Could Lindens take a peek in here plz!

I live to fly!

I disagree with just about everything in this thread.

I LOVE to fly….

I HATE cities…..

I LOVE the freedom to come and go as I please….

I HATE the idea of a goals based system…..

If you want goals, play TSO….

If you want adventure, play Everquest…

If you want hack and slash, play Diablo…

Don’t force me to do something I have no desire to do. Let me live in peace in my cottage by the sea, fly around and look for new buildings and people, built when I want, visit when I want, or do nothing when I want.

The only advantage I have seen to any of the suggestions so far, is so that those who have (scripters, builders, texturers) can have more, buy forcing the have nots to buy their cars, boats, planes, jetpacks, flying carpets, whatevers, just to survive in the world.


-TK

The reason TSO sucks sooooo bad (yes I did play it) is because it has -no- goals. Zero. There is no reason to own a house, no reason to accumulate money. Everything you could do at your house you might as well do somewhere else. The game turned into a poorly designed chat room.

I just hope that doesn't happen to SL.

If flying were removed, I would instantly and completely lose all interest in SL.

Reality sucks -
Kerstin

Since so many of us like flying so much (me included), I think it'd be a shame to put "energy limits" on it, as that would just make it a pain.

Like I said before, if the Lindens want to encourage variety in this world, I wouldn't be opposed to have a dedicated group of sims, preferably apart from the main world, where it's a no-fly zone, just so there would be something "different," as to encourage land-based transportation.

I never want to see a popular feature "swapped" for another...it should aways be added to what we have now, so that SL can appeal to a wider range of people when it does go gold.

Just my opinion, anyhow...

J

If you don't want people flying on your land, make it "no fly". If you want to make a large no-fly area, buy a lot of land, or team with like-minded people. Otherwise you're just trying to impose your preferences on other people and calling it "policy".

More freedom and abilities == good.

As for the other points N.Nash originally raised, I disagree with almost all of them but agree that land taxes and costs could be further tweaked to encourage close building.

Instead of building cities around the use of cars why not build them around flying. Your letting RL limit what you can do here if you think something is missing because people don't have to use some sort of transit system to move around.
I like SL because it's not a MMORPg. I played Ac for alm,ost 3 years and got completly sick of it. I tired the AC2 beta and realized after only a couple of weeks that I would probably never play a MMORPG again.

Bp.. I hope that you are right

Great thread. Thanks, Nexus.

So it seems that the 'mostly supported by everyone' desires from this thread are:

1. In general, add some challenges that are structurally beyond 'mini-games' that cause the world to 'push back' on us all, and make achievement beyond building more obvious.

2. Create some simulators that are very expensive to live in, as a fun place to visit to see the works and capabilities of really established residents (I guess they'd have less lag too!).

3. Explore reducing the capability we have to fly (energy, speed, etc), so that the world seems larger when exploring, and travelling long distances is more rewarding.

4. Create really large areas in which flying is not allowed at all, and see how folks like that.

"Mostly supported by everyone"?

I think not.

To me, SL is most definitely not a game. SL is entertainment, yes, but it's not a game in the sense that it has a point.

"But Cate," you say, "if it had a point, then it would be a game! Games are fun! I like games!" Yes, that's true, but by imposing limits on what we could do, we would lose much of what makes SL so entertaining.

SL does not need goals any more than it needs a storyline. I think we need to compare SL less to MMORPGs and more to the cyberpunk vision of cyberspace. It's no secret that there are a number of Neal Stephenson fans around here.

Linden may disagree, but I see SL as something akin to the web -- the basis for almost infinite possibilities, but not technically an end unto itself.

There's no reason that a group of people couldn't get together and buy a sim to run as they see fit. In fact, I think that provisions should be made to allow greater freedom for projects like that.

Basing SL on reality helps us interact with the world better, as it's already familiar to us, but intentionally limiting our freedom means there's less to do. I enjoy SL for its nearly limitless potential and to escape from reality, not to be restricted by more rules. I realize that many people NEED some kind of purpose, but that doesn't apply to us all. If you like Everquest or TSO, play EQ or TSO.

The parts I DO agree with in this thread are mainly limited to the creation of large (multi-sim?) testbed zones to try out different types of server rules. So THAT much I agree with.

Catherine Omega

Thanks kate!

The larger vision of the shared space which connects people together in a new and very powerful way (which I think is the collective hymn of Stephenson, Gibson, Vinge, etc) is certainly a big goal for us too.

The challenge is that there must exist features and capabilities that entice a big crowd in our early stages. We need an audience for our antics, yes?

I completely agree (and it has been our feature strategy thusfar to do this) that all these 'global' restriction, etc, will be under user/collective control. Sometimes for the purpose of experimentation it may be easier to test something as a true global, but rest easy we will always find ways to make everything user-controlled.

Please do NOT include me in supporting the ideas expressed here.

It seems that most of these feature suggestions can be attained within the scope of the world already defined.

Like minded people can create a group, purchase land and create "no fly" zones, build a city, charter specific goals.

By the way, try spending some time in Tehama.
Experience for yourself how 2nd life can be with "limited" energy resources.

I agree with Catherine & Sinatra. I see no reason why areas can't be developed by interested parties for their own end goal.

Changing the way things are done as a whole will only push groups away. If you want to attract large groups then maybe existing groups with a specific agenda (cities, rpg, no fly, driving) should be supported in developing zones for specific purposes. Kind of like the themed community idea only surrounding actions rather than style.

Maybe some (sims or sim areas) can be like different countries and things done differently in different areas based on that population, with the lions share being open for people to just do what they please (like it is now).

I really think trying to change SL as a whole to be like this game or that is a big mistake. Why be like someone else? If you want to play that game, its already available to play... go play it.

Please don't include me either in the 'supporters'. The ideas proposed just kill my interest in SL, which is primarily the idea of a 3D environment that encompasses the needs and wants of virtually everyone.

Thanks -
Kerstin

I said it earlier in this thread, and I'll say it again....

Leave SL alone. Let individual groups control their own destiny. We don't need more "government" control.

If flying was to go away, so would I.


-TK

I think I've made my views clear above, but I wanted to add some thoughts on the subject of "goals".

Extremely limited games need artificial goals to extend gameplay. (Pratically) unlimited games allow players to create their own goals.

What I'm saying is in a game like EQ, on the day you join, you can not beat a level 12 dragon, you need to level up to a 5 level fighter (or whatever, I've never played EQ, sorry if this is condescending to EQers, but you catch my drift). This is an artificial goal, the growth of your _character_ is simulated by the game. If you could kill a level 12 dragon on your first day, get all the treasure and status and whatever, there would be no point in playing beyond the first day, hence, artificial goals.

In SL, everyone has equal potential. If I logged in to a new account today, in that account I could do anything I could do in a 3 month old or (possibly) 3 year old account (money permitting, but that's another issue). The point is, any leveling-up happens in you the player, not in some integer stat recorded in the server.

I think this, by the way, is why some players are so mad for money, beyond their needs. We've been conditioned by games to grab on to a concrete number and do whatever the game wants us to do to make that number go up. The implicit connection in every gamers mind is "number going up" == "winning".

The concept of an unlimited game is scary. It's like "well here I am in the world, what do I do now?" and "What do you mean? I did all this work, and I don't get to level up?" So new players need to be introduced and there need to be ways to engage them. But artificial externally imposed goals are not the way to do this (IMHO).

There should be a stat on the bottom of the screen: "score: " and there should be some areas that make your score go up, and some that make your score go down, there should be hidden areas that make your score go up a lot. Players with a score above a certian level should be able to set their land to "high scoring" so that it increases to score of visitors. There should also be a leaderboard section for score. This should be the only effect of score.

I had a reply all written out for this thread a couple days ago but did not post it because I thought many of the people in the thread had expressed my feelings better than I did.

Then Philip made a post that chilled my heart! I read words like "cause the world to 'push back' on us all", " reducing the capability we have to fly ", "large areas in which flying is not allowed at all" and gasped in dismay!

So obviously not posting earlier was the wrong thing to do...So to all you lurkers, post your opinions! Linden policy is busily taking shape and whatever your opinions are, now is the time to speak.

Anyway to make clear where my opinions are I present the previously scheduled post....

I love the freedom to do what I want and I am not interested in seeing goal-based systems like popular MMPORGs use implemented here. There are plenty of places to have that type of gaming experience, why does SL have to become one more?

However, I think introducing zones that offer varied playing expereinces is a wonderful idea. So Nash's vision is a cool one and sounds fun, but not for all of SL. The restrictions on flying and the development of transportation would be cool for a designated area. Like Josh said, let's add to the experience, not take away.

And if there are special zones that require transportation, then for the people traveling in them, they will respond to the need by purchasing access to whatever planes, trains, automobiles are available. If this place is an attraction for residents, then it will stimulate the economy.

That's what's so special about SL, it's not responding to artificial goals imposed by developers, but to the genuine interests of the residents. Unfortunately, we don't always respond the way people want us too. Don't buy what they think we should. Don't handle money according to their favorite economic model.

Instead of creating a bunch of limitations to force residents to do what some of us think is best, how about adapting to the style of play that is actually going on in SL. And responding to the needs we already exhibit.

<rant>Snap out of the pre-programmed content style of entertainment. You can enjoy yourself without someone handing you a ready-made goal. We do not have to be lever-pulling, pellet-munching guinea pigs in the lab of someone else's agenda. That disorienting feeling you are experiencing is freedom. You have been disconnected from the Matrix. It's ok to be not sure what to do next...that's the quiet time into which ideas come. If you are constantly reacting to the environment, you never get a chance to be proactive. It's still growing. Give it a chance. It's Beta!</rant>

Whew, feel better. I can be sweetness and light again.

Ok here it goes...

Bel - OMG very well said!!! Nice and polite supporting my dream! (I love you!!!) You are a prim example on posting!

Wed - leveling up.... nah I don't want that... that's the last thing I want! But I see what you mean in that restircting would mean kind of a lvl up.

Button - damn I hope that you a right on that city thing!!!

Phil - bang on the mark, on that marking the world bigger idea. I forgot who posted this.... but the whole walking 3 hours to a certain point... nah... do like in THERE summon your buddies to where you are! Exploring is fun!!! P.S. thx for the "good post" comment. But if you guys are willing to try it... could we get vehicles and optimized servers before? Because I KNOW that if it's tried now ppl will simply get pissed at the lag and mobility

For all you non supporters... would'nt you like to see the world bigger? and have farther unexplored areas. so that you could get a group of ppl and say... come on let's go to this cool beach that BBC told us about! Then set a land mark an being able to tele there anytime? (I know it sounds like THERE), but SL has a HUGE potentiel, and i will never play THERE over SL... btw.

One more for you NON supporters... what in your view could make SL better (and I don't want to hear LAG)

It's not that I don't support your ideas. I think any idea that has a remote chance of improving our environment is good. However, we shouldn't eliminate any of the things we enjoy now, add to them.

Like Bel said.......However, I think introducing zones that offer varied playing expereinces is a wonderful idea. So Nash's vision is a cool one and sounds fun, but not for all of SL. The restrictions on flying and the development of transportation would be cool for a designated area. Like Josh said, let's add to the experience, not take away.


-TK

------------------
"wouldn't you like to see the world bigger? and have farther unexplored areas"?
------------------

Yes, and that is exactly what has been happening since I joined. I expect it will continue to grow as more people come in and more sims are created.

---------------------
"what in your view could make SL better"
---------------------

SL keeps getting better all of the time. Every time someone creates something fantastic, introduces a new script, game or event.

I would like the ability to "lathe" shape objects.

btw, vehicles would be great.

That's a great suggestion. Hope it doesnt get lost in here

Bel, Wednesday = So well said that I wouldnt dream on adding to it.

I am fully in the NON-supporters camp.

Nexus.

Yes I want the game bigger (and bigger and Bigger and BIGGER)

but..

As was pointed out to me when I talked about setting up city sims, Wed and friends built their own city. They bought the land, set the plots, the roads, and controlled what was built, how it was built (to an extent), and *made* a city.

Y'all want limited travel zones - great, I'll back ya - but do it right. Get all the people who are interested, buy up a whole big plot of land - and set in place the no-fly permissions. You get what you want, others get what they want, and they didnt have to limit anyone to achieve it.

Remember also - just cause a sim is no fly - do you want people who accidently cross the boundary to plummet from the sky because they were flying when they entered? that would be a quick way to piss everyone off. So the no-fly sim would be like the no-fly zones we have now - if you cross and *land* you cant fly again... ok... so whats the difference. Why *code* the sim, when you can just set the permission according to the people who want to live there?

As a note - this is ideal for a area in the group only new sims coming. Like minded people - control over content.

And as for adventuring. Yes there is alot to see out there, and I do occasionally walk the sims to look at it - but *force* me to, and I wont just get pissed - I wont come back.

As it is everyone has freedom - those who want freedom to fly can, those who want freedom to drive can - why should one persons vision be more important than anothers?

WOW, great discussion. Probably too broad to be usefull, but great anyway. I'll just ping on a few topics that were important to me...

Flying: I think no-fly would be interesting, but we would all get tired of it in about a week. I kinda like it the way it is now, although I'd still like to get myself to a particular altitude and just stay there rather than gradually falling lower as I fly, I'm tired of bumping into buildings. Another thing is enjoying the builds. Some things can best be enjoyed from the air, and having to climb a set of stairs to take a look at such a build would be a PITA.

Cities: Also a good concept. But to be meaningful we need a LOT more land. 20 sims, or 25 (if they were in a 5x5 array are NOT really that much space. It would be nice to get some sense from Linden about how many sims they project for the first year or so of the games existence. Lets say 100 was the limit. In that case, population is going to be way to dense to have separate cities, in fact I'd say a 10 by 10 grid is about the right size for something that might be called a city (maybe I'm just used to big cities in RL). A huge grid would change the thinking somewhat about flying. If it took an hour to fly from one end of the system to another, then paying to teleport might make more sense. If the idea is to make the game seem larger by restricting movement... I think the best way to make it seem larger is to make it larger.

In General:

I think we are trying to balance two fundamentally conflicting needs. First, we want the game to be "realistic", thats why we have physics, hi-rez textures, gravity. But we also want the experience to go BEYOND reality. If the game becomes TOO realistic, then why wouldn't we just all go off and "play" at our real lives? Don't forget there are still quite a few fun things to do there!

Why do we have a tax system? Is it because we all enjoy dealing with the IRS and we want to continue thinking about taxes even during our free time? I think not. The tax system is primarily there to "preserve" resources. Limited sims, limited land, limited ability to run scripts, etc. Keep in mind that at some point you will be PAYING to use this service. Pick a number that you think will be a reasonable monthly price for you to pay (I know that number can vary a lot between individuals, but the exact number isn't important here). Now think in terms of paying that amount and comming into world and finding that all of your property had decayed while you went off on your real world vacation. Or imagine that the easiest way to earn money in SL is to write scripts, but try as you might, you can't get the hang of writing scripts. So you settle for a tiny little doll-house while Joescript next door has a palace with a football field in the back.

While the "tax" system is EASY to understand... you must "charge" people for resource they consume, the counterbalancing "reward" system will get very complicated in my opinion. Maybe there will be a constant tinkering with what things are rewarded and what things are not. As I've stated before though, the "preservation" aspect of the tax system will be defeated if too much money can be created out of nothing, or out of things that don't serve the community particularly well. Just an example or two of how the tax and reward systems can lead to unintended consequences:

Notice the number of "grassy buttes" in SL? Someone with limited funds wants to live on a mountain, so they buy one square and raise it to 300 feet and build a square house on the top exactly filling the space. Not only is it not realistic, but it doesn't even look good. And without flying by the way there would be no way to get in the front door! On the other hand you can easily understand why such structures occur. It's too expensive to buy 9 squares of land to make a true hill so that you can build a house on the central one.

The people in my "neighborhood" like water. So we were careful to buy extra land around our "island" that could be submerged realistically. But ultimately we will struggle to pay for this unused land and as we are forced to give it up, something, perhaps a Montana style butte will pop up next to our shoreline.

I'm not sure I see a solution to these issues that fits within a framework that allows SL to stay in business. Some ideas to address the two issues above: Maybe there should be a "natural" elevation to all land in SL, and by that I mean pre-formed hills, valleys and waterways. Builders might be able to raise or lower the terrain to a certain extent, but to a large degree would work within the geography of the place they selected to build. Otherwise, the spot I picked out as an ocean view, will end up being a hill surrounded by a mote surrounded by mountains and sky scrapers.

Anyway, this is getting too long. I'm glad the Linden people show a willingness to keep experimenting with these parameters. I think there will be a lot of experimenting ahead to get it right. The idea of dividing things into zones where different rules apply in each zone has an appeal to it, although I'm sure that some of us that have picked our spot won't be too happy if the rules for our zone are not to our liking. Porting ones possesions from one side of the world to the other might be one thing that is actually HARDER in SL than in RL

Lots of good discussin in this thread.


Heh I do think this is misjudged. Although in this case I do support most of them.

I would really like this. Mini games are fun and good, user created games are fun and good. But I think the game should have some intrinsic challenge beyond getting two primitives to line up.


I am also very for this. I would love to see what the rich and famous can build as monuments to themselves. hehe. Or cool primo party pads. Adding some other features to this land would help. My ideas for this are: default public land to no build, Items on public land don't decay to prevent tree theft, maybe even have the sim start off 'sculpted' and don't allow editing of land, make it only somewhat more expensive but change the smallest buyable lot from 4*4 to 20*20 or something.

I must admit that I am kinda suprised at the vehemence of some people about messing with their flying. I just think of flying as another aspect of the game, but some seem to equate flying -as- the game or something. I personally think travel is too easy now. However removing flying would -really- cause trouble it seems. I think as the world stand now it should be left. However once some lag issues are resolved and vehicles are implemented then I think flying will need a change. Either in the form of an energy system, or just slowing it down some.

I actually like this idea, sorta like the outlands is an always pvp zone, an area - one or two sims - with no flying. Also make it so that no one can fly over the sims though. Some people suggest getting a group of people together and buying a large set of land and setting it no fly. The problems I have are these: the area couldn't be large enough to mean anything unless you know of an entire sim available that I don't, and no fly zones just mean they can't start flying there. Anyone already flying can keep flying... even if they stay still over the no fly zone. I know of no method for keeping flying people out. Any door can be flown through, or AV made short enough to fly through, and a wall or ceiling large enough to cover the kind of area for it to mean anything would take all my money.