Talk:Second Life

SL is not an MMORPG

I personally DONT beleive SL has much to do with being an MMORPG, quite the contrary it's users have made it so. SL is a VIRTUAL WORLD, a mimick of REAL WORLD in so forth that it lets it users... ok scratch that, COMMUNALLY FORCES Its users into doing things in such away that even in the REAL world they'd gag and barf from it. WoW is different than SL and same with other things - GOREANS ARE NOT MMORPGS they're honestly an RL and SL merge of a society that is bound by their laws. BDSM and such are not RPGS either. Would you call SL modeling an RPG? (You walk around in a modeling area like a doll, you wear custom created content and listen to crabby other users who make you feel like crap for being an honest person. wait.. this sounded like Diablo 2 back in the day.). This is just feed back of personal opinion, if other people think i'm wrong or different whatever its option of opinion :) XxReikoxX - The Visual Asia Geek (talk) 06:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

MMORPG and SL Roleplay and Combat

There seems to be some confusion both here and in the article about Combat Sims and Roleplay Sims. They are NOT one and the same. Yes, there's often combat included within roleplay, depending on the genre, but this section of the article makes it sound like these sims are functioning like MMORPG's...and there are very few that even come close to that kind of linear "end game" structure. The closest I've seen to date is Avalon, which offers a puzzle filled quest that ends with slaying a dragon and which will earn the avatar who completes it a rideable dragon. All other sims are either combat focused with a little "role-play" on the side to keep it social or devoted to roleplay at the level of paragraph roleplay with "actions" to suit that may include metered combat only in rare instances. Nor would be combat, zombie killer sims are combat (possibly even classed as "first person shooters" as they're very like a shooting range and not roleplay at all), Valahari and Everwind are fantasy roleplay that actually frown on combat outside of sanctioned "arena" duels..whether with magic or weapon HUDs. Most Gorean sims are roleplay with combat limited to dueling matches, slave capture, or raid style combat as the roleplay requires. Most martial arts and japanese sword-style combat sims are entirely arena based metered combat with almost no role-play involved beyond the niceties.

Incidentally, having been a gamer (online and offline) all my life, a citizen of Second Life for over three years, and a beta tester for virtual worlds like Blue Mars...I find the inclusion of "Entropia" in a list of virtual worlds that compare to SL a bit...idiotic. lol It's only working "portal"(Planet Calypso)is a game, even if you can put ridiculous amounts of real world money into it and it has no "end game" beyond trying to make that money back. It has no social interface beyond what you can find at the often skinned Knights-Online and no user input to the creation of anything. CryEngine or no, it plays like a sci-fi mmorpg. [Well, okay, Anarchy Online actually plays a lot better...and it doesn't even require a GPU. Raging graphics be hanged, learn to design something people want to log into already. ;P] Steorling (talk) 14:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Prim vs. Sculpty Prim

I am not very good at editing here, so please forgive me if I make any mistakes in what I'm about to say: the mentions of prims in the article link to a page on sculpted prims. However, not all prims are sculpted prims. Many if not most prims are basic objects such as boxes. There are a set number of 'basic' prim types, including boxes, spheres, cones, etc, which can be linked together. A page should probably be created to differentiate prims from sculpted prims, or perhaps the two terms combined into one page? I have never made any edits that weren't grammatical or spelling fixes, and I am also a regular SL user who makes money there, so I feel I should not attempt this myself for fear of appearing biased. Ihavenomouth (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:29, 14 January 2010 (UTC).

Sex content removed

It was replaced with "this is not allowed" or similar. I dropped the not allowed thing, but while I don't think the section should have been deleted entire, it was largely OR and I don't feel it should be restored... and I don't feel motivated to fix and re-add. - Sinneed 20:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

How much did SL cost to develop?

I'm trying to find information on how much money was spent in the initial development of Second Life. Considering the fact that it started with almost no content (since users actually create the content themselves), I'm guessing it must have been a much cheaper to produce than a real MMORPG. Does anyone have any info on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.203.96.6 (talk) 22:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

1) Linden Lab's investment is likely to be highly confidential company information. 2) A great part of the development of Second Life, as Linden Labs is the first to proclaim, was done by users themselves. Their contribution would be impossible to assess. 3) An investor asked me how much it would cost to create a competitive site, my guess was at least $10 million to launch a beta -- and a lot of luck. Piano non troppo (talk) 15:54, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

This is different to source of information

"In March 2009, it has become known that there exist a few Second Life entrepreneurs, whose profits exceed 1 million US$ per year." The source given (http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2009/03/million.html) only suggests that these entrepreneurs have grossed over 1 Million. They could have invested more than a Million and even lost money for all we know.124.171.20.77 (talk) 11:17, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

The second edition of "The Official Guide to Second Life" mentions, as I recall, that only 5% of businesses make a profit, and that only a few people earn as much as "six figures" (USD). The people I have talked to who claim to earn their real world salary from Second Life were all peddling online sex services. Piano non troppo (talk) 16:06, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Feted Inner Core?

Since the article never mentions the expression, i've removed the redirect, please don't create it again unless there is actually some info about FIC in the article. --TiagoTiago (talk) 23:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

My understanding is that FIC is a supposed elite within SL, that was occasionally reported on, maybe five years ago. You'd probably have to do original research to get some info. Not something that seems to be current. Zhochaka (talk) 13:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

The "FIC" is the pet boogyman of everyone's favorite ranting lunatic Prokofy Neva. It is of absolutely no notability independent from Prokofy Neva themself. Prokofy Neva however is possibly of note. Just google the name and you'll find all you need to know. 75.146.40.221 (talk) 19:17, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Woodbury University Controversy

This is currently a live situation, and the piece on the page only reports one point of view. Since Linden Lab seems to have a consistent policy of not making public statements about bans, I doubt anyone will know the reasons for sure. It maybe is part of the big picture, but I can see a big NPOV problem looming. Zhochaka (talk) 13:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I deleted the material, largely for the reasons given. Second Life is an complex environment, with millions of individuals, and thousands of businesses over many years. Often people will be involved for some time without knowledge of features that others use on a regular basis. There's a temptation to speak from one's experience. Wikipedia is not a battleground. Nor is it a place to insert bias by pick-and-choosing isolated studies. Rather than synthesizing, more emphasis should be placed on stable reliable references such as "Second Life: The Official Guide" and "Second Life for Dummies". Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 18:43, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit Needed

History Section "...formed Linden Lab. The development of hardware that would enable computer users to be fully immersed in a virtual world experience." ---This isn't a complete sentence. ArishiaNishi (talk) 03:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I fixed grammar and removed wandering WP:PEACOCK language. Piano non troppo (talk) 06:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

An average 38,000 residents at any one time?

I find this figure quite incredible. I went to 2nd Life a few years ago because I saw a program about it on British Channel 4 News saying there were five million people on it. This proved pure hype. I chatted to a few people I met there in the virtual world and they all agreed that five million people may have joined up but 4,999,500 got bored with it very quickly, left and never returned. There were never as many as a hundred people resident in the few times I went there. Now I am quite prepared to admit I am totally wrong on this but 2nd Life seemed to me to the most hyped thing I ever found on the whole WWW. I got bored with it very soon like all the rest of 4,999,900 and have never felt the urge to return. It is really just a glorified chat-room but with very, very few people. So I am baffled by this figure. As I say it was a few years ago and maybe things have changed. I don't feel inclined to revisit the site and find out because, as I say, I found it all immensely dull. Has anyone else had a similar experience or can throw any light on this please? Thanks SmokeyTheCat 13:23, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

You can find the number of people currently logged in on the login page, or look at graphs for the past day or longer here: SL Graphs by Tateru Nino, and it currently averages 50,000 people (35-70K depending on time of day). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.62.128.190 (talk) 03:01, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

There have been articles in Wired Magazine and The Register, accusing SL of inflating its population statistics. Refernces to that controvery seem to have been expunged from this article and its discussion. DonPMitchell (talk) 19:03, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Apple?

Why is Second Life part of WikiProject Apple Inc.? Bwrs (talk) 07:49, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Why is this even listed as a game?

Because to be a game it has to have a goal like killing monsters,gaining experience points,leveling up,or anything like that. It has none of that.Werewolffan98 (talk) 03:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

This has been discussed pretty thoroughly. See the sections above. Second Life is a meta-game or "game container". There are many Sims that offer roleplay, combat system huds, point systems, and much more. I do not have statistics but my guess is that of all the various activities within Second Life, gaming would be near top of the list along with dancing and spamming local chat with inane gestures :) Ronald Joe Record (talk) 16:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the Emerald viewer

Although the Emerald Viewer was the most popular third party viewer, as of 9/8/10 it is now banned as a couple of developers effectively performed a DDoS using the client, and then refused to step down off the project at Linden Lab's request. Emergence and Phoenix viewers have picked up where it left with much of the original Emerald team, minus the few that LL demanded removed. http://blogs.secondlife.com/community/features/blog/2010/09/07/emerald-viewer-to-be-blocked-from-second-life —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.105.50.158 (talk) 19:01, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Economy Edits Needed

I've never actually played the game (not trying to contribute the war revolving around the word 'game' - I'm just not sure what else to call it), but was coming here to learn about it (this is why I'm not going to do any editing myself). As a non-user here for academic reasons, I find the economy section to be a bit lacking. It seems to imply that in-game money (L$) can be converted to real world currency and that some users run real world businesses on SL. But 'imply' is all that it does. This section really doesn't explain SL economy to someone who is not already familiar with the subject. 170.170.59.139 (talk) 23:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I made a stab at clarifying this, adding a paragraph to the Economy section along with additional stats. Ronald Joe Record (talk) 04:25, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Rewrite "Separate grids"

The entire section should be rewritten, such as

In Second Life, there are two age-differentiated grids (one is for teens 13-17(which no longer exists), one is for adults 18(now 16) or over)

Which just looks sloppy. I'm not very good at writing but it should be more like,

In Second Life, there is only one grid for those 16 and over.

Also, the part about the forums and false allegations, totally unsourced. If someone has the time to rewrite, it would be nice. I may try but it would probably be very poorly written. I guess I will try. Alex³ (talk) 00:33, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Did a little work myself anyways with a friend. It looks better but it still lacking A LOT OF SOURCES! Sheesh really the section should be removed, but hopefully someone will help it. :/ Alex³ (talk) 01:22, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

"Unclear trading limit obtention"?

The section headlined "Unclear trading limit obtention" is so poorly written as to be incomprehensible. Can someone render it into English, please? I would fix it myself but I don't have the time or energy at the moment— and I don't know if some editor has been jealously guarding the section in its current form. Timothy Horrigan (talk) 04:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The issue is sufficiently complicated that it can't be made accurate and simple. Suffice to say some people can earn 50,000 USD in secondlife in a year, and not be able to move that money into a real life bank account like they used to overnight because all the tentacularly complex multilayer weird ways to ask for a trade limit raise are entirely obscured or even unknown to Linden Labs staff itself. As such some well known product lines ended distribution because they couldn't get 50,000$ USD/year in their pocket after earning it - and linden labs ends up keeping the money. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.89.231.65 (talk) 06:16, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I believe I have remedied this problem. Jeff Alexander (talk) 08:38, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I think you helped some, but I think it's still far from clear to somebody who has no idea about how Second Life works. Also, it's still fully of whining that looks suspiciously POV. I can understand people would be pissed about not being able to move money out of SL (which I gather is what this issue is about, although again this section doesn't explicitly state that), but Wikipedia isn't the place for it. Wjousts (talk) 13:04, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Now that it's readable, other editors can determine whether this is truly a widespread criticism of the game or merely the griping of a single editor overreacting to a bad customer service experience. The former is appropriate in the section it's under. Jeff Alexander (talk) 07:41, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

File:SecondLife premiumgrowth.png

Does anyone remember why this image was removed? - RoyBoy 18:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Highly Dubious statement in "History" section

The statement is this:

In January 2008, residents spent a total of 28,274,505 hours "inworld", and, on average, 38,000 residents 
were logged in at any  particular moment. The maximum concurrency (number of avatars inworld) recorded is 
88,200 in the 1st qtr. 2009 [9]

Basic sanity check: 28,274,505 / 38,000 == 7440.7 hours spent in-world by the average resident that year. 7440.7 / 24 == 310 full 24-hour days spent in-world by average resident in 2008. ... People maybe stayed logged in all the time (?), then this might make some sort of sense.

Also, that citation is no longer any good. Kace7 (talk) 16:39, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

That 38000 is only the number of people on at any one time, not the total number of players. Handcuffed (talk) 18:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

3rd Party viewers

Mostly speculation, has little baring on the current state of open source tpv development beyond a footnote. Needs a rewrite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.221.11.15 (talk) 02:22, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Perceived competition

• The section Competitors was deleted.

  Since any company can view themselves as potential competitors of another, an uncited list of wannabes has no place in Wikipedia. Any company at all could see themselves as a competitor, this is a matter of business planning, not verifiable fact. A company, for example, that seeks to improve the standalone PC/console market could reasonably want to put Second Life out of business. That would give an opening to every single PC/console game company to include themselves in this article.

  Really the only thing that should be accepted is a reliable, official statement from Second Life about who they see as competitors. (And no, I'm not assuming good faith on the part of a system administrator who removed an edit that had been justified, by his own, that was not justified.) 76.102.1.193 (talk) 16:55, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

• The sentence in question is:

  Second Life has many smaller competitors including Twinity, Smeet, Smallworlds, IMVU, Active Worlds, Onverse, Kaneva, Utherverse and Blue Mars.

  When describing something popular, what is wrong with saying what competitors it has?

  I restored this section with edit comment "some people DO want to know what other programs are like Second Life.", with "like" used to mean "similar to".

  It was later re-deleted with edit comment "Appleyard, see Discussion. "What people might like" has nothing to do with Wiki rules and guidelines. And you know that .....", with "like" used to mean "find pleasant", not with my meaning. See wikt:like. Let's discuss this properly here. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

• Why not put the competition in 'See also'? PrincessSchala (talk) 23:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

reaction

it' called Hipihi http://www.hipihi.com/en/ it's the only Competitors of SL, because it offers the same service and same functionality but by a japenese company article speak primarily of second life and not of another world — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdoppelganger (talk • contribs) 08:47, 10 February 2012 (UTC)