The creative director at Sony Home summed things up for me in a way he probably hadn't intended regarding the difference between SL and Home
"Personally, looking at other models, a lot of them are too hardcore, a lot of them are garish in the way they look. I think what we've done with Home is have the best-looking multiplayer world - and actually the most user-friendly that I've seen as well."
...it's not to criticise them, it's just that as a PlayStation 3 online space it was very important that there is a quality bar that we want to hit."
In other words, Second Life is a place where artists can create their own visions, with all the many forms, messiness, experiments, unpredictable things which that may encompass. And Home is built by a company. Not a hard choice in my book.
Labels: Second Life
posted by 
- 10:16 PM
- 10:16 PM
Comments:
Well if everyone would simply listen to me, then Second Life would look like a spreading baroque architectural masterpiece - not at all garish or hardcore. Just the sort of place everybody wants to inhabit. I think this principle of baroque invention should be instilled in every newbie who appears on Orientation Island, forced on them if necessary. I would fine them if they build in any other style. Then we would all be happy.
And, I believe the quality bar is frequently hit, and often dented, in Second Life.
/me staggers off the quality bar stool, having hit too many in one week.
And, I believe the quality bar is frequently hit, and often dented, in Second Life.
/me staggers off the quality bar stool, having hit too many in one week.
Post a Comment
PLZ LEEVE A MEZZAGE KTHNXBAI