For those who track the virtual worlds industry the competitive landscape usually comes down to a handful of usual suspects and a bunch of hangers-on while the reality is that the ‘game-changers’ won’t come from our traditional definitions, it will come from innovations that exist elsewhere. Not dissimilar to the game industry which had a myopic view that included consoles and large MMOs and then found itself side-swiped by casual games, virtual worlds are about to face competitive threats that won’t come from the expected quarters, and which will place huge pressures on the existing platforms to adapt or die.
My post yesterday kicked off a discussion that I didn’t intend to have happen, and it’s my fault really, because in a larger post about the vitality (or my impression of vitality) of the virtual worlds industry I made a throw-away comment about Web.Alive (that, um, basically it shouldn’t be) which brought the tireless Rigbys out to defend the utility of the virtual world platform. While I applaud any competition that will help to widen the adoption of the metaverse, my broader point about Web.Alive wasn’t that I have much of a problem with the platform itself, but rather that it represents a fairly narrow band of innovation in a fast-changing technology landscape.
I also made another throw-away comment, which I’ll also probably regret, that if there was a Second Life-killer in the wings it’s probably Unity, but seeing as that will also be misinterpreted, I’d probably better try to clarify and ramble a little so I can later defend myself by pointing back to vague and non-committal comments.
The Usual Suspects
The traditional storyline goes like this: virtual worlds divide roughly into two large camps – ‘adult worlds’ which embody escapism but also education, simulation and collaboration; and ‘teen worlds’ (which aren’t just for teens) which are really social media with avatars. In the latter category are worlds like Kaneva and IMVU (and, I’d propose, Metaplace, which has never quite shaken its tweeny-type feel), while the fomer category includes Forterra, Protosphere, Wonderland, Croquet, and a few latter arrivals like Web.Alive.
The de facto leading virtual world remains Second Life. Its challenge is that while it has a ‘deep’ community who spends countless hours and hundreds of millions of dollars in-world, it seems to be perpetually poised to break into wider adoption without ever quite getting there. Hopes become pinned on improving the first hour, relaunching the Web site, making it more friendly for business, and a host of other fixes and tweaks.
SL leads the way, or is the example at least of what a 3D world can look like including how it can be used by enterprise (including schools and non-profits and so on). In response to SL’s weak spots other platforms come to fill the gaps. Protosphere, for example, has carved out a nice niche for themselves and raised millions in venture capital financing based on the simple premise of being business friendly and highly focused on specific solution sets and markets. Forterra built an expertise in government contracting, basically, and simulation for the military. OpenSim yearns to be the “Apache of 3D Worlds” but hasn’t, so far, but HAS become a mirrored version of Second Life with more administration and server control and a lower price point. Finally, Blue Mars is betting on visuals as the ‘attraction point’ but has really based its business model on being an MMO developer platform where the developer only needs to worry about the environment and not the hosting, QA, back-end technologies and registration.
The storyline branches off a little between business applications and consumer use of the technologies. We can argue about virtual worlds for business and then have trouble reconciling that with widespread adoption by consumers.
I personally think these categorizations either narrow our language and expectations (in the case of business uses) or set an impossibly high expectation (in the case of consumer use).
When we think of virtual worlds as business platforms, we start talking about holding conferences and meetings with remote offices, or doing some sort of training kiosk idea, and miss the deeper potential for virtual worlds to change how we think about the enterprise itself or as sites for radical innovation.
When we think of them for consumer use, we immediately set up a comparison to console games and MMOs. Second Life does not currently have the wider appeal of Warcraft, say, and certainly doesn’t have the ability to scale like Farmville, or XBox gaming.
Now, I have no issue with virtual worlds that DON’T scale, that don’t have the potential to be ubiquitous, either in organizations or amongst consumers. There’s nothing wrong with writing up an application that allows deep simulation or prototyping, say, which is what I’ve seen as a major appeal of Web.Alive and its detailed mesh models. But when I think of the broader opportunities of the metaverse I DO think of game-changers – the kinds of technologies that will be competitive “must-haves” rather than niche “nice-to-haves”.
Expressive Domains
My personal preference is to think of virtual worlds as expressive domains. In this definition, virtual worlds have no competition. While there are all kinds of ways to express ourselves – whether on blogs or youTube, on community forums or in the back chat on Warcraft, virtual worlds are constructed so that the range is both wider, and the ability to co-participate in that expression is deeper.
This market definition allows virtual worlds to embody BOTH consumer and enterprise, entertainment and education, creator and consumer.
As expressive domains, virtual worlds allow a level of self-expression, storytelling and sharing that is rich, varied and deeply immersive. For enterprise, (or schools or non-profits) the virtue of being expressive opens up significant value in the potential for creativity, innovation, empathy, and deep collaboration.
The value of virtual worlds isn’t in making geography non-existent or in holding corporate conferences or whatever – it’s in creating a shared space in which exploration and expression leads to tangible and very real results. Expressive domains allow the creation and exploration of artefacts that in themselves can create changes in attitudes or behaviors that you won’t usually get from watching a youTube video or taking a Web-based course. Expressive domains allow a level of person-to-person interaction which lifts inhibitions and fears and opens us up to divergent viewpoints and more creative ways of approaching problems.
Against this definition, virtual worlds may not be able to compete for real-time communication time with things like Twitter, but it can provide an ‘island of calm’ in the sea of social media where we can better assimilate what information MEANS.
Against this definition, virtual worlds may not be able to compete with an XBox for the entertainment time or dollars of a teenager, but it can compete for the time of the person who wants to extend their self-expression and have more control over their personal narratives.
Now, not everyone is a 3D content creator, and the idea of an expressive domain isn’t meant to define the users of virtual worlds as the ones doing the creation. But virtual worlds provide the site for expression which can serve as the backdrop for others – who find their own immersion and participation to be equally expressive, even if they aren’t the one rezzing a prim.
The challenge, however, becomes this: that in a world where the Web gives lots of other ways to express ourselves, virtual worlds are hobbled by the fact that while the tools and quality of expression are vastly superior in many respects, they are both difficult to use and difficult to share.
Blue Oceans
So when I think of the competitive landscape for virtual worlds, I don’t think of it as a fight between virtual worlds and NetMeeting. Or between Web.Alive and Second Life. I think of it as a competition between the different ways in which we can participate, with others, in immersive and rich expressive domains, and the ease with which we can do so and, further, can share those experiences.
This allows us to consider augmented reality and mirror worlds and their potential as expressive domains. While I’d argue that mirror worlds are an important technology which will help to display information in intuitive and useful ways, I don’t see them immediately competing as expressive domains. This is one reason I don’t particularly fear seeing avatars pop up in Google and on further reflection is a better way of thinking about projects like Near London, which didn’t set OUT to be an expressive domain but is an informational one that is tied to geo-specificity.
Augmented reality, on the other hand, DOES hold the promise of being an expressive domain, although I’d propose that for the folks who have abandoned attention to virtual worlds for the joys of holding their iPhone up to a storefront at the local mall, it’s probably still a little early to be pushing the tools easily as forms of expression – we’re still sorting out the underpinning tech and there will be a lot more hype and fails before the inevitable trough of disillusionment and then something approaching wider adoption. Mind you, if you’re Tish Shute, that’s the part of the curve you love following so more power to you. LOL
But the winner of the virtual worlds race will be the ones that solve the challenges above: to make it easier to use, and to make it easier to share. And to accomplish that, we’ll need to see game-changing improvements that go beyond creating another Second Life clone where avatars can walk around, talk, and maybe click on a Web page or two. Those are platform features not game-changers.
This is one of the reasons why, so far, I’ve been disappointed with OpenSim. I’m patient and will give it time and still hold out hope – because I believe in the idea of OpenSim, and I believe it is a site for solving some key challenges around interoperability, say. But I haven’t seen the kinds of innovations I had hoped for, and can’t help feeling that what we end up with is a cheaper version of SL.
And it’s why I’m not excited about Web.Alive, which seems to be trying to match feature sets with all of the other virtual world platforms out there but which hasn’t yet, to my mind anyways, shown anything unique in its model other than more detailed meshes. To appropriate a corny business term, Web.Alive is red ocean thinking rather than blue ocean strategy – it’s an engineering task but not an innovative disruption. It has its place, it deserves its niche, it’s a solid product – I give it all of those things. If I cast aspersions I only mean to do so as a way of seeking out the game-changers and not just incremental improvements that amount to not much more than “mine can do that just like yours only with more polygons”.
Game Changers
We can argue about what Second Life would need to make it more acceptable to the masses. But those are proxy discussions for the larger questions of what the expressive domains of the future look like. When we talk about avatar identity, privacy, IP ownership, platform governance, and other forms of policy, these also are proxies that help us understand how and why these things work or don’t. With some of it, we may not like the current models, we may not agree with Linden Lab, and we may wish it was handled differently. And some day maybe it will – because the lessons today will inform the platforms tomorrow that are able to crack these challenges in new and innovative ways.
My own short list is just a guess, or a wish list maybe. If any of these were radical industry-changing innovations I, um, probably wouldn’t post them here, and the reality is someone way smarter than me will figure it out. But it’s a start:
- Variable Immersion: the ability to participate in the expressive domain at varying degrees of ‘presence’.
- Cross-platform: easy-of-use across platforms including mobile.
- Input devices: use of different controllers including things like Microsoft’s Natal or Wii controllers used in a way that fundamentally rethinks avatar and immersion control
- Social media integration including clever ways to link identity portfolios
- Leveraging the potential of 3D in the browser
- New ways to handle distribution of content (server-side rendering)
- Intuitive and seamless execution of data visualization
A very short list although I’ve blogged other ideas before. I’ve also blogged that in the short term, the issue isn’t feature sets, it’s solutions. Build the best 3D conferencing solution in the world and you have a winner. Be able to import architectural models and share them easily with clients and you have another. Solutions are the current killer app.
But if we’re going to talk about platforms, I’m not convinced that there’s room for more than a handful of 3D spaces with avatars and Web pages embedded in them. This isn’t to say that we won’t see niche products – that’s fine. And it wasn’t my point about Web.Alive in particular, as I noted above.
One of the things in fact that’s critical about game-changing innovation is the creation of the ecosystem around it. And this is where it won’t be sufficient to have a good technology, you’ll need to build up, as well, a business model around it, a management team, an approach to governance and monetization. And this is where Unity DOES seem like an “SL-Killer” – because it has created a technology and business model and has facilitated a development community which, frankly, puts Linden Lab in a very poor light, and which may very well be on par with game consoles.
Because at the end of the day, without the people evangelizing and believing in your platform, like the Rigbys do with Web.Alive, and without the hooks to get them there and the incentives and sense of community that will make them want to stay, then you DO end up with Betamax. Which you can be proud of for its spec sheet and engineering but which was a game changer that never had its day.
Well, a better try;)
But i cant still help keep thinking about the “metaverse roadmap” and the pre-clever zebra “top 10 virtual worlds leaders list” from 2006-7 to which i poopooed all the “rationale” presented by those loud experts of the moment… i wasnt to popular then either. How about launching out of alpha before we call them gods— Metaplace anyone? or do we forget Multiverse too soon?
a google search finds most of the “leaders” of 2006 already stillborn.–Ogoglio anyone?:)
As to Unity, its been around since the early 00s,, many knew it, used it, then as well… Croquet- well its birth was in 1994.;)
Without any mention of O3D (google) or the (web3d-firefox) efforts, I think calling SL the web3d “leader” is um frankly… very 2006;)
Ill let the future offer the O3D hackers efforts up in the next 2 years,…Plus no mention of Autodesk or Adobe (other than IMO the most probably Unity3d puchaser) and these roadmaps look crooked again to my POV.
Anyhow, new road shows, same as the old road shows.. but for a real industry, the methods that are repeatedly taken by a “platform-service- vced maker” and its “3rd party developers” has never worked.
Tools can build Industries, not “service platforms” with FIC… but again, I never said there was a vr industry or metaverse to come out of the SL 2006 bubble.
The whole “meta” way of thinking and stealing “er earning revenues for a few on the “deferred returns” of the many, really has gotten to be a tired joke.
Ask jaron lanier (NYT 2007) whats the game… if you ask who? then you really are a VR 2009 leader.;)
BTW- all crankyness meant plural… not singular, since i dont believe in singularities…..;)
but really, lessons today? come on. no one listened to the lessons of yesterday. Thats not how tech culture works.
c4
Um, O3D was what I meant by “Leveraging the potential of 3D in the browser”.
But can you help with something, Cube? I get that we need to learn lessons from the 90s and it’s great to have you remind us of that. Persistently HAHA.
But what exactly IS your alternate vision for how this is supposed to roll-out? There’s a lot of what it shouldn’t be and how we’re all deluded sods because we haven’t gone back to read Jaron’s prophecies, but I never understand what you think the actual model SHOULD be.
You say ‘tools can build industries’ and then deride VRML. Can you explain how tools alone an industry make? And if you think it’s all in the tools, then why do you make it sound as if O3D will belong to hackers?
And please try to explain it in plain English.
uh.. read jarons new york time piece from 2007. not a “prophecy” but a lament. His time for vr prophecy (your trick now) was 15 years earlier…in 2007 he said “sorry”
laughing at others past experiences? You do what you like…but whatever.
tools are sold to artisans to make fair trade with. this is how business gets built in ecosystems to form industries… today new thinking is for software makers to control all revenues from their efforts and their customers efforts. and simply this is why these web2.0 efforts will fail. they are ego rich unsustainable pyramid biz’s and i see no reason to tell anyone that “magic beans” work.
As long as blogger pundits and FIC line up to replace each other to “front for” and fight over “tools” theyre paid to hype. Itll just cycle over and over and Gartners and the Pips will be “celebrities”:… not there will be no actual industry of mass creation or true earning generation for many..just the scoring of whose “pretending” to be the “thoughtleader billionaire” of the nanosecond.
and really its just getting boring.
All i want is to be able to buy pencils and paper and create work product to earn a living.
the “techoizing” of even that simplest act- to a “branded- mechanical, tech-scored act” is not the way to a new media for humans..
Of this Im sure.
c4
Repeating the old Silicon Valley Mumbo Jumbo will get us nowhere!
People need examples to judge what they want; the old mumbo jumbo go in one and out the other.
What is the future? Listening to the past is a bore.
People want “one click from a browser and your in”.
People want audio that is easily use like the telephone.
People want easily accessed information, networking, conversation, etc.
You know, I read all this and read all this and accept all the caveats and then I come back to something Fred Wilson said on his blog in some debate with me, that “Second Life is too immersive”.
Expressive domains, sure, but some people don’t want them to be immersive. They are happy to be immersed in their i-phones, though.
Wow, great post, great comments. Thank you all.
Whose’s fred wilson?
Immersive like real life is what people want; is the response I get!
Real life is 3D and natural isn’t it!
Prok – agreed.
My idea of expressive domains is a kind of loose and possibly, well, useless definition LOL but I was looking for some way to think about this that got us out of immersive/simulation, mirror world/fantasy world and business/consumer dichotomies.
I don’t want to argue that SL should become less immersive, it’s one of the things that makes it a world. But in the competitive landscape, there are people like Rigby with their realistic um boilers was it? Isn’t that one of your projects – walk through boiler rooms? Which is great – realism is definitely an appeal to a large potential audience. But realism to what end? If it’s merely prototyping, then we don’t need avatars. The presence of avatars shifts realism into ‘realism in a space which we share in order to have a site for expression’.
And Ken, I have no idea what mumbo jumbo you’re referring to but you’re right on that score and I know that I try to avoid being esoteric in my pitches (um, with difficulty, it’s my nature to be esoteric and is usually why I get hired).
But your examples miss the point because they’re not SOLUTIONS to anything, they’re features.
One-click from a browser and you’re in to do WHAT exactly? Audio like the phone WHY? They have Skype already.
What’s the problem you’re trying to solve?
Cube – I’m not laughing at past experience, I’m merely pointing out the consistency of the message. I mean, it’s not like you haven’t said these things before…I’m merely trying to understand what the lessons are other than “don’t fail the same way we did a decade or so ago”.
I’m still not following the comment about tools, however. I mean, Lotus was a tool, but it had a business model built around it, a company, a marketing plan, whatever.
Television was built on a set of tools, but it needed networks for content, advertisers, creators.
How does a technology grow without the accompanying ecosystem of businesses trying to make a buck (including those who do so through pyramid schemes or becoming nanocelebrities)?
And when you say: “All i want is to be able to buy pencils and paper and create work product to earn a living.”….who are you earning this living FROM?
Maybe you just don’t like people talking about it? An aversion to bloggers and celebrities and evangelists? I’m still not following, sorry, and it’s not because I’m not trying or being dismissive, I’m just a bit, dense I guess.
I suppose being an engineer in a previous life makes me think differently.
To me the objective is to replace the real world with a 3D Virtual World. This VW will to all intent and purpose enable you to perform day to day living without leaving your home. A god send for the elderly and disabled in our community who can no longer physically or mentally leave their own home; yet can be in contact 24/7 with all their care worker, relatives, services.
This is our main target at the moment with AAL proposals, etc. Many new interfaces are being designed, e.g., HCI, AI (many types), haptics, monitoring sensors, etc. At the heart of the system will be the VW providing the necessary interactivity. The system requires safety, reliability, security, ease of use, attributes or factors.
As an engineer you choose components, assemblies, system/segments prior to finalising the system. Each part needs careful selection as the system is only as good as the weakest link.
If we can get it right for the elderly then we can use it for the benefit of everyone
Maybe this defines the problem we are trying to solve.
About the Silicon Valley Mumbo Jumbo; over the years many claims have turned out to be just vapourware. We need to see the examples not just the rhetoric and hype that dog SL and its credibility. I know people have invested heavily and it shows; but it is the functionality that matters; is it fit for purpose and can deliver the Quality factors identified in the earlier comment.
What ever *did* happen to Multiverse and Cory? The other Cory.
Is there a place where you can download Joe Rigby’s world and walk through it?
cube has still not articulated his positive vision. But I know from reading my own blog comments that he thinks it’s all about “the Secret FDR Tape of the Human Rights They Don’t Want You to Know About!” — and therefore just as utopian and conversely, exploitative, as the Silicon Valley hustle.
“Replace reality with 3d worlds” ? geez,ugh yech. is that what ive been doing, with way too many examples for 20 years?..No. I would never be that deluded.;) nor that foolish to want that to be the goal.
Yes, Im writing dense, unstructured and not simple. and yes, im forcing you or any reader to do some work and think beyond a press release of a evangelists point sheet.
Web3d as a whole, as media hasnt changed in 15 years….its the same silos, and actualy i was of the same contrary voice then as now,( that the tech meme method of tool:media monetization has no need for users or artisans anymore- its a pyramid of bankers money and virtal valuations on 5 year cycles ) the delusion is that non coders of the tools will ever get a chance to create any value with the tools… THIS is the reality to of which jaron wrote, and you cant seeem to read, or refuse to hear or want to conceed any value from.
Yes. prok, 3d rt virtuality can be too immersive.. Which is why I keep posting the past obvious to the newly delusional, else they will soon have us all slaving away for pennies to enrich a few game gods and there chosen profits.;) pun
yes, im weary of tbe paid for tech evangelist because in the 25 years since the method began its no longer needed. And its become a SUBSTITUTION for a tech companies PR, where actual Client Successes SHOULD be the good press a product requires to be a “thought leader” or a “killer app”
both are the memes of the blogger evangelist, not an actual creator/ designer/ tool user, or client who really has a problem to solve.
so in many thoughts Dusan, we agree, as i started these posts, “better, closer” than youre last post, which had you dress as a cheerleader avatar for only your team. and forced a web.alive team to get all defensive…
by blogging about the 3d media as you do/did -scorekeeping – it assists the tech meme need to cycle “games” or “dev version numbers” , and it dosent allow for an industry or expertise of anything but programmers and bankers….
and paid for celebrity of the moment pimping.
Not alot of balance for a mainstream industry as the types that built our culture and country for a century plus.
Up until we let the virtuality of money and wall street go unbalanced and get beyond “needing” customers or clients.;) but they had the evanglists of BUISNESS WEEK AND FINANCIAL NEWS NETWORKS and CNBC and finally the FED and white house to blog “speaking points” and such for them..etc..
But if we replace reality with 3d worlds ,, then we’ll all be fine..
–seem im not repeated enough –
Joe’s world
http://ec3v3.projectchainsaw.com
see Titanic, spitfire and steam locomotive
“cube has still not articulated his positive vision. But I know from reading my own blog comments that he thinks it’s all about “the Secret FDR Tape of the Human Rights They Don’t Want You to Know About!” — and therefore just as utopian and conversely, exploitative, as the Silicon Valley hustle.”
untrue…but thats a Prok post;)…partial info posted as fact…i do try to pepper her blog with reality and facts;) once in a while.
I have no requirement to offer a positive vision for dusans blog or at yours prok;) I have the rights (still) to express my ideas and works as i please.
..
evidence of my “vision” of a “better world” or “better tech/ media biz partnerships” are not hard to find online.
http://www.starbasec3.com has been online for over 15 years… and anyone can read its vision and the future it speaks of. even a childs 3d ebook version from 2001.
I also ran and founded 2 national web3d groups from 1995-2005 created for designers and developers- not funded by the tools/platform makers-agenda.
I never turned away an interested media designer/developer who didnt have an extra 1000usd for a seminar by a web3d evangelist.
I also created numerous trade show panels on web3d that still go on today, and of which i cant get invited to to sit on today, because i dont sponsor with my banker the trade shows monetization, or that of another tech maker of a “leader” web3d platform.
Ill let reality speak for itself.
i suggest many of you do the same.;)
c3
Joe’s world beckons’ Prok’
http://ec3v3.projectchainsaw.com
Come in and say that!
Hello! Anybody there?
Come say your piece at:
http://ec3v3.projectchainsaw.com
No Proky; no cheerleader turned up.
What do we make of all this?
We need serious answers to solve one of the major 21st century problems (elderly care) and everyone hides.
Not my problem Gov! “We just ponse about in our cheerleader outfits or reminisce about past failures and SV Mumbo Jumbo metaverse promises.”
Uh. Ken, Ive been in touch via Joe for months via email, skype, actually demoing, feedbacking and moving along your web.alive links/examples to my contacts online. etc.
I dont hide, I dont reminise and while I have had constructive communications with Joe, I have no desire to play blog expert or offer “serious” advise blindly to a “open community” that has shown over and over again an inability to work in ways that open a media uniformly and in ways that arent targeted at “distribution control” of all efforts tied to a tool – owned by a single company.
That said, there is no doubt that in the 21st century ahead we face problems to solve.
c3
Hi Cube: UNREAL is an open source tool like maya / photoshop. We own our content or environments, etc.
Safety, security, usability, re-use, etc. are factors to enable requirements for clients,
Ken,
As you’re so fond of reminding us. Words mean nothing, without action it’s just vaporware.
Can you share with us your client experience? All we’re seeing here is your own “mumbo-jumbo”.
No client work, No real world projects means your opinion is all very much theory.
Oh and how perfect, you have a sand-box project called Titanic.
Ken, I have contacted the new owners of Web.Alive, with a link to this forum. Hopefully they can share with us their vision.
Perhaps the only real requirement for a dominant virtual world would be that it somehow made Generation Z happy to be there… whatever that means.
I’m not convinced that a place has to be inherently, obviously utilitarian to be useful. Any place where two or more people can talk is useful. Like the telephone, or even email. All it has to be, is a bit different. A sense of presence alone might almost be enough.
Sorry, Ken. I can’t come say my piece, because http://ec3v3.projectchainsaw.com is Windows-only.
Ian, Thanks for the contacts; we are in contact with the developers (the old Nortel Guys) but the new buyers haven’t appeared yet. Web.alive will be emerging from Beta soon, So we may be able to disclose some of the clients/projects; but we have a NDA for there reasons.
Thanks
‘Mumbo Jumbo’ was coined by Caleb Booker a while ago to describe the Silicon Valley Vapourware popular maybe 2 years ago.
Melissa, the PC emulator works fine on the MAC; so I am told.
Hula hoops had their day in 1955.
Beatles in 1963
SL in 2006
Nothing new in the boom / bust cycles.
The times they are a’changin’; dont sink like a stone, dont critize what you can’t understand, etc, etc.
Ian, are you the “Ministry of Ian” guy.
If so, why are you interested in or projects/clients. We only produce content that works in web.alive browser plugin. Our content is not totally committed to web.alive it can be ported into other similar plugins using the UNREAL engine.
I’m intrigued by your interest and motives?
The challenge of course is that VR Products are moving targets. You cannot come to market with a new product that does everything that the old products does, plus “all the stuff that nobody every thought of”. if that is your spec, you have essential drafting a perma-dev scenario. You can’t possible complete something that has a perpetually evolving V1.0 set of requirements. Therefore, to be viable, you must bring to market something that does basically what the other do(assuming people actual want that feature list),then add a modest amount of improvement to establish differentiation. get this right and you can then begin adding innovation. get it wrong, you will never make the shortlist at a major corp(again, this assumes that an existing set of usual suspects have a product that someone wants). if you don’t make the shortlist, and convert the RFI to contract, you end up looking like some of the “usual suspects” who have burned through 10’s of millions of $$, and are still not financialy viable. but consider this: MySpace is tremendously popular. I could build an exact replica and call it MyPlace. I would never succeed. To succeed, I must do everything good that MySpace does, eliminate the bad, and then add a feature set so compelling that I draw away the MySpace users. and that is just to compete with a FREE product. My point is this: SL has had something like 7-10 years to mature, and we see the result of that today(good, bad and other). Forterra, Proton etc have had maybe 3-4 years, and web.alive possibly 2 years. while it would be nice to imagine that someone coming to market today, could deliver a product like “MyPlace”, but that simply is not viable(see paragraph 1). what a new competitor must do however, is deliver to market something that has enough core featureset to make the shortlist, AND enough obvious competitive advantage that it does not need to be exhaustively defended/explained, etc.
Web,alive is just a delivery platform we use to provide our content. We work like the film industry just creating content in a very similar way. High res models, textures, AI, Animations, etc.
Ken,
I hope the new owners of Web.Alive discover this forum thread. I’m sure they will be very interested in your company taking on the role of ’spokesperson’ for all things Web.Alive
Surely if you have an NDA, this would also extend to no unauthorized usage of communication, without prior written approval in publication and press?
I also LOL when I hear people using an NDA for their lack of clients, activity and commercial presence.
As you say, until then the whole thing is ‘mumbo jumbo’. We wait to hear about real clients, real projects and a real reason to believe what you’re saying.
Your web site is your front door, the one thing that will tell your true story. On that issue I rest my case. LOL.
Also this need to quote Dylan?! bizarre.
Hula Hoops and the Beatles are boom and bust cycles?! Really? Also, SL in 2006 and the growth to what it is in 2009 is bust? Just about every platform would like SL’s revenue, brand and opportunities. Sorry Ken, you’re logic is very odd.
I can only think you’re using this forum as a self publicity driver. As in the loudest voice is heard?
Dusan, Can I also ask why you’ve let Ken and Joe hijack your blog?
There are many historical examples on how new ideas, products get developed and evolve.
Steam Locos, Motor cars, Films, Radio, TV, etc. etc.
We see VRWs will follow the film industry model; no interest in the delivery media (Cameras, projectors, Computers, etc) If the content is good people will demand, it must be easy to use, reliable, secure, safe, etc. these are our concerns at the moment. Content needs good film like experts, storybording, animators, AI progammers, etc.
Freedom of speech “Minister of Ian”
I thought this site was for as billed:
Applications and Tools, Business in Virtual Worlds, Deep Thoughts, Virtual World Platforms.
It seem like a SL appreciation society; defending something to the death; Why SL will always be revered like the Model T FORD (fit for purpose in its day)
Neil Canham
Co-founder at Flying Island Limited
John I understand some of the points you make, but doesn’t it depend on your use case? I have on office on the Beta Business Park in Second Life. It’s a fantastic business community, I get to make great contacts and generate prospects for our collaboration and VW meeting solution without travelling all over the world. However, when we drop into the office from our web site for a private meeting of a confidential nature, then we’d prefer something more private. Achievable in SL? Yes. Expensive? Yes. What if we want to own the data? Then we need SLE or OpenSim running on our own boxes/cloud. What if some of our users are not VW converts but see the value in the 3D space, so they want it to launch quickly, easily and be very easy to use? Web.Alive has plenty to offer for that last case. Do I feel as immersed in Web.Alive with the absence of voice gestures, lip sync, subtle things like animations for fidgetting when resting/sitting, less flexible camera? No. But I am pretty sure that for a first time / infrequent user, they can start getting the benefits of a shared 3D space more quickly with less frustration with Web.Alive
Ken,
If this is the case, why then are you shouting so loudly about Web.Alive? As you’ve said, they’re all just a “delivery media”. Following your sudden u-turn in your argument, It should not matter if this is achieved on SL, Teleplace or Web.Alive.
This is total contradiction, contrary to what you’ve been ramming down our throats in two forum threads. The “delivery media” is redundant, as long as the content is correct. In Holland, we have a phrase that states that a “two-faced snake is not deadly, just comical”.
Ken, you’re an odd man. Odd. LOL.
Freedom of speech, is fine. You have every right to spout off your opinion. The down side is we’re seeing the REAL YOU. It also means Nortel and the new owners of Web.Alive, will have an e-trail now back to this thread. Freedom has consequences.
Ian Green
Niba-NTL
I must in all humility post this entry from Neil Canham at http://blog.knowsense.co.uk who has commented thusly on an article “IBM goes Web.alive” at LinkedIn Virtual Worlds group.
“I have on office on the Beta Business Park in Second Life. It’s a fantastic business community, I get to make great contacts and generate prospects for our collaboration and VW meeting solution without travelling all over the world. However, when we drop into the office from our web site for a private meeting of a confidential nature, then we’d prefer something more private. Achievable in SL? Yes. Expensive? Yes. What if we want to own the data? Then we need SLE or OpenSim running on our own boxes/cloud. What if some of our users are not VW converts but see the value in the 3D space, so they want it to launch quickly, easily and be very easy to use? Web.Alive has plenty to offer for that last case. Do I feel as immersed in Web.Alive with the absence of voice gestures, lip sync, subtle things like animations for fidgetting when resting/sitting, less flexible camera? No. But I am pretty sure that for a first time / infrequent user, they can start getting the benefits of a shared 3D space more quickly with less frustration with Web.Alive”
Now that strikes me as a calm, simple objective critique of the situation. Maybe we can treat web.alive as a step to getting mass adoption of SL.
Man speaks with fork tougue; methinks
What an earth is your beef?
Anybody know who this ‘Ian Green’ Character is?
I’m going to try Joe’s world but in awhile, I just saw this.
Has “Ian Green” any URLs or is he just hot air? Vapourware!
Unity example at last;
just click on “Try it now” on the homepage of http://www.assemblive.com
Direct access to our “trial” event: http://www.assemblive.com/main/trial/
If you want to schedule your own events, you have to register (It’s free for now).
(Direct access: http://www.assemblive.com/main/register/ )
Dusan under pressure from above?
Comments awaiting moderation!
Just took a ride into that Web Alive titanic portfolio thing. Seems OK, but now I need two hands to walk, the mouse and I got to hold down a button on the keyboard. Next I’m going to need an extra arm just to walk around a 3d space.
Another Unity URL list:
We have utilized Unity as our Serious Games platform of choice because of it’s web-browser capabilities. Checkout our demo at: http://www.nvisiondefense.com – we have also utilized Unity for our Commercial Product geared for architects and developers: http://www.nVis360.com
Posted by Rich Ortiz
Bet it’s the spam filter again!
[...] Week »What are people saying? -The Competitive Landscape of Virtual Worlds by @DusanWriter http://tinyurl.com/ya497e5 #secondlife #virtualworldsThe Linden$ exchange rate just changed! Best rate to buy L$ for EUR is [...]
Three different Web front ends for OpenSim (and Second Life) are in the works — 3Di, Unity and Xenki. 3Di seems closest to reality, and is actually being used by companies in Japan as a Web front end for OpenSim worlds. (Some bugs remain in the public general-purpose version, such as avatars not looking right.)
With a Web front end and a very very limited functionality set, it becomes possible to hold quick meetings, social get-togethers, training sessions… and for people to invite their friends, companies to invite their clients, achieving a social networking effect. Right now, this effect is greatly hindered by the steep learning curve.
After the Web front end, what’s needed is an easy authoring tool. Something like the Diva Distro, but launched automatically using an easy Web-based interface, with a broad selection of OARs to download to get started. With this, everyone can be their own grid owner, for free (if they run it on their own computers) or at a low cost (if they have it professionally hosted).
Gaming clubs, social groups, and of course schools and companies can then easily set up their own worlds for work and for play, and connect them to other worlds via the hypergrid.
We’re already seeing the start of this, with over 300 different grids running on the OpenSim platform, most of them hypergrid-enabled — even though the hypergrid technology was only implemented this year, and OpenSim only became stable enough to use a few months ago.
Yes, most of these grids are single-purpose: a builder needing a sandbox, a machinimator needing a low-cost set, an architect needing a place to show designs to customers, companies needing meeting spaces, schools needing virtual classrooms.
But over time these small projects add up. The early Internet was similarly composed of small Websites, badly designed, limited in functionality. Many were simple “brochureware” sites. But it was the sheer number of them that made the Internet so useful and interesting.
As the worlds based on OpenSim technology (or other compatible standards) continue to explode, we will see an ecosystem start to evolve from these point projects. I personally, am very excited to be around to watch it happen.
– Maria Korolov
Editor, Hypergrid Business (http://www.hypergridbusiness.com)
Hi Maria, Link inoperative can you please adjust.
This post has been a great read with some thought provoking, albeit, sometimes overly personal comments. So many of these issues seem generational to me, or maybe better, demographics related. I often think about the kids adopting these technologies and their pure experience, unclouded by preconceived ideas of what that experience ‘should’ be. The digital ‘natives’ saw is over-used but valid nonetheless. This generation asks few questions, they just experience and learn. When their time comes, they will exploit their innate comfort with the medium and innovate.
We, the developers of the day, definitely need to build on the current model for VW’s that has been established but inevitably, the changes will be incremental. I’m always surprised at the obituary styled bashing of SL. It seems so alive and well to me whenever I choose to rez there.
Thanks to all though, much appreciated.
I thought that was the purpose of this site. Not SL bashing (but I have noticed some very passionate defenders) “The King is dead; Long live the King” is the term we in the UK use to describe moving to a new reign. SL served us proud but it seem stuck in a rut; and dogged by hype and promises that never materialize. Other initiatives are in the wings.
One of the problems with text is you can’t hear the tone of voice – you can guess at it, but you’re still guessing. Now, having spoken with Ken, I know he is enthusiastic if not downright garrulous. So I can’t help reading his comments with that in mind: imagine someone you sit down with at the local pub who likes to get into a loud debate about college basketball or the meaning of the 17% tip…or that’s how I prefer to think of it anyways, as if it’s a rollicking good time with a lot of wandering and no particular end, but it’s spirited, anyways, perhaps in more ways than one. LOL
It’s also how I think of his messages spamming across every single LinkedIN group I’m in or his comments on some unrelated question which turns into a sell sheet for Web.Alive. There’s nothing wrong with shameless promotion, it’s how you generate awareness and clients after all, but I put it in context and don’t particularly expect a platform-agnostic discussion.
But based on this, Ken, your moaning about people who defend SL comes across as, well, a sort of highly refined hypocrisy or, at the very least, kettle calling by the pot.
The point of this post wasn’t to defend Second Life – it was to point out that while SL has been a leader, there are far too many “me-too” products that have come on-stream that aren’t actually SOLUTIONS to business problems, and that don’t push the technology in a sufficiently innovative direction to be game-changers.
(Maria – I was very excited about the browser based viewer from 3Di which I first saw at the Virtual Worlds conference in 2007 I think, but I’m not sure it’s sufficiently robust to call it a game-changer and, as you point out, the functionality is limited. It IS however, an example of the kinds of innovations based on OpenSim that I hope to continue to see).
Now…you can bring in the needs of old people and elder care – which is kind of like holding up a photo and saying “but think of the children!” – kind of hard to argue with, but can you show me the project again? I missed the link.
So, this started as an agnostic piece about the virtual worlds industry, and yet you keep setting it up as a “Web.Alive is great and SL never fulfilled its promise” and yet….well, you never substantiate that argument. Because my measurement has nothing to do with concurrency, it has to do with whether the platform is supporting use cases for paying customers and showing measurable returns, and on that basis I’d say that SL is getting along just fine, thanks, and that the promises made are being fulfilled.
I mean, at the end of the day, I’d like to hear you outline the pros and cons and to do so against a credible interpretation of other products. In case you didn’t notice, it’s an intelligent and knowledgeable crowd here and they know a “pitch” when they see one, including from me. But a rational intelligent and thoughtful explanation of W.E is more than welcome – but that would include the good and the bad, just as we have no hesitation talking about the good and the bad of SL or of OpenSim or PaperVision.
In any case, I’ve found the discussion highly useful and, at times, entertaining, and at other times a little too pointed and personal – but you leave the pub, and who really remembers what you said the next day anyways right?
I thought that was the point of this site! Deep thought, etc, etc. SL isn’t a Sacred Cow it’s a utility (unless you are financially committed; then you shouldn’t be running this site) that can be commented upon to improve or otherwise. Good debate needs challenging not sheepish silence from the crowd. Silence is deemed as acceptance where I come from.
We all like the game changers, the innovators. But it is the me too people, the engeneers and the businessmen who take the new game to a different level. Edison advocated direct current, but in the end it was alternating current, with it’s weird equations and the work of techies who became the standard.
Who ever invented the horseless carriage has made a tremendous leap in technology. But nowadays people want cars with safety belts, windscreen wipers, cruise control and climatisation. Modern cars are a product of me too, product improvement built on the original concept of a few. Economy works on the prinicple that people want the best product for their money. That is not necessarily the most innovative, only the one that best fits the need of the customer.
Maybe virtual worlds are leaving the phase of novelty and entering the phase of continuous improvement. Things like stability, a limited need for restarts, reduction of lag, clear pricing and conditions, IP protection, custumor relations and adaptation to existing platforms are becoming important. Seems to me Linden Lab needs to review it’s strategies.
I couldn’t get web.alive to work. I guess it’s not ready for consumers yet. I downloaded it and installed it and saw no desktop icon. I looked in the programs list and it wasn’t there — that is, only a device for reporting crashes was enabled but no client. I looked in my folders under programx X86 and programs and searched all over — nothing to click on to start this world up.
Unless it’s some sort of extender and I’m supposed to “go somewhere” and “do something else”.
Prok, you just dont get it, it’s “a one click and your in” world now. Stop thinking 20th Century. Baah, Baah, Baah.
Uallas,
Finally someone is starting to think along making progress. People have started to understand the concept of VR, they want; ease of use, security, reliability, lots of content, etc. and are not interested in the brand.
I’m thrilled to here announce my new 3D immersive virtual world: “Express.” Express is virtually real and as easy to use as your imagination. With the speed of thought it transports you to a world that you define. What will you create?
My own creation is an idyllic fantasy vaguely reminiscent of a south pacific island permanently aglow like its the Bikini atoll – awash in warm breeze and the gentle crashing of a sea mist so fine you can move beneath it just as you fly through the air. Here I have every comfort, here my every wish is fulfilled. I move in this with the power of a god – if not the God.
Soon I’ll want others to share it with, and somehow I expect that my female companion Ruth will start talking about something “RL” that some snake insists is the only apple still missing from our paradise. (Well, my paradise, as hers looks a little different) And before long I’ll probably get so bored I’ll go crazy and kill my own brother just for something to do.
Luckily you’re much brighter and won’t make such a hash of it. No doubt you’ll find a way to monetize “Express” while I serve my time. I bequeath it to you.
What will you build?
Using the word utility shows how badly Dusan’s point was missed. His post was never a comparison of platforms. Not written for engineers…not about widgets and lights that go blinkity blink in the night. I am uncomfortable saying much more because I have a vested interest in keeping it a secret…but the crowd, the only crowd there is, is in Second Life. Not because it is good widget but because that is where immersive, co-creative content is being generated and (passion)communities of interest and practice are growing as a result.
The operative phrase was “Expressive Domains.” Story, narrative, characters, setting and dialog are what makes Second Life sticky…whether they fix the first touch experience or not. If all the arguments above were correct we should all be out building a better Beta Max…it was the better engineered technology but oops only let you record an hour of programming. VHS gave you a degraded picture but more content…Duh… Again with 3D media the lesson will be the same “Content Trumps Technology.” If you missed this, “As expressive domains, virtual worlds allow a level of self-expression, storytelling and sharing that is rich, varied and deeply immersive. For enterprise, (or schools or non-profits) the virtue of being expressive opens up significant value in the potential for creativity, innovation, empathy, and deep collaboration.”
Triumph/victory and dominance will be delivered by the 21st Century virtual world equivalents of DW Griffith, Sergei Eisenstein, Federico Fellini, John Ford, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg…story tellers all. It ain’t the bling it’s the sparkle, awe and wonder. http://www.TVWSP.com
I noticed you left Teleplace off your list as well. Why? They’re as much in the collaboration business as Forterra and the like.
Neptune – agreed. And I’ve actually been quite impressed with Teleplace, especially its ability to include Web content and ‘co-edit’ documents etc. Wasn’t an intentional oversight although I’m not sure they have a very high growth curve or market share. Maybe you have some idea of their momentum?
Dusan – Not offhand. I saw them at 3DTLC in San Jose, but I couldn’t speak to their momentum. But based on their website, it looks like they’re moving along decently.
listed was Croquet.
Teleplace is them, with a new name and website.
New web.alive convert:
http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/technology-and-science/nortel-webalive-second-life-for-business.asp
Speaks for itself;
Dusan – People are starting to disagreeing with your evaluation.
Uh huh. Ken, you’ve become, well, kind of, hmmm. I’m not sure what the word is. But I think you’ve had your say and have shifted towards using up your quota for self-promotion. Move on.
Thanks for the opportunity.
Will use a pseudonym like you next time.
http://games.venturebeat.com/2009/12/17/multiverses-remix-makes-it-easy-to-create-avatar-spinoff-games/
for proks query….
Multiverse? making 2d flash games for facebook promotions…
from keynote to footnote… more reality for the virtual set.
[...] the speculation turns out to be true or not, it reinforces my personal sense that we’ll see a shaking out in the virtual world’s industry in the coming months as [...]
Metaplace looks like next one.
MellaniuM holds the key to the future?
Re:
http://www.miltonbroome.com/index.html
Is high definition 3D models and high concurrency with 3D VOIP Spacial audio the furture?
A NEW one worth looking at…3DVIA has created 3DVIA Scenes. Make your own 3D environment, and share with others easily. Currently in Private Beta (see video):
http://3dvia.tv/using-3dvia-scenes/
Nice article, and I may cite a few bits for couple of proposals I’m gearing up to pitch.
As for the future, all the links above seem to repeat the failed approaches of the past. New technology is not an answer, after 20 years – I’ve seen and used more than most. Its a question of application and in the margins of a few comments above are good directions.
PS those interested in History, Art, and Innovative Design in virtual worlds – and will be in LA for SIGGRAPH (late July) are invited to the Web3D Art Retrospective.