Issue Rehash: Second Life MUST be an enjoyable place for the Average Person
|
Cienna Samiam
Bah.
Join date: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,316
|
04-25-2005 17:23
It is important to note that 'the average person' per se is not an MMO player.
It is also important to note that Linden Labs has specifically created a playground that, from every possible perspective in-world, rewards those who create content over those who do not.
To my mind, this was/is intended to draw and support creative players.
There is no evidence that I have seen to indicate Linden Labs has a specific interest in drawing the casual MMO player or, for that matter, players who are not willing to take more than a consumer role in the metaverse.
This is a striking and unique thing in the genre, as most of the offerings specifically cater to a consumer market and handle exclusively the matter of content generation.
If anything, Linden Labs would be best served in drawing and retaining creative content generators by supporting them 'above and beyond' any other market segment, as it is this slice of the market that will guarantee them fresh content -- which will in turn draw those who are of the consumer mindset.
This does, however, suppose the consumer in the scenario is aware their place in the metaverse is more strictly bound to their willingness to consume and tied rather securely to the secondary market to do so.
The SL metaverse is a striking example of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. As some have pointed out -- there is a tendency to be 'bullish' on things that are demonstrated to be successful and from this, new and even more interesting things arise as content creators reach further and futher to gain notice.
In many ways, it is a very self-sustaining process so long as Linden Labs maintains their perspective on what constitutes the real 'draw' -- fresh content.
Tools such as the event calendar very desperately need an overhaul to permit not only tighter cataloging of available content, but the ability to allow residents to tailor their searches and decide for themselves what they do and do not wish to see.
The event calendar should strictly host social and entertainment *events*. There should be a seperate Business Calendar for malls, stores, etc. that would enable them to operate in typical business fashion (i.e., grand openings, sales, etc.).
Both should possess tighter structure and rulesets for validation of input to maintain quality of information to the betterment of all.
I agree with the poster who states there is a need to increase avatar maximums per sim.
Currently, most sims are unable to support any level of popularity. The existing sim max of 40 is well below what would be considered 'minimum draw' anywhere else. With as many Sims as exist in the metaverse, the number of avatars maximum per Sim should more accurately reflect a median percentage of the whole. (e.g., If 100,000 avatars and 1000 sims, then any one sim should be able to hold .1% of the population [100, in this example], etc.)
Add to this that social and networking tools are in need of expansion and modification to more closer meet the needs of those who use them. 'Groups' in general serve entirely too many purposes, even though the types of associations are often similar. My personal take is that 'groups' should be business oriented and other types of organizations should be formed with tools tailored specifically to their needs -- 'cooperatives' who share resources, or 'clubs' who meet and do things together, etc.
Finally, having arrived after the support of the club industry ended, and in full knowledge of all the disgruntlement caused thereby, I do think some form of consistant and persistant support of those who regularly contribute content to the world for the enjoyment of all is needed.
From all accounts outside the strictly philanthropic, the primary motivator to create content was the promise of achieveing enough success with the populace to earn stipend from Linden which in turn supported expansion and competition in cater to the consumers within the metaverse.
With the end of the stipend and the introduction of 'traffic/dwell', it has ceased being about quality in service and moved to somewhat of a cattle-chute mentality. Many clubs have closed, others struggle just to draw enough of the consumer market to keep their doors open... this is not as it should be in a world where Linden profits more than all of us from the content being created.
Second Life doesn't have to cater to the 'average person' to succeed. They need only reaffirm their commitment to those who insure the 'average person' has something to enjoy and pursue when they get here.
_____________________
Just remember, they only care about you when you're buying sims.
|
Cienna Samiam
Bah.
Join date: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,316
|
04-25-2005 17:29
From: Buster Peel I'm not sure which 'issue' you mean. I stand by my assessment that SL must grow substantially from its current size in terms of number of paying customers.
Being "on track" is not the same thing as having reached a sustainable level of business. All growing businesses must consider that if they focus on too narrow a market, they will run out of new customers.
I did not say that I think there is a current defficiency of some sort. Only that growth is necessary, and that a broader appeal is needed to achieve that.
I would also wager that Phillip & co are not striving for adequacy. Reaching a broader audience *IS* in their game plan. Bet on that.
Buster You wrote: From: Buster Peel But SL does need to appeal to a braod constituency in order to grow enough to justify its existence. There isn't enough money in it at its current size to run a business like Linden Labs for very long. It must grow in order to survive. In order to grow, it must appeal to a large audience. SL does not need a broader appeal to justify its existance. They have already done so, and the reality that they are, indeed, still here and showing no signs of losing ground demonstrates this handily. You do not have the knowledge to state 'there isn't enough money at its current size to run for long' (sic). This too, is a completely unsupported assumption. The statement that 'they must grow to survive' is equally an assumption. There are a number of MMO offerings that maintain a very respectible P&L with no growth whatever. You have not demonstrated a 'need to grow' outside your belief that only exponential growth equates with success. Finally, you assume that 'in order to grow' SL 'must appeal to a broader audience'. This too, is an unsupported assumption. It is very, very probable that SL can grow at a rate of .5% a year strictly by continuing to appeal to the audience it always has -- the young, white-collar and IT professional, 22-35, making $30,000+ per year, and with an interest in using their technical background to further their virtual enjoyment. Let me know if you need further clarification on why I say you're operating on pure assumption... assumption that has handily been refuted by Andrew Linden only today.
_____________________
Just remember, they only care about you when you're buying sims.
|
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
|
04-25-2005 17:30
From: Elle Pollack The issue with the event calander and ratings system changes isn't so much that they weren't broken and didn't need changing. It's that LL's changes didn't fix them. The event calander is no different except it's needlessly harder to get events posted. The clogged-up-ness people complain about is still there. The ratings changes weren't a complete "fix" (and I can quote Robin Linden on that), the effect could be likened to putting ice on a broken limb: helps the pain and swelling but doesn't really heal it. Not every change is good progress.
"50,000,000 other events" copying someone else's winning fomula isn't a symptom of a broken event system, it's a symptom of the human race. No change made to SL is going to change the human nature of its inhabitants en masse. People would rather follow than innovate. People's complaints about Tringo/Bingo, malls (which I sometimes like) and clubs (which I don't like but don't care about) would presist even if there were *no* event calander, I'd be willing to bet.
I've seen games go stagnent before and it's not pretty. However, I don't think SL is facing stagnation of any sort, because there *are* innovators, and plenty of them. What can be done is to give them what they need to innovate without many hastles...which perhaps not so ironicly are the same things that would benifit the average person. That includes not restricting the event calander, bringing in better search tools to more easily find people/events/objects/places/groups, better group and land tools, collaberative tools (which could include contract systems and conflict resolutions), more AVs in a sim, more bugfixing, etc. I'm not saying the changes weren't problematic. I'll be the first to admit they were. But that doesn't mean we should hide and scream "Change it back! Change it back!". That doesn't get us anywhere.
_____________________
I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me: I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offenses at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves, all; believe none of us.
|
Buster Peel
Spat the dummy.
Join date: 7 Feb 2005
Posts: 1,242
|
04-25-2005 17:38
From: Cienna Samiam Let me know if you need further clarification on why I say you're operating on pure assumption... assumption that has handily been refuted by Andrew Linden only today. I would prefer to use the word "assessment" over "assumption". I make my assessment based on readily available information, and on personal business experience. Of course you can make your own assessment, everyone is entitled to an opinion. I've provided mine. I think its also very clear that Linden *DOES WANT* to appeal to a broader audience. Consider this post by Andrew Linden in the "move past the techie wikki" thread: From: Andrew Linden As far as I know the concept of a "techi-wiki" category of SL residents has not been introduced in LL design meetings, formal or informal. I foresee no need to ever bring it up -- it appears overcomplicated and my instinct is to discard it based on some mutant variation of Occam's Razor. Therefore IMHO the question as to whether the "techi-wiki" is "holding SL back" is based on a false premise. The LL model of the SL population and how it would grow was always much simpler. From the start the theory was that SL would become an increasingly interesting place as its population grew. In the beginning would be the "early adopters" who were excited about virtual reality in general. Eventually some artists and programmers would find the feature set complete enough to express their creativity and these "content creators" would build stuff. As the content became more interesting some casual explorers would find the content compelling and would buy some of it -- "consumers". A population of consumers would provide a market for those content creators that wanted to make real money -- ta-da, a market is born that only gets more interesting as it grows. Every person on Earth has some threshold of features/content at which point they will find SL useful and/or interesting enough to login. As SL grows more and more people will fall into the subset whose threshold has been passed. The grand plan is to push the feature set of SL and allow the population to expand until nearly everyone's threshold has been passed. It was always the intention to start SL small and let it grow. SL 1.0 was not launched ready for 1 million residents, and it is still not ready for that many. SL is growing at a very healthy rate. In fact, LL's main challenge is to develop the platform fast enough that SL's architecture can handle the next season's population. At the moment don't see many reasons to speed up the growth rate -- if SL were to "tip" and suddenly become the next big thing such that hoards of people were joining up, then LL would be forced to throttle new accounts until SL's fundamental system was more ready. So, even if there were some minority of residents that were "holding SL back" then I might not be inclined at the moment to ask them to let go. (Taking a liberty quoting from another thread, but the thread is the same subject.) Andrew was addressing the specific wording of the other thread heading, but in the process, he clearly lays out the grand plan. Even if you do not share my assessment that SL must grow in order to survive, at least accept that Linden Labs actually *wants* to appeal to a broader audience. Buster
|
Prokofy Neva
Virtualtor
Join date: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 3,698
|
04-25-2005 17:43
From: someone It is also important to note that Linden Labs has specifically created a playground that, from every possible perspective in-world, rewards those who create content over those who do not. Not true. It also rewards those who buy land on the auction and resell it and manage it in various ways -- even as it hobbles them in some ways, too. There is no evidence that I have seen to indicate Linden Labs has a specific interest in drawing the casual MMO player or, for that matter, players who are not willing to take more than a consumer role in the metaverse. ? Why do they have a last name Thereian? And it won't be long before they have a last name Tso. They have an open page on the Internet with a free trial. It's open to anybody. You don't need to wear the special FIC ring to get in the game -- that only comes later LOL. From: someone This is a striking and unique thing in the genre, as most of the offerings specifically cater to a consumer market and handle exclusively the matter of content generation. Yes, but surely there can be a more granulated and diverse notion of a world than "content creators" and "consumers" because information, services, management, etc. are all areas of endeavour that are productive and help the game grow and don't fit into the rigid scheme of "content" and "consumption". From: someone If anything, Linden Labs would be best served in drawing and retaining creative content generators by supporting them 'above and beyond' any other market segment, as it is this slice of the market that will guarantee them fresh content -- which will in turn draw those who are of the consumer mindset. They did that, and it now constitutes a hobble to the game. From: someone This does, however, suppose the consumer in the scenario is aware their place in the metaverse is more strictly bound to their willingness to consume and tied rather securely to the secondary market to do so.
Cienna, why does the consumer have to "know their place". Why do they need to be "strictly bound" and hog-tied to their consumption? It's actually not so rigid. Even the lowliest newbie makes an outfit in "appearance" and creates -- and sometimes sells it for $10. Content creators sell to each other and become consumers one minute and creators the next. The point is to make the world diverse. In many ways, it is a very self-sustaining process so long as Linden Labs maintains their perspective on what constitutes the real 'draw' -- fresh content. Fresh content alone -- the bane of other games was that it was lacking -- is still not enough. People need to have a comfort level, a "stickiness". Content alone will not placate them. There are other, sometimes vague ideals -- community, relationships, purpose -- that static content churned out by indifferent or even cynical content kings will not fullfill. From: someone Tools such as the event calendar very desperately need an overhaul to permit not only tighter cataloging of available content, but the ability to allow residents to tailor their searches and decide for themselves what they do and do not wish to see.
The event calendar should strictly host social and entertainment *events*. There should be a seperate Business Calendar for malls, stores, etc. that would enable them to operate in typical business fashion (i.e., grand openings, sales, etc.). It's good to see you agreeing with my idea, which I put out first, which you don't credit, because to do so would somehow put a pea in my pot which you wouldn't want to do, but I'm happy to let my ideas loose not for attribution From: someone Both should possess tigher structure and rulesets for validation of input to maintain quality of information to the betterment of all. Oops, no, we don't agree. Players should tag and upload content to shoppers and not be hog-tied to "rulesets" or the need to hire "better" writers. Let it go, Cienna. The people want their Tringo. Let them. From: someone Add to this that social and networking tools are in need of expansion and modification to more closer meet the needs of those who use them. 'Groups' in general serve entirely too many purposes, even though the types of associations are often similar. My personal take is that 'groups' should be business oriented and other types of organizations should be formed with tools tailored specifically to their needs -- 'cooperatives' who share resources, or 'clubs' who meet and do things together, etc. Yes, I've been saying that all over in many threads. I'm glad we agree. There is no need to kill off the "business" groups, there can be different types of groups. But what Cubey and others, including myself, have suggested is to create a list of functions rather than a list of group types or list of group role types. Then the list of functions is mixed and matched through toggles to generate different styles -- everything from monarch and serfs to CEO and board of trustees to dom and subs to hippies all equal in their commune to club managers all of whom manage events, some with different levels or functions. From: someone With the end of the stipend and the introduction of 'traffic/dwell', it has ceased being about quality in service and moved to somewhat of a cattle-chute mentality. Many clubs have closed, others struggle just to draw enough of the consumer market to keep their doors open... this is not as it should be in a world where Linden profits more than all of us from the content being created. I disagree that Lindens should go on giving events grants to people for holding sexay avatar costumes. The creators of the sexay avatar skins should sponsor their own contests and events.
_____________________
Rent stalls and walls for $25-$50/week 25-50 prims from Ravenglass Rentals, the mall alternative.
|
Chip Midnight
ate my baby!
Join date: 1 May 2003
Posts: 10,231
|
04-25-2005 17:54
Wow, Prok, you know I can totally relate! I used to play checkers and then someone told me about this game called chess. They offered to let me come try it. Well when I got there and played it, it wasn't like checkers at all! It was so hard! All the pieces moved in different ways and no one would king my pieces! Damn, what a poorly designed game. When I told them that they should make it more like checkers they just laughed at me. I mean it's obvious that checkers is what they intended to make. The board even has the same number of squares on it!! They're clearly a bunch of elitist checker-haters and I intend to stay there and rant about the error of their ways because it's an important social issue and someone has to do it. I mean, who will look out for the checkers players trying to play chess if not for me?!
_____________________
 My other hobby: www.live365.com/stations/chip_midnight
|
Lianne Marten
Cheese Baron
Join date: 6 May 2004
Posts: 2,192
|
04-25-2005 18:07
From: Prokofy Neva ? Why do they have a last name Thereian? And it won't be long before they have a last name Tso. They have an open page on the Internet with a free trial. It's open to anybody. You don't need to wear the special FIC ring to get in the game -- that only comes later LOL. Dibs on "General Tso."
|
Nolan Nash
Frischer Frosch
Join date: 15 May 2003
Posts: 7,141
|
04-25-2005 18:13
From: Chip Midnight Wow, Prok, you know I can totally relate! I used to play checkers and then someone told me about this game called chess. They offered to let me come try it. Well when I got there and played it, it wasn't like checkers at all! It was so hard! All the pieces moved in different ways and no one would king my pieces! Damn, what a poorly designed game. When I told them that they should make it more like checkers they just laughed at me. I mean it's obvious that checkers is what they intended to make. The board even has the same number of squares on it!! They're clearly a bunch of elitist checker-haters and I intend to stay there and rant about the error of their ways because it's an important social issue and someone has to do it. I mean, who will look out for the checkers players trying to play chess if not for me?! Nice analogy Chip. The endless droning on about TSO, engineered "job" levels, and the like is starting to become just so much background noise. Don't get me wrong - more group ranking options=good, however, demanding a portion of the populace conform to bureaucratic bloating=bad. We don't need company towns with "jobs" pulled from thin air. We don't need litter-prim-picker-uppers in the parks and malls. We do need to preserve our right to self-determination.
_____________________
“Time's fun when you're having flies.” ~Kermit
|
blaze Spinnaker
1/2 Serious
Join date: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 5,898
|
04-25-2005 18:28
The analogy is poor.
The rules of chess are not in flux. There is no room for debate.
If we were discussing the rules of a new game we were thinking of calling chesseckers, for example, then it would be a useful analogy.
However, that analogy would quickly show that bringing the strengths of chess and checkers together isn't such a bad thing.
_____________________
Taken from The last paragraph on pg. 16 of Cory Ondrejka's paper " Changing Realities: User Creation, Communication, and Innovation in Digital Worlds : " User-created content takes the idea of leveraging player opinions a step further by allowing them to effectively prototype new ideas and features. Developers can then measure which new concepts most improve the products and incorporate them into the game in future patches."
|
Chip Midnight
ate my baby!
Join date: 1 May 2003
Posts: 10,231
|
04-25-2005 18:46
Yes, SL is still in development. That doesn't change the fact that it's not TSO, was never intended to be TSO, and will never be TSO. It also doesn't change the fact that comparing a world with completely user created content that incorporates the tools necessary to create that content into the UI with a closed system like TSO or any other MMO is like comparing chess to checkers.
_____________________
 My other hobby: www.live365.com/stations/chip_midnight
|
Nolan Nash
Frischer Frosch
Join date: 15 May 2003
Posts: 7,141
|
04-25-2005 18:52
Here we go again with wise Father Blaze, he'll set us straight everytime. You can analyze it all you want, whether the games are dynamic or static has no bearing on the point being made. The point being, that making the step up to a more complex platform and then trying to change the gameplay, is, self-centered, presumptuous, and plain bad form, whether it has hard rules or not. SL's ruleset, i.e., the TOS and CS, are not that dynamic, by the way. Yes, there are minor changes, additions, and clarifications from time to time, but they certainly aren't in "flux". Whatever perceived technicality you can find to deflect other's points, I suppose.
_____________________
“Time's fun when you're having flies.” ~Kermit
|
Cienna Samiam
Bah.
Join date: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,316
|
04-25-2005 18:58
From: Prokofy Neva blather I didn't read beyond the first 'ahHA ahHA I said it first! Actually, if you ever bothered to actually show up and participate in the in-world discussions, you would know every idea in that post of mine was introduced to LL myself, without ever knowing you as much as breathed it... you see, contrary to what you obviously believe, I don't read most of your self-inflated bullshit and anything you might have said that would constitute a good idea would have been floating in too much crap to be recognized. I doubt seriously anyone would ever recognize a good idea from you, fella, because you can't deliver an idea without adding your own special blend of psychosis to it. So like... don't flatter yourself, m'kay?
_____________________
Just remember, they only care about you when you're buying sims.
|
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
|
04-25-2005 19:15
From: blaze Spinnaker The analogy is poor.
The rules of chess are not in flux. There is no room for debate.
If we were discussing the rules of a new game we were thinking of calling chesseckers, for example, then it would be a useful analogy.
However, that analogy would quickly show that bringing the strengths of chess and checkers together isn't such a bad thing. Actually, the rules of chess are constantly in flux. It's just a very very slow flux. The same is true of almost every board game. The chess you play today is not exactly the same game it was when it was first developed, and in 1000 years the game will be a little different still. And more changes have been tried that you will never hear about because they didn't turn out to be utlimatly advantageous and didn't catch on widely or were dropped alltogether. It's just that it doesn't change much, because it's fundamentaly a very simple formula with little basic need for change.
_____________________
I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me: I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offenses at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves, all; believe none of us.
|
Jeffrey Gomez
Cubed™
Join date: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 3,522
|
04-25-2005 22:15
From: Cienna Samiam *A LOT of good arguments that are too large in volume to post*
From all accounts outside the strictly philanthropic, the primary motivator to create content was the promise of achieveing enough success with the populace to earn stipend from Linden which in turn supported expansion and competition in cater to the consumers within the metaverse.
With the end of the stipend and the introduction of 'traffic/dwell', it has ceased being about quality in service and moved to somewhat of a cattle-chute mentality. Many clubs have closed, others struggle just to draw enough of the consumer market to keep their doors open... this is not as it should be in a world where Linden profits more than all of us from the content being created.
Second Life doesn't have to cater to the 'average person' to succeed. They need only reaffirm their commitment to those who insure the 'average person' has something to enjoy and pursue when they get here. This is such a good summation that I am personally in awe, Cienna. It is exactly what I wanted to get at, and more. That said, do you have any suggestions of what Linden Labs should do to reach these ends? Or, if I missed them earlier in this thread (as it has quickly become too voluminous for me to read it all), can you add them here? ----- As to the rules of Chess, they (as with many things) are in a constant state of flux. Other things in flux include: Languages, the human species, and even the Bible. All of these things are constantly in motion as living issues, and change as the perceptions/needs of people change. The fact they are not more rapidly changing only attests to their steadfast nature, and I'm not even a Christian saying that. Here is a perfect example.And so is Second Life. The fact it is in a more rapid state of flux proves it is still only in its infancy.
_____________________
---
|
blaze Spinnaker
1/2 Serious
Join date: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 5,898
|
04-25-2005 22:38
From: someone Actually, the rules of chess are constantly in flux. It's just a very very slow flux. The same is true of almost every board game. The chess you play today is not exactly the same game it was when it was first developed, and in 1000 years the game will be a little different still. And more changes have been tried that you will never hear about because they didn't turn out to be utlimatly advantageous and didn't catch on widely or were dropped alltogether. It's just that it doesn't change much, because it's fundamentaly a very simple formula with little basic need for change.
I tell you what, I'll play you a game of chess and we determine who is right based on that.
_____________________
Taken from The last paragraph on pg. 16 of Cory Ondrejka's paper " Changing Realities: User Creation, Communication, and Innovation in Digital Worlds : " User-created content takes the idea of leveraging player opinions a step further by allowing them to effectively prototype new ideas and features. Developers can then measure which new concepts most improve the products and incorporate them into the game in future patches."
|
Jeffrey Gomez
Cubed™
Join date: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 3,522
|
04-25-2005 22:46
Do I get to use en passant? *brushes off chess trophy from years ago* Actually, I'm off my game, so we'll just say you won that "game" instead. M'kay?  Edit: Whoopsie! Wrong quote/person. Works, though. 
_____________________
---
|
blaze Spinnaker
1/2 Serious
Join date: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 5,898
|
04-25-2005 22:47
Yes, rules have changed. But there is a different between every few 100 years and every few days.
I don't know if Xylor's board can do en passant. One problem with Xylor's board is that you can castle in check.
I played someone and they castled in check and it really freaked me out.
Won the game, though, of course.
_____________________
Taken from The last paragraph on pg. 16 of Cory Ondrejka's paper " Changing Realities: User Creation, Communication, and Innovation in Digital Worlds : " User-created content takes the idea of leveraging player opinions a step further by allowing them to effectively prototype new ideas and features. Developers can then measure which new concepts most improve the products and incorporate them into the game in future patches."
|
Hiro Pendragon
bye bye f0rums!
Join date: 22 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,905
|
04-25-2005 22:49
You know, I had a different thought entirely.
What is "the average person"? If we are presumed to target some audience, than we must identify the audience.
The thing is, the audience we have identified is all over the world... different cultures, which anyone who's played more than a month of SL will realize is true.
So what's the average? There isn't. The people who come to SL, and the people we want to come to SL, are too diverse to ever take any sort of average from.
So how do we gauge the game? Ability. Freedom. And, eventually LL will open source it so that independants can make custom browsers, tools, etc to make it as easy or advanced to use as possible.
We're now left with an interim problem - what do we do in the meantime?
Well, Prok& Co. longwidednly raise a point, which is we could use more consumers that don't want or care to use building tools unless they have to.
Can we make the GUI an API? If not, can LL make a dumbed down browser?
I'm assuming the kiddie grid will have a simplified UI ... maybe the most straightforward solution to helping SL expand to more non-tekky consumers is to lighten up the front end? I mean, I downloaded Firefox and love the fact that it's way less cluttered than Netscape or IE.
Or what about the Inventory? We have everyone asking for an inventory that's easier to use... that seems like an obvious way to make SL more accessable.
_____________________
Hiro Pendragon ------------------ http://www.involve3d.com - Involve - Metaverse / Emerging Media Studio
Visit my SL blog: http://secondtense.blogspot.com
|
Jeffrey Gomez
Cubed™
Join date: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 3,522
|
04-25-2005 22:50
Chess is an old game, but it does serve a valid point - once something works, and works well, it can endure for generations upon generations with very little change. En Passant is a perfect example of one such minor revision.
Can we resume the original topic now?
_____________________
---
|
Jeffrey Gomez
Cubed™
Join date: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 3,522
|
04-25-2005 23:51
From: Hiro Pendragon What is "the average person"? If we are presumed to target some audience, than we must identify the audience.
The thing is, the audience we have identified is all over the world... different cultures, which anyone who's played more than a month of SL will realize is true.
So what's the average? There isn't. The people who come to SL, and the people we want to come to SL, are too diverse to ever take any sort of average from. Correct. This is why some of my earlier responses actually are written to the effect of "average and varying degrees above or below that" to raise this point. From: Hiro Pendragon I'm assuming the kiddie grid will have a simplified UI ... maybe the most straightforward solution to helping SL expand to more non-tekky consumers is to lighten up the front end? I mean, I downloaded Firefox and love the fact that it's way less cluttered than Netscape or IE.
Or what about the Inventory? We have everyone asking for an inventory that's easier to use... that seems like an obvious way to make SL more accessable. I think the answer is much more simple. Second Life needs a system that better caters to a user's level of ability. This means that, instead of placing restrictions on content, content should be focused into a coherent beam for the user and creator alike to access in whichever way they please. "What does this mean?" you might ask: 1) Fewer restrictions on content publication, particularly where land sales and events are concerned.
2) Better filtering to compensate for this.
3) Stronger infrastructure for events. As Robin pointed out I believe, the current event system is built for roughly 1/4 of where the Second Life population is now. This must change. I feel the current restrictions are for the short term, and that they are "working on it."
4) More venus for content distribution. How about in-world mailing lists? Stock tickers? Stronger product searching? These are not new ideas, and by and large we can pick up this torch at the resident level.
5) Second Life itself should seriously consider the success of Google when considering in-world commerce and information.
6) More gradient UI and interface options. Period.Anyway, that's my current $0.02.
_____________________
---
|
Hiro Pendragon
bye bye f0rums!
Join date: 22 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,905
|
04-26-2005 00:06
From: Jeffrey Gomez
1) Fewer restrictions on content publication, particularly where land sales and events are concerned. 2) Better filtering to compensate for this. 3) Stronger infrastructure for events. As Robin pointed out I believe, the current event system is built for roughly 1/4 of where the Second Life population is now. This must change. I feel the current restrictions are for the short term, and that they are "working on it." 4) More venus for content distribution. How about in-world mailing lists? Stock tickers? Stronger product searching? These are not new ideas, and by and large we can pick up this torch at the resident level. 5) Second Life itself should seriously consider the success of Google when considering in-world commerce and information. 6) More gradient UI and interface options. Period. Anyway, that's my current $0.02.
1 & 3) -- "they are working on it" heh. 2,4,5) Have you heard about my Scoogle project? I have a search engine designed for SL... trying to clear my plate of current issues so I can start coding. 6) Agreed.
_____________________
Hiro Pendragon ------------------ http://www.involve3d.com - Involve - Metaverse / Emerging Media Studio
Visit my SL blog: http://secondtense.blogspot.com
|
Cocoanut Koala
Coco's Cottages
Join date: 7 Feb 2005
Posts: 7,903
|
04-26-2005 04:07
*Wonders again what a GUI and an API are. And a gradient UI.*
coco
|
Elle Pollack
Takes internets seriously
Join date: 12 Oct 2004
Posts: 796
|
04-26-2005 08:28
From: Cocoanut Koala *Wonders again what a GUI and an API are. And a gradient UI.*
coco GUI: Graphical User Interface. The buttons and menus, etc. API: application programming interface. Allows users and other programs to hook into the code of an existing program and make cool stuff that uses it, though without revealing all the source code. Dunno what a gradient user interface it.
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
04-26-2005 08:44
As far as traffic Dwell/ Paying for events , etc. >
I think an eventual goal should be making busineses profitable enough to their owners that they need no Linden subsidies.
The economy will be better if Lindens dont need to instill money into the system to spur content creation.
Of course that may not be something that is reasonable at the present time ..
But youd hope someday it would be.
|
Cienna Samiam
Bah.
Join date: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,316
|
04-26-2005 09:42
From: Jeffrey Gomez This is such a good summation that I am personally in awe, Cienna. It is exactly what I wanted to get at, and more.
That said, do you have any suggestions of what Linden Labs should do to reach these ends? Or, if I missed them earlier in this thread (as it has quickly become too voluminous for me to read it all), can you add them here? I keep a notebook near my computer and as I think of things, jot them down. Then, when there is a Linden Discussion, I go and mention them. Some get interest, some do not, but most all have been heard... which is a refreshing change from previous places I've been in the market. 
_____________________
Just remember, they only care about you when you're buying sims.
|