!"

Hmmm...

While you ALWAYS have to take Google's project seriously ... is hard to see a Second Life "Killer" here.

Lively reminds me of IMVU, Vivaty and the early Kaneva. It is not a virtual "world" but a network of loosely connected scenes. This is a quite popular model for many platforms calling themselves "virtual worlds", which appeared on the market in the last 3 years. I am uncertain, if this model will be too successful in the long run. Many of the projects, which were based on "rooms" alone in the past, have added additional spatial constructs lately. For many applications besides "hey, look at my cool appartment" and "let's spend the night (an hour) together" a room or scene is a very limited surrounding.

This does not mean, that this could not reach a huge target audience. But the competition is already there. And some of the products already on the market do not look too bad. Vivaty, which has a very similar approach (as far as one can judge it now), has the big advantage of being tightly integrated with Facebook and AIM. I consider this a very valuable feature for this type of platform - because, the way Lively is now, it is basically a nice add on for a profile page on Facebook, MySpace or a blog. And for this purpose, a good integration with Facebook, MySpace or a blogging platform is important. Google certainly has these platforms available and the technological abilities to add such an integration.

Lets see what happens in the next months.

Technorati Tags: 3d web, google, googlewatching, metaverse, lively, second life, twinity, virtual worlds, web 3.d

Why use Intraworlds (Corporate Virtual Worlds)?

2008-07-08T13:54:54-07:00

When I first wrote about Corporate Virtual Worlds last week, I forgot the most important side of the topic: The 'Why question'? Or in a little more words: "Why use a relatively demanding technology like virtual worlds for the typical tasks for which an intranet usually is applied to? Ain't this just another new play toy, costing a lot more but with little or no advantages beyond traditional 2D applications - besides a certain sexy-ness?"

Certainly not. The MPK20 team at Sun Microsystems came up with a good justification a few months ago when they published some info about their project. MPK20 is an intraworld, a corporate virtual world, that was launched in 2007. It is based on Sun's virtual worlds toolkit Project Wonderland, and it is extremely interesting, to see, how the team is "selling" the idea of an intraworld (which Sun calls Virtual Workplace).

While it might be possible to build a 2D tool with functionality similar to MPK20, the spacial layout of the 3D world [...] provides strong cognitive cues that enhance collaboration. [...] the juxtapostion of avatars in the world [...] allows people to intuit who they can talk to at any given time. The 3D space provides a natural way to organize multiple, simultaneous conversations. [...] the arrangement of the objects within the space provides conversational context. If other avatars are gathering near the entrance to a virtual conference room, it is a good guess that they are about to attend a meeting in that space. It is then natural to talk to those people about the content or timing of the meeting, just as you would if attending a physical meeting. In terms of data sharing, looking at objects together is a natural activity. With the 3D spacial cues, each person can get an immediate sense of what the other collaborators can and cannot see.

Makes sense, doesn't it?

In other words: once you get used to the new metaphor (or have un-learned the implausibe 2D ones), intraworlds offer a much more intuitive environment to meet people and to collaborate and cooperate with them. It is certainly not "better" to watch a Powerpoint presentation in a virtual world. But, if I want to present these slides to a bunch of people, discuss them with these people, rework the ideas etc. a virtual world it definitely preferable to a conference call, a video or web conference. Our brain is deeply wired to recognize and act on spatial clues - especially when interacting with other people. It is about proximity and distance. It is relevant where someone else is located, if we are standing close or apart, if we are moving nearer or farther away.

Additionally, a 3D world lends itself very naturally to the spatial display of quantitative information or of complex systems and their relationships. This can be done in a web page, too, of course. But, again, a 3D world is a much more intuitive environment to display such a 3D visualization, to view it from different angles - and, to discuss it with others, of course.

Technorati Tags: 3d web, intraworld, metaverse, second life, virtual worlds, web 3.d

Wozu sind Intrawelten (Corporate Virtual Worlds) gut?

2008-07-08T02:26:48-07:00

Als ich letzte Woche das erste Mal kurz über Intrawelten (Corporate Virtual Worlds) schrieb, habe ich einen wichtigen Punkt ganz vergessen: "Warum?" Oder, mit etwas mehr Worten: "Warum überhauot eine relativ aufwendige Technologie wie diese für die typischen Aufgaben eines Intranets einsetzen? Ist das nicht nur ein neues Spielzeug, teure aber mit wenig tatsächlichem Zusatznutzen gegenüber den bewährten 2D-Lösungen?"

Sicherlich nicht! Für eine gute Begründung der Vorteile muss ich gar nicht einmal lange grübeln. Da MPK20-Team bei Sun Microsystems hat eine recht schöne Vorteilsargumentation anläßlich der Vorstellung ihres Projekts ins Web gestellt. MPK20 ist eine Intrawelt, die schon in 2007 gelaunchet wurde. Sie basiert auf Suns Toolkit für virtuelle Welten, Project Wonderland (auch mit Weblog) und es ist interessant zu sehen, wie das MPK20-Team die zugrundeliegenden Prinzipien einer Intrawelt verkauft (wobei Sun diese Plattform "Virtual Workplace" nennt).

Klingt plausibel, oder?

In anderen Worten: wenn man sich einmal an die neue Metapher gewöhnt hat (bzw. die umständlichen 2D-Metaphern verlernt hat), bieten Intrawelten eine viel intuitivere Umgebung für das Online-Arbeiten und speziell für die Zusammenarbeit und Austausch über Distanz.

Natürlich ist es erst einmal nicht 'besser', eine Powerpoint Präsentation in einer virtuellen Welt zu betrachten. Aber, wenn ich diese Präsentation einer Gruppe von Leuten zeigen, mit ihnen diskutieren und eventuell bearbeiten will ... bietet eine virtuelle 3D-Umgebung mit Avataren klare Vorteile gegenüber einer Telefon-, Video-, oder Web-Konferenz. Unser Gehirn ist einfach so verdrahtet, Informationen über räumliche Anordnungen sehr intuitiv zu nutzen - speziell, wenn es um die Interaktion mit Menschen geht. Es geht um Näher und Distanz im direkten und übertragenen Sinne. Es ist relevant, wer wo steht, ob mir jemand nah oder fern ist, wir uns annähren oder entfernen, wo sich Gruppen bilden.

Zudem bietet sich eine 3D-Welt auch "natürlich" für die 3D-Darstellung von Daten und komplexen Systemen an. Auch das kann man selbstverständlich auf einer Webseite machen - und macht das schon. Aber auch hier wieder ist eine 3D-Welt eine viel intuitivere Umgebung zur Darstellung, zur Betrachtung aus unterschiedlichen Blickwinkeln (einfach herumgehen) und natürlich zur Diskussion der Darstellung zusammen mit Anderen.

Technorati Tags: 3d web, intraworld, metaverse, second life, virtual worlds, web 3.d

The Intraworlds are Coming!

2008-07-04T01:22:03-07:00

In the first wave of the big virtual worlds hype (which was a Second Life hype, actually) the canonical application for this new technology was "marketing" - maybe because marketeers are the ones, which just love new ways to reach the minds of customers (and the costs for some experiments in Second Life did not mean much in relationship to typical marketing budgets). They were disappointed after a while, when they discovered the size of their target groups, which they could reach through Second Life ... and the anti-hype began.

At the same time, quietly and steadily, another group of people began to discover virtual worlds. And actually, it seems as if at least in the "corporate world" there is a lot more immediate potential for a real ROI with applications in the context of intranets and education/training. The big advantage of virtual worlds, immersion, the feeling of being together with other people, no matter, where they are in the physical world, is extremely interesting for these application areas, too. That is not just a virtual worlds fanboy's opinion. IBM, Gartner, Forrester or McKinsey do agree.

So, while we might have to wait a few years until the global Metaverse appears, there will certainly quite a few Intraworlds around in the near future. I would like to define an Intraworld as follows:

Intraworlds are to virtual worlds what intranets are to the web. An Intraworld is a virtual world, which is accessible to the employees of one company. The server side of such a platform usually runs in the company’s own data center and the users access the world with PCs connected to these server(s) through the company’s LAN (or through a VPN connection). Additionally, an Intraworld is optimized for similar purposes as an intranet: communication, information sharing and general collaboration. Typical applications are meetings, conferences, presentations and sometimes training.

In a similar way you can define 'Extraworlds', too, of course.

The first products, which are optimized for this market, are Sun's Project Wonderland and Qwaq by a company of the same name. Both are intended to help companies set up their own Intraworlds. Qwaq is more of a packaged service offering (see here), while Project Wonderland is a real "tool kit" in a more technical sense. You can build a virtual world with it, but you can not simply "log in to" Project Wonderland. Sun has used Project Wonderland to create their own demo intraworld, already, which it calls MPK20.

I will be looking into both products in some detail in the coming weeks.

Technorati Tags: 3d web, second life, virtual training, virtual worlds, web 3.d, intraworld

Die Intrawelten kommen!

2008-07-03T23:39:00-07:00

In der ersten Phase des "Virtuelle-Welten-Hypes" (der eigentlich ein Second Life Hype war) nahmen Viele an, dass das Hauptanwendungsgebiet "Marketing" wäre, vermutlich, weil Marketeers immer nach neuen Wegen suchen, ihre Kunden zu erreichen (und die typischen Kosten für ein Second Life Experiment in Relation zu typischen Kampagnen-Kosten nicht besonders hoch erschienen. Diese Leute waren sehr enttäuscht, als sie feststellten, welche Reichweite ihre Kampagnen in Second Life hatten (was keinen Experten verwunderte), und der Anti-Hype begann.

Zur gleichen Zeit entdeckte eine ganz andere Gruppe von Anwendern heimlich still und leise die virtuellen Welten. Und tatsächlich sieht es aus, als gäbe es zumindest in der "Corporate World" ein großes Potential für Projekte mit virtuellen Welten im Umfeld von Intranets, Aus-/Weiterbildung sowie Training. DER große Vorteil virtueller Welten, Immersion, das Gefühl - unabhängig von räumlicher Distanz - mit anderen Leuten zusammen zu sein, zu kommunizieren und zu arbeiten, ist für diesen Anwendungsbereich hochinteressant. Schließlich arbeiten in allen großen Unternehmen die Teams inzwischen standortübergreifend zusammen und Reisekosten und -Zeiten sind ein entsprechend großer Kostenblock. Nein, das ist nicht allein die Ansicht eines "Virtuelle-Welten-Fans. IBM, Gartner, Forrester und McKinsey stimmen zu.

Wir müssen vielleicht noch ein paar Jahre auf das Werden des globalen Metaversums warten. Bis dahin wird es aber sicher eine ganze Reihe "Intrawelten" geben. Wobei ich Intrawelten wie folgt formulieren würde:

Intrawelten stehen zu virtuellen Welten, wie Intranets zum World Wide Web. Eine Intrawelt ist eine virtuelle Welt, die nur den Mitarbeitern eines Unternehmens offen steht. Der Server einer solchen Plattform steht meist im Rechenzentrum der Firma und die Anwender erreichen diese Welt nur über das firmeneigene LAN (oder über eine VPN-Verbindung), Weiterhin ist eine Intrawelt optimiert für einige der wichtigsten eines Intranets. Kommunikation, Informationsaustaushc und Zusammenarbeit im Unternehmen. Typischen Applikationen sind Meetings, Konferenzen, Präsentatione, Diskussionen und manchmal auch Trainings.

Analog dazu könnte man natürlich auch 'Extrawelten' definieren.

Die ersten richtigen Produkte für diesen Markt sind Sun's Project Wonderland und Qwaq (der gleichnamigen Firma). Beide sind dafür gedacht, Unternehmen beim Aufsetzen eigenen Intrawelten zu unterstützen. Qwaq ist schon mehr ein fertiges Lösungsangebot (siehe auch hier), während Wonderland ein echtes "Tool Kit" ist. Man kann eine Intrawelt damit bauen aber nicht einfach in eine bestehende einloggen. Allerings hat Sun Project Wonderland schon dazu genutzt, eine Intrawelt für das eigene Unternehmen zu bauen, MPK20.

Ich werde mir beide Produkte in den kommenden Wochen mal etwas genauer ansehen.

Technorati Tags: 3d web, second life, virtual training, virtual worlds, web 3.d, intraworld