Interest In Lively Already Waning Compared To Second Life

Google's virtual world chatroom Lively launched on July 8th, drawing an enormous spike of attention that lasted roughly a couple weeks afterward.  However, according to Alexa.com and, well, Google.com's Trends, web traffic to Lively.com has been steadily dropping since then.  This is a snapshot taken yesterday afternoon--  Lively seems to be losing traffic, both in absolute terms and in comparison to Secondlife.com, which has traffic that remains relatively stable.  What do you suppose explains both these phenomena?

Comments

[Vidal Tripsa]

The fact that Lively was new and now isn't would be my strongest guess. I'd also wager that this drop is also partly down to the vast swathes of people that realised, "ooh, hang on, this actually isn't a virtual world in the same sense that we're used to, is it?", not that Lively really claims to be.

I'd predict another rise when Lively actually does launch. It's a constant occurrence nowadays, but while public betas do represent a launch of sorts, it still doesn't represent a complete product. When Lively does eventually graduate it may even manage to draw back the 32-Bit Vista exiles such as myself, who cannot use its service because of serious hardware conflicts.

[TisI]

For all the people who moan about how SL runs, they'd have a coronary in Lively. Plus there's no Tringo and user generated content.

[Gahum Riptide]

Well, if it causes most people's browsers to lag heavily or freeze up like it does mine, I'm not surprised.

[Patchouli Woollahra]

It's got something to do with the fact that even though SL's content isn't as awesome as Lively in several aspects, it's still our stuff.

People hang their personal artwork first and foremost when they can create, more often than not.

[Melanie Aluveaux]

I tried Lively, and found it BORING compared to SL. Its just chat, and nothing really to do otherwise. Plus, it seems difficult to navigate compared to SL.

[eggy lippmann]

Because Lively sucks? :)
I've been complaining for years about how limited SL is, but I love it. I complain because I want it to move forward, because I know how much better it will be in, say, ten years, but - much like a kid on Christmas Eve - I want it all now! :D

Lively brings nothing to the table that we didn't already have twelve years ago with ActiveWorlds.
AW bombed, SL has so far succeeded, if in a rather lukewarm sort of way.

Second Life is by and large the yardstick by which all virtual worlds will be measured. I can't for the life of me imagine why anyone would want to switch to that shoddy, outdated piece of crap.

Google has become too stretched out. It pays little attention to each individual project for the sake of horizontal growth. I don't know what those people are doing, honestly, it has taken them several years to develop Google Maps, which is sort of crippled compared to traditional GIS software that we had to install and run locally.

Google seems to think it can get away with a substandard software offering simply for the convenience of it being web-based, or that it's "lightweight" and thus supposedly "easy to use".

Well guess what. Half the software in the world was built with a relatively unfriendly computer language. It was built because, as a tool, it was the most flexible and powerful.

No self-respecting virtual world will ever drain people from Second Life unless its at least somewhat similar. They'll end up missing something. Whether it be the diversity of content, or their old friends, or their old hangout spot, or the fact that you can own land, or simply the fact that you can *fly*.

Conversely, what I have continously reiterated over five years is that Linden Lab must focus on enabling and empowering developers, overcoming ancient limitations, triggering inworld explosions of creativity, making us more and more productive so we can take on bigger and better projects. Only by doing this can they remain on top and ahead of the curve.

How's There (and Kaneva I guess) these days? :)

[Bryan]

Google's Lively is a joke. I went into it with an open mind, but it is really difficult to love at the moment.

Slow loading times, the awkward movement controls.

However, I do see potential for something like Lively taking off. But at the current stage it is in, I doubt anything major will come out of it.

[Jayden Emmons]

I think there was simply an initial surge of interest in Lively ("Hey, check it out!") which was not sustained simply because it was not yet ready for widespread use. When it is ready, I'm sure there will be another, longer-lasting surge.

There's really no comparison to the traffic for Second Life, which is a significantly more mature platform (in terms of its development).

[sirhc desantis]

Well I did try Lively and frankly it killed my laptop. I'm a big SL basher at times, but I just completed my first competition build and while it had its moments of hair pulling outedness I would not have missed it for the world(s). Until someone gives me that kind of fun in an alternative grid then sorry - not interested. User created content is the killer app - even if my stuff is laughable. The G team wanted a stake? Well take that stake and put it to good use - ask any vampire hunter

[LifeFactory Writer]

Hello!

I was pretty excited about Lively initially, not as an alternative to SL...it simply cannot compare, in my mind...but as an additional outlet for work I create in secondlife. I see Lively as another satellite outlet, like YouTube, Blip, Myspace, etc, and potentially valuable in this respect.

I had intended to set up a Lively room and stream my current film into it. But Lively only supports links from YouTube, and my film is two minutes too long to be posted on YouTube (As a side note: blip.tv gets my vote for both quality of image and no limits on running time. YouTube offers 1GB file size but only 10 minutes running time limits, while blip offers only 100 MB file size but no limit on run time. And even with 100MB limit, good compression provides acceptable image quality).

So...I cannot screen my current film in Lively, and I cannot make my next film there, which will be a trippy story that incorporates 16mm film I shot years ago starring Heather Donahue (of the since, Blair Witch fame).

If I cannot screen in Lively, and I cannot produce anything very sophisticated in Lively, then there is not much left for me to do there... I found myself getting homesick for SL pretty quickly.

I have some ideas for utilizing Lively down the road, but I do not find it a viable replacement for SL.

[Lynette {Radio}]

No Mac client = no deal. Plus, the PC I run WOW & SL works very well, but runs like frozen pancake syrup with Lively.

[barry]

If developers can work with open standards, then there is no limit using ExitReality as a platform. The creative desires or restrictions within Second Life are alleviated by creating environments such as Second Life on the web. The interesting thing is who will be the first movers to realise anyone can create a true virtual world.

[Mark Brown]

I think people miss the point with Lively, it is a) Google and b) only just the beginning! Regardless of initial trends LL would be foolish not to take Lively seriously.

As someone committed to virtual world rather than SL I welcome the competition.