New World Notes

Why Sony Needs to Discount PSVR to $99 (Comment of the Week)

Reader Tyler D., who clearly knows their stuff, has good suggestions for Sony in the face of slow sales of the PSVR:

There's just no way around it: $299 is a lot for a console peripheral (it's more than the cost of the base PS4). Until Sony slashes the MSRP to $99 impulse buy / bundle pack-in pricing, I don't think they'll move many more units.

For people willing to spend $300+ on mid-range VR, the Quest now offers more flexibility and functionality (in an arguably better ecosystem) for ~$100 more-- as a complete standalone package.

That said, it's worth remembering that the PS4 is the 2nd best-selling console of all-time so a 5% install base isn't shabby in terms of units sold.

That all strikes me as true, and frankly I'm surprised Sony isn't so far willing to take a loss up front by deeply discounting the PSVR. (Though I wouldn't be surprised if a price cut is announced this year.) I think Tyler's right that anyone in the market for VR per se are going to consider Oculus Quest, not PSVR -- while PS4 owners not in the market for VR might still consider buying a $99 PSVR, if only because it gives them more life to the PS4 that they spent so much money on.

Bonus suggestions from Tyler for Microsoft, which has been floundering with its own VR efforts:

Linden Lab & Magic Leap Bought, NeoVR Rises: Reader Predictions for 2020

Pic by Julienn Sands

Some really solid VR/VW 20202 predictions from readers:

NeosVR will be a success. They are now laying a solid foundation with all the tech. No big amount of active users but it's ok to focus. If the speed of development will continue the NeosVR quality will be recognized I assume. -- Rob

More about NeosVR here. Here's another:

Magic Leap will eventually be purchased by one of two companies: Facebook, or Disney. Apple will scoop up at least half of Magic Leap's patents from JP Morgan Chase. Google will stay on the fringes of XR with its mapping efforts and SLAM.  --  Joey1058 

If you're wondering why Magic Leap might be bought out, here's a post partly explaining why.

Finally, predictions around Linden Lab and High Fidelity:

No, Making a Baby Yoda in Second Life Without Disney's Permission Isn't Actually Fair Use (Comment of the Week)

When I wrote about the sudden spike in Baby Yoda content on Second Life's marketplace last week, I ironically closed by saying they were on sale now "[u]nless or until Disney's lawyers deploy a totally uncool interpretation of fair use fan art". I.E., uncool in the sense that it would probably stand up in a court of law.  As reader Zoey explains:

This wouldn't be a fair use, it in no way is for a transformative purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody or even for educational use, The only purpose is for the creators to make money off a copyrighted item which is not fair use at all. This would fail in court in at least 2 of the 4 factors. Factor 1 Transformative: being the purpose and character of your use, being you are taking a copyrighted figure to make Money. and Factor 3 Substantial of the Portion Taken, its a 100% copy of the copyrighted material with no changes. It's not a totally uncool interpretation of fair use for Fan Art. The creators are profiting off or have the potential to profit by cashing out on a copyrighted character.

Fan Art is drawing your own interpretation of a character and posting it, not selling it for profit. IF I turn around and made my own Baby Yoda fan comic and sold it I would be sued to death by Disney and rightfully so. IN order to rightly create and sell a Baby Yoda product in any medium one has to get permission from the copyright holder period.

I am not a lawyer but that all sounds about right, except possibly the "sued to death" part -- a takedown request to Linden Lab (in the SL Baby Yoda case) or a stern letter from Disney's lawyers is way more likely. (Ask the creators of an SL community for Frank Herbert's Dune.) And in any event, Fair Use is not an instant bullet proof defense. As the lawyer for a major game company once told me, "If you want to end up in court, claim fair use."

Oh yeah, another slight demur to Zoey's comment: Even getting permission from the copyright holder might not protect you. Ask a YouTuber named Toos:

Was Second Life's Move to Mesh a Mistake? (Comment of the Week)

Pictured (via NPIRL): SL fashion from the pre-mesh era in 2008 created by Eshi Otawara -- which sold in a Relay for Life fundraiser for a $1700 donation 

Reader Madeline Blackbart made a point recently I've been wanting to bring up for quite awhile:

Remember when everyone cried that mesh would ruin Second Life, and we all laughed like they were just chicken little?

They were right, to be honest.

While mesh did help keep SL up with the times graphics-wise, somewhat, it is definitely the cause of its monopoly issues. The skill level required to create mesh just makes it damn near impossible for your average user to make marketable items.

And once mesh body monopolies (here's looking at you Maitreya) took over, the creative freedom, variety, and artistry of the masses, offered by the freely available and easy to learn building tools in SL, were a thing of the past.

Sure, also learning building tools is difficult -- but it's nowhere near as difficult to learn as 3D modeling. And your average user doesn't have time for that, let's be real.

So mesh was/is a double-edged sword: Needed to keep up with other modern games, but the cause of the death of a lot creativity in Second Life.

She made this observation around the same time a longtime reader (Patchouli Woollahra) reminded me of some SL fashion brilliance (above) before mesh was introduced in 2011. And while I've seen much mesh-based fashion made with great skill,  it rarely reaches that pre-mesh level of innovation -- and for that matter, rarely steps outside the standard fashion template you'd see in a real world shopping mall, or in a real world fashion magazine.

At the same time, whether or not mesh has improved or hurt Second Life as a creative platform, it definitely hasn't grown its userbase:

Readers Puzzle Over Linden Lab's SL Marketplace Commission Increase

Good conversation over the recent SL Marketplace commission increases and the developers who (mostly) worry about them. Readers Indyra Seigo and Petite Maison make this point in response to Linden Lab saying the price hike "remains significantly lower than most digital content commissions across the industry. Apple and Google charge a 30% commission on sales in their app stores..."

Not so fast, they retort:

It's a false equivalence that they are comparing themselves to Apple and Google in order to explain the doubling of their Marketplace commission. Apple and Google have hundreds of millions of individual users. SL has less than .1% of that. This increase can neither be justified by how many items there are for sale nor can content creators ever expect to make Google and Apple marketplace like profits on the SL Marketplace. The comparison is absurd. I predict sellers will simply pass the cost on to buyers in the form of higher prices.  

Then again, if sellers do pass on the prices, that means more SL consumers buying more Linden Dollars (making more money for Linden Lab).

Rather than do that, however, Clara Seller has a different proposal -- low commission for developers who are Premium subscribers/land owners:

SL-Based Education Not Hurt by "Wokeness", But Institutional Indifference (Comments of the Week)

Great comment thread in response to one educator speculating that a very politically incorrect Second Life would never work as an educational tool on today's "woke" campuses. SL-based artist Nebulosus Severine says not so based on her personal experience:

So-called "woke" colleges (I attended one) frequently engage their students about society's dark sides, controversial issues, and problematic human behavior ON PURPOSE. It doesn't try to shelter students from them, it encourages them to face them & discuss things like this - that's kind of a big part of what being "woke" is about??

While I was still in school, we had several incidents with controversial groups on campus, including anti-abortion protesters who posted graphic images on large signs, etc. And we were all able to handle these things like civilized fucking adults. School staff made it a custom to alert students to events like these, so that we could choose to avoid them or not as we chose, because we're all grown-ass adults who have agency. And these controversial topics of discussion were the norm, not the exception. The process of becoming woke is to examine controversial topics, to try and understand them, not to run away and hide from them because they're upsetting to think about.

That sounds right, though there is a substantial difference between controversial groups on campus which students can avoid or engage with as they choose, versus what we were talking about: SL-based educational programs, where students might be required to share a (virtual) environment with these controversial groups as part of their necessary coursework.

In any case, Victoria Leavenworth, another reader with experience in virtual world education, argues that the real problem with SL-based education is the institution itself:

Educator: Second Life as a Teaching Tool Would Never Work on "Woke" College Campuses of Today (Comment of the Week)

Pictured: Gorean roleplay, one of Second Life's most popular roleplay subcultures

There's a very interesting reader thread on the recent Electronic Gaming Monthly article on Second Life as told through its old guidebooks. including this thought from "Iggy", who some ten years go, when SL had hundreds of "virtual campuses" owned by real life colleges and universities (up to and including Harvard!) was once among the most passionate educators advocating for the use of Second Life as a teaching tool in colleges:

SLers Furiously Debate Whether They Should Pay to Change Their SL Names

Last chance to take this survey on whether you want to pay for the chance to change your SL name; I'll post the results tomorrow. In any case, it's definitely provoked a passionate conversation among readers. Here's some highlights:

I love having the limited selection as long as it's long enough, like in the old days. I can hardly wait to see the list of names and to see avatars that aren't stuck with "Resident." Currently I'm happy with my avatar names, so there's no reason to pay for new ones. I just wish that all those stuck with "Resident" could, without charge, add a last name from the list. So much nicer.

-- Acacia Merlin

Please do not make us choose from a list of names. I doubt we will get what we want that way! Custom name is worth a fee, otherwise. Unless you have my last name I want, I'll keep the old one!

-- kedvenc ivanovic 

Sorry we took all those profits we collected from your $300.00 imaginary lands and used them to make a gigantic VR bonfire and dissed you in the process.

Luckily, in the ashes, we finally hear your pleas. Our little elves are working like mad to make a doohickey that will take us back in time to the days when we knew how to give people names. You'll need to pay a fee to pay a fee to get this amazing regifted fruitcake. Happy Holidays!

"Names" was on my 2011 Christmas List. In 2019, I want justice.

-- Jenny8675309 Resident

Several more after the break!

Roblox Version of Second Life Sim Translates Well (Comment of the Week)

Remember "1867", the Second Life roleplay community which moved to Sansar and then set up a presence in Roblox? Longtime reader and SLer Pulsar, who's familiar with both the original SL version and the Sansar variation, visited this new version in Roblox, and came away pretty impressed:

Very interesting. It even rains! 1867 was fascinating in SL, even if the traffic wasn't high. In Sansar it felt kind of bare to me.

With Roblox you can visit 1867 on your iPad too (or other mobile devices) and it works well. The Roblox version strongly reminds the previous iterations aesthetically. It's still a work in progress, but it looks like it's going to be fun and interactive.

Click here to visit yourself in Roblox. I know among virtual world fans, there's often an "it's just for kids" bias against Roblox (I can be guilty of it too). But as Pulsar adds, citing this analysis from HackerNoon, Roblox and to a certain extent Fortnite, are not just virtual worlds, but essential social spaces for a new generation as they come of age:

Second Life Really Needs to Switch to a New 3D Engine (Rant of the Week)

Left and right: From August, bakes on mesh when using the updated SL viewer... and a 3rd party viewer at the time (as featured here, photos by Rhonda Huntress via this thread) 

Great discussion last week verging on a rant in this post about the gradual, imperfect efforts by Linden Lab and the community to adapt Bakes on Mesh to Second Life content. An anonymous reader suggests the fundamental problem is far larger that that patch:

This really always comes down to Linden not doing its job, just trying to push its work on others.

New engine
New engine
New engine

If their current employees can't do it, then... get people who can or lease an engine that works the best with your files. It's 2019 and you're trying to constantly stitch together a 2003 engine time and time again. I'm pretty sure when the engine was made in '03 they couldn't even think of ray tracing,GPU Power, virtual reality, peer to peer, or even blockchain. All we can keep doing is fighting 'cause the company is lazy, and keeps saying downgrade downgrade back to '03.

There is no incentive for mesh body creators and clothes makers to update in Second Life. They don't get monthly payments from their customers , so it's really just you don't like it, "thanks for the fish" mentality. It's said in the Slink group chat everyday.

BOM won't be truly a WTF moment till the next Bento update comes up and they have to update their bodies to "BOM versions that are downgrades" and they say, oh yeah we stopped supporting your body that you paid for and liked for system avatar 2.0.

There's definitely a sense where upgrades like Bakes on Mesh and Bento feel like welding Ferrari chassis parts on a car with a Model T motor. In any case, another reader argues that Anonymous' points "don't appreciate the difficulty of upgrading a system that has been in almost non-stop operation for sixteen years and where upgrades need to get it right on first or second bounce as rollbacks may cause bigger problems than they solve." Which is also true, but here's Anon's reply: