New Release
LL have released an update to Viewer 2.0. It incorporates some positive actions, but still leaves a lot of issues uncommented on. LL are at least still taking feedback, but I’d venture to suggest that they’ll stick with Tom Hale’s put-down made back on the 23rd Feb that what we’re seeing is pretty much *it* and that large-scale changes (even those that make sense) aren’t going to happen.
Nevertheless, the improvements are somewhat welcome and we’ll hopefully see more tweaks as time goes on.
Of Polls and Surveys
A new survey on Viewer 2.0 has also been released. After the outstanding joke of the original “poll”, as put up by Amanda Linden, this one at least has the appearance of seeking feedback from residents.
The original poll is, sadly, still available on the front page of the Viewer 2.0 forum, where it appears to make glowing reading – 67% of those asked apparently love the new Viewer! It is only when the actual poll itself is viewed that one gets the full measure of the spin involved:
- Only three responses were obtained before the poll was locked
- The three options that followed the question, Do you like Viewer 2.0 were utterly skewed towards favouring a “positive” outcome, given they were:
- “I love it!” – i.e. overwhelmingly “in favour”
- “I like most of it” – i.e. still “in favour”
- “I’m indifferent” – i.e. can be counted as “in favour” as it doesn’t actually say “dislike”
- “I don’t like it” – i.e. only giving a 25% chance of wholly negative feedback
Many of us took Amanda to task over the poll when published, and this may have influenced the shut-down.
I’m curious as to the new poll on four counts:
- Whether the results will be made public – I’ve yet to find a link allowing me to view results.
- What degree of spin will be employed on the results should they prove negative (remember, Hamlet Au over at the Herald managed to turn one poll that had a 66% negative feedback into a positive, simply by only mentioning that 33% of those polled were “in favour” – making it sound as if this was the largest portion of votes received).
- How the poll compares to this one, which does include the ability to view the results
- Whether LL will even publish the results or simply push them to one side if the feedback tips strongly towards the negative.
Security Worries
One of the new features in Viewer 2.0 that has caused much commentary is shared media. However, the commentary hasn’t been entirely positive, raising issues over security and privacy. So much so that it prompted Samuel Linden to post on the subject. It was supposed to smooth over the concerns and calm residents.
It didn’t. While it is reassuring to know – as posted in response to the thread – that LL are “working on” the specific issues vis-a-vis potential exploits provided by shared media, which really weren’t addressed in Samuel’s blog post, it is still somewhat worrying that LL were seemingly aware of the risk that resident’s computers may be exploited through the unscrupulous use of shared media and still opted to set Viewer 2.0 to a default of auto accepting shared media.
It’s also worrying that while most web browsers – which seem to be the paradigm for the new Viewer – give the option to turn off things like Javascript support, etc. (or rather, turn them on) – LL’s wisdom was to have them turned on by default, with no option currently included – or originally going to be included – in the Viewer to turn them off.
Samuel states LL will now be providing this functionality in the next Beta release, albeit it somewhat grudgingly: Obviously disabling JavaScript will severely limit the functionality of websites, and turning off plugins will render Flash inoperable, but these are features that were requested, and we are providing them in the next Beta release.
It is comforting to see that LL are listening and responding to user concerns relating to security around shared media – but it is also worrying that they opted to take such a cavalier attitude towards security in the first place. If nothing else, this again points to the fact that Viewer 2.0 is – primarily – viewed by LL as “business tool” aimed for those whole will (in theory) be using it alongside their SLE product, nice and safe behind a corporate firewall, where fears flash and other tools being hacked are pretty much eliminated.
The First of the Third Party V2.0-based Viewers
Elsewhere, the first of the third-party iterations of Viewer 2.0 has popped up. KristenLee Cinquetti has always had a reputation for producing really top-notch Viewers which incorporate a lot of very useful features. Of all the Viewers out there, hers has always been my favourite simply because of the fact that her custom graphic pipe means that things like dynamic shadows actually work, and her graphics settings allow a whole new level of realism. Sadly, she does not embrace RLV functionality, which means I stick with Emerald – which, admitedlly, is almost there with the shadows.
Her first attempt at a “Viewer 2.0” compliant KLee Viewer incorporates elements that have found their way into the latest Beta update – so some may wonder at the fuss. That her mods were slightly preempted by LL is a shame – but they at least show how things can be done.
The major changes made are:
- The Sidebar no longer shunts the world view to the left when opening (now in the latest official relase)
- The Camera controls have been tweaked to something like the old system – both move and rotate are on the same toasty (pop-up). Admittedly, they still vanish if you click elsewhere – which is annoying and the control itself is still overly large, but at least there is no need for painful toggling
- About Land is back on the top bar as standard – an XML tweak has previously been provided by Alexandrea Fride for Viewer 2.0, and its inclusion here is very welcome and makes the Viewer land management friendly once more
- Some attempt has been made at making pop-ups, etc., transparent when the focus is moved from them but – frankly – the interface really doesn’t lend itself to this. While this is hardly Kirsten’s fault, it still renders the effort on her part as almost wasted (transparency has also been somewhat introduced to the official Viewer)
- Preferences -> Graphics includes an additional tab that allows the more “advanced” user an even greater degree of control over how their SL experience looks and feels – and this is very welcome
- The Map and Mini Map button have been returned to the bottom toolbar. While both are very welcome additions, the former is huggable, as it means the bloody Sidebar can be totally avoided when trying to use the map!
- Inventory is also back on the toolbar – so **HUGS** again as the Sidebar can be avoided!
- Speed – as with all Kirsten’s Viewers, the average fps (for me) is around the 30 mark – considerably faster (and smoother) than the official viewers.
There are some things that are currently missing – but this could be down to the fact that the interface doesn’t (if Tom Hale is to be believed) make for significant changes. The Sidebar, for example, does not turn transparent when left open and the focus moved from it. Again, it may be entirely possible that making it so wouldn’t so much to change the impact it has on the immersive experience but there is a lot of black in the Sidebar, and it would be nice to see some of it “vanish” when forced to keep the bloody thing open. But then, like the official Beta, this is just a first stab at V 2.0.
Overall, I have to say that Kirstenlee’s approach is a major step forward in developing a Viewer that actually addresses two somewhat disparate audiences – the “old” and the “new”. What is more to the point, it goes a long way to ensuring that Viewer 2.0 doesn’t become increasingly annoying to “new” users as they gain grater familiarity with the Viewer and the platform and simply want to enjoy their in-world experience as a 3D experience rather than a 3D background to a clunky interface.
Inara Pey: Living in a Modemworld 
I am still waiting for someone (most likely Imprudence) to backport all useful new features to the 1.x codebase. I do think viewer 2 is good for new users, and might help them “survive” the critical first few days. However for a serious user it just does not “cut” it.
LikeLike
Your last point is well made, and the reason why I don’t think Viewer 2.0 is going to achieve LL’s publicly-stated goal of “user retention” any better than Viewer 1.2x.
While it may help new users over the initial “hurdle” of initial exposure to SL, its usability / usefulness is liable to pall quickly as said “new” users gain experience and expertise and start to explore the capabilities of SL. Whither then for them? It’s all very well for LL to point to 3rd party viewers – but this is hardly ideal:
One could question whether viewer 1.2x was such a mountainous issue to user retention that it really needed such a radical overhaul, or whether the inability of SL to retain the interest of those that don’t stay for long actually lies elsewhere. That, however, is probably the subject of another post – allowing for the fact the subject may have been roasted to death in other blogs!
LikeLike
No one really knows what makes people stay in SL and what makes them leave.
I don’t support the idea that current SL people are a special breed. But there has to be some reason why Philip thinks we are his artificial brain, and also why the Military and FBI take a special interest in the platform users. We are a little different from the rest of the computer game enthusiasts.
To the normal world, we are just a bunch of sex crazed VR swingers. That is what the infotainment world tells them.
LikeLike
Leaving the “evils” of Facebook to one side, SL is inherently a social medium, and it cannot be denied that the ability to share, to socialise, to be involved is a major consideration when one reads all the forum postings on what attracts people to SL. But yes, individual reasons as to why we come and stay or not are subjective and personal.
Are we a special breed? I doubt it; and I’m certainly not proposing that we are.
Does the FBI take any greater interest in SL users than users of other social media tools? I don’t know – but I suspect that in the scheme of things, their interest is no more or less greater than their interest in the likes of Facebook. As has so tragically been shown here in the UK in the last week, social media tools do present opportunities for some to commit crimes of violence – so the interest from law enforcement agencies in these tools, 2D or 3D, can be understood in this regard. But at times I have to admit that there seems to be a degree of paranoia prevalent when people discuss SL and the FBI.
Does the military take special interest in us as SL users? I have no evidence that they do or don’t. True, much has been made of the US Navy’s use of SL, etc., – but how much of this is PR spin (on both sides: LL to promore SL as a “serious” platform, and the USN bods to justify their involvement in the platform to their superiors)?
Philip’s whole transhumanism thing is something else inasmuch as I find that entire subject bogglingly creepy.
My point about retention and the Viewer is simply that LL seem to have potentially put too much emphasis in the Viewer being a *major* cause of lack of retention. While the viewer isn’t the easist software in the world to get to grips with – and likely puts some people off – there are other issues within SL that are potentially more damaging to user retention – and in many respects the new Viewer doesn’t address these issues, because gives a faux impression of doing so.
LikeLike
Military is very serious about SL. Their sims are extensive showplaces for personnel and contacts. They also use them for recruitment purposes.
The FBI was going to do the same, they posted that on their website blog. But then things went quiet.
It has also been said that military, government and law enforcement personnel are in world now (WoW, SL etc) but don’t reveal themselves. Which is wrong and unethical. But that is happening a lot nowadays. People and Governments are using VR holes to get around legalities.
LikeLike
Are they?
Coalition island et al are virtually deserted 90%+ of the time. Depsite the LL-lead hype of November last year, not a lot seems to be going on there.
As to recruiting: I’d hazard a guess that the catchment potential for the US military in SL is small – if at all; it is hard to see dedicated effort being put into SL compared to the massive catchment represented by schools, colleges and the like across the USA.
Most of the “real life” military groups in SL have a) been founded by individuals rather than DOD / Army / Navy departments; b) represent a perosnal interest; c) contain perhaps a dozen members.
Where the government / military *do* appear to be using SL is the SLE product – tucked behind firewalls, and safe from prying eyes. As such, I concede they’re using the tool – but it is not, as we’ve been discussing, the grid as a whole – not where “serious” work is concerned.
As far as recruitment is concerned, I’m not surprised the FBI went quiet on the subject – again the likely catchment doesn’t measure up to the effort involved.
Again, I don’t say the military et al haven’t shown an interest in the emerging potential of virtual worlds Fronterra, etc., is proof of that; I just don’t accept the hypothesis that it is “rampant” (or even “unethical”). Such claims – without supporting evidence are the virtual equivalent of the old “reds under the beds” outcries.
LikeLike
There are people who “get” the immersive aspect, and people who don’t. Those who don’t get it will be hard to be able to retain.
An anquaintance of me does not “get” the immersive aspect. He is in SL for over 2 years and still looks like a caricature and does not immerse. However he has found his niche and is a rather known sponsor of the arts – something very much related to his RL interests and occupation.
Recently his wife joined SL, and she is one of the “natural immersonists”. She is only a few weeks old, but already takes part in some sort of elven roleplay, has a very defined and stylish apperance already, got herself a home and even found a boyfriend already. She instinctively “gets” SL and when she is online “lives” in it.
The number of those instinctive immersionists is probably rather small – and most likely not large enough for LL to survive. So we need those other ones as well, and we need to somehow include them into our clture, accept their approach to SL as well as they need to accept our approach to SL.
LikeLike
Peter,
You do raise an interesting couple of points:
I agree that some drawn to SL don’t get the immersive nature of the platform – but I’d venture to suggest that those who don’t – and who stay – are actually the minority. Ergo, just how successful is LL likely to be in appealing to markets – such as the Facebookers – who pretty much have what they want sitting in front of them via their web browser already?
Certainly, there are probably many in the FB community who also engage in 3D games – be they MMORPGs or standalone – these people might well be attracted to SL. Similarly, FB has communities of artists, etc, who could find SL a fascinating medium for expressing their artistry and craft. In this respect, one really cannot blame LL for “going after” the FB market. Certainly, that would help explain Mark Kingdon’s kludged comment given in the recent resident’s meeting, where he proclaimed FB to the “the future of the Internet” – and his attempts to clarify the statement following the meeting.
In summary: if the current concurrency level is indicative – as a percentage – of the overall “retention market” (if I can invent that phrase) LL are likely to capture, then it perhaps helps explain why LL are casting their net so wide (and seemingly in desperation): it is only by doing so that they feel they can catch the people who will invest in SL in terms of time and money.
Does this make the platform viable? One wonders. Again, we still come back to the fact that once people arrive in SL, it is surprisingly difficult to do things. Neither Viewer 1.2x nor Viewer 2.0 are particularly intuitive, and neither have what I would call the “instant lightbulb” moment wherein those that really wish to immerse themselves beyond wandering and shopping go, “AHHH!” The first hour experience itself seem to do little more to help with this eureka moment, either, so people are still left pretty much to figure things out for themselves, whether or not they are inclined to the immersive experience – and this is still a big failing within the platform.
This is where I scratch my head; leaving aside all the issues that plague SL in terms of content protection, scalability issues, etc., – all of which can and will impact on the viability of the platform – when I look at the various directions TPTB in LL are moving in, I still can’t shake the feeling that, while they may have a deeper appreciation for the potential of the platform than we perhaps give them credit for – they actually have no clue as to how to translate that understanding into a cohesive plan that will help develop and expand SL in a constructive, fluid manner.
This is again why I don’t buy into the whole “SL is a business platform” or that “SL is big in the military” arguments. Sure, there are some cases in both of these areas where SL – or more correctly now, the SLE product and hived-off “Second Life Workspaces” – are being toyed / experimented with – but one rather suspects that – like the number of immersive players in the world – the number of companies and organisations that view SL/SLE/SL Workspaces as a viable suite of platforms is very small.
LikeLike