Rod Humble hints at more virtual worlds in LL’s future

On October 14th, and thanks to Lelani Carver, I commented on an article in VentureBeat’s Gamebeat in which Rod Humble discusses LL’s new products and mentions Second Life (see Rod Humble talks-up new products, creativity and Second Life).

In my piece, I included a quote from him which appeared in the article:

“We are still investing in 3D virtual worlds,” he said. “But shared creative spaces is what we do. There is an opportunity to embrace the new way of developing things. A lot of this could be done inside Second Life. But you get more creativity in the hands of more people by building on new platforms”

Rod Humble: “Yes, the plural is deliberate”

At the time I was writing, Humble’s initial wording caught my eye: “We are still investing in 3D virtual worlds” (note the plural). I thought it an odd turn of phrase; why not simply, “We are still investing in Second Life”? In the end, I dismissed the various thoughts floating around my head and assumed the quote was either misinterpreted by the interviewer or that Humble was simply using a broad term by which to define Second Life without using the name itself.

However, it would appear the quote was accurate and intentional. Dropping a comment after my article (which you can read in full here), Rod himself had this to say on the matter:

My comment about also investing in virtual worlds is correct. As you know I don’t like to detail things until we are close to something actionable, but we absolutely are investing in the large virtual world space which I think will make Second Life users, business owners and developers very happy…. but its a ways off :).

In replying to my response to his comment, he went on to add:

Welcome! Yes the plural is deliberate :)

Now this is undoubtedly going to open the doors to speculation (why on Earth do you think I’m pushing this article front-and-centre 🙂 ). For my part, I find the comment “I think will make Second Life users, business owners and developers very happy….” possibly telling. After all, business owners and developers are by definition Second Life users – so why distinguish them somewhat apart from “Second Life users”?

Also of interest is the use of the phrase “the large virtual world space”, which is also open to a lot of speculation.

As Rod points out, it is going to be some while before anything further can officially be said. However, it is obviously fair to say that he wouldn’t have gone even this far without having a reasonable level of confidence that whatever is in the pipeline is going to come to pass.

So what do you think? Do you think he’s referring to the “SL 2.0” some have been writing about / wishing for? Is it “SL+” – perhaps with additional features such as larger regions? A whole new generation of virtual world solutions, perhaps cloud-based? Or something else entirely?

And if you decide to reply, please remember what else Rod said in his original comment: “Our commitment to Second Life remains key and central to our company.”

Related Links

36 thoughts on “Rod Humble hints at more virtual worlds in LL’s future

  1. He’s being smart and not mentioning Second Life. The stigma is bad, the name is even worse. If Rod is as smart as he appears to be, I’m sure they are looking at ways to rebrand. The name Second Life is awful, and I continue to say it. Why not just name it Loserville. Hey, Loserville is a great place, but if its named Loserville no one is going to be knocking down the doors. That would be a great strategy sure if you were looking to stay hidden. You need the youth to get into any big movement to virtual worlds, no one who has to sit through class with adolescent d-bags is ever going to admit to using a platform called “Second Life”.


    1. Stigma aside, it was the very name “Second Life” that drew me here in the first place. It was a perfect description of what I was looking for at the time. Of course it has become much more for me since those early days, but it is still my “Second Life”.


      1. I tend to wonder if the entire “stigma” thing is overblown. Yes, there are some in the media who do look at SL and start pointing the finger, raising innuendo or making outright allegations. We had one such case here in the UK not so long ago when a major broadcaster dug-out a story from five years ago and re-presented as “today’s news”. However, most the the media do seem to react to SL in a pretty neutral manner – if they do react to it at all, that is.

        I think the greater burden that SL does suffer from is that it is now stale in the eyes of the media on those occasions when they do think about it. It’s had its hype cycle, its been the darling of the press and the spotlight has moved on. And that is something which is very hard to overcome unless womething completely radical happens. It is again why I understand Humble doesn’t attempt to constantly promote SL when talking about LL and the new products in the manner some insist he should. Not only is it not what he’s in front of people to talk about when holding the interview, its because those doing the interviewing are aware their editors are less-than-interested in running an article on SL because it is “old news”.

        The real problem facing SL in the media is that it is now well and truly “yesterday’s news”. It’s had its time in the spotlight and news and feature editors have their eyes elsewhere and they simply aren’t interested. Unless something truly radical happens with the platform, that’s a tough attitude to overcome.

        In the meantime – and as you rightly say – “stigma” or not, SL is still pulling-in registrations very strongly, and not all of those signing up are doing so “for the seccs”. As such, the problem isn’t a case of overcoming any bias the media may have (stigma or otherwise), its again conversting those registations into engaged users. And that, as we know, is a horse of a quite different colour.


      2. Yes but let me take a wild guess that you are already a mature adult. Second Life the name didn’t turn me off either, but like I said I was way beyond adolescence where I could really care what the name was. Not until trying to explain and get other people in Second Life did I see how they reacted, even if they never heard of it. Obviously intelligent people are not going to fall victim to to stereotype or preconceived notions, but kids and young people will.


        1. Well, you are right about “mature adult” but is SL really a platform for “kids and young people”? My feeling is that they want something more like WOW, or even Patterns. SL requires some amount of commitment and willingness to learn, do we really want it dumbed down to a kiddy game?


  2. Before the doom-and-gloomers and fist shakers trickle in to pontificate or remark snidely, I’d just like to comment that whatever Linden Lab does is not only okay by me, it’s looked forward to with pleasant anticipation. While many things increase in worth by remaining the same and becoming venerated, in the computerized industries to remain static is to die. Of course, the thought on everyone’s mind is always what about all my “stuff”? Like Pharoah, we want to take it with us when we go. 😉 If LL is planning on creating another virtual world similar to SL (most likely also on the plate are virtual worlds of a simpler type) one hopes they are taking that concern seriously. Either way, I’m stoked. (Points forward)


    1. I share your outlook – and agree on the matter of “stuff” (depneding upon what LL have in mind / are planning).

      Inventory is potentially the biggest factor (along with friends in SL) as to why the majority of people stick with SL rather than vanishing off to other grids completely. If anything comes along that requires people “start over”, then it could lead to them doing so – outside of LL’s influence.


  3. Pingback: Rumors
  4. Do you think porting the “stuff” forward is really important? Peeps love to make new stuff! Peeps love to shop fro new stuff! It’s my sense that active residents change their shop, home, avatar, etc in an ongoing basis. Backward compatibility, aka “standards” really hampers growth and innovation, especially big change and growth.

    I certainly don’t want my “stuff” abandoned at the same relentless rate that Apple changes connectors on their devices! A box full of Macbook > VGA adapters and NONE of them will get my presentation on the screen? No thank you!

    But the idea that a “new world” or even a Mark II world, would be bound to, uh, “support all the ‘features’ of the Ruth avatar… let’s move on!


    1. Stuff is determinative for many people, especially those (and there are many of them) who do not build much and have a limited budget to to out and buy.
      My feeling is to make as much as possible portable and we will have to accept some loss. Much the same as Microsoft rolling out a new OS, some things will no longer work, but it is offset by what is new and wonderful.


    2. This is one of those things…

      I notice you have a non-caucasian avatar. So you can almost bet that if they don’t port your stuff to a potential 2.0; you’re going to be facing an identity crisis.

      These things have always followed the same pattern: start out whites only, then wonder why all the rest of us “are backwards Luddites who don’t like technology”, and then roll their eyes when we do finally show up and start looking to make space that resembles us and our PoV.

      Its going to be white-only human avatars unless and until other folks get in and master the tools. Even now, in SL, the rest of us get pretty much ignored by a lot of content makers. There’s a narrow list to choose from if you’re avatar is not a white human. A list that, if a non-white human or neko, barely existed at all two years ago. Meanwhile the homepage of LLs is getting even -more- ethnically exclusive over time…

      Not getting my “stuff” to come over would mean losing many parts of my online self-identity. My skin tone and ethnicity. My neko state, and my furry self. Even the fact that my hair is in dreads or “nappy”.

      I still can’t find a look that reflects me when I venture into Open Sim and inWorldz – and those are on the same technology as SL…

      A potential SL 2.0, that’s going to be like a Cloud Party reboot. Lets not be beat around the bush with niceties… I don’t trust any pack of white folks to represent me. They never have before, and I don’t see why they would get all enlightened all of a sudden. Human nature is not good at that – people get too focused on their own worldview.

      That said… an SL 2.0 -IS- needed. I just think its going to be a very nasty shock for a lot of us, and we’re going to be right back into the days of fighting over some rather outdated ethnic representation issues again.

      But the avatar-mesh we have now is so dated its started to feel jarring. The underlying engine is so old it limits us way too much. Notions like a sim, a number of avatars in that sim, prim limits, and so on… just seem archaic.

      And entirely new set of “computing protocols” and paradigms behind the ‘under the hood’ engine is needed… And that need grows by the day.


  5. I think he’s just referring to investing large chunks of money to upgrade SL’s infrastructure and improve stability, which would of course make those who invest time and money into SL would be pleased with (that’s if they notice improvements)


    1. He actually refers to a “majot upgrade” for SL quiet separately in the Gamesbeat article – which I also think is leading towards the hardware / infrastructure investment (I’m looking at the news that regions have started moving to new hardware & the recent network optimisation test as evidence of this).

      However, his use of the plural when referring to “virtual worlds” is not only made quite separately to any direct reference to SL, he also makes it clear the use of the plural is quite intentional – which tends to point towards something more than just meaning SL itself.


  6. Now this will very likely be the most speculative announcement ever 🙂

    Linden Lab is developing more virtual worlds?? Oh my. And virtual worlds that will make us happy?! To be honest, I have no idea what to think about that. First and foremost, it’s obvious that Linden Lab cannot fully develop a “SL 2.0” from scratch in 6, 12 or even 18 months. SL 2.0 — even assuming some form of content transfer might be possible from the current SL — will take years to develop, and I’m not sure that LL has a big enough staff to do so many things at the same time!

    But then, Rod’s words sound so… odd. “We are investing in the large virtual world space which I think will make Second Life users, business owners and developers very happy”. So what is this “large virtual world space”, and why should it make us happy? By comparison, what would Rod refer to as a “small virtual world space”? (Patterns?) How does a “virtual world space” differ from a “virtual world”?

    This raises so many questions that the mind boggles.

    Now, Rod is definitely not stupid. There is a roadmap for Second Life’s upcoming features, and many are really dramatic, and we’ve been waiting them for a decade. But there are definitely vast areas where we have absolutely no clue what LL will do. To be honest, it’s a very hard exercise these days to think about a “better SL” which bears no relation to what we know. I can imagine a virtual world with avatars that can be even more personalised than the current batch — but that would be “SL+” and not “SL 2.0”. I can imagine LL adding a lot of clever techniques to put their CPUs to better usage: distributing the load across regions, using mega and micro regions to accomodate more avatars, and so forth (all these are possible under OpenSim so we know that the theoretical possibilities are there). That would still be an “improved SL”, not a new virtual world. LL could get a different interface on the viewer; fix inventory; make avatar clothing/attachments work in a completely different way (these days, with mesh clothing, it’s actually harder to figure out what you’re wearing and where it’s attached!); allow avatar bits to get replaced (no more ugly hands and feet!) easily in a single interface; redefine the way AOs work; revamp the exceedingly complex way people buy content in-world and hopelessly figure out how to unpack it and store it on the right place in their inventories; allow meshes to be built with the viewer tools (e.g. clamp prims together and they will be replaced by equivalent meshes; add tools that allow “sculpting” prims in the way Sculptris works); add more layers of APIs to allow more scripting integration with the simulator itself (like OpenSim does) and radically revamp how scripting works; offer Web-based and mobile/tablet viewers, or even viewers with content streamed from remotely hosted applications; and, of course, start offering cloud-based regions. The result would continue to be an “improved” SL as-we-know-it — even if it would require moving on to a “different” platform with a “different” viewer, it would pretty much be a similar experience.

    Anything else would just be a “watering down” of SL’s capabilities, and I wouldn’t describe it as “making users, business owners and developers happy”. So whatever Rod has in mind, he either is using an odd turn of words to describe it, or it’s going to be something completely different, but then I fail to understand how we will be made “happy” 🙂

    Gosh, too little information to work upon — a typical case where an explanation raises far more questions than answers.

    On the other hand, it seems that Rod is finally starting to attract the media again, and this is definitely good news!


    1. 🙂

      You’ve just written out all the speculation I ran through last night and resisted adding to the article :). What is it they say about great minds? 😉

      Your point on “small virtual world space” and Patterns is a good one – particularly given the hints as to where LL want to take the product (procedural-based capabilities, cusomtisable avatars, other creatures, etc.). I wonder if Rod has any comments regarding that? :).

      I’m more-or-less with you with “SL+” (which is why I threw it into the piece, to see if it would encourage a reaction), but would point-out that in terms of “SL 2.0” we actually have no idea how long LL have been working on whatever it they have planned, or what the timeline is, so while I do agree with you in feeling that “SL 2.0” is not what he’s referencing, I wouldn’t limit the planning / development to an 18-month period – it could be considerably longer.

      That said, I do view things as potentially an “SL+” (or should that be, “SLs+”?), and agree with you on things like avatars – that is an area where LL could potentially have a “big win”, and have people more willing to let go of at least some of what they have currently by way of inventory. New, more comprehensive avatars with additional bone structures to alow greater customisation, a more intuitive mechanism for “fitting” mesh clothing, the addition of material processing for skins, etc., as well as your ideas, could prove popular. Add additional revisions (again like you mention), and offer-up a means of transitioning and that could be something.

      On the other hand, there’s the fact that he could actually be referring to the continual, gradual development of SL “as-is” – fixing the major issues and providing new features within the the existing framework, continuing the back-end enhancements hardware / infrastructure-wise and thus leaving SL more-or-less apparently “unchanged” in terms of anything glaringly obvious, while at the same time developing “parallel” worlds that are specifically geared for “developers” and “businesses”, depending on what he means by these terms, which are themsevles pretty broad. Take “business” – is he talking “business” as most of us in SL look upon it, users establishing themselves as merchants, creating and selling content? Or is he meaning something broader – is the idea that SL can be used as some form of “real world” business platform still knocking around in LL in some revised, more pragmatic vision / idea? Just becuase they dropped the entire SLE model / approach, doesn’t mean they necessarily gave up on the basic idea that SL can have some form of business focus.

      The lack of information is what makes this so intriguing. And as you say, Rod Humble isn’t stupid. He knew this to be the case when he popped in here and left his comments ;-).


      1. Well, my assumption that there hasn’t been any development on “SL 2.0” in the past is that LL only had a limited amount of resources for doing so. During the Mark Kingdon days, this meant focusing on “SL Enterprise” — besides the Viewer 2 and other server-side improvements — which seemed to leave few resources for doing anything else. After the “Big Firing” in 2010, shrinking LL to what seemed to be 2/3 of its former glory, it meant even less resources — and now we know that a fair share of those developers are working not on one, but five different platforms. I’d be hard pressed to believe that they have anyone left to work on “SL 2.0” which would be truly a major project — unless they are able to pay a tiny team of 2-3 developers to do that over a decade 🙂 If so, it would be the Lab’s most long-term project ever attempted, which, in turn, would also be a good sign: no company plans ahead for 10 years unless they’re almost absolutely sure they will continue to be around in the next decade 🙂

        I have also toyed with the words “business” and “developer” in this context. The only thing I see is that somehow Rod is planning something that would allow current business owners and developers to create and sell content elsewhere, away from LL’s SL grid. Two things cross my mind. One is the possibility of offering a SL Marketplace covering non-LL grids, i.e. using the SL Marketplace to deliver content to OpenSim grids. This is actually very, very, very, very easy to do. The benefits for LL would be some extra fees. Content creators, currently “trusting” LL (but not OpenSim grid managers), would know that at least they would get paid for content on other grids. The huge fragmentation of tons of little grids actually benefits content creators: it means that they can sell the same item over and over again and increase their revenue that way. This is a possibility, but even for Rod’s standards, it looks far too radical thinking 🙂

        The other possibility is going the way Blue Mars did: develop a smartphone application where people can have fun dressing up avatars. This is not so stupid as it sounds. This is a short list of popular dress-up applications and Blue Mars is not even there. So there is clearly a market for that — an extra market, which could be tied into existing content, and allow current content developers to expand their markets as well. Let’s be honest: no one in the whole world can offer the variety of content for dressing up avatars as Linden Lab can; they would totally swamp up whatever competition is out there. And thanks to their clever model of letting content developers do all the hard work, and just charge a fee, they could easily distribute this application for free and give content creators an additional channel for sales. Easy-peasy, win-win situation, good-bye dress-up competition 😉 The only issue is how to deal with running scripted items on a mobile phone, because the rest — clothes, attachments, mesh on avatars — even if it takes a few challenges (like accessing your inventory on a mobile phone!), it’s doable, like the Radegast team is constantly showing us: you don’t need the full SL renderer to show SL avatars with some acceptable quality.

        Besides those two examples — the first being rather unlikely for “political” reasons, the second being a bit more reasonable, since it was the route taken by Blue Mars (as a way to challenge IMVU on the mobile market, since IMVU doesn’t show avatars with their mobile application) to “save” themselves and their technology from completely disappearing — I cannot really imagine what Rod means.


        1. It’s precisely because they have SLE sitting in a box somewhere that I comment on the time frame for “SL 2.0’s” development possibly being longer that 18 months. A lot of time, effort and resources (which were specifically recruited into LL for the task), so we’ve no clear idea what was developed and which never made it into the box and may be suitable for “re-tooling” for other purposes.

          With regards to “shrinking LL to 2/3s of its former glory, and without belittling what happened in 2010 on a personal level, it’s worth pointing out that while one third of the workforce were laid off, during the previously 18 months, Mark Kingdon had actually increased LL’s headcount by around 50% (118 hirings between his arrival in May 2008 and late 2009 alone) – which was a phenomenal (and unsustainable) growth, most of which went into SLE development. Of course, since then, we’ve seen the losses cut a lot deeper which is why I actually do agree with you in that “SL 2.0” is unlikely.

          Interestingly, I wrote about expanding the Marketplace to embrace other platforms a good while back. I still think it is a good idea today – although I strong question whether the Marketplace as it stands is up to the task, given all of the issues and problems surrounding it and would, frankly, question LL’s ability to manage such an endeavour based on their track record in managing the Marketplace since 2010. Whether or not the plethora of incidents, problems and isuses which have occurred over the years impact “a small number of users” (as LL put it) when each is taken on an individual basis is actually irrelevant. The cumulative result is a service which is gaining wider and wider acknoledgement within and beyond SL as something which “doesn’t work”. So while I’m not ruling it out, were it to happen, it could end up being a very tough sell.

          The “dress an avatar” idea is interesting, but does that really fit the “3D worlds” aspect of what Rod has said? It sounds like a market for an entirely separate product range.

          And keeping on the “3D worlds” part of the quote. There is something else that has been rattling around inside my head since reading the Gamesbeat article. Rod specifically said, “We are still investing in 3D virtual worlds” [emphasis mine].

          Obviously “investing” can be used as another word for “working on” – as in investing time, effort and resources. However, let’s not forget the other use of “investing” – as in “putting money into other things”.

          As we’ve seen, LL are not averse to acquiring other companies; we’ve also seen (most recently with Patterns) that they are not averse to working in partnership with other companies. So, could he actually be using the word in this context; that is:

          • LL are actively involved in acquiring another company or service in order to grow their presence within “3D virtual worlds” (including expanding SL’s own capabilities as well as helping to bring “new products” which are linked to SL to the market)?, or
          • LL are developing a partnership of some description to achieve the same or similar ends?

          Either way, thought I’d just throw those questions into the pot for consideration ;-).


  7. Rod knows very well that he’ll not “make Second Life users […] happy” unless it’s tied directly to Second Life, so it is almost certainly tied to the SL concept/technology as we know it.

    One thing which could fit would be some interoperability with other virtual worlds. There have been many small(ish) projects about cross-grid teleportation, avatar sharing/standardization and (secure) asset transfers, and LL could be the lab which coordinated and drove a re-invigoration of those. (In the process opening up a bigger market for SL creators).

    I can see words match there, but some gut feeling tells me it’s not quite this. I don’t have any better guesses, though.


    1. What, resurrect the old Open Grid Protocol that allowed teleporting from the SL grid into any OGP-compatible OpenSim-based grid? That would be awesome! This was abandoned in 2008 or so, but I still leave the grid I manage with OGP compiled in, happily running to cover the bright, shiny day that LL might get back to OGP again 🙂

      Wishful thinking!…


  8. Somehow I have this idea that LL may offer a package that would allow people to run independent grids, as OpenSim does, but compatible and connected with the existing grid. It would explain the use of the plural in his comment. And it would have interesting implications.


      1. Indeed, and that is what I had in mind. One could say that OpenSim already allows this but having LL behind such a package for personal/private use and connected to the SL grid would really make a difference. It would partly relieve LL from maintaining a huge grid, lowering infrastructure costs, lowering costs of virtual land. By creating an API they would open the doors to customizations and create an eco-system of new products which could go beyond creating content as we know it today. Gosh, if they created an API to developed customizations in C# I’d be a happy camper!

        Gwyn, I believe it was you who suggested this in a post of some time ago.


  9. There is another important thing to consider here: new games aside, we have a confirmation that LL has a roadmap focused on virtual worlds. There have been lots of discussions lately about LL not having a future unless it made serious changes to its business model with the current state of affairs. Rod’s comment seems to prove that the management is aware of this challenge and working on it.


    1. (Crossposting from one of Indigo’s threads on G+)
      As I’ve said before, I quite like what I am seeing. LL is branching out with a clear purpose and theme, without cannibalizing their existing market.
      My guess (hope?) is that we’ll see several small (for some value of small) projects and games/apps, and once LL gets some experience with those, some may be “harvested” for features and ideas to share with the others.
      And given that SL *does* have a rather special, unique status, it would make sense to me to have that be the stable “main line” which provides hosting environment for the other ideas as they evolve and come to fruition.
      Something like Little Text People’s work would be a perfect fit, allowing them to put their work into the hands of a large (creator-)audience without having to make a new, dedicated game/environment for each.
      This would be the “lab” approach – without the SL users being the only lab rats, as Inara has worried about in an earlier post – and it could be a whole lot of fun to be along on that ride.


      1. Hear, hear, @Indigo. You’re totally correct on that. Rod as a CEO is doing a fantastic work: branching out, making the company depend less on a single product, experiment with different business models, experiment with different distribution models (Steam, App Store, and who knows what will come next). If I were a stakeholder of LL, I’d be quite happy with the way Rod’s doing. As a SL user, all I can say is that a financially solid LL means more resources for developing and improving SL and keeping it going for several decades, which is all we want 🙂


      2. Yup

        I believe the the diversification is god for LL, and that people decrying it because they either believe it is “taking away” from SL or that “LL isn’t a game company” are making their pronouncements far too prematurely. Currently, I’m looking forward to seeing what Dio and Versu bring, for precisely some of the reasons you mention and, in Versu’s case, the idea that the story cannot only be shaped by choices made by the reader, but in how the reader opt to asign motivations to characters from the outset, and how those motivation feed into and impact the development of the story and the decisions of the reader. If it works, there’s potential here for establishing a strong and engaging line of interactive fiction, and LL have the initial expertise with them now to build on that.

        Patterns has already shown that LL can take their strengths and bedn them in new ways, opening opportunities. The “Minecraft” meme aside (which it has to be said can work both for and against Patterns, and does need to be handled (put to one side, even) quickly by demonstrating that Patterns is far more than a “Minecraft clone”), the response from those outside of SL towards the Genesis Release has been broadly positive. While it is still very early days, the company can hopefully capitialise on the (through the rapid iteration cycle) to maint the interest and hype and grow Patterns’ popularity off the back of the interest being generated.

        Whatever happens vis-a-vis these products, it’s clear the SL can and must stay central to the company’s plans and future for a good while yet, and such it is vital the paltform itself continue to be nurtured and grown. As Indigo says, doing so allows for a cross-pollination of ideas – now just outwards from SL to other products, but potentially (and in time) the other way. And while the new products can – down the road – help lift the burden of being the only source of revenue for the company from SL (which again could be highly beneficial), LL does still need that central, stable, and vibrant pillar around with it can build itself.

        One thing I would quickly just put into context however. My comments on “putting the “lab” back into Linden Lab” were quite divorced from the company’s diversification. Rather, they were in relation to the apparent philosphy towards SL itself, wherein releases have apparently been made far too prematurely (and knowingly so in some cases), which have had deterimental impacts on the platform and its related services. Indeed, a further example of that approach arose not long after I questioned the approach, when the advanced creator tools were deployed across an RC channel without the requisite permissions system updates – and were immediately exploited. Given that it was known within the Lab that the code required a change to the permissions system in order to be properly implemented, it’s not as if the risk of exploitation couldn’t have been known and a basic level of protection taken.


  10. LL creates a Hypergrid interface that allows any to visit other grids still using its inventory!
    That would be, 4 years ago, a reasonable and hopefull idea!
    But the more Sl is closing its routes to open sims, its obvious that this 1 is not going to go on!
    LL creates a hypgrid and lanches a program that allows any to hops a specific grid, that will only be able to connect to sl main one, but can be hosted for free in any computer!
    That would kill the mean to have land on Sl, so can’t see this happen either!
    LL creates a new grid, not adult content allowed, lanch it on steam, and allows it to be connected to Sl via a sort of hypergrid, that would ease Valve puritanism (Onwers of steam just dont allow adult content on their plataform, period!)
    LL lanches a grid where adult content will not be allowed, renaming it and placing it on steam!
    While they do that, they will raize land on SL and will make it les expensive on that new grid!
    Rod can be fired!
    Sl can be sold!
    Rl can end!
    Well so many speculations
    Lets hope that Sl will be improving and getting more stable, the rest for me is irrelevant at this time!


Comments are closed.