Sony's PS3 "Home" steals from Second Life-

Hello SL citizens,

I just viewed a video on You Tube which showed the PS3’s “Home” environment. Essentially, for those that don’t know, Home is a virtual environment (I just said that) where anyone with a PS3 can go to hang out, build, buy, chat, etc. From what I saw, it looked like a Second Life, albeit much better graphics. However, the major difference is that although you can have private areas and public areas, all content is purchased via the PS3 online store…which sucks.

The graphics are smooth and beautiful. And when I saw them select a chair prim and drop it, it dropped in a very realistic physics manner—which is super cool. They said that this Home environment will grow in time…and essentially anyone on the PS3 network can join…but why the hell won’t they let the users create content? Oh…right…they want more money, what was I thinking. The $600 PS3 isn’t enough, we need to support the Home servers of course.

The avatar creation was a bit weak (again, no user content). They say there are millions of combos, but most of these “millions” come from purchasing content from the Sony store.

Anyway… You Tube it…check it out. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSADSjKhZAc


~Michael Bigwig
Lead Designer, Glowbox Designs

Well you know that part of SL where there are millions of dollars of transactions every day? In the ps3 home all those transactions will be paying sony.

Ah... but will you be able to have pixel sex?

To get me to buy one of those things they are going to have to come over and service me in person.....

What has Sony "stolen" exactly? I think SL still has an edge over the Sony system because of the user generated content and economy--as you mentioned. Also, more people have a home computer than a PS3. However, the better graphics and brand recognition is Sony's edge along with likely a better user interface. I think most people just use SL as a fancy chat room--you don't need an economy for that.

It will all work out, this could motivate SL to do some better marketing(I've never seen a TV spot for SL) and to provide better graphics(they seem to be working on it). The next competitor that provides better graphics, user generated and owned content, an economy AND decent customer service support will be a serious threat to SL.

Home isn't supposed to compete with SL - it is merely a 3D front-end to their online environment unlike the 360's 2D environment. Shame really, because it could completely stomp SL into the ground if Sony actually tried to compete and thought through the business model... That's the beauty of consoles - same performance for everyone due to everyone having the same set-up.

Hopefully Sony will re-think and release build tools and land-ownership availability- I'd be there in a flash and happy to pay. No-payment types could hang out in the lobby just using the interface as their view into the Sony online universe.

It would be stable; it would be vastly superior graphically; it would not take 6 hours to firmware update. Still, being Sony they'll screw it up for sure and miss the opportunity.

You tout the smooth graphics, realistic physics and similar features of the Sony "Home" over SL but all of that is accomplished by Sony having total control over all content in the platform. Many of the problems we experience in SL are due to the fact that virtually all content is created by users of SL and not by LL.

What we value most in SL is also the cause of our biggest complaints. I am sure that someday LL will "get it right" and we will see major improvements but I doubt that it will ever be as smooth and flawless as something that is wholly under the control of the provider.

I thought I was being pretty diplomatic and open-ended in my original post. Sure I was excited about seeing something similar to SL that looked great…but I am in no way playing for any team—if I was playing for a team, it would be Second Life, as I own and operate a legitimate business there.

Also, I didn’t mean “stealing” in the thievery sense…wrong choice of words I suppose. Inspired would be a better choice.

Home will never be anywhere near what Second Life is. Second Life will always be unique in its fully user-created content and economy. And if any of you have seen the Japanese version of Second Life coming out…similar thing, although the Japanese Second Life looks crappier than SL, and I didn’t see the “builder” showcased at all (you can You Tube that also).

There really isn’t much I dislike about Second Life. I think the graphics could be better, but I also understand the constraints of VRML streaming data, population, and hardware limitations…but boy, will it be nice when Second Life looks like Half Life (2)! I can dream can’t I?

I think Home is a great idea for the PS3 community…more power to them. If people want to BUY all content…let them. Watch the video…it’s pretty cool actually…not for me though, I like to SELL my content…

~Michael Bigwig
-Lead Designer, Glowbox Designs

I really think Home will attract the people that essentially WANT to be marketed to by RL companies. Basically those people you actually see at IBM island and Playboy island (except for the pictures). It has all the basic features of SL except building. Streaming will be easier, talking will be easier, playing mainstream games with your friends will be easier...that'll leave quite a void in the DragonBall Z combat sim!

It will most likely also attract all the RL companies away from focusing on SL since it fits the corporate mold of "you enjoy it how we tell you to".

I can't wait for it to come out!

Things like Home, IMVU, are a very mixed bag.

Essentially you're right, they can't be anything like SL because they don't support user created content - but Ravanne is right, the fact that SL _does_ support user created content brings with it a whole host of technical problems which Home won't need to deal with.

And the majority of Second Life users are more content consumers than content creators. With the wealth and quality of content available in Second Life now, creating everything yourself just doesn't make so much sense anymore. Back when I joined, many people would build their own houses and living in a prefab was a slightly negative option. Nowadays even some excellent content creators I've seen are living in prefab houses with prefab furniture because although they probably _could_ make things that were just as good, it would take a lot of time and effort, and by putting that effort into making something to sell they could earn more L$ than the house would cost, so why not do that? That's pretty much nothing less than the mark of a successful, efficient capitalism. And that's for people who can create content - from the new users I've spoken to, many seem to consider it beyond them.

So it's a tradeoff. Sony know that the majority of users aren't going to create content, and that user content creation would add a lot of technical trouble, so they haven't supported it. Can such a thing threaten to take users away from SL? Unfortunately, yes. Always spare a thought for the people for whom SL is just like Home because creating content for them isn't an option.

There's also the "it's $500.00 for a PS3" factor to consider, though.

I think a lot of people are mega consumers in SL because it's a lot cheaper than being a mega consumer in RL and they really want to consume something!

I was that way when I started until I realized I could probably have made some of the stuff I bought. It was about a year of consumption before I started trying my hand at building stuff.

SL is safe from Home.

I dunno... you HAVE seen what an island goes for right?

Yes, but those people that buy islands aren't the consumers. They're the producers. They are the ones influencing what content is out there for the consumers to buy.

Owning land is not a requirement for playing SL. Owning a PS3 is for Home!

Without true user created content, IMHO, it'll not get any better than TSO was: A fad.

I'm also looking for the on-topic resident question to answer.....

It depends on the quality, variety and price of whatever content Sony decides to sell. The "economy" in SL is very interesting but its on shaky ground. It is dictated by people's entertainment needs and that is traditionally very fickle. Someone mentioned that a PS3 costs $500. However, you need a fairly decent computer to run SL. In addition, in order to fully appreciate SL, you'll probably want a decent amount of land (costs real $$) a decent house ($$) and cool clothes ($$). It's all priced in lindens but the really good stuff costs significant RL money. After your all done with that, you're closing in on $500 in many cases. If not, you've probably gotten bored with your 512m with cheesy pre-fab house and left SL entirely to buy a Wii.

I've seen a yacht priced at $150 U.S. in SL. Now, I'm not saying creators don't deserve to be paid and they may even deserve to get $150 per copy of a nice yacht. The question is, what will the market bear long term? For $150 I can go out and purchase several video games. If Sony sold a super pimp photorealistic yacht for $2.00 U.S. can the content creators in SL compete with that? I'm not sure.

They're going to sell clothes and stuff to wear. Otherwise it'll just be a place to hang out, stream music (in an easier way than SL), share pictures and have a place to put game "trophies" you get from acheiving certain things in PS3 games. You'll also be able to meet up with people and all jump into an online game together. Otherwise they have the equivalent of foosball tables in places for people to play social games. There will also be sizeable areas of advertising for various PS3 games and most likely the eventual RL companies sponsoring things there like they tried to do in SL.

There is no outdoors. Almost all gameplay relies on other games you still have to buy or download.

The thing, too, about this vs. a computer is the fact that you can use your computer for many non-entertainment functions thus making it a more valueable asset than a PS3 which is all entertainment...and limited at that!

I, personally, will most likely get a PS3 in about 3 years once I see the spread of games they end up having.

I generally choose to stay about 3-5 years behind on console games to guarantee longevity and selection...not to mention getting games used for cheap! I still have plenty of ground to cover with my PS2!!

However, I still think SL is safe from Home!

I’m sorry, I didn’t know where to post this question. I looked for the forum that seemed to suite my needs—where is the “General Chat” forum? In the archives, the general chat doesn’t seem to work the way I want it…it only has two stickys.

Home will always have a ton of people wandering around…but it will never reached the level of detail, popularity, economy, and interest that Home can. I mean, I helped build a sim for Die Hard 4, where Bruce himself actually sat as an avatar, and did an interview for a room full of SL citizens…do you think that will happen in Home? Never….or wil it? Dum dum dummmm. Those that have the money to consume, or produce enough to allow easy consumption will thrive in Second Life…Home users are only given what is allowed them. I think you can take a picture in RL and upload it to a picture in Home…but that’s about all the “user created content” there is.

They both are great apps. Second Life’s user created world will always be more interesting, diverse, and unique…

By that logic, owning a PC or Mac is a requirement for SL.. and one that will run SL well costs more than $500.

The big problem with Sony Home and all other games where content is provided to you by the company is that they are held back by many, many things. There's volume. Sony Home developers are how many? A hundred developers making items for Home would be a generous statement. OK maybe 50 at the most. Compare that to several thousand people making stuff in SL. Who decides what gets made for Home? A stuffed suit. A middle manager. A committee. Do you think a group of programmers along with their accountants can sit down and seriously iron out how to make a single doggy-style poseball? They'd be too embarassed or too busy laughing or the suits would say it goes against company policy. LL did a good job keeping themselves out of the creation process. When a company makes something, content, they sanction it. It's theirs. They are saying... 'Hey everyone take a look at what Sony made. This is what we are and what we want you to be'. Can you imagine if they came out with a sexbed? The headline would read 'Sony says it's OK for game players to have casual sex'. Not so with LindenLab, they can point to the residents and say, "they made it". Sure the sony dev can make a yacht. But the SL residents will have several hundred yachts. It's not just volume. It's creativity and attention to detail. Would you like a yacht from a sony dev who gets paid by the hour, got told by his boss to make a yacht and has about one day to finish his project? Or would you like from John who's sitting in his own houseboat, has sailed since he was a kid, and has carved out model sailboats from wood and finally figured out how to make them virtually? When I try walking around a single region in SL I find something new every single time. When Sony releases some content for home how much do you want to bet that everyone will simply get it and then be waiting again for something new. It's like a thousand mouths sucking at a single teat where in SL we are simply awash in milk.

There is no General Chat. They won't let us have one....Meanies!

Read my latest post. Do you just use your computer for SL or other games? Is it possible to order things online or do your taxes on a PS3?

$1000 on a computer will still go farther than $500 on a PS3.

I looked at the 'Home' promo video some time ago. It is true the environment graphics were better - less obviously primmy and the lighting in particular was better. Movement was smooth too, but the avatars were less realistic and all looked like they were from the early 1990s, and none had long hair - not even women - hinting that might not be possible in Home.

Very well said some of you...some excellent points have been made. Is forced creativity as inspiring as random acts of creation? I suppose that depends on the artist and their skill with the application...but you get my point--just as Bree was illustrating.

I think the beauty is in the freedom. Everyone is encouraged to create this world. Take a walk around sometime...sure a lot is uninspired, but there are so many diamonds in the rough to be found, and there...there in-lies the beauty.


Why would I want to pay Sony for a love seat, when I can create one myself, much better suited to my personal environment, and just as high of quality? Not everyone is an artist...but they don't have to be...leave that up to the artists who sit at home and model for the love of it. And yes, some designers are modeling in Second Life to pay the bills...so be it...at least no one is telling them HOW to do it.

~Lead Designer, Glowbox Designs

Well, yes - but from the point of someone who isn't an artist, and isn't building, it's much more attractive to be able to buy a PS3 once and then get all the content they want for free because the artists are making money from their Sony salary, than to have to pay piece by piece.

I even know an actual artist who _quit_ SL because they felt it was about being "nickled and dimed to death".

Ah, but a computer is a useful tool as well as a gaming system. Now, can a PS3 run Microsoft Word? Excel? No? Not worth the 500 USD for a PS3.

Three letters would keep me from being on Home, if four words didn't. "PS3" and "no player created content."