User
Is Second Life an alternative to There
As I wrote earlier, There.com will close on March 9th. I also wrote that many of their users might probably go to Second Life afterwards, as their approach at virtual reality is similar. But is Second Life really an alternative for There?
I have been at this point several times in the past, only approaching it from the opposite direction, and asked myself for alternatives to Second Life. It is the purpose of this article to compare my view on other virtual worlds than There and Second Life, and perhaps serve as a guidance for refugees from both worlds.
I am limiting my comparison to the ‘Second Life’ model of virtual worlds. This model shares the following traits:
- There is no overall ‘theme’ or ‘goal’ to the virtual world, and it is not a ‘game’, but rather can serve as a platform for such.
- The virtual world does (or can) have an in-world economic model
- The virtual world enables its users to create content themselves
Thus, I did not include many of the most popular MMORPG’s like World of Warcraft, EVE Online, or even Entropia Universe (which is sometimes traded as the hottest alternative to Second Life, but which has been left out here because of the gaming aspect and the fact that there is no way to step out of the ‘theme’).
Another point to note is that most virtual worlds do not display their user statistics, so there is no telling how easily and how many people can be met when signing up to that world, unless you become an active part in it. I did not try all these worlds myself, but merely collect them here as a reference and comparison guideline.
Active Worlds is unique (or near-unique) as it allows access not only through a client software, but also through a browser plugin. Personally, I believe this is overrated, even though there seems to be a consensus that ‘people don’t want separate clients for different aspects of the internet’ and prefer to have everything inside their browsers. This view leaves aside the fact that web browsers aren’t eternal themselves, and are subject to change as the technology changes. (Who knows, maybe Viewers will be the next browsers?)
Other than the browser plugin feature, Active Worlds looks really ugly from the outside, and the avatars aren’t nowhere near as good as in Second Life (even though they are a far cry from the avatars in There). Also, their community guidelines prohibit “material containing nudity, pornography, or sexual material of a lewd, lecherous or obscene nature and intent”, which is a showstopper to me, as these contents are all part of the human life (and a most enjoyable part actually) and something I enjoy virtually as well. So all in all, it’s not a place I’d like to be.
On the other hand, the chinese online world HiPiHi seems to come closest to Second Life in terms of graphics and content creation. Actually, it is so similar that it’s hard not to think of a Second Life Copycat, even though HiPiHi creator Hui Xu states otherwise that “it is absolutely a misunderstanding of the virtual world if people think HiPiHi is a copycat of SecondLife”. Due to the nature of HiPiHi, most of its users are chinese, so the real issue with it will probably be language barriers. And then, why switch to a virtual world that is just like SL anyway?
IMVU is another virtual world whose user base seems to be quite large (the website talks about ‘millions of users’ and shows around 100.000 users ‘online right now’). Their avatars, again, look worse than Second Life (and childish, in a way). Actually, ALL competitors seem to share this common drawback, even though SL avatars are believed to be ugly already (probably in comparison to MMORPGs which feature expertly created avatars and great graphics, but nowhere near the creative options of virtual worlds).
Kaneva is another world with ugly avatars and terrible graphics, and even the website doesn’t feature much (or ANYTHING at all) about why I would want to join it in the first place. Actually, it is getting tedious of seeing this trait over and over, as virtual worlds all offer the same ‘meet friends, chat, create, have fun’ scheme without offering something unique that would give people reason about why to join THIS world in the first place.
Maybe it’s just me, but the avatars of Onverse look so freakish to me that I actually am afraid to join it. They are probably meant to be comical, but for some reason give me the creeps. Also, this ‘funny’ approach prevents users from creating a really beautiful virtual persona, which is a huge incentive that shouldn’t be overlooked. Other than that, more of the same.
Then, of course, there is Blue Mars, which, from its onset, offers much better graphics, more professional building tools, allegedly better performance and (by now, at least) cheaper prices than Second Life. A massive drawback right now might be the small user base, and the demanding system requirements.
And finally, there’s the Red Light Center, which is an exception in this list as there doesn’t seem to be a way to create content yourself. I just included it here as a curiousity, because it is exclusively aimed at the ‘adult’ side of virtual worlds and gives its residents plenty of opportunities to dance and have intimate encounters. The point here is again: Why settle for ‘just this’ when you can have the same things at the same graphics quality in Second Life as well, and so much more?
While there are some promising alternatives (Blue Mars, HiPiHi), Second Life remains the standard in today’s virtual worlds, and will provide its users with the largest possible creative freedom and customization as well as sporting a gigantic user base. However, SL has its drawbacks, too. As There.com shows, virtual worlds are dependent on commercial success, without which they will cease existing. This is true for all of the above, and thus sets them at the same risk as There, which already backed Adam Frisby’s first prediction for 2010.
To sidestep this risk, there is the very narrow path of taking part in an open sourced project at creating standardized virtual world software, called Open Simulator. Is is a non-commercial project (and thus independent of commercial success) and aims at openness and intercompatibility. Currently, it is fully compatible with the Second Life viewer software, thus enabling anyone who is familiar with Second Life to access one of the many OpenSim Grids and enjoy the same graphics and features as SL itself (plus a few extra, such as megaregions and megaprims).
The biggest of these Grids is OSGrid, which is also the most ‘open’ as it enables anyone to connect their own servers to their grid, and test and play with the software in any way they like, without being restricted by terms of service. The one thing to keep in mind is, however, that the user base of OSGrid is very very small in comparison to Second Life (around 100 users online at all times in OSGrid, when over 60.000 are online in SL). Thus, OSGrid and OpenSim are certainly not for everyone, but rather a viable alternative for those who feel SL is too restrictive, expensive or not innovative enough to be exciting.
3
Mar
There is over. For some reason I can’t resist that pun, but it’s actually grave news for the Metaverse. There.com was launched in 2003, about the same time as Second Life. Both had similar concepts and shared common traits, such as an in-world economy and user-created content. Unlike SL however, There was aimed to be PG-13 rated and therefore open for everyone (where SL is basically an adult world with an attached Teen-Grid). When I joined SL, I had tried various other virtual worlds as well, including There (and I again did so after getting banned from SL). Personally, to me There had some really bad graphics (which were way worse than Second Life) and that put me off before I even got to know how the community was like, or understood that adult content was disallowed there. In hindsight, of course I’m glad I didn’t move there, as I would need to move again now.
However, I still have mixed feelings about this. Mike Wilson, CEO of Makena Technologies (the providers of There.com) wrote in the statement that announced the closing the very true and revealing sentence: “There is a business, and a business that can’t support itself doesn’t work.” The people who created content in There, or even had their own businesses based on There’s in-world economy, will lose their creations forever. There, like Second Life, is a walled garden, yet unlike SL there is no open sourced community that is working on a compatible virtual world. In short: Everything will be gone. And while There.com will try to reimburse recently converted Therebucks (There’s in-world currency), everything else will sleep the long sleep of cables.
This, once more, gives me opportunity to think about the concepts of virtual worlds, and which is the best route to follow. As long as your virtual world depends on business, it will rise and fall with the economy. It is nice to think it won’t happen to SL, as it is too big and economically strong, but the current crisis has brought even bigger giants down. I’m not saying I have reason to believe SL will close. I guess my point is just that, as long as it is in the hands of an economic business, its fate is doubtful. (Would the internet ever have grown to what it is today, if it would have been backed by a capitalist venture?) The new black is Blue Mars, which just launched its Beta a few months ago. Many people are putting a lot of effort and creativity into it now. Will it work? Will it survive and honour those that contributed? I would hate to put my heart into creating things there, only to see it close because of economic reasons. I wish it all the best, but it’s still the same fear as with Second Life, and every other business virtual world.
Many players of There will probably switch over to Second Life, and I welcome them with all my heart, and hope they will find a place that is just as great, or even greater, than There was. However, I would even more like to see them in OSGrid or in another non-commercial open simulator grid. Not just because every new face there is refreshing, but also, because I believe these are the foundations built to last. From what I have come to learn is that: If you don’t NEED to make business, don’t try. It removes a lot of pressure from you, and gives you more room to breathe. Also, only the things you share can never be lost. Because they can be shared back with you at any time. If you keep them to yourself, they are vulnerable to loss due to unforeseen circumstances.
THERE for: Welcome Therians. We salute you.