Comments on: Philip Rosedale: Second Life Is Better Than Lively Because It’s Like Warcraft

By: Philip Rosedale erklärt Second Life | Cyberwelten

Philip Rosedale erklärt Second Life | Cyberwelten — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 10:00:54 +0000

[...] 02.08.08: Philip Rosedale: Second Life Is Better Than Lively Because It’s Like Warcraft [...]

By: Dusan Writer’s Metaverse » Head of Second Life Stability: He Isn’t a Linden

Sat, 13 Sep 2008 12:36:36 +0000

[...] can make SL seem “visiony” again, instead of sounding defensive about the potential and comparing it to Warcraft or [...]

By: Dusan Writer’s Metaverse » Blizzard vs Linden Lab: Who Wins in Graphic Improvements?

Sat, 30 Aug 2008 01:11:37 +0000

[...] Rosedale recently explained that Second Life is a far cry better than browser-based worlds like Google’s Lively by [...]

By: Sigmund Leominster

Sigmund Leominster — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 16:30:39 +0000

There are two separate issues to consider here: The Content versus the Delivery. The Second Life(TM) environment is a product that certainly requires a platform on which to exist, but it can be viewed as existing independently of the client. The Second Life world, made up of its prims, people, communities, businesses, events etc. could exist in different platforms. The specific software platform on which it stands (and that could be a web browser, a stand-alone client, a java-based app or whatever else) is, in essence, a delivery system.

Linden Lab(R) are really working with two products; a virtual world and a software client. It is possible for these two to be divorced and for Linden Lab to farm out the platform work to others. What they need to do is continue to define the nature, scope, and content of the Second Life virtual world, which will, in turn, drive the development of the client.

This model suggests that the issue LL needs to focus on is maintaining the content. I ;m not suggesting the platform is not important – without it you can’t have your Second Life existence – but customers don’t sign up for Second Life because they want software but because they want to experience the virtual world. You may have the slickest, fastest, most stable software on the planet, but if the VR you visit is a dull as the Barbie Girl(TM) virtual world, you won’t stay. It is worth remembering that current SL residents still stay with the experience despite the flaky software. Ultimately I suggest VR experience is more important than the software platform – web-based or otherwise.

For a discussion of some of what I consider the four key elements of a successful virtual world, check out my article in “SLentrepreneur Magazine” entitled “The 4C’s of 3D’s.” http:/www.slentre.com (due out on September 3rd, 2008).

By: Dusan Writer’s Metaverse » Don’t Worry, Says Philip Rosedale: “There’s No Eye Contact in Second Life”

Fri, 08 Aug 2008 13:03:35 +0000

[...] of a TechCrunch interview where in explaining why the 3D properties of Second Life are important he compared it to Warcraft, and then followed it up by telling the New York Times that Second Life is a [...]

By: Garret Bakalava

Garret Bakalava — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 14:52:28 +0000

All I have to add is:

He said, what????

By: Dusan Writer’s Metaverse » User Interface Design Contest: Towards a Winner

Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:51:10 +0000

[...] an annual award or whatever, but more broadly they need to communicate a “why”. Philip comparing SL to Warcraft doesn’t help. He struggled to explain WHY an immersive 3D environment is better than a Lively [...]

By: Dusan Writer’s Metaverse » Philip Rosedale’s Second Round: Second Life is a Terrarium, Interview with New York Times

Sun, 03 Aug 2008 13:42:41 +0000

[...] I covered Philip Rosedale comparing the immersive qualities of Second Life to World of Warcraft in order to [...]

By: Alberik Rotaru

Alberik Rotaru — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 08:21:40 +0000

There may be room for an embedded version of Sl. By light client I was meaning a viewer that would run with reasonable stability and without a lot of bells and whistles. The frustration with LL’s current management is that they have a passion for imposed strategies. You will adopt Dazzle and like it. You will use a voice-enabled client whether you like it or not. A light client would resolve many of their problems with the education sector. It would also resolve a lot of user-base problems because they would not be pushing the line that you will have a graphics card not less than 14 days old or else.

Announcing these dikats in language that would embarrass a first year university composition class, usually accompanied by historical, philosophical and bog Zen allusions that survive any informed examination for about 15 seconds just exacerbates the sense of frustration.

By: Clive Jackson

Clive Jackson — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 08:17:33 +0000

The look, feel and rendering speed of a virtual world is just the same when running in a browser as it is when running as a stand alone client. The advantage of a virtual world running in a browser is that actions on the hosting Web page such as button clicks can be sent to the virtual world and actions in the virtual world can be sent to the Web page, so one can drive the other. This provides strong integration between the Web and virtual worlds. Things such as moving between different virtual worlds from different vendors while still staying on the same Web page can also be supported. This approach provides a universal mechanism for accessing virtual worlds.

http://www.pelicancrossing.com/inDualityInfo.htm