Clipmarks
funanafollowshare
1-16-2007 9:43 AM983 views
funana says:
Very interesting negative review...

"Second Life’ is praised as one of the ‘new chances to life your live’ like you want it to, but this seems unreal for the following reasons:
1. I don’t like a world with Smurfs
2. I don’t want to live in a world with goddamn zebras talking to me
3. Second Life is already commercialized, at two different spots a person was offering ‘free ipods’ if you’d click on his shinny backpack.
4. Second Life features a world which is empty, or at least not really populated.
5. Second Life features cheap adult material, sleazy hookers and strippers. If one wants porn, simply fire up google and look for it.
6. Second Life makes it rather impossible to earn money big style, exceptions are rare. Why would you earn more in an E-True cybergame then at McDonalds around the corner?
7. Why can these people fly?
8. Weapons welcome in Second Life, so at least, was my impression. They can either be bought in arms shops or created using the ‘no limitations create
7 Comments   | Add a Comment
1-16-2007 9:46 AM
funana
I have to say that I don't feel exactly like the author, but I was very amused about his article. It shows very good why some people dont like Second Life.
1-16-2007 10:11 AM
invictus
I agree with (1) and (2), couldn't understand (3), found (4) a mistaken judgement and a wrong approach, there is nothing new about (5) as everybody knows sex sells so why is a google search with links leading to spyware and virus infected sites considered "better" by the author is completely ununderstandable, (6) is simply and awfully wrong - looking at Anshe Chung example (the woman who earned 2 milllion bucks in just two years from SL real estate business) is enough to see this and even a talented and smart person can earn very good money if he/she works fairly hard (just check SL architect Bill Stirling or fashion designer Julia Sooothsayer for instance), number (7) is plain silly and not...
1-16-2007 10:41 AM
funana
Thank you for your comprehensive comment, Invictus! 100% agree!
1-17-2007 4:41 AM
anonymology
Second life seems hilarious, but it would hold my interest for about a day before I got bored with it. I don't have enough time to live my own life, never mind taking on a second one!
3-21-2007 5:21 PM
NonStatQuo
When Richard and Judy herald SL as the best next thing, it's time for a mass exodus. I tried it for 2 hours, enough to get thru the initiation and then wondered? What is the point. It's just an AOL chatroom with a lot of 3d guff.
3-24-2007 11:51 AM
invictus
Two hours is far less than "enough" to be initiated to SL, one needs at least a few days to get used to the rules and customs of the metaverse. I don't know it will be SL or other 3D metaverse, but this is surely the "next big thing" since the WWW was invented. If Linden Labs manages to survive, then they'll be the leader and dominate the new platform - or another competitor will take the lead. But 3D metaverses can't be downgraded to "AOL chatrooms" with the immense possibilities and the rich experience they potentially have. It all depends on what you expect and what you want to do. In a 3D metaverse, you can browse the "world", create content or use the content others created, interact wi...
4-18-2007 5:51 AM
NonStatQuo
I keep my rights to criticise Linden Labs reserved but I must say, they
did a "revolutionary" thing by inventing Second Life. So my congrats go
to them anyways.
i'll give you that much.
Login to Comment.  Not a member yet? Sign up





Embed This Clip In Your Site...


OK