(thx, Lum)
News coverage here (via Google). My comments below.
If you try it out, feel free to rearrange the furniture in our coffee shop, embedded below...
« In search of Afunakwa | Main | SL Bar Association meeting »
Jul 08, 2008
Comments
The comments to this entry are closed.
Wow, it looks like the vision from my last TN posting http://terranova.blogs.com/terra_nova/2008/06/virtually-etern.html> Virtually Eternal which talked about "small, web embedded worlds" is going to get a real try-out. Lets see if Lively can create a true mass market social virtual worlds platform!
Posted by: Bruce Damer | Jul 08, 2008 at 20:35
"Requires Windows Vista/XP"
That pretty much sums it up for now.
Posted by: Nexus Burbclave | Jul 08, 2008 at 22:14
Well its certainly not polished up to glossy yet. But I do sense something on the edges... the seeming integration with the 'rest' of the internet is going to make for some interesting intersections I think.
And I really hope we're not in for another roasting of a developer for not providing a Mac version right away. Its only 6 hours old... they have to start somewhere.
Posted by: Adam Ruch | Jul 09, 2008 at 00:03
I have been eagerly anticipating Google's involvement in the virtual world space for more than a year, but I am deeply disappointed with what they launched this afternoon.
In the LIVELY forums, one user includes this excerpt from the Google FAQ:
They. Just. Don't. Get. It.
The most exciting aspect of social virtual worlds is the way they can empower grass roots content creators around the globe. Instead of folding content-creation tools into the fabric of the world, Google has given us an impoverished space in which content can only be developed in-house or by "trusted developers."
It seems that Lively seeks a broader audience for virtual worlds by creating this streamlined, browser-based environment, and many users may not notice or care about the absence of tools for creating their own content. But at what cost to the creative imagination?
A better approach to broadening the virtual world user base would be to focus on strategies for improving the usability of the more open-ended platforms while also folding in features (such as data security, privacy protection and content-filtering) that would make it easier to deploy virtual worlds in classrooms, workplaces, and family living rooms.
Ultimately, I guess this will be good news for Linden Lab, IBM, Cisco, Sun, the developers who are working on Open Sim, and everyone else who is working to improve the reliability, interoperability, and accessibility of truly open virtual worlds.
Posted by: Aaron D. | Jul 09, 2008 at 01:15
I've always thought G would make "Google Worlds" that adds an "avatar layer" to SketchUp and Earth. But I guess they are suffering the atrophy of megacorporation much too early. Their various departments aren't communicating as much, and maybe the networking just isn't working out...
Lively seems geared at a limited market - particularly kids. It looks like its main features is "chat with friends" (in cartoonish 3d).
Posted by: Ina Centaur | Jul 09, 2008 at 05:22
Aaron D. said:
Well they do say they "hope to enable user generated content soon", don't they?
Moreover, I don't think it's true that SL style dedicated tools for creating complex 3D content are a prerequisite for creativity and expression. People used to build pianos out of fish steaks and chessboards in Ultima Online. In Habbo Hotel, user created content ranging from cruise boats to police stations is absolutely pervasive.
Still, I agree that it would be really cool if Google came out with advanced content creation tools that are easy to use.
Ina Centaur said:
Well, according to Sulake, Habbo has "close to 10 million monthly visitors", while Linden's latest stats say SL has around 800k "Residents Logged-In During Last 30 Days". Which one is the more limited market? ;) But I guess you are thinking of some future metaverse scenario..
Btw, it looks like IMVU's combination of "chat with friends" (in cartoonish 3d) and user-created 3D content has worked out rather well for them.
Posted by: Vili Lehdonvirta | Jul 09, 2008 at 07:07
Yeah, it seems, after poking around a bit, like it's essentially an IMVU-type play, which does have a market, even if it doesn't get the press. A more Web-integrated, major-player-leveraged version of IMVU.
My guess is that this is part of their larger Adsense, YouTube strategy of owning a piece of everyone's website and then datamining that piece to no end and eventually using it as advertising space.
I'm surprised at how "safe" they're playing this, but, on the other hand, they've got a relatively shiny brand and they don't want the headache of bad PR that SL has suffered with gambling, the virtual sex trade, etc. So no UGC.
It's also safe in that they've avoided, for the time being, any kind of artificial scarcity. No game points, no ratings and rankings, no currency, everything free. Scarcity is fun, though -- it was even part of the fun of Habitat. So they're really, essentially, doing something more like the Palace or other augmented chat worlds, than anything else.
The most exciting thing about this, by far, imho, is the prospect of seeing lots of major sites with Web-integrated avatar chat spaces where your standard avatar can show up and be known. E.g. -- making chat "at" a site feel more like a place-based experience with others.
So it does, I think, cut in a bit on the turf I had mentally associated with Metaplace.
This could go one of two ways. Google has been known, in the past, to launch and drop new toys like this if there isn't enough interest in them. At the same time, if they get enough social mass and interest in-house, you could see new features rolling out on a regular basis, some of which will be pretty cool and unanticipated.
It would be nice if they opened this up, somehow, to more free-form external development, like they've done with some projects. But my guess, based on what they've done so far, is that they want to keep this thing a more closed than open system for the moment.
Curiously, this is much more of a content-based thing than Google has financed in the past (meaning financed original creative content, not data). I'm kind of wondering how it fits into their overall mission to "organize the world's information" -- perhaps what people do in Lively will be part of the information they're organizing?
Disclaimer: Though I've always been an avid user of Google, I'm on the record as a bit worried about the power of the Google Borg.
Posted by: greglas | Jul 09, 2008 at 08:58
Oh, and btw, in addition to the WinXp thing, my 4-year old laptop doesn't have a fancy video card and seems to get hung up on Lively. That kind of hardware constraint issue is also not part of the Google philosophy. Actually, it reminds me a bit of There in the early days...
Posted by: greglas | Jul 09, 2008 at 09:01
Unless I miss my guess, this is an early attempt by Google to somehow 3D interact-ify the entire Web.
How they plan to trump Second Life's corporate/government adopters is something I'd like to hear about. My father is a professor, and his work in Second Life makes use of more advanced technologies (AI, etc.) than Lively will be capable of for quite some time, if this early version is any indication.
Posted by: Ben Overmyer | Jul 09, 2008 at 09:57
Raph's thoughts on this are worth a look.
Posted by: greglas | Jul 09, 2008 at 11:41
Color me unimpressed, sadly. As someone who eats through content like acid, the fact that they're limiting content creation to "trusted partners" like Rivers Runs Red means it's already irrelevent.
Seriously, aren't there like a baker's dozen of these types of embedded, light, social worlds being developed? No content creation, limited customization, decentralized environments. But it goes on your MySpace!
The VW market seems to be going for designing "games" that have nothing to do. There's no plot, no point, just avatars standing around. While that might be entertaining once or twice, spreading this limited population segment across a dozen or so independent, fractured startup companies seems stupid.
Indeed, the design process seems very similar to the games industry, with the difference of having the conscious effort to avoid giving any goals, points, or plot to the environment.
The same argument can be applied to SL, except for one thing: embedded content creation tools and unfettered access to them. SL's printing press of content trumps anything a closed-loop system can churn out, even if 90% of it is crap. Amusingly, most of the "trusted developers" doing stuff for Lively, IMVU, etc. came from the jungle of SL content creation (Rivers Runs Red, the Sheep, Anshe, and so on). With a closed system, there's no cross-pollination. It's just consumption.
I guess web integration (ie, a widget on your blog) is the next big thing, but I'm not really impressed, sorry. The fact that this "Web Integration" has crashed Firefox 3 twice in 2 hours doesn't help either.
Posted by: Lordfly Digeridoo | Jul 09, 2008 at 12:37
I've been a fan of creative expression in Second Life for over two years and have eagerly awaited Google's entry into VW.
Well, a few minutes is hardly enough to evaluate lively... or is it? I went to the Lively: Google Room which seemed a promising birth. I selected my avatar, I think. No confirmation, and I can't see myself, yet anyway, so who knows. Hmm, maybe I'd ask, but no one's home... or maybe there is, as the "joining room" stuck at the bottom leaves me wondering whether 5 minutes is enough time to have rezzed. I can look around, sorta, though there seem no inworld instructions on navigation, because while I never understood people complaints of Second Life being hard to use, I might claim that here. It seems I'm surrounded by cyclorama in individual rooms, oh well, I suppose that could work. Try another room, maybe I can ask someone for some clues...
hmm, no one here either...
maybe "visit popular rooms"?
hmm, no one here either...
I expect many will evaluate it that way. And teleport away. Until their friends convince them to try again, should Google get lucky.
Posted by: David Cheney | Jul 09, 2008 at 13:16
perhaps they launched this when it was not ready for prime time because others are moving quicker and with much more innovative products. i tried the rocketon ALPHA recently and it was much mre buttoned up than the lively BETA - and there was much more to do.
Posted by: techno-rob | Jul 09, 2008 at 13:24
I echo comments here, but inject the note that Lively was part of the Google 20% crowd - projects you do on your own time, and in this case it was an individual putting this together on their own (with help, sure, but I mean it wasn't a corporate play, it was something that came out of a Googler's explorations).
The NY Times covered the background of its development a bit.
So, this may not be the end of Google's work on the metaverse. Their recent acquisitions to flesh out the 3D pipeline would indicate that the Sketch-Up crowd may still be able to walk avatars around their models, but Lively sure ain't it. They may not "get it" with this particular application but it doesn't mean it's the only trick they have up their sleeve.
As a corporate move into virtual worlds, well, it isn't - it's an attempt to "monetize social networks". Greglas pointed this out, and it's clearly outlined in their TOS that it will be an advertiser-supported medium.
17.1 Some of the Services are supported by advertising revenue and may display advertisements and promotions. These advertisements may be targeted to the content of information stored on the Services, queries made through the Services or other information.
However, as I posted in a more lengthy response of my own it may do more for virtual worlds than all the others combined by bringing the Google name to folks who have never heard of an avatar. Once you get tired of cartoon chat, you might be more willing to seek out a "real world" than you would have been before Google gave you your first 3D candy.
Posted by: Dusan Writer | Jul 09, 2008 at 13:33
What Google wants is to make sure that they're the biggest player on Web-embeddable 3D chat rooms... throwing Meez, IMVU, Vivaty, and who knows who else out of the market, revamping Orkut, and making sure that everybody on MySpace and Facebook are showing a 3D chatroom on their pages and profiles.
In the mean time, they pitch the concept that any company's website can also quickly add their own room by just embedding it, all it takes is a copy & paste, a few clicks, and your company now has a 3D virtual presence in the Metaverse! It's that simple!
Push that idea strongly at the Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, Washington Post, Chicago Chronicle, and a few selected media across the world... and that's all it takes to make Google's 250 million registered users to make Lively the largest 3D virtual world designed by human beings on this planet. That's not too bad, for a half-done project.
All it takes is a bit of Google magic... and a Reality Distortion Field™ as big as Steve Jobs'.
Posted by: Gwyneth Llewelyn | Jul 09, 2008 at 16:39
The graphical style reminds me of Physochonauts... The nightmare is now a VW. Sheesh!
On a serious note, the system requirements are somewhat high for your average "hip surfer".
Posted by: Nicholas Chambers | Jul 09, 2008 at 17:05
Here are Lively Worlds care of Google Maps:
http://www.livelyworlds.com
Posted by: Mapper99 | Jul 09, 2008 at 17:14
Here are Lively Worlds care of Google Maps:
http://www.livelyworlds.com
Posted by: Mapper99 | Jul 09, 2008 at 17:14
Surprised google would pop this out in this state. Another small bit of evidence to mount for anarchy and against the monolith. A positive thing.
Can't even invert the cursor for gossakes. When you pull down you should look up, everybody knows that.
Economic analysis pishaw.
Industry analysis peshaw.
Tech analysis pew pew pew.
Fun factor rulz: Thumbs down.
Posted by: dmyers | Jul 09, 2008 at 17:40
Folks, if you notice the navigation keys in Lively (keyboard arrows) are all nonstandard and screwed up, see my post below I made last night on the Google Lively forums..
***
Google Lively team! Great job so far but the all important navigation keyboard keys are backwards, it is standard that up arrow goes forward and down arrow backs up your point of view. And the left and right arrows shouldnt slide but should *turn* the avatar left and right.
Slide mode is infrequently used and should be enabled by shift + left or right arrow.
Please could you fix these to standards used is virtually all virtual worlds before it is too late?
bruce damer
author of "Avatars"
***
Posted by: Bruce Damer | Jul 09, 2008 at 18:10
another blog reports a user who took an hour to figure out how to move his avatar....lol
funniest thing i read in weeks....
hey bruce, dont you think you should get paid for your knowledge and experience?
maybe the culture of "free" shows its real worth again.:)
three little letters.. B.O.B
but yes, time to sell more 3d chips...:) what we do with immersion media as a culture of humans, will we get what we blog?.
c3
Posted by: c3 | Jul 09, 2008 at 19:18
Crikey, Lively has so many chances to be doing something huge. It's going to be pushing the boundaries of Social Networking where Second Life couldn't manage (Google Welcome Lively.com)
Also it'll become involved in a struggle to become a new social networking power, maybe above Facebook's, Bebo's reach!
Dan Course : http://www.thoughtden.co.uk
Posted by: Dan Course | Jul 10, 2008 at 06:25
I installed Lively, and the first thing it showed me was a list of "All rooms" with a sex chat room at the top (and at number 4 and ...).
It they wanted to avoid Second Life style sleaze, they've already failed.
Posted by: SusanC | Jul 10, 2008 at 09:26
Yep -- I noticed that too. Very prominent. They should easily be able to screen out pron room names, but I'm a little surprised they didn't anticipate it before launching...
Btw, Philipp Lenssen of Google Blogoscoped has put together a really helpful FAQ to guide you through, e.g., managing to move, add streaming video, and recover from the frequent crashes. You can figure this stuff out, but taking a look will probably save you some time...
Posted by: greglas | Jul 10, 2008 at 10:44
Loading room...
Posted by: Nicholas Chambers | Jul 10, 2008 at 13:57
Remember the WEBCAM SOCIAL MEDIA explosion around 2000-1.-- Yes stickam and youtube public sex videos all bubbled before.
And the most popular app was Netmeeeting- from MS, that got closed down after MS "didnt realize" that "office teleconferencing" wasnt what web folks at home late at night wanted to do with it...lol.... so "sex" room for google at top is no surprise.
so ended Netmeeting, and many other WEBCAM -immersive- avatar-lol driven vc funded, or corporate giant funded webcam SOCIAL services...
servicing uh... "people" is different from servicing B2B tech companies...
SOCIAL and Monetizing via P+G media buys and mass media scrutiny of VRmedia will be a bit more difficult than solving the 3d clipping problem, or hiring metapundits of the moment to create "content"--lol built by college students taking 3d modeling classes.- for free.
get ready for the blowback...lol
Google will redirect Lively to an over 18, or under 18 audience in all possible ways within 60 days... and will send out all sorts of PR telling us they "understand"
yep.. do no evil.....lol
but only after WE can only do the Good.?
wasnt that LEX LUTHORS and Osmandiussp(Watchman) plot over an over..-- geek note for the novans
anyhow-- more 3d in mass usage on the web- the future -always has been- its not rocket science to be discovered at blogs like this...:) here it comes...again:)
Google dabbling in it--- means the world outside this VR metahobble will be looking--again...
and just like Jaron Laniers appearance on NIghtline in 1992 or so. of the razorfishes appearance on 60 minutes in 2001 or so, the world will now be looking and blogging back .
many more "Proks". youll have to be banning i think...:)
thats the easy fix for novans.... the hard fix is how to address the baby and bathwater affect that a "beta" haste media distribution brings to a social civic society.
History doent bode well for Lively or Google based on the current release structure of Lively.
At least all the IP violations that poured to the top of Google 3D warehouse were primarily static star wars spaceships, not "have sex with Leia anime furries sexrooms"
Immersive media is the future and the place most of us will "live" in.. What kind of "life" we'll have, and our children will have is up to ALL of us..hopefully not just google and its core partners.
BTW- the timeline on vr everyone is blogging too- check out the FIRST entry-- THE MACHINE STOPS-- rightly it in that spot.. maybe READ it. for those who never heard of it before. Maybe itll also help remove the metanew punditry of todays recently funded or epifanied or job hired shilled--
"youll see, ill show you"...:) JOKER.
best all
c3
Posted by: c3 | Jul 10, 2008 at 14:05
Google Lively is going to be just like Second Life which is just a glorified chat program . . .
Posted by: GotGame.com | Jul 10, 2008 at 18:57
I suppose Lively is also a new chance to check all the theories about virtual property against it. Imho, any items are becoming more and more virtual...
Posted by: Daniel Stengel | Jul 10, 2008 at 19:20
"requires windows XP or Vista".
Epic fail.
Posted by: Adam Hyland | Jul 10, 2008 at 19:34
"The graphical style reminds me of Physochonauts".
Now I really, really want a world that flips gravity in crazy ways and has CIA agents disguised as gardeners and road workers. That world dream was on the epic side of awesomely cool for me.
Posted by: Daniel Speed | Jul 11, 2008 at 10:38
The main challenge for internet marketers is to understand how to use this great tool for marketing purposes. I am sure the original ideas will be very successful and of course Google will be the biggest winner from all.
Posted by: clifinar | Jul 11, 2008 at 11:25
I get the impression the Googleplex is a bit isolated from the rest of the world. Using their own take on arrow keys, not the most common one. Not knowing that the first people to colonize your social world will be the sex industry. They should have had a strike team on hand to enforce the TOS from the get go.
The common experience, in the game worlds at least, is that first experiences will be the ones that set the expectations. I think Lively might avoid this fate, because there is very little “world” there. Easy embedding in a web page is a big deal. It will make people think of it as an add on to that page, rather than entry to a separate world. The FAQ quoted above made me a bit nervous. If hosting web sites can spoof the “enter your Google account details” stuff, that would be a big security hole.
@Adam. Its not so much “epic fail” by Google, as “epic success” by Microsoft. They’ve convinced video card makers to focus on DX10 drivers rather than OpenGL. Without OpenGL, the port to Mac/Linux is that much harder.
Posted by: Hellinar | Jul 11, 2008 at 15:23
Having played this for a little bit, I started worrying about privacy.
Now, any VW might be logging all your chat, but Lively shares a single-sign on with Google search, so if you've authenticated yourself to the Lively web site so you can buy some clothing for your avatar, and you forget to sign out[*], your next Google search will be linked to that avatar and to the email address you used to sign up. i.e. signing up for Lively makes Google Search even less privacy friendly.
This, remember, is the company that keeps a record of every video you've ever watched on YouTube linked to your IP address.
[*] And clear cookies, and maybe even tell your Tor client to rebuild its circuits. Or whatever it is you need to do for privacy these days.
Posted by: SusanC | Jul 11, 2008 at 18:42
>>Hellinar: @Adam. Its not so much “epic fail” by Google, as “epic success” by Microsoft. They’ve convinced video card makers to focus on DX10 drivers rather than OpenGL. Without OpenGL, the port to Mac/Linux is that much harder.
To be honest, and I really hate to say it, OGL is somewhat less powerful than Direct nowadays. Thus, if you're going for high-end graphics, with minimal costs, you might prefer DX. I do, however, fail to see why they'd use it for Lively. This isn't Crysis we're talking about.
Posted by: Nicholas Chambers | Jul 12, 2008 at 10:30
>>Hellinar: @Adam. Its not so much “epic fail” by Google, as “epic success” by Microsoft. They’ve convinced video card makers to focus on DX10 drivers rather than OpenGL. Without OpenGL, the port to Mac/Linux is that much harder.
To be honest, and I really hate to say it, OGL is somewhat less powerful than Direct nowadays. Thus, if you're going for high-end graphics, with minimal costs, you might prefer DX. I do, however, fail to see why they'd use it for Lively. This isn't Crysis we're talking about.
Posted by: Nicholas Chambers | Jul 12, 2008 at 10:31
Having played around with it tonight, I can see the potential. But it definitely suffers from a lack of available content, creation tools, and is horribly lagged. But for being what amounts to a visual chat room, it certainly succeeds, albeit minimally.
It also needs some type of central station where all rooms are connected, so that once in the VW, you can stay there.
Posted by: Dustin | Jul 13, 2008 at 21:17
What does this mean for other web-embedded "small worlds" companies and platforms like IMVU, Vivaty and 3DXplorer and others? Is there a big enough market for all of them and Google in the picture? I think back when Google bought Keyhole and for all the other 3D Geoviz earth-viewer companies (NASA WorldWind and GeoFusion etc) the writing was then on the wall. Nobody could keep up.
Posted by: Bruce Damer | Jul 15, 2008 at 21:14
I don't see it as much of an answer to Second Life, at least not for a while. Perhaps when they implement their money system, but even then they do not really have a "world," just a bunch of rooms which are embedded on a websites. Well, Lively has got time to grow!
Posted by: Bob B | Jul 16, 2008 at 04:54
What you have to remember, I think, is that all virtual worlds are just platforms. What matters is what people do with them, or what you can convince people to do with them.
World2Worlds and ZiffDavisEnterprise, for example, did a panel on Lively, last Saturday night -- in Lively, Second Life, and on the web -- with journos and execs from CNN, Reuters, and InformationWeek. "A chatroom with some visuals" is all you need for this kind of thing, and it worked fine. There was the usual mild chaos (one panelist was on a Mac and couldn't get into Lively, so had to sit in SL, etc.). But, by and large, it was business as usual: 300 smart people using cost-negligible social media to communicate about a topic of current interest.
So ... _sure_ it can be used for business. And it will be.
Was a good panel. Video, mp3 here. http://www.world2worlds.com/index.php/blogmenu/34-blog-entries/99-second-life-looks-at-lively
Posted by: John Jainschigg | Jul 16, 2008 at 09:18
What you have to remember, I think, is that all virtual worlds are just platforms. What matters is what people do with them, or what you can convince people to do with them.
World2Worlds and ZiffDavisEnterprise, for example, did a panel on Lively, last Saturday night -- in Lively, Second Life, and on the web -- with journos and execs from CNN, Reuters, and InformationWeek. "A chatroom with some visuals" is all you need for this kind of thing, and it worked fine. There was the usual mild chaos (one panelist was on a Mac and couldn't get into Lively, so had to sit in SL, etc.). But, by and large, it was business as usual: 300 smart people using cost-negligible social media to communicate about a topic of current interest.
So ... _sure_ it can be used for business. And it will be.
Was a good panel. Video, mp3 here. http://www.world2worlds.com/index.php/blogmenu/34-blog-entries/99-second-life-looks-at-lively
Posted by: John Jainschigg | Jul 16, 2008 at 09:20
Hey I just wanted to add some info to Bruce's comment above, and also point out some things about 3DXplorer that are on topic given other comments above.
---------------------
Bruce Damer says:
What does this mean for other web-embedded "small worlds" companies and platforms like IMVU, Vivaty and 3DXplorer and others?
---------------------
Unlike the others mentioned that offer proprietary closed worlds, 3DXplorer is definitely a platform, a “plug-in-less,” browser-based VW world creation platform. It is Java-based and runs on Windows, Linux, Mac, IE, Firefox, Safari and Opera. V4 supports multiuser customizable avatars with chat, animations, etc. And it is programmable via an API.
3DXplorer allows others to build their own virtual world that is open to the web, or password protected. Someone could build their own Vivaty, for, instance, but it would be extensible and programmable, and potentially part of an open universe of other worlds.
So as compared to IMVU or Vivaty, 3DXplorer is really focused on a different business opportunity and target. 3DX is intended to enable any business, organization, even individual, to decide whether they will enter an existing world, or build their own, for which they can define the rules and business parameters they want. A nice part is that these potentially independent worlds, games, whatever, can be connected as loosely or as tightly, secure or totally open, if the entities creating them desire it.
To some other points made above about the desired characteristics of such a platform, 3DXplorer emphasizes user-generated content. Content can be imported in 3DS and COLLADA formats, with animation supported in COLLADA. This means anything from Google's 3D Warehouse can be imported, or anything created in SketchUp, or 3D Studio Max, or Rhino. The Benaroya Hall that was recently created for the Casual Games Association Casual Connect Seattle conference was built in Autodesk's Revit in a few days.
Benaroya Grand Lobby:
http://www.3dxplorer.com/download_file/worlds/index_benaroyagrandlobby.html
A 3DX world can also be directly imbedded into any web page, like this one: http://www.logiciel.org/3D/index.html
I’d also like to take exception to the notion of 3DXplorer being included as part of “small world” classification. Indeed, someone could build a big world like Second Life with 3DX, but the idea of open and connected, and potentially independent spaces, to and from which persistent avatars can travel at will, is essentially infinitely scalable. It’s effectively the entire web. Is that not as “big” as it can get? Technically, even a “big” world like Second Life progressively loads data as you move to a new area, correct?
Sorry if my marketing hat got too big? I tried to restrain myself. Don't let me do anything that puts people off to me being an active and engaged part of this community. ;-)
Greg Milliken
VP of Marketing, Altadyn
Posted by: Greg Milliken | Jul 17, 2008 at 14:25
I tried it and i think its a little bit too much of a cartoon for me. Ticket4one has a similar thing but atlaest i can see real people from the 3d Virtual Chat Room
Posted by: rayq | Jul 31, 2008 at 03:29
IT SUCKS THATS WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO LEAVE IT AT THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: RAN | Aug 01, 2008 at 14:10
I reviewed Lively and other 3D world systems that are embeddable in a web page or Facebook recently.
I found that Lively is not a real menace for others in the market. The only reason is that Google is behind it.
Google has many excellent products like Google Code, Blogger, Hotmail... but Lively is a 3D worlds platform in a very early alpha stage. Its full of bugs, consumes a lot of RAM memory...
I see it more like an experiment. I think that even Google didn't want so much promotion about it, but all that they do gets known soon.
There are other good alternatives out there, that are much more stable.
And what is said about 3DXplorer is true, and with its V4 version it is a better alternative compared to Google Lively. Specially when we talk about stability and usability.
Posted by: Jordi R Cardona | Aug 02, 2008 at 15:18
Article very interesting! It is possible to learn a source or it is author's article? Excuse for bad English. http://video-kino-mult.ru/map.html
Posted by: MolReaL | Nov 17, 2008 at 08:36