April 13, 2008 by Nobody Fugazi
Posted in
When I read Frustrated virtual agencies look beyond Second Life, I was a bit amused. Well, no, as a Virtual Worlds Consultant, I laughed. Consider this:
...“In 2006, Second Life seemed like the place we could get the most immersion,” said Electric Sheep chief operating officer Giff Constable in a telephone interview. “Linden hasn’t been able to realize the potential of the platform or to make it easy.”
Electric Sheep has produced some of Second Life’s most visible corporate projects, including a tie-in with CSI:NY, and Reuters Island. In December the company laid off about one-third of its staff, mostly from its Second Life-heavy Events Group.
The change of view, as Constable describes it, stems from a series of unfulfilled promises by Linden to improve both the usability of its software, and to implement developer tools that would allow MDCs to customize the Second Life experience for its corporate customers...
Now, let's take stock. Electric Sheep Company (ESC) is the only company to date that seems to have been able to get a commercial license for the viewer. And their CSI:NY project... somehow managed to make the front page of the Second Life website. How, exactly, does one get Linden Lab to place a project on their front page? If that doesn't spell 'h-o-o-k-u-p', I'm not sure what does. If ESC is going to complain, they should at least acknowledge the food they got before biting the hand that feeds them.
As far as 'improving usability' - let's be frank again. It is the platform, yes, but you shouldn't be dressing up a bulldozer as a Ferrari when you're making a sales pitch to a customer. We all know, or should - especially the 'experts' - that Second Life has a history of being difficult to use for many people whose lives are lost in Office software and who have never played a 3d game before.1
The tone of the criticism seemed to revolve around the CSI:NY project, which seemed - as roberte commented on the article, a means of spreading the manure more evenly:
...Virtual Worlds for Marketing and branding was’nt the issue- the lousy jobs done by those who said they were the -new experts - and the bloggers who “anointed them” as the “metarati” was...
I don't know that ESC did a good or bad job on the CSI:NY project. I wasn't interested; as a Virtual World Consultant myself I was a bit annoyed at the favoritism ESC was given. To see them complaining now makes it amusing to me.2
But then they brought it right back:
...Constable agreed with Haik the industry is trending towards more modest virtual experiences, and tempered his criticism with praise for Linden’s past cooperation. “I’m bullish on virtual worlds,” Constable said. “I’ll keep on rooting for Linden Lab to make progress on their platform, and maybe we’ll be back in Second Life in a significant way down the road.”...
The sheep kissed the hand after the bite.
Other companies mentioned seemed realistic. Other virtual worlds are always options; they should have been. But here's the thing: Most of the virtual worlds mentioned have existed for quite some time - and they have been options. So why the sudden criticism? It does seem that there is a trend toward blaming the virtual world of Second Life's platform for not living up to expectations. But then, that really isn't new.
Maybe the problem is with having realistic expectations when it comes to virtual worlds.
Speaking for myself, the first thing I have to do with new clients is make sure that they have realistic expectations. Virtual world consultants and virtual world agencies are supposed to have realistic expectations and make sure that their clients do as well. Maybe the problem in larger agencies is that the person doing the selling isn't one of the people doing the actual work: The curse of any form of development in a corporate environment is getting one's requirements for a project from a marketing brochure.
As far as the rest - I have to openly wonder how the projects mentioned in the article measure success.
1Arrow Keys. PgUp. PgDown. This is hard for many people, as silly as it sometimes seems.
2 I don't know who I have to sleep with to get those sorts of hook ups, and I'm not sure I want to because I have a feeling it would be someone I find repulsive.
- Nobody Fugazi's blog
- Add new comment
- 869 reads
Not made for soundbites
This topic is not cut out for soundbites. I was interviewed for this piece shortly after I wrote a blog post (http://blogs.electricsheepcompany.com/giff/?p=546) and before catching up with many Lindens at the VWC. I blogged some comments trying to clarify some things after the story here: http://blogs.electricsheepcompany.com/giff/?p=557
This is not about casting blame. We made our own mistakes on CSI -- for example, with the download of the CSI-OnRez viewer we were originally using a combination of EC2 and S3, but realized right away as traffic spiked that EC2 was throttling the downloads, so flipped over to using S3 solo, which worked smoothly. That was a tech-architecture misjudgement that made some people wait for the download -- luckily we were able to fix it quickly.
Linden Lab has been a good partner to ESC, and they realized that the CSI event was the most high profile thing ever to happen to Second Life since the Reuters launch. You can call that favoritism, or you can call it business. They've also been a frustrating partner, but that's inevitable and understandable since our priorities don't align perfectly. I'm sure ESC has frustrated Linden Lab at times as well. For the record, we do not have an exclusive on the commercial license for the viewer.
I think that it is silly that we cannot talk openly about technical constraints without the conversation shifting to a knife fight. If you want to fantasize that Second Life is the perfect platform as it stands today, that is your choice but I prefer to walk with open eyes and examine strengths and weaknesses honestly. We have never pitched Second Life as a "Ferrari" or set erroneous expectations with our clients; I don't quite know how or why you are making that statement. With CSI, we hit almost exactly the expectations that were set. We have always been straight talking with regards to the platforms pros and cons.
Second Life has been a fabulous place for learning and experimentation, and with experimentation comes mistakes all around. We accept that. We have pushed Second Life in countless ways, and it has been worth it many times over. That said, we *currently* think that other platforms better fit the needs of most our particular clients. Everyone must make their own decisions.
- Giff Constable
Since you gave me the option to choose...
Between favoritism and business, I'll make my choice, Giff:
Favoritism.
Why do I say that? Mainly because ESC has gotten a lot of things out of Linden Lab that are not available to We Other Folk. I still haven't got licensing cost information from Linden Lab. I still don't know how CSI:NY got on the front page of Second Life. I don't know anything about those things.
If you care to explain how such things happened on your weblog or here, I might be able to make a more informed choice. But from the data on hand... I must tell you... I have to go with favoritism in business.
And, honestly, Linden Lab's synthetic world has gotten too big for people to get hookups. So the criticism is mainly on Linden Lab - not ESC. But if the shoe fits, by all means, stick your metatarsals in.
Second Life Consultant
Fair enough
I can't comment on how LL makes their decisions because I just don't know. I don't know their criteria for whom they share that licensing information -- all I can tell you is that we don't have an exclusive.
People have been crying favoritism in Second Life since 2004, and it isn't worth dwelling on. Linden does what they will do -- whether as SL community members or "metaverse developers", we've all seen it over and over. I like them as people a great deal, and they try to be fair but they are not always consistent. They try to listen but it doesn't always happen in practice. Their intentions are good but we still end up frustrated at the pace of change, level of transparency, and openness of technology. So we all just focus on getting stuff done. If we ask LL for something and they say "yes", great, and it they say "no" (which they do all the time), then we figure out another way. It's just the reality of doing business with Linden Lab. Actually I don't see why criticizing them on this topic is so radically different from my being critical of technical constraints to Second Life that seem to be a long way from being fixed. You've been in SL for a long time -- you know the story when it comes to havoc, speedtree, html-on-a-prim, http versus xml-rpc, LSL vs Mono, regAPI 2.0, etc. Some is finally being implemented -- a long time coming -- which is a *great* step forward I hope.
Is it really surprising that I would be interested in other technologies that I suspect will be more amenable to the mainstream, and also where I don't need to wait on another party to agree that my technical needs are even relevant, agree to a mutually acceptable implementation design, and agree to an implementation timeline?
- Giff
baaing a different tune
In fairness, the sheep later posted that they'd been somewhat misrepresented in the Reuters piece.
Yes, they did post.
But Eric Reuters doesn't misquote, does he?
Second Life Consultant
The Cardinal Rules of the Consultant
1. If it goes right, it's because of your effort.
2. If it goes wrong, clearly someone else is at fault.
That, in a nutshell, is Electric Sheep's case. They're no different than any other consultant. For them to put themselves out as any more is disingenuous. That Linden Lab jumped into bed with them to hype the CSI stuff...well, that's a sign of naivete on Linden's part. (I know, shocking...)
Actually...
Those are the Cardinal Rules of the Bad Consultants.
Second Life Consultant
Yes, but what are the expectations?
"...Second Life has a history of being difficult to use for many people..."
It certainly does if we're expecting everyone who walks thru the gate to buy their first land and start building within minutes of arrival. Isn't this all, at least to some extent, a case of early-adopter blindness? We're all so close we don't see wood for trees. Building a huge shared 3D space might be the main thing we, the early-adopters, come for but i doubt it's what (most of) a mainstream audience will want to do. They'll come for the fun of socialising in a 3D virtual space, for the virtual shopping and for the virtual sex (like it or not). They will be the AUDIENCE, not the producers, of virtual worlds.
Seems to me we need to make THAT audience experience work first and foremost and stop trying to convince ourselves what we need are better 3D construction tools and everything will be ok. The truth is we'll build in virtual worlds pretty much whatever the tools are like, that's what we like to do.
The mainstream audience we all seem to want will arrive when we hide the hammer and chisels and bring out the toys!
This is very much on point
This is very much on point there. The first time I came to SL, I found it a very frustrating interface, difficult to use, and difficult to find my way around to places with interesting people. (And let's face it -- the orientation was very buggy and not terribly helpful. I don't know if it's improved.) After a few hours (and a few crashes), I gave up on it.
However, the second time around, I had friends already there wanting me to join them, and they helped me learn the interface, the shortcut keys, the Search function, and all the little things you need to know. And over time, as I learned more, I started doing some very basic building and scripting (though still not much), and I even started DJing at a few clubs. Now I'm the one helping new friends arriving, and I'm deep into SL.
Playing to the audience, especially the newbies, is what will really bring in the mainstream.
Vortmax Mumfuzz
DJ Vortmax