With the recent Interface debate and competition I thought it was nice to bookmark and link the great overview of ‘futuristic interfaces‘ Smashing Magazine has posted recently. Amongst some of the things I posted about earlier, they list some prototypes that seek to improve the immersion into 3D, or bring virtual (3D) scenes to the physical world, such as the video above shows.

Posted on: August 19, 2008 | No Comments » |

With the recent launch of a number of virtual worlds such as Google Lively, Vivity and WebFlock virtual worlds inside the browsers seems ‘the way to go’. This poses many interesting questions, the most obvious one so far goes something like “Will browser-based worlds such as Google Lively replace virtual worlds requiring a download and installation such as Second Life”? In response Linden Lab founder Philip Rosedale claimed in recent interviews the browser based virtual environments could not offer the same ‘immersion’ a client based virtual world (“like World of Warcraft”) could. But are browser-based virtual worlds really that far behind in the race to provide the ‘early majority’ immersive 3D spaces?

When looking at browser based worlds such as Habbo Hotel or Club Pinguin, its not hard to see what Philip might have meant, these 2D spaces are significantly different ‘virtual worlds’ than the kind Second Life offers. But the recent wave of browser based virtual worlds is no longer ‘flat’. They have added the third dimension with the help of Flash techniques (Papervision or Alternativa) and Java, creating 3D spaces inside the browser. The most recent update of Flash (10) can even address a computers graphical card directly, promising major improvements in graphics over the next year (perhaps months) compared to older 3D Flash applications. Last, the recently updated ‘3Dxplorer‘ by Altadyn allows users to create environments which I find hard to distinguish from the graphical quality Second Life offers with the help of Java:

One of the major advantages of these browse-based virtual worlds is they can be hyperlinked, or even simply placed into your (2D) website. However, the embedding of these virtual worlds into regular websites is not just about the application, or adding immersive spaces to contribute to 2D pages. It’s not even necessarily because these browser-based worlds can use and interact with other digital data more easily. I think it will turn out to be healthy competition that could benefit both the browser-based and client-based virtual worlds because people who wouldn’t seek out virtual worlds by themselves will get to experience these 3D environments as they become part of the established web instead of ‘a geeky isolated place/game’.

Client-based virtual worlds require a certain path to visit, with a lot of obstacles you might not be willing to deal with if you don’t know what the virtual environment will have to offer. Think of the download, installation, orientation etc. This prevents a lot of people from experiencing the added value of immersion and experience on the ‘flat web’. As said, the browser based worlds can be easily hyperlinked, or embedded on websites if they make a valuable contribution, merging them seamlessly with the web and removing the obstacles and still contributing their value as immersive environments.

So will client-based virtual worlds ‘recover’, or are they being replaced by their browser-based competition? I think it will depend on some technological improvements inside the client, versus improvements in the browser. Right now browsers were not made to support 3D, but with enough demand (and given Microsoft’s own interest in 3D and virtualization) this could significantly change. So will a separate program/client really be required in 3 to 4 years to offer the exact same kind of experience, without concessions on graphics or speed? If concessions have to be made, do they weigh up against the accessibility of client-based virtual worlds? Given that the audience outside of virtual worlds is still vastly larger than the audience inside virtual worlds, companies and institutions will go for accessibility over immersion (reach over experience).

Posted on: August 16, 2008 | 35 Comments » |

I must have missed the Rivers Run Red promotional video for their development in the Google World Lively, because apparently it has been up since the 8th of July. But as it was just a great promotional clip of the platform and Rivers run Red as a development company I bookmarked it here anyways. (View the machinma by clicking on the title image above, RRR doesn’t seem to like external web embedding much)

Rivers Run Red also recently created its first 3D space in Lively, called ‘Avalon,’ which serves as a demo area for visitors to explore how Lively can help turn their content into a destination. You can visit the Lively room over at: http://www.lively.com/dr?rid=5938680814301302400

Posted on: August 13, 2008 | No Comments » |

Yesterday the winners of the Dusan Writer Second Life interface Contest were announced live on Metanomics. After a short overview of all the contestants, the finalists and final winner are as follows:

First place: Rheta Shan
A well deserved winner, she got the viewer and presentation done down to the last details. As major improvements I’d list the snapshot feature, the loading bar, and the clear grouping of navigation elements at the top of the screen. Click on the image to see an interactive Flash version of Rheta’s proposal.

Second place: Jacek Antonelli
The second place was won over by Jacek’s thorough knowledge of the current Second Life viewer. Using her experience Jacek crafted a new interface with clear grouping of social/communication tools, scalable menus and a great make-over of the inventory system, solving a significant problem for most long-time users.

Third place: Roy Cassini (me!)
After writing extensively on Dazzle, and how the interface wasn’t solving the problems it could be solving, I had to put my money where my mouth was. I focussed on creating the interface more accessible to new users with an on-board tutorial, guiding new users through the first steps inside the virtual world.

Overall it was a fun experience to see some virtual world crowdsourcing in action, and some insights into the different perceptions on interaction design solutions for Second Life. I’d like to thank the entire jury (Ordinal Malaprop, Eristic Strangelove, Vint Falken and Keystone Bouchard) and of course Dusan Writer for their organisation and time, and hope this won’t be the last we hear of the efforts for interface improvement.

New Worlds Notes seems to have started of the ‘aftermath’ with a poll on the features as presented in the designs over here, and all full presentations can be seen here. Title image by SLNN who did the live coverage of the event (showing Dusan, Beyers Sellers of Metanomics, Rheta, Jacek and Roy from left to right).

Posted on: | 4 Comments » |

It’s no wonder Linden Labs recently choose to hire former AOL Frank Ambrose to oversee work on scalability problems with Second Life, they had a vision. The above video shows a promotion for Q-Link, an America Online (AOL) enterprise. Social networks, ‘twitter’ (message boards), sharing and virtual worlds, its all there. Who said things have changed on the interwebs?

Through Greg Verdino ‘Hate to tell you, Web 1.o was social too‘.

Posted on: August 12, 2008 | No Comments » |

Is the future of virtual worlds inside the browser, or will the rich, client-based become the dominant model for virtual worlds? Not even a week after a lengthy discussion on my previous post on this topic, some major clues arrived to the scene as to how this ‘war over the metaverse’ is about to unfold in the near future.

1. Limitations of Plug-ins

Ugotrade has an interesting and detailed write up of an interview with Avi Bar-Zeev, one of the co developers of the application which spawned Google Earth, and now Virtual World thinker at Microsoft. Avi Bar-Zeev adresses the same issues Paviig Lok noted in our debate on the concessions being made by both clients and plug-ins: ‘most plug-ins are still not build to handle the required features for virtual world applications’.

“Being “hosted in the browser” implies a few things that ActiveX can’t handle. First, the 3D viewer should run in a sandbox, with prohibitions against accessing or writing to other parts of your computer. That’s a benefit of the XBAP method Adam picked. But “hosted” also typically implies more cross-platform portability, much like Javascript, which his chosen method doesn’t provide. XBAP does work equally well in IE and Firefox on the PC with .Net installed, so that’s a plus. But a Mac version, for example, will be more difficult to come by. To be fair, even Javascript, incl. AJAX apps, often require a few platform-unique code paths, but hopefully only for low-level logic, not the whole app.”

Furthermore, engines inside the client produce better graphics quality than JAVA and Flash could offer now, which is especially visible in the case of blue Mars. Blue Mars is a virtual world that will most likely need a large download and therefor create a large barier of casual users. Its tools for modeling are very advanced and it runs on a n engine that wont be comparable to anything that can be placed inside the browser for a long time to come. Its model is based on creating absolute stunning imagery, combined with futuristic experiences and game like entertainment. The developer of Blue Mars Avatar Inc has said its virtual world has deliberately made concessions on accessibility to customize the message they want to send out to their nich: Being the absolute best in virtual experiences.

In essence this means we haven’t seen the last of client-based worlds for a while, but on the other hand there is a serious hunger for more accessibility as provided by a number of possible options:

2. A standardized ‘Virtual World Plug-in’

“we’ve christened it “Xenki” - it’s a mix of “X” (for XBAP) and “Enki”, an ancient god of crafts.” - Adam Frisby

Xenki (Snowcrash reference?) is a browser add-on able to show the OpenSim environments inside the browser. The original post is amazingly fuzzy at explaining what it does exactly (just technobabble to anyone not deep into coding) but its the very basics of getting 3D inside a browser in a similar manner OpenSim renders the same content inside its client.

Though this plug in is still its its early stages, it reminds me a lot of the development of the Flash Plug-in. Flash, at some point in its development, ran into its ‘killer app’ in web-embedded video which instantly took off. A match made in heaven as it launched Flash into ubiquity and web video into a mainstream platform. However, this type of ‘circle of succes’ requires a mainstream audience to begin with. People where using video long before Flash, the process was just a lot more tedious with stand alone applications in media players, requiring downloads before viewing and different formats.

3. A new type of browser

From the same interview by UgoTrade, Avi Bar-Zeev notes:

“The best hope for true “hosted” 3D viewers though is for 3D to become a native element of existing browsers — OR — for someone to write a new class of browser that’s built to handle 3D and 2D equally well. It’s the best hope, simply because 3D is a superset of 2D — anything you can do in 2D can be done in 3D with some degrees of freedom left blank. 3D elements should be able to be mixed effortlessly with traditional 2D markup and vice versa, selecting, cut, paste, flow, and so on. And that’s never going to happen in a simple plug-in.” - Avi Bar-Zeev

And as I said in my closing statement of the ‘Is Second Life being replaced?’ post - this is not entirely unlikely. Visualization and virtualization are becoming a major trends, not just in terms of virtual worlds but in overall information indexing. Some ‘3D browsers‘ have already popped up, and the developers of clients stand a lot to gain from making a more capable program, potentially dramatically increasing usage of these clients (and the portals they create to search, or other browser-business models).

4. ‘Light clients’ and modular viewers

There seems to be some fuss about Second Life registering ‘SLim‘ - supposedly ‘Second Life Instant Messaging’. On the exact details and status of the project is little known at this time, but speculations are it is supposed to be a new communication system for Second Life, moving the chat (and the Second Life friends/contacts network) outside the client. A modular system for virtual worlds where functionality such as chat or quick instant messages don’t really benefit from the visualization inside the client.

Another speculation is the long awaited ‘light version’ of Second Life (SLim as in ‘thin’) - A more accessible client as part of a broader virtual experience, with less features, focusing on the basics of virtual words (content exploration and social functions). Such an approach would be another step to lower the barriers for people to step into a virtual world.

The idea of modular viewers like Dusan Writer and Pavig Lok propose are indeed an interesting concepts:

“This kind of approach, where there’s a solid complex multifunction world, with gateways into lower rez spaces would allow for much greater integration. The lightweight world client can act as a gateway into a more featured environment, and of course the complex world also gets an easy public access crossover space. Like a foyer.”- Pavig Lok

CyWorld and Gaia Online are using the modular model for web based virtual world - introducing various levels of accessibility (Flash World, 3D world, 2D forum, chat/shoutboxes, and a facebook’ish profile based environment). One way for client based-worlds is to move their content out of their client for the more ‘fleeting applications’ such as chat, browsing profiles or sharing music (things you want to do instantly, and then close again) while using the client for more sovereign applications (things you do with your full attention such as modeling, exploring, following narratives).

Conclusion

Overall, things are never as black and white as ‘client or no client’. The modular option for virtual worlds offers the ability to maintain the interest as generated by clientbased virtual worlds for example (or vise versa, guide people into the full experience and application through accesible worlds). This increases the potential of integrating a complete, virtual setting into existing workflows and every day life through task oriented design, or in other words: “What is it the user wants to do with virtual worlds, and how can we best facilitate this?”. The diversity of modular worlds allows for a much better, much more accurate answer rather than to push every possible answer into a specific setting (such as powerpoint presentations on a Crytek2 Engine, or customizable immersive narrative in Habbo Hotel).

However, even though modular and hybrid models are a great foresight, they too will produce their own issues, most likely security, consistency and ‘noise’. Ugotrade does a great job in addressing some of these issues in the remainder of the interview with Avi Bar-Zeev, and is really must read material if you want some insights in the ‘roadmap’ towards these type of worlds.

Posted on: August 9, 2008 | 1 Comment » |

What do you do when you don’t want to become ‘just another player’ in the battle over the metaverse? You start by adopting the most incredible graphics engine available, create a plausible setting to put your community building efforts into context, create amazing visuals and concept art to grab the attention (a tactic commonly employed by the hugely successful Blizzard), and get a ‘Visual Futurist celebrity’ involved in your content creation. You end up with attention, anticipation, context, a story, and huge potential.

Today Avatar Reality Inc. announced their (3rd party) partnership with Virtual Space Entertainment (VSE - and don’t you just love their slogan ‘everything else is just reality’?), a virtual world developer, to provide the first attraction on the soon to be inhabited planet of Mars. The virtual version that is, within Avatar Reality Inc’s platform ‘Blue Mars’. VSE is led by Syd Mead who calls himself a ‘visual futurist’ and has an impressive portfolio (some of the highlights are the movies Bladerunner and Startrek - The motion picture). Avatar Reality Inc. runs a third party program, inviting developers of 3D content to join in on the ‘cultivation’ of Mars.

Buts its more than just content creation, its about building truly unique content on a professional level that could easily serve as an ‘attraction’ to anyone with a slight interest in the future. The developers are challenged to think about the future, and VSE has promised their city will allow visitors to experience “the future of entertainment, social networking, commerce and education. Retail shopping centers, entertainment venues, museums and more will give visionary entrepreneurs the best commercial opportunities of the 22nd century.”.

I love the approach Blue Mars has taken to their virtual world development. It’s remarkable, it’s refreshing, and it’s certainly risky. I really just wish they did more with it the potential of building a ‘mainstream’ attraction than I’ve seen on their website and press releases so far. Why not build this futuristic platform for experiencing the real future - much like the ‘Space Collective’. A collaborative community providing content for an ever expanding ‘must see attraction’, a new type of themepark where the audience is as much a part of the story as the developers are…

Blue Mars is to be released near te end of 2008 as a ‘massive multiplayer virtual world’ - something in which I hope the ‘MM’ of massive multiplayer will be secondary to providing a rich experience, context (the ‘real’ future) and content (attractions). The proven ‘game niche’is already convinced, now lets see if ‘experiencing the future’ is a persuasive application for a larger type of market.

Posted on: August 6, 2008 | 1 Comment » |

Some nice linkbait by Gary Hayes of the Personalizemedia blog I wanted to bookmark here. In his video “The ‘Social Virtual’ World’s A Stage“ Gary walks through some of the most popular social virtual worlds, adding visuals to virtual worlds such as HiPiHi, Kaneva, Twinity, ActiveWorlds, LagunaBeach vMTV. There.com, Habbo, Google Lively etc. Overall a very nice overview of what the ‘metaverse 2008′ has to offer:

Posted on: August 5, 2008 | No Comments » |