Category: Opinion

A Look at Tyche’s private estate survey March 2016

Posted on by Inara Pey
Rocca Sorrentina
Rocca Sorrentina – blog post

Tyche Shepherd, who tracks land statistics in Second Life, issued a full Private Estate survey at the end of March 2016. It’s the first such survey she has published since the end of November 2013, representing a 28-month gap between reports. Given this, it makes for some interesting reading, some of which is highlighted below.

Overall, the distribution of regions between Full, Homestead and OpenSim in March 2016 remains very similar to that of November 2013 (in fact these figures tend to  remain fairly constant as representative indicators of region distribution).

Year
 Full
 Homestead
 OpenSpace
March 2016
 53.9% (+/-1.28%) 45.6% (+/-1.28%) 0.5% (+/-0.18%)
November  2015
 53.8% (+/-1.30%) 45.5% (+/-1.29%) 0.7% ( +/-0.21%)
Surveys based on 4,208 accessible regions in March 2016; 4,402 accessible regions in Nov 2013

However, Tyche indicates that, overall, the amount of private estate land has consolidated more within the top 20 estates over the 28-month period from November 2013 (39.5% of private estate land) through March 2016 (49.1%; +/- 1.3%). Using supplied list prices, Tyche estimates that the top 20 estates account for some 40.6% of total private estate tier, compared to 30.5% in November 2013.

In terms of regions held, of these top 20 estates, seven are actually under the Anshe Chung Studio (ACS) brand, accounting for 19.1% of private estate holdings, compared to 13.8 in November 2013 for ACS; again a significant increase.

Grandfathered Homesteads stand at around the 85.32% mark for 2016,  compared to 82.4% in November 2013. The year-end reports do not indicate the percentage of Full private regions that are Grandfathered, but in a comment on SLU following the Lab’s announcement on Grandfathering and buy downs, Tyche indicates that the current number of Grandfathered Full private regions stands at just over 11%.

In terms of private region decline on the grid, Tyche offers the following:

November 2013 March 2016
 28-Month Region Loss
 %age Decline
19424 17549 1875 10.7%

Comparing annual region losses for the period January 2012 through December 2015 shows that overall, while the decline still continues, it has slowed considerably as a percentage of the total grid since hitting a peak in 2012. However, 2015 did see a slight increase in the rate of decline, but just under 1%.

2012 2013
 2014
 2015
Loss %age
 Loss
 %age
 Loss
 %age
 Loss
 %age
2863 12% 1719 8.2% 673 3.5% 825 4.4%

In terms of revenue for the Lab, in  November 2013 the Lab was generating approximately US$3,857,000 (+/- US$52,000) per month. By March 2016, this figure was approximately US $3,385,000 ( +/- US $43,000), representing a 12% decline in monthly private region revenues across the 28 months.

While this is a drop, and allowing for the fact that figures can only estimated, it would suggest that the Lab is still generating around $49 million revenue from tier (private + Mainland) at this point in time, representing approximately 80% of their total revenue. Taking into the assorted costs involved in running, maintaining and enhancing Second Life and the company as a whole, this would suggest the Lab is still reasonably profitable.

Which is not to say there are not other clouds on the horizon. The recent buy down offer on regions could pose a problem to small or medium-sized estates where full regions are concerned (given that the majority of Homesteads are already Grandfathered), as they may find meeting the up-front US$600 difficult to meet. If so, this could make it even harder for them to remain competitive on pricing with the larger estates, and potentially lead to further consolidation of land among the latter at the expense of smaller operations forced to turn in their cards.

Tyche’s ongoing reports make for interesting reading – particularly these month-end reports, which have been sadly missed (and my thanks to Ciaran Laval for pointing-out that we now have a new one to look at). As such, I hope the March update might signal the return of these reports are returning to something of a more regular appearance, assuming Tyche has the time to pull them together!

Related Links

Sundry thoughts on recent bans in Second Life

Posted on by Inara Pey
From Pixabay
From Pixabay

Note: Linden Lab has provided the Better Business Bureau with a breakdown of the permanent ban process, which is available for public viewing.

On  Sunday, February 21st, I posted an article concerning SL content creator Teager (Breeder’s Choice and Teegle brands). In it I covered the news that Teager was asking people not to buy from her Marketplace store, on account of her accounts having been banned from Second Life.

Some 24 hours after posting that article – and approaching a week after she first started encountering problems, Teager had her accounted released. As I noted in my update to my original post on the situation, the news first came in a * Breeder’s Choice * group announcement, via Teager’s husband, AgentEightySix in SL:

There is news regarding Teager. She has been unbanned. She’s not home right now, she got the email on her phone, but I’m sure she’ll be on a little later. For everyone who donated at the donation box, thank you.  No need to do any more.  We’ll take it down tonight, and everything can get back to normal around here.

The following day, Tuesday February 23rd, it was confirmed another creator initially banned under similar circumstances, WarmAnimations Lisa, had also had her ban rescinded.  In both cases, warnings were given about the risk of further banishment in the event of a re-offence.

The notifications that their bans had been lifted was also the first time both Teager and WarmAnimations Lisa were actually told why they had been banned: they had used images within one or more Marketplace listings which were deemed to be “not acceptable” – the actual items specified in the listings did not appear to be in question.

While objecting to an image in a listing, even one rated as Adult, may sound odd, it is worth remembering that there are subjects which can still be deemed as offensive or disturbing even among those who have consciously opted to enable the Adult content rating when browsing the Marketplace. This is something content creators should keep in mind when preparing their listings; the Adult rating isn’t necessarily a carte blanche allowance to post absolutely anything.

But that said, for the Lab to immediately respond with an outright ban, as was the case with Teager and WarmAnimations Lisa (and possibly others) without warning nor explanation, is, in five words: excessive  and completely heavy-handed.

Even with the best will in the world people make mistakes. They’re not wilfully breaking the policy; they’re not attempting any kind of subversion, they have simply erred. This can happen even when they’ve read all the standards, requirements and policies related to something. As such, there are cases where people should be given – for want of a better term – the benefit of the doubt before a hand starts reaching for the ban hammer.

As it is, Linden Lab can remove any content at any time from both the Marketplace and / or in-world at any time, might it not have been better to go that route first with these situations? That is, remove the content causing the problem; communicate with the affected content creators and explain what has been done, why it has been done, and issue any appropriate warning (if necessary) on the possible consequences of future transgressions.

Such an approach achieves a number of beneficial goals for the Lab:

  • It allows the offending images to be removed without fuss
  • It offers a clear explanation of what has been done and why
  • It allows said content creators to consider any other items they have listed with images which might be considered “not acceptable”, and thus replace said images
  • It may allow word to spread through the content creation community without undue rancour or drama, so that others with possibly questionable images in their listings might also replace them, removing the need for future actions on the Lab’s part
  • It demonstrates that Linden Lab recognises that people can, and do, make mistakes, and that most are prepared to accept their error if it is properly explained to them
  • It demonstrates consideration without removing the explicit understanding that there are policies which must be adhered to, and that repeated violations won’t be tolerated.

Obviously, there are times when it is appropriate / necessary for the ban hammer to be wielded within Second Life. no-one is denying that. But equally, there are times when it should not be seen as the immediate and preferred tool of action when there are other means to initially handle a situation. This is a balance those at the Lab with access to the ban tool seem to have problems in understanding.

Over the past couple of years, the Lab has been investing time and effort in rebuilding users’ confidence in itself on several fronts. If nothing else, an over-reliance on bans as first response to policy transgressions when there are potentially other ways to deal with matters, risks unravelling at least some of that restored confidence.

As it is, when looking specifically at both Teager’s and WarmAnimations Lisa’s situation, it’s very hard not to reach the conclusion they were handled in a manner akin to the image at the top of this article.

At what price VR?

Posted on by Inara Pey
Oculus CR-1 with microphone, Oculus Remote and Xbox wireless controller
Oculus CR-1 package (image: Oculus VR)

On Wednesday, January 6th, and as I reported, Oculus VR announced the price of the first generation Oculus Rift VR headset as being US $599 (€699 in Europe and £499 in the UK) + shipping at applicable taxes, with the unit available for pre-order.

The price has caused some consternation around the globe, even though Palmer Luckey had, since September 2015, been indicating the headset would be more than the assumed price of US $350, as my colleague Ben Lang over at The Road to VR quoted Luckey saying at the time.

As it is, the Oculus Rift is apparently heavily subsidised by Facebook; had it not been so, then the price might have been north of the US $1,000 mark . Further, and like it or not, the HTC / Valve Vive is likely to have a price point somewhat more than the Rift – although it will include hand controllers and room sensors, which the Rift does not. In addition, the latest version of the Vive sports a “chaperone system”: a front-mounted camera which allows the user to overlay their VR environment with images of the room around them, making for easier physical movement when using the headset.

Elsewhere, there has been speculation about the possible price of Sony’s PlayStation VR (PSVR), particularly after Forbes reported Amazon Canada had it listed at CAN $1,125 (roughly US $800). The listing price was later removed, with Sony stating it was an error and that the final price of the PSVR has yet to be determined – but it has left people wondering.

And while the Oculus Rift price may seem steep, it might be worth pointing out that the Vuzix iWear, an OSVR-based headset initially aimed at the immersive film experience, but capable of supporting VR games and applications, is currently available for pre-order at US $499, and comes with a specification somewhat below that of the Rift.

Sony PSVR - Amazon Canada quoted a price of US $800, quickly countered by Sony - but some speculate it might be accurate
Sony PSVR – Amazon Canada quoted a price of US $800, quickly countered by Sony – but some speculate it might be accurate or at least close to the truth (image: Sony Computer Entertainment)

So does this mean the US $599 price tag for the Oculus Rift is justified? Given that the first pre-order batch apparently sold-out within minutes, one might be tempted to say “yes”. However, the initial rush could be deceptive; while there are undoubtedly a lot of early adopters out there willing to pay a premium for the hardware, they aren’t likely to be in the majority.

And here is where consumer-focused VR could end-up being hoist by its own petard, and in a number of ways, some of which are pointed to by Chris Kohler, writing at Wired.

The first is that VR as a term is already being badly abused.Much is made of 360-degree video (already a thing through Google Cardboard systems), but it really isn’t VR as many would accept it.

The second is there is already a rising tide of headsets offering “VR experiences”. Most of these are (again) Cardboard-based and utilised a mobile ‘phone. The problem here is that inevitably, the quality of the experience isn’t all it could be. What’s more, it often hooks back into the idea that VR is pretty much stuff like 360-degree video.

Samsung's Gear VR sits at the top of the mobile VR pyramid, and could be said to be indicative of where Oculus VR would like to go: a self-contained, lightweight system which doesn't necessarily tether the user to their computer
Samsung’s Gear VR sits at the top of the mobile VR pyramid, and could be said to be indicative of where Oculus VR would like to go: a self-contained, lightweight system which doesn’t necessarily tether the user to their computer (image: Samsung)

The issue here is that despite these factors, these low-end headsets and units such as Samsung’s Gear VR, are presenting VR as something that’s easily affordable (given most people are liable to have a suitable ‘phone to use with them). The experience may not be terribly clever when compared to the Rift or the Vive – but it is there, and it is coupled with a possible perception that VR is about 360 film / sports experiences.

Thus, unless the Rift and the Vive et al can convince the greater populace they offer a truly unique, high-end, head-and shoulders-above-the-rest type of VR experience that instantly compels people to shell out the readies for them, there is a risk that they could be seen a “just another headset”, and passed by in favour of the cheaper albeit less capable headsets, at least until the price point is seen to come down – and that could put something of a pin in the side of the VR bubble, if only in the short-term.

In the Press: the future of VR with Bloomberg

Posted on by Inara Pey
Emily Chang from Bloomberg Business discusses the future of VR with Ebbe Altberg and AltspaceVR CEO Eric Romo
Emily Chang from Bloomberg Business discusses the future of VR with Ebbe Altberg and AltspaceVR CEO Eric Romo (via Bloomberg Business)

On Monday, December 7th, Linden Lab CEO Ebbe Altberg appeared alongside AltspaceVR’s CEO and founder, Eric Romo  on Bloomberg Business with Emily Chang, to discuss How to Find Realistic Timeline for Virtual Reality. In the interview, which lasts just under 5 minutes, the three discussed the potential of VR including.

The foundation for the interview is a report by TrendForce which proclaims the VR market will be worth around US $70 billion by 2020, with some US $20 billion coming from hardware purchases and US $50 billion from software and applications. It’s the latest in a bullish series of predictions on the future of the technology, many of which have gone unchallenged – and even then, TrendForce believe their prediction is an “understatement”. But how likely is it?

The Trend Force prediction for VR growth (via Bloomberg Business)
The Trend Force prediction for VR growth (via Bloomberg Business)

US $70 billion represents a tenfold increase in market worth for an industry slated to generate around US $6.7 billion in 2016. However you look at it, that’s a pretty steep growth curve. Both Ebbe and Eric see it as “reasonable”, with the latter citing the idea that a lot of companies which might not be considered as “VR companies” seeing a value proposition in the technology and leveraging it within their business model. In particular, he refers to the expected upsurge in VR as a paradigm shift comparable to that witnessed with the smartphone revolution.

Others are more cautious, as is the case with Oculus VR CEO Brendan Iribe, who is shown commenting:

We definitely believe the mass market … there’s going to be a lot of adopters, early adopters, of VR. but if you’re looking at the kind of smartphone scale, you know, billions of users out there, that’s going to take a long time.

While not nay-saying the potential of VR, other analysts view the TrendForce report as being unhelpful. When approached by Tweak Town, for example, Moor Insights & Strategy’s VR Analyst Anshel Sag, had this to say:

$70 billion by 2020 is more than extremely ambitious, $70 billion assumes that VR is a mature and mainstream market. There is no way that VR will explode into such a mature market within effectively 4 years. While I am extremely optimistic about the future of VR, such projections do nothing but hurt the future of VR by setting unrealistic expectations. There are no players in any part of the market that could turn this industry into a $70 billion industry in 4 years.

During the Bloomberg discussion, there is an acceptance that VR needs to overcome certain technical hurdles to gain more of a mass-market appeal. Certainly, these issues – cost, reliance on high-end supporting technology, etc. – are real, and doubtless will be overcome. But they aren’t the single issue facing VR in terms of its adoption.

Like it or not, VR is actually an isolating experience. Sure, you can in theory see anything, go anywhere, etc., while using it. But you do so at the expense of pretty much cutting you off from the rest of the world around you. It curtails your ability to properly interact with the things around you, to multi-task, etc. For many people and situations, even those seen as potential VR use-cases, that could curb the appeal.

There’s something else as well to be considered when discussing VR and its potential; what might be called the elephant in the room: augmented reality.

While AR is off to a slower start that VR, it is fair to say that it has the potential to reach into many of those markets and use-cases as seen to be ideal for VR, and offer a more attractive option in doing so. Initial AR systems are far more self-contained and portable; those on the horizon promise a wealth of capabilities (up to and including VR). More to the point, they do not isolate users from the world around them, something which could make AR far more practical and appealing for everyday use in the house, at work, on the street, etc.

By the time VR is really in a position to offer low-cost, lightweight systems freed from requiring high-end computing power, it could be facing stiff competition from AR for many of the markets seen as "ideal" for its use
By the time VR is really in a position to offer low-cost, lightweight systems freed from requiring high-end computing power, it could be facing stiff competition from AR for many of the markets seen as “ideal” for its use (image via CastAR)

So, it could be said that AR appears to be a far more natural proposition for widespread adoption and use, becoming a far more natural evolution from (and with) mobile and smartphone technologies. Hence why some put AR’s market worth as being in excess for US $100 billion by 2020.

Which is not to say that VR doesn’t have a place in the future. There are very niche and compelling cases where it will gain momentum. But whether it will ever reach the level of adoption comparable to the smartphone, as is so often cited, is questionable. There is no reason why, that for many of those potentially uses of VR outside of entertainment and gaming, AR might not offer a far better value proposition for take-up when compared to VR, leading to the latter being subsumed by it well before it has the opportunity to reach the scale of growth predicted for it.

You can catch the Bloomberg video by flowing the link towards the top of this piece, or you can catch the audio below.

Lab offer 50% off Marvelous Designer training with CG Elves

Posted on by Inara Pey

In something of an unusual promotion, Linden Lab is offering Second Life creators with a 50% discount on a training course for learning how to use a tool suite called Marvelous Designer – and to be honest, I’m scratching my head a little over it.

Marvelous Designer is billed as a software package which:

Allows you to create beautiful 3D virtual clothing … with tools that enhance quality while saving you time. From basic shirts to intricately pleated dresses and rugged uniforms, Marvellous Designer can virtually replicate fabric textures and physical properties to the last button, fold, and accessory.

The product boasts use in a wide range of environments include 3D and the world of film, where the results can apparently be seen effects created by Weta Workshop  for The Hobbit and The Adventures of Tin-Tin.

The Lab’s offer specifically focuses on Mastering Marvelous Designer: Beginners Course & Advanced Workshops, video-based training supplied by CG Elves, with the blog post stating:

Visit the CG Elves site through this link, opt in to the “Mastering Marvelous Designer: Beginners Course & Advanced Workshops,”  select any add-ons you may want, then use secondlife-special in the coupon code section of the checkout cart to receive your discount.

This offer is only good until December 30th, 2015 – so find out more about the training course and if it’s right for you by visiting the CG ELves website today!

I don’t pretend to be a clothing content creator, so I know little about what tools are in use by SL content creators, how useful this offer might be or how widely Marvellous Designer may be used by SL content creators.

However, given that Marvelous Designer has a pricing structure which starts at a monthly subscription of Us $59.00 and runs through an annual subscription of US $360.00 or a one-off payment of US $550.00 (with no option to switch between perpetual and subscription options), part of me suspect the tool might be seeing widespread use by SL designers. However, there is a 15-day free trial for those wishing to give it a poke.

The training course itself totals some 52.5 hours of video training, delivered in 1080p quality. It comes at a full cost of US $399.00 – so the discount offer will reduce this to US $199.50 – something which again may not have even the curious knocking down the door.  However, to find out more, follow the links to the CG Elves website, above and below.

As noted, this is something of a curious offer for the Lab to roll out, and I’m not overly convinced at to how well it might be received or taken up. Is this also some vague pointer that Marvellous Designer is a tool set that will be supported by “Project Sansar”? Your guess is as good as mine. In the meantime here  are the links again.

Related Links

Project Sansar: in the news and marketplace thoughts

Posted on by Inara Pey

“Project Sansar” has been getting noticed again. In Dublin, at the 2015 Web Summit, Ebbe Altberg, the Lab’s CEO gave a presentation about  the new platform, the end of which included short video of the platform, which was captured by attendee Janne Juntunen. Following this, at least a couple of articles have appeared in on-line media outlets, with my colleague Ben Lang offering a brief write-up in Road to VR, while Fortune On-line, to which I was directed by Ciaran Laval, also carried a piece.

The Fortune article offers an enticing headline, How ‘Second Life’ Developer Hopes To Deliver The ‘YouTube For VR’, drawing on the Lab’s YouTube / WordPress analogy they’ve used in talking to the media over the last few months, but neither – beyond offering an image captured from “Project Sansar” and which can be seen on the Lab’s redesigned corporate website, has much that is new to those of us following “project Sansar” as closely we can.

An image from the Lab's redesigned corporate web site showing the Golden Gate Bridge model from "Project Sansar", complete with glying vehicles moving around it - a moving versions of which was show at the Dublin Web Summit 2015
An image from the Lab’s redesigned corporate website showing the Golden Gate Bridge model from “Project Sansar”, complete with flying vehicles moving around it – a moving versions of which was show at the Dublin Web Summit 2015

The YouTube  / WordPress analogy is fitting, given that “Project Sansar” is designed to be pretty much a white label environment where clients and customers can come into the platform, develop their virtual spaces and then market them to their users under a brand of their own choosing, complete with dedicated access from the web.

Given most of the statements made in both articles will be familiar to those following Sansar, I was drawn to one statement in particular made by Ebbe Altberg:

We want to make it less expensive and less difficult for creators to get started with Project Sansar, while at the same time enabling them to create higher quality, larger, and more immersive experiences, reach larger audiences,and create much larger business opportunities—whether selling virtual items or monetizing entire experiences. In addition to supporting our community of creators we’ll give them tools to create and support their own communities and serve their customers and audiences. [Emphasis mine.]

The first part of this comment again doesn’t really reveal anything new; however, I’ve highlighted the last past of it because it presents another opportunity for some speculation.

A further image from the Lindenlab.com home page showing a scene which formed a part of the Lab's Dublin Web Summit video
A further image from the Lindenlab.com home page showing a scene which formed a part of the Lab’s Dublin Web Summit video

Yesterday, and thanks to a huge amount of legwork by Vick Forcella, I wrote about the Lab’s subsidiary Tilia Inc, and the filing of a trademark for Tilia, a payment processing system.  Seeing Altberg’s comments about providing “project Sansar” customers / clients tools to … serve their customer and audiences”, I find myself wondering if “Tilia” might be intended to provide “Project Sansar” customers with a further white label environment in which they can build and brand their own marketplace presence and control the goods and services presented to their customers.

Thus, rather than sending their users to a generic “Project Sansar” marketplace where they might be confronted with a plethora of goods, including those from competitors or which might otherwise be unsuitable to their target audience, customers using Sansar could present their users with exactly the virtual good they wish them to see and use, a level of control which could be extremely attractive to the core vertical markets towards which “Project Sansar” seems to be being steered (e.g. education, training, simulation, architecture and business).

Ebbe Altberg presents a short video featuring footage shot from inside "Project Sansar" at the Dublin Web Summit 2015 (image via )
Ebbe Altberg presents a short video featuring footage shot from inside “Project Sansar” at the Dublin Web Summit 2015 (image via Janne Juntunen on Twitter)

In his Road to VR piece, Ben Lang focuses more on the technical aspects of the new platform, pointing-out that style and looks can be an integral part of a game or platform’s longevity, and that in his estimation  of these initial screen shots, “Project Sansar” is hitting the nail pretty much on the head.

It is in the Road to VR piece that we do get an interesting insight. It has been previously indicated that “Project Sansar” will offer ways and means to optimise content to improve performance, rather than just shoving everything down the pipe and little the viewer try to handle it all. In discussing things with Ben Lang, Ebbe Altberg gives some indicators as to how this will be achieved.

We’ll do a lot of things to help users understand how to create performant content. There’s a lot of work yet to do, but we have plans for things like automatic optimization of content, polygon reduction of content that preserves quality at the same time, including showing users that create content some sort of visual indication of how performant their content is going to be across various platforms [i.e. clients].

Both articles offer good light reading on “Project Sansar”, even if they don’t offer anything especially new, with the Fortune articles also underlining a few facts, good and bad, about Second Life.

I remain intrigued by the direction the Lab is taking with their new platform. While it is early days, and given the fact I  still tend to feel “Project Sansar” will end up  niche product  – albeit it a much larger niche than filled by the likes of Second Life and OpenSim today – I also tend to think that the Lab is far more one the right track in their thinking than those behind some of the other platforms currently in development out there.

Related Links

P.S. Ben, if you do read this, please check the e-mails, still awaiting a reply vis our discussions!)