Windows users go on Safari

The latest version of Apple Computer's Safari browser, now in beta, promises to offer its ease of use and yet another alternative to Internet Explorer, Firefox, Opera and others for users of the Microsoft Windows operating system.

What's probably more important to Windows web developers who must test their builds against all these is that not having a Mac isn't a barrier to now test against Safari, since the Windows version should render and behave the same way as its Mac sibling. Given that Mac has recently achieved its highest market share gain at 8% and likely to grow further, testing against Safari is now more of a priority for developers who wish to "bulletproof" their builds as much as possible against failure before release and the PC version of Safari should be a welcome tool in their tool-kits.

Warner casts a Blu-pall over high-def landscape

A probably fatal blow in the high-definition battle between HD-DVD and competing standard Blu-Ray was cast on Friday when Warner Brothers announced that it would be, starting in May 2008, exclusively Blu-Ray. Subsidiaries New Line Cinema and HBO Films were excluded from the announcement, leaving those studios free to make their own decisions. However, it is expected that both will follow Warner into the Blu-Ray exclusive camp. Warner Brothers will likely continue to honor any existing HD-DVD promises through May, though HD-DVD releases will lag behind standard and Blu-Ray title releases.

The decision of the last major studio to support both formats to change its stance to be now exclusive to Sony Blu-Ray forced a quick cancellation of Toshiba's planned CES announcement for HD-DVD, since Warner Brothers was said to feature prominently in that press release, being touted as one of the success factors for HD-DVD and one of the most prolific studios to release high-def titles.

HD-DVD supporters, Toshiba, Microsoft, Paramount Pictures & subsidiary Dreamworks, and Universal Studios remain the only significant backers of HD-DVD while the Blu-Ray camp includes not only major studios Disney, Fox, Lionsgate, MGM, Sony Pictures-Columbia Studios and now Warner Brothers, but most of the smaller studios and distributors as well as most hardware and PC vendors. The Warner move gives the Blu-Ray camp about 70% title share, according to the Financial Times; with more to follow IF Paramount (and Dreamworks) exercises an alleged clause in its HD-DVD switch agreement that allows it to reverse its exclusive move if Warner were ever to drop HD-DVD. Even prior to the Warner announcement, a number of smaller studios that had been HD-DVD exclusive announced that they would be supporting Blu-Ray as well, indicating growth for Blu-Ray, while no such defections occurred from amongst the exclusively Blu-Ray supporters. Even the controversial decision last year for once-format-neutral Paramount and its subsidiary, Dreamworks, to defect to the HD-DVD camp excluded any Dreamworks films by Steven Spielberg, who was said to be either a backer of Blu-Ray or someone who favored supporting both formats.

Warner Brothers executive, Kevin Tsujihara, specifically mentioned that Warner Brothers did not take any money from the Blu-Ray group to come to its decision, contrasting the decision last year of Paramount and subsidiary Dreamworks, to switch from format neutrality to be exclusive to HD-DVD, a move the New York Times later revealed to have been motivated by a payout from the HD-DVD group for $100 million and $70 million respectively to make the switch. Warner Brothers was said to have been courted with a similar deal to switch to HD-DVD exclusivity, which had it occurred, would have likely ended in a format stalemate.

This move by Warner Brothers was said to reflect industry concerns that the format war was hurting the overall adoption of either format since consumers were both confused and wary of purchasing product that could at one point become obsolete. This has kept high definition disc sales stagnant at a minute fraction of potential sales compared to standard DVD. Director Michael Bay, who was highly critical of Paramount's decision to switch to the HD-DVD camp and who was initially furious that his blockbuster Transformers would only appear on HD-DVD, openly stated his opinion that the money used to essentially bribe Paramount and Dreamworks came from Microsoft and that Microsoft's true motives were not to back HD-DVD but to ensure that the format war would continue until Microsoft could develop a high-definition digital download service, undercutting both. Apple Computers, which does continue to expand its own digitial downloads service for movies, was a backer of Blu-Ray and recent news has indicated that Apple intends to offer Blu-Ray drives in its computers at some point soon.

There has been no news on how this might effect the third format, VMD, which unlike either Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, uses a red laser and is said to offer a much cheaper alternative for high-definition content for vendors since it does not require the same level of retooling to produce the discs. It seems likely though that the Warner Brothers announcement will spell doom for this late-comer on the high definition scene.

Update: Apparently New Line Cinema made the expected move to Blu-Ray exclusivity. This will bring the impressive New Line catalogue over to exclusive Blu-Ray distribution, expected to include the Blockbuster Lord of the Rings trilogy whenever that anticipated title makes its high-definition disc debut. There is no word yet that I've seen about HBO Films.

Also, the purported reasons that Michael Bay assigned to Microsoft support of HD-DVD may well come to pass at some point, subsuming movie disc sales to those of digital downloads in the same fashion that CD sales, though still strong, continue to give way to digital downloads. In addition to Microsoft X-Box Live, the pairing of Apple iTunes & Apple TV, and those already available through cable and satellite, Netflix is intending to offer a streaming downloads service as well, premiered at CES. Sony has hinted at much the same for the PS3 with movies and other media potentially available through portals such as Playstation Home. Given that Sony is the only hardware vendor that actually owns their own extensive movie catalogue, competing services might find themselves starved for certain titles or scrambling to lock up exclusive deals of their own. If such fractured availability should occur, I would think it could only harm the adoption of digital downloads in the same way that the HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray battle harmed mass adoption of either format.

Update: HBO Films have moved to Blu-Ray exclusivity as well. There is some rumour that Paramount/Dreamworks is mulling a move away from HD-DVD according to the Financial times, Universal possibly as well according to Variety, despite statements to the contrary made by both studios. Both studios have declared support for HD-DVD but Paramount's only move so far is to delay two forthcoming HD-DVD titles by three weeks. And further questions have been met with a no comment response.

In any case, I think the final summation of all this is that it's too bad that the studios could not have made a compromise forestalling this format war. This see-saw battle not only hurt themselves and left both standards in jeopardy of being preempted by direct downloads, but seems likely to have left over a million adopters of HD-DVD bereft of future title releases and having to hope for after-market solutions to keep their HD-DVD high-def title investments viable down the road. Apparently corporate memories are short and the lessons learned in the debacle that occurred between VHS and Betamax that helped lead to universal adoption of a single CD and DVD standard had since been forgotten.

Virtual world industry leaders forecast 2008

VWN is offering a report that details the response of 45 virtual world managers and leaders to a five-question questionnaire that asked:

1. What are your top 3 trend predictions for 2008?
2. What business goals have you set for 2008?
3. What challenges do you expect 2008 to bring for the virtual worlds industry?
4. A number of new platforms are launching in 2008. What are the biggest impacts this will have on the industry?
5. How will the above changes affect your specific segment of the industry in 2008?

To order the Virtual Worlds Management Industry Forecast 2008, simply send an e-mail to to address listed at the former link and you'll receive a PDF copy of the report in your e-mail.

I found this a fascinating read and I'll have to read it again to compare the disagreeing statements. A number of the respondents were at the recent Virtual World Conference in San Jose and I appreciate the chance to read what they had to say. As you might expect, some had very different opinions regarding the upcoming months. I also noted that education seemed to figure prominently in a number of forecasts as did the expected strong growth in virtual worlds for children.

My only druthers for this report would have been to have the company name repeated after the name in each response since I don't know all of the responders by name and I couldn't follow their association with the industry from question to question.

Newbie ponders what "there" is of IBM's and Cisco's Second Lives

Computerworld writer Gary Anthes was tasked to do a piece on Second Life, which, after spending nearly a week of his time within the simulation, he titled Second Life: Is There Any There There?

Within this piece, he is somewhat critical of the corporate presence within Second Life, having had a rather empty and underwhelming experience at the islands built by IBM and Cisco.

"Knowing my editor would ask me about practical IT applications, I sought out a virtual island owned by IBM. To get an idea of how exciting this place is, imagine a 1950s-era IBMer in a starched white shirt and tie with a "THINK" sign hanging on his wall."

Part of his frustration was his failure to find any company representatives to talk to about goods and services, or to just answer questions.

"I returned to IBM's main island determined to find an IBMer who could answer some questions. I didn't find such a person, but I had a long chat with a well-dressed wolf who said he was from FurNation. He said he was only there to use the public "sandbox," which is provided by IBM, to build things."

And failing that, finding any person was a welcome respite and at least a chance to ask some questions.

"I told him I was trying to find out if companies in SL made any money. Virtual companies make real money, he said, 'selling furry avatars, sexual bits, weapons and the like,' while real companies like IBM only advertise and recruit. The wolf was not applying for a job at IBM, it seemed, but he thanked IBM for providing the sandbox."

And of course, all of this begged the question of what function did all this corporate presence provide?

"Still fretting about bandwidth, I traveled next to the Cisco Virtual Campus and walked into the Cisco Training Center. A sign indicated that it was for use only by Cisco partners and employees, which raises the question of why it's on the public Internet and not on a Cisco intranet.

In any case, I found neither partners nor employees in any of the training rooms, and no books, computers or training materials of any kind. Never had it seemed so reasonable to ask if there really was a there there."

Though he did have a relatively better experience at Sears, the author I take it was not impressed with corporate presence within Second Life, or that much with Second Life itself for that matter. Some of his advice:

"Each major company location in SL should be staffed with a real person, at least during business hours. If some friendly and attractive avatar at the Cisco center had approached me and said, "Yes, sir, how may I help you?" and then had given me useful answers to my typed in questions about training, employment opportunities or products, I would have fallen out of my chair with amazement and delight."

So what do I make of this? I'm not sure where the subjective "attractive need play into this. Well-groomed would do for me. Otherwise, I think it's a good piece. And it's original. As far as negative criticism goes, it's not some regurgitated bit of anti-hype backlash. Nor is it a piece written to reclaim credibility damaged by over-reaching optimism by riding the pendulum swing going the other way. I wouldn't even argue that it's all that negative. I don't think this writer had any axes to grind. I think he came to the assignment with a fairly neutral standpoint. What Anthes is describing here is a very typical regrettable newbie experience. (And it probably didn't help his experience that some web links were broken).

If you read the full piece, you see that he spends at least two days of his assignment just trying to learn his way through the interface and figure out how to find places. Out of desperation, and having wasted time through misunderstanding and bad advice from another confused newbie, he buys a book. Now, if he had me to help him out, I could have handed him a Notecard with some landmarks to visit later, maybe even checking out a couple places with him. I could have taken him to New Dove and New Citizens Incorporated (NCI) to get him started on his own look and get him hooked up with help resources, even classes if he was interested.

But Anthes didn't have me there to help him, did he. He, like most newbies, was left stranded in an empty virtual landscape having to rely on people just as new, confused, and ultimately as bored and frustrated as he came to be. Experiences like his are one of the reasons that though Second Life can claim millions of registrations, they can only muster an active user population of 30,000 - 55,000 on most days. People try it, go "huh?" and leave, never to come back.

In fact, I was one of those. When I first went to a meeting showcasing Second Life for uses at work, I dutifully created an account; I logged in; I then had my "Huh?" moment. I forced myself go through orientation and get onto the mainland. But my experience only degraded the more time I was there. Totally underwhelmed by the perceived function , the lag and abysmal graphic quality, I thought, "Are people serious? Someone has got to be kidding me, right? This is lame. This is a total waste of time." And I left, never to come back, or so I thought. Had it not been for an overdue promise to visit a co-worker's build in Second Life, I would never have given it another look. And the virtual light bulb above my head would have never gone on.


Truths out of the mouths of newbies

Yes, having a real person staffed in Second Life is a big overhead for a company. Server space (aka "land") is not cheap, let's face it. Tack on some employee cost tasked against really no revenue for most Second Life corporate uses, and how does one justify that on the books?

Well, I would ask, how much is your company image worth? Do you want to build a presence, which I presume has some underlying marketing potential, and then leave it to a a visiting anthropomorphic wolf or rabbit with no company affiliation to explain your presence for you? Even if you have staff in simulation, not being able to find them is just as bad. In a large build, teleport signs can be your friend, and the friend to visitors.

I wouldn't expect my local GAP store, even if they could lock down the goods, to just leave their store abandoned, hoping that I'll come in to admire the goods but not having anyone to talk to, and expect me to still walk away with my questions answered, a good feeling about GAP, or likely to buy something. The GAP doesn't have a virtual store that I know of, but if they did, I would ask: why treat a virtual space any differently? Insofar as how a person (and the force driving that avatar, at least for now, is a real human being) is going to react to your company, a virtual space can have the same impact, good or bad, as a real building. That's why companies staff people to help greet and guide visitors in real world lobbies.

If you have goods or services to sell, jobs to offer, information to give out, have someone there to do it for you that speaks for you and has your interest in mind. If you have a virtual space that you are using for a corporate function, do what you would for a real building when not in use - lock the doors (or in Second Life parlance, just restrict access). In the former, you're going to improve experience and maybe actually drive some use and results; in the latter, the lock will probably give the impression the space is important and actually sees use. In most corporate builds, I suspect that the space probably isn't and doesn't but they don't have to know that. Perception is everything.

Doppelganger cleverly controls perception by use of space in vSide, making it appear larger then it really is. In fact, restricting the overall space has the positive benefit of channeling people into the same area, giving the perception of popularity and a crowd, even with a small number of users. Let's face it, we're social animals and many people feel more comfortable in a crowd, even a virtual one. People imply popularity, that you're in the "right" place, and that there's something engaging to do there. Effective virtual builds, like real world buildings, are probably going to need to adopt architectural solutions for crowd management, but at least for Second Life, factoring in the ability to fly.

Nothing is more lonely or gives a sense of a places unpopularity in Second Life like coming into it and seeing that there's only one green dot on your mini-map - and it's you. Now maybe you are visitor number 2,001 that day and you just happened to come at a time when no one else was there. But you don't know that. Unlike web pages, we can see who's visiting at the same time we are. And it doesn't matter how many people were already there or who will come back later. If you're a newbie, you probably got the impression that the space is unpopular, and that feeling maybe carries over to the brand behind it, like there's something wrong with it maybe?

When Electric Sheep opened the Virtual CSI:NY presence in Second Life, I first peeked in after the show just to see what's what and to try out the OnRez viewer to see how different it was. Well, it was crowded, with a bunch of lost newbies who were tripping over their own interfaces. There was a clever use of audio media and a HUD to explain the CSI game. But the game wasn't the problem. It was Second Life. Even more sad was a veteran SL user who popped in to see and who was valiently trying to explain the interface. She didn't realize that all these newbies were using a different world viewer, the OnRez viewer provided by Electric Sheep, where buttons and functions could be in different places than the Second Life viewer provided by Linden Lab. I could just see the thought bubbles going up all around me: "Huh?" <-- brought back memories; "I don't get it"; "I'm so confused"; "How do I get my clothes back on?"; "This is silly." I tried to do my part and both help guide the newbies by giving them links to helpful places like NCI and New Dove, as well as help flag the veteran Second Lifer that there was a new viewer, hence the mismatch between what she was trying to explain and the reality in place. Well, after such a fiasco, you'd expect to come back to Virtual CSI:NY and expect to see few or fewer dots. But such is not the case when I've peeked back in. Why? I can't be certain but one of the things that I noticed was that there was a staffer, I presume from Electric Sheep (maybe CBS) to greet, answer questions, and help new users get started in the entry zone. Wander farther into the simulation, what does one find but more helpers. And those little green dots on the mini-map? There seem to be quite a few of them, all congregated in various spots. Just in case this was an aberration, I checked back a couple more time and the dots at a glance, seemed about the same. I don't know how profitable Virtual CSI:NY is given all that manpower investment, but I'd have to say in Second Life terms, it's popular. Green dots it seems have a way of attracting more green dots.


I know the avatar I'm talking to isn't real. But is she real?

Presence can be costly. It's a lot of overhead to consider. And one has to figure that the virtual world never sleeps. Logging into Second Life at different times, it takes on a European, Australian, or Asian tone. Companies have to figure that a visitor might pop in at any time.

Which is why AI avatar "bots" are being developed that can take on that overhead instead of having a real person. They work quite cheap - free in fact beyond their build cost and they don't take breaks. The initial ones are likely going to be fairly simple responders but there are rumblings of some very savvy ones (see Artificial Intelligence Applications in 3d Virtual Worlds) that can do a credible job of mimicking the responses of a real person.

This of course undercuts one of the basic presumptions of virtual worlds, that an avatar represents a real person. One of the interesting aspects of virtual worlds and MMOs is that people tend to treat an avatar at face value, as if they were what they appeared to be. If that avatar appears to be a human man or woman, you, as a virtual world user, would probably respond accordingly. This probably belongs in its own post, but imagine a virtual world where someone can seed avatars to make a space seem more popular as if other people really found it engaging, making you think twice about stopping to take a look around at the offers. Or that person chatting you up and that seems so interested in your latest real world shopping adventure could be a bot mining you for buying trends. Or your new "friend,", taking advantage of how viral marketing works, just swears by Eau'dee'doh perfume or MuskOxen deodorant.

Let's forget about the ethics of AI bots for the moment. Until such bots are available to help "staff" virtual builds, companies who are going to spend a lot of money and time investing in virtual worlds need to consider the whole experience if they want to make it a success, imho. That means considering staffing such builds as if they were real locations, at least to the point of offering someone to help answer questions and take down contacts. I pity the poor person stuck in an empty Second Life island all day but hopefully such exposure will help that person suggest ways to bring traffic and make the spot a purposeful destination point with the intention of conducting business or inquiry of some sort.

Otherwise, just hope that the visiting furry using your sandbox is polite and friendly (I have to say, they often are) while she tries to answer people's questions. I'll conclude with the rest of Anthes' advice:

"Yes, I know that would cost serious bucks. One or more real people would have to be paid real dollars to do that. But if a company can't make its virtual experience substantially better -- and I mean really head-and-shoulders better -- than its existing Web capabilities, it might as well not bother.

Because my wolf friend isn't going to buy an IBM computer because he spotted it through the window while playing in the IBM sandbox. The IBM island must be a destination deliberately sought out by people with an interest in IBM, with the knowledge that they will have a really cool virtual experience there while being treated like a real human by a real human."

Enchanting Dryad

Stanford Virtual Worlds Group has a nice little package for us under the Yule tree this year. It's a free tree creation utility for 3d applications and worlds called Dryad. Dryad works on most Windows XP & Vista systems, as well as Mac OS X. There is a promise that a Linux version is being compiled, but will possibly be some time in coming.

Dryad did not function correctly on my XP work T60p (I could use it fine. I just couldn't see any effect in my black preview pane that only blinked now and then to show part of that area). I have had numerous problems with the T60p in regards to virtual world use so I won't fault Dryad too much just yet.

"We are aware of a small number of incompatibilities with existing systems which manifest themselves in the form of graphical corruption. We are currently working to resolve these problems. In the meantime, we suggest you run Dryad on another system."

So until I can get home and pop Dryad onto the Vista game rig and Mac workstation, I'll have to take some of the claims on faith. If you have any updates or comments, please do share.

Since I could see some of the interface, I could explore a bit. The right-hand pane, as you can see in this borrowed screen capture, is a contextual options selection. It changes view according to the editing mode. In this initial view, one chooses the basic tree form. Since I could see the occasional glimpse of the interface, I knew where to click to access options. In one case, I accessed numerous slider bars that would change my tree's form and appearance. Finally, clicking the center checkbox allowed me to save my work in the generic and widely supported OBJ format. Since I don't have any 3d applications on my work machine, I was not able to open my edited file to view any of my work.

Trees are very complex objects to render and have them look any good. I remember I was all excited when Bryce first added tree models and very disappointed in how some of them looked upon render in that older version. WorldBuilder was one of the better approachable applications in terms of getting off the ground quickly but look at the price. Let's not even talk about Lightwave or Maya. Looking at some of the gallery images, Dryad appears to do a mighty fine job for current virtual world use; it's intuitive to use; it's free.

Whats more, there is a collaborative aspect that VWN reported on in their coverage, albeit one that I was unable to witness. If as reported, there's a great potential for growth, communication and building upon the work of others as the Dryad application is stated to improve and grow the more it is utilized by the community - sort of a shared object database I'm guessing. I also took advantage of Dryad's prompt to join the Stanford Virtual Worlds Group mailing list, the form conveniently found on the first page of the Dryad site.

Other than for some bugs which I have faith will be worked out, my only objections regarding Dryad is that is is free, easy to use, encourages creativity and collaboration, and outputs in a generic file format understood by most 3d applications (ah, if only most virtual worlds allowed for direct utilization of OBJ). I mean, where's the elitist factor in that? Give people powerful tools for free or modest cost and soon everyone will be creating these wonderful scenes and objects to use and share. Creativity will become the focus instead of tool use and access.

What is the virtual world coming to? Bah humbug! ;-)

Eyes inside virtual worlds

There's been some good buzz here and there recently about the iWear VR920 virtual reality goggles from Vuzix. Given the mostly positive vibes I'd been reading, I had been expecting a lot more coverage by now in my fav blogs. Haven't seen a word dropped therein. So I'm going to kick this out there. Hopefully someone with some more spare cash than I've got can give them a look-see and get back with some more feedback for the rest of us. I'm especially keen to read about their use in Second Life.

Just like you read it, these are virtual reality goggles. They simulate a projected 62 inch (157 cm) screen via two small LCDs parked in front of your eye-balls. Now, I'm not in favor of strapping another source of EMF radiation directly onto our heads, but I can't say I haven't been dying to give these a spin nevertheless. And though the current drivers are mostly for games, as you would expect, I think there is a huge potential for use in virtual worlds.

The difference is perspective. One of the strengths of virtual worlds, and why they are so attractive in their varied forms, is the projection of a formed self, aka avatar, interacting with other counterparts. But you, as a user, are still mostly removed from the setting, peering at your avatar from above, or even in mouselook, through a window that is your computer screen. In other words, there's still a bit of distance between you and the medium and between you and other users. What these goggles do is to put you into the setting, removing the boundaries. They react to your movements by changing the perspective and reaction of your view as if you were really there. It's a not so subtle distinction and I think the experience could be a great driver for interest and use of virtual worlds as it makes them a bit more natural, at least to our eyes. They are also a step, I think in the right direction, of removing some of the construct of the interface for virtual world use, and let us function more directly in the medium. In this case, it's merely a visual perspective but that's a lot and the difference I imagine (until I find a spare $400 that's all I can do) is profound and if popular, could lead to other inputs such as hand and facial gestures recognition. And though not really enabled as yet (these work, but only with older graphic cards - sometimes), there is a potential for stereoscopic 3d and the creation of depth perception as well.

Getting back to the here-and-now, the linked review and a commentary I read about a user finally getting to use these in Blizzard's World of Warcraft underscores the wow!-factor. Unlike some predecessors, the price-point for these goggles is not unapproachable for the masses, though still far too high for mainstream use. And they are said to be finicky to calibrate and set up and require learning a slower head-turning response. But, this is a point that was underscored in the reviews, they actually deliver as promised. In fact, I'm hearing there is a bit of a backlog in getting one of these so perhaps they are catching on after all.

These goggles currently work with Second Life and a select list of games. But there's no reason that drivers for more virtual worlds and games can't be created given interest and time. Like virtual worlds in general, game use can provide the adoption bridge that brings these into more common use and the non-game virtual world spill-over I think could really help bring new users into that medium. I can imagine these goggles would make Forterra's already excellent training simulations all the more engaging and, after Second Life, I would just love to strap these on and visit an ultra-high DX10 session of LOTRO or Entropia Universe's promised DX10 makeover.

Just want to make a final note that despite what the reviewer erroneously states for supported systems, my understanding is that these work as well on Apple's OS X, not just Windows. So we Mac'sters are apparently covered.

Is an island bigger than a planet?

Not so fast with your answer now. We're talking about virtual worlds here, where all things are relative.

VWN is reporting that Entropia Universe intends on potentially giving away whole planets to businesses, as long as those businesses can "add value to the universe as a whole" (in other words, bring in traffic and use I expect). So planet is something of a misnomer here. What MindArk deems a planet I believe is more like an asteroid in current Entropia practical parlance. We're not talking Mars, or even Ceres here, for real estate. However, there's nothing to say that given the mutable laws of virtual physics, that such asteroids can't grow themselves over time (or just open up heretofore inaccessible terrain) given the need and traffic.

That gulf of spacial separation will allow for different laws and function - I would expect - perhaps even different techo-themes, bringing to Entropia, customization ala Second Life's island sims. - I was wondering how Entropia was going to offer different environments given that their core design is built around a science fiction theme with an embedded gaming function, sort of. I would say this points the way.

So even if (insert company name)'s New Mars turns out to be someday as big or bigger in pixel depth as the real Mars would be in virtual terms - which will really be bigger, an Entropia planet or an island sim in Second Life, has yet to be determined. I'd say, for this moment, the island is bigger given that it has more use and with more potential to drive traffic (or at least media buzz), but that can certainly change. It's really up to you and I and everyone else to ultimately decide.

On other Entropia topics, I got an e-mail from the Entropia folks telling me to go in and spruce up my avatar, in anticipation of the Crytek-enabled graphic revamp. I haven't gotten around to it as yet and the sample pics didn't entice me much. However, I am very much looking forward to the rest of the makeover. This much hyped revamp has promised to make Entropia Universe one of the most graphically pleasing virtual worlds - simulating the experience of top-end games that use the same CryEngine2 game engine: such as Crysis. We'll have to wait and see. The entry-point for a game like Crysis might be fine when catering to a market of afficionados with top-end rigs. But when trying to pose a product for a world, much of whom insofar as game-like applications are concerned have less than stellar systems, could create an entry barrier. Not fulfilling that promise can undercut the pre-generated hype and anticipation buzz. I suspect they'll have a way to degrade gracefully, like most games do. But I'll be curious to get a sense of the experience range when they finally do launch the changes. And if the use proves practical, I don't suppose that Crytek has given exclusive license to Entropia but we'll see. I know at least one other MMO has licensed the engine and with this cash-and-carry potential, there's nothing to say that an Entropia rival with deep pockets can't just mimic and ultimately steal Entropia's graphic-enabled thunder.

I've always termed Entropia Universe a hybrid virtual world: part social world, part game. I think the folks at MindArk understand that one of the failings of Second Life is that it often lacks for activity function beyond the purely social (even more so with the closure of gambling) and would like to tap into the success of mainstream MMOs (everyone of course thinks of World of Warcraft, but even LOTRO, or City of Heroes, or EVE Online). But trying to be both things at once, I'm just not sure it works. I think it better to have distinction between the spaces but the ability to interlink and travel between them as the needs and fancy suits the particular user. And some users might exclusively prefer one over the other but can still function in the overall space. Otherwise, people can be put off, say, by the violence and conflict or trading function that governs the game activity or find the social function superfluous. I think Sony intends for their Home to be such a bridging construct and I suspect Microsoft has been considering similar uses.

This opening up of "planets" could be just the thing to help move Entropia Universe away from the science fiction gaming anchor and allow it the versatility to function in multiple activity zones. If more business or media "planets" open up, they could provide the social, possibly even educational and commercial, perspectives leaving the main original Entropia planet to explore its function shifting more exclusively to games without feeling it has left the social users abandoned or put upon by their more combative brethren.