Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Role Playing (Games)

Coldwell Banker To Sell Second Life Properties 175

Posted by kdawson from the piece-of-the-rock dept.
Dekortage sends news of what may be a new development in the attempted mainstreaming of Second Life. We've seen plenty of examples of real-world news media, politicos, and PR campaigns setting up in SL. But so far most of this action has been about first-life organizations trying to gain real-world publicity by their forays into SL. CNN is reporting that the real estate firm Coldwell Banker is moving into SL for the purpose of selling and renting in-world properties. From the article: "Coldwell Banker has bought extensive tracts of property on the central 'mainland' of Second Life. (Most companies own 'islands' scattered all over.) It subdivided this digital land into 520 individual houses and living units, half of which it will sell and half it will rent... 'A small number of land barons mostly control real estate in Second Life, and we thought we could bring real estate to the masses,' [a VP explained]."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Coldwell Banker To Sell Second Life Properties More

Coldwell Banker To Sell Second Life Properties

Comments Filter:

  • Supply and demand (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Harmonious Botch ( 921977 ) * on Saturday March 24, 2007 @11:03PM (#18475885) Homepage Journal
    Has Linden guaranteed in writing that they will never expand the world? If not, then Coldwell Banker buyers are idiots.

    What is to keep Linden from increasing the amount of land? ( They did it back in 2003, IIRC ) Not only would this give them more space for more players, but it decreases the power of land barons. And having a 'new world' to explore would add more interest to the game. Anyone want to be Magellan? Or Columbus? There seems to be no downside for Linden to increase the ammount of land.
    There definitely is a downside to NOT increasing the ammount of land: competition. If SL gets too crowded, that just helps up-and-coming competitors.

    As supply increases, price decreases. There is not even the real-world parallel of "location, location, and location" to uphold property value in Second Life because of teleportation.

    I predict that Coldwell Banker will lose their shirts on this one.

    • Re:Supply and demand (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Lally Singh ( 3427 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @11:06PM (#18475899) Journal
      I think CW's buying the initial land in order to get the ball rolling on getting themselves involved in the transactional business of real estate on SL. Long after the current stuff is sold off, they want to be the agents you buy virtual real estate from later.
    • Linden seem to be masters of manipulating the media to the point where major companies think its smart to be involved in a game that actaully has very few players relative to other MMOs. I don't even know anyone who plays Second Life or has ever played it.

      An interesting read on the subject:

      Here [valleywag.com]

      The article basically points out that when Linden says they have 4 million "residents" they mean 4 million avatars have been created. This number isn't even directly related to the number of people who regularly pla
      • Linden seem to be masters of manipulating the media to the point where major companies think its smart to be involved in a game that actaully has very few players relative to other MMOs.

        The number of players isn't what interests these companies. It's the fact that they can be a part of the economy, i.e. they can make money in a new way. There are few other virtual worlds for which that is true, and among them, Second Life is undoubtedly the largest.

    • Re:Supply and demand (Score:5, Insightful)

      by UbuntuDupe ( 970646 ) * on Sunday March 25, 2007 @12:24AM (#18476277) Journal
      As supply increases, price decreases. There is not even the real-world parallel of "location, location, and location" to uphold property value in Second Life because of teleportation.

      Well, not quite true: it helps to have e.g. a lot of merchants together in one place, as it's a pain to teleport 30 times to look at everyone's goods. So new merchants are going to want to be where the merchants already are. Although I agree you can't use the whole "They ain't makin' any more land" line here, as LL certainly can do that.

      Still, I have to ask, WTF? Don't people play SL to get away from assholes who add no value but take your money ... such as real estate agents?

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by rubberchickenboy ( 1044950 )
      I predict that Coldwell Banker will lose their shirts on this one.

      Maybe, but they're only virtual shirts, and they can just rez others.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by paladinrocks ( 1079717 )
      Am I the only person who doesn't get this? This must be the point in time when I must call myself old. I played MUD games (text-based) online games twenty years ago. I don't understand how a real company buys up land in a world that doesn't even exist, except in an online gaming forum?

    • Re:Supply and demand (Score:4, Funny)

      by John Hurliman ( 152784 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @01:37AM (#18476575) Homepage
      In 2003? They increase the amount of land all the time. Every time someone buys a new island the amount of real estate in-world is increased, and the Linden-owned mainland continent grows all the time as well. Around a month ago over 100 new sims were added, and these sims the Coldwell Bankers bought were auctioned off meaning it was fresh mainland additions.

      It's like when a company sells more shares, and all those idiot investors lose their shirts. You should probably get on the phone and tell Coldwell why they are idiots, and how if you were in charge you could save the company. They'll probably hire you on the spot.

    • Re:Supply and demand (Score:4, Insightful)

      by NetSettler ( 460623 ) * <kent-slashdot@nhplace.com> on Sunday March 25, 2007 @02:02AM (#18476647) Homepage Journal

      Has Linden guaranteed in writing that they will never expand the world? If not, then Coldwell Banker buyers are idiots.

      Indeed. This is what happened with domain names. They went sky high, then lots of businesses crashed and they increased the number of TLDs, so people who had invested in the land grab didn't always win.

      The other thing is that any theory of scarcity presupposes that Linden will be the only, or at least the winning, item in this area. If someone came along and offered an alternate space, it wouldn't even matter if Linden had put a guarantee in writing... the value could still drop due to ordinary competition. No one has guaranteed Linden a monopoly.

      Cyberspace is big... There's really no reason for there to be a scarcity of real estate. It isn't, after all, real estate. It's contrived. And if the prices go too high, that simple fact should invite competition. A key defining characteristic of real estate is supposed to be that they're not making more of it.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Skreems ( 598317 )
        The key thing that remains like the real world, though, is location. Proximity to the "good neighborhoods", the center of the mainland, etc. When they add land, they do it at the edges of the mainland, or in islands (as I understand, I've never played). But if there's a viable "commercial district", owning land in it will actually make a difference. Just like in Stephenson's "Snow Crash", there's essentially unlimited space to expand on the outskirts, but all the old clubs, cool stores, events, and "in crow

        • Just like in Stephenson's "Snow Crash", there's essentially unlimited space to expand on the outskirts, but all the old clubs, cool stores, events, and "in crowd" people are located much closer together.

          And the furthest reaches of the 'world' contain a secret government lab building WMD's?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Knuckles ( 8964 )
          But if there's a viable "commercial district", owning land in it will actually make a difference.

          Why should i care for "physical" location if I can teleport wherever I want?
      • Of what happens if people stop giving a shit about a given game or perhaps "virtual universe" if you prefer. In the real world, while certain areas may experience a net loss in people, population keeps growing so overall there's more people who are in the market.

        Well games, that's not the case. The player base can leave. UO and EQ are two examples of that happening. Once both were major players, and were able to claim more people playing them than any MMORPG before. Both now have dwindled to be minor player
    • Thought I would respond to this (and one of your responses) in one go.

      If Linden Labs increase the land size it will have no real effect on the people with the houses.

      As it stands now lets say you have the premium account (about $72 a year). That allows you to buy up to 512m3 without incurring extra costs. However the price to do that is about $1600 then a couple of $100 a month on top of that. Once you have land you can lease land for cheaper (works around $30 for three months) but you incur extra costs on
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • > I can see the appeal of pretending to be a psionic goblin (or whatever)
          > and running around in a pretend world with lots of other psionic goblins.
          > But playing around with *REAL ESTATE*??? Sheesh, you people SURE know
          > how to have a GOOD TIME!!!

          Even a Psionic Goblin needs to relax at home sometime. Been a few years since I played D&D but I recal real estate was also in it. :p

          > Thanks for that definition and for your sacrifice for the benefit of all.

          *shrug* The issue that most people fin
    • If a comet hits the SL data center, they're going to lose their shirts.

      This has got to be the most spectacular example of foolishness ever. This is not real estate, it's virtual estate, and CW will be made to understand that the hard way.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Zspdude ( 531908 )
      Not at all. This is a just a case of good, smart and ambitious advertising. What better way to tell people, "We are here to help you buy a house."? (Even in your video games!)

      More land only means more opportunity for them to grow their presence in the SL world. CB is a large company with a lot of resources that they can spend on escapades like this, if they so desire. If land expansion happens, they are in a pole position to take advantage of it. Nor are they stupid - they know exactly what they're willing

    • A real estate company? Please, they are used to dealing with millions of dollars, not the pennies involved in Second Life.

      This is advertising but with a twist in that is slightly more then just putting up a banner. But it is advertising nonetheless and they know exactly what it is going to cost them because buying/renting land in Second Life is simple enough.

      While the costs are high for a casual player for a company it is peanuts compared to even a simple direct mail campaign or even having a couple of pe

    • The hardware cost of adding more land. They don't have that much money.
    • Not only would this give them more space for more players, but it decreases the power of land barons. And having a 'new world' to explore would add more interest to the game. Anyone want to be Magellan? Or Columbus?

      Did the discovery of the New World destroy property values in the Old World?

      I predict that Coldwell Banker will lose their shirts on this one.

      To lose one's shirt implies losing everything one has. If Coldwell Banker were shifting it's entire business to virtual land, that might be a sound predic
    • You forgot the three rules of real estate (see the subject line). They bought land on the main drag. Who cares if some outlying islands are created. It is all about location, location, location.

      (disclaimer: I've worked for Coldwell Bankers before, but just as a courier to get through college.)

  • I wonder... (Score:3, Funny)

    by LynnwoodRooster ( 966895 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @11:06PM (#18475901) Journal
    If I can get one of those 30 year, first 5 years interest-only subprime mortgages here? Maybe this is the way to "save" the sub-primes - virtual property! After all, it seems that "virtual" clients didn't work to well...
  • Somehow this news made my brain urinate a little. No, I don't understand how that's physically possible, but nevertheless.
  • Does this make people more or less likely to use Coldwell Banker for real (ie., meatspace) houses? Or does it matter?

  • Blurring the line between real and virtual (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 2Bits ( 167227 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @12:14AM (#18476231)
    When people are too addictive to games such that the line between reality and virtuality is blurred, it starts to get into a dangerous point. Life suddenly becomes all about speculation, nothing is real and no productivity is gained for human societies as a whole.

    It's the worst kind of speculation we can have, worse than speculating on the stock or commodity market. If you buy a bunch of stocks on a company, and if the market crashes, you still own bits of that company, and the company may be just doing well, making a profit every year. If you buy the so-called lands in SL, and if SL were to die, what are you left up with?

    I think this is where gamings are dangerous. And this is an area where I support legislative control. We already have regulations on stock markets, on currency trading, on casino, on auction, on the general trading, etc, we might as well have regulations on the worst kind of speculation: speculation on nothing.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MaelstromX ( 739241 )
      Your comment makes no sense. Any number of other commodities would lose all their value if suddenly they had no use to people anymore, and it's not a scenario that's unique to imaginary assets. If Second Life "dies" you are left with a valueless property, the same way that an exodus of people and businesses or an environmental disaster might leave real life property worthless.

      A smart investor will not put his money in something that has the risk of becoming valueless. Evidently, Linden has made many people
      • A smart investor will not put his money in something that has the risk of becoming valueless.

        not true. no one would invest in start up companies if this was true and private equity would be almost non existent. and then, mortgages wouldn't be written in Florida for a primary house(because in bankruptcy court, you can't take someone's primary residence in the state(I know its a simplification, but assuming no other assets that the court can force to be liquidated...). The rule is simple, the bigger the
        • The mortgage company's lien on the house can be executed if you default, homestead and/or bankruptcy protection notwithstanding.

          THEY can take your house, believe it.

          Any secured creditor can take the collateral in default (that's what secured means), unless someone has a higher priority lien on it.

          With houses: Fed gov't first for back taxes, then other taxes, then first mortgage, then second, then third (if there is such an abomination), etc is the usual order.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by cliffski ( 65094 )
        "A smart investor will not put his money in something that has the risk of becoming valueless"

        you mean like the futures market?
        I disagree, its a matter of risk.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by ThosLives ( 686517 )

        If Second Life "dies" you are left with a valueless property, the same way that an exodus of people and businesses or an environmental disaster might leave real life property worthless.

        The only problem there is that real physical property always has some level of intrinsic value simply because it physically exists. Sure, it might not have any people living near it, and it may be somehow polluted or wrecked by natural disaster, but there is always intrinsic value in matter because it is, well, matter.

        This

        • The only problem there is that real physical property always has some level of intrinsic value simply because it physically exists.

          I would disagree.

          Sometimes having a physical property is liability.

          Lets say its 1969 Detroit. You buy a house...

          During 1970 Detroit the US car manufacturing plummets, crime increases, and your neighborhood becomes a warzone.

          You still are paying the mortgage... Now you can't sell the house and even if you didn't have a mortgage you still have to pay taxes and eventually you eithe

          • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

            by ThosLives ( 686517 )

            What I meant by "intrinsic value" is that a house is always a house (assuming it isn't crumbling) despite the fact that it may not be in a nice neighborhood, or even if it doesn't have a high trade value. I think taxes are irrelevant and just confuse the issue because that's a social construct and involves opportunity cost, not intrinsic value.

            Don't confuse "monetary value" with "intrinsic value". Put another way: does a slice of bread have any less nutritional value if it costs $0.05 instead of $1.00? The

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Znork ( 31774 )
        "Any number of other commodities would lose all their value if suddenly they had no use to people anymore"

        No, commodities would lose all their cost if they suddenly became non-scarce. Which is the whole point of the economy; to make things non-scarce.

        Virtual property is inherently non-scarce. There are no natural limitations to its production, only an artificial construct. It's like monopoly money; you can pretend it has value, but as you (or Linden labs) can print up a bazillion if you want to, there is no

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Laxitive ( 10360 )

        I agree with you. What it means is that ultimately, the investment CB made to acquire that property is as much an investment in Second Life as it is in the actual real estate. Considering the cost of real-estate in second life, though (65,536 m2, roughly an 8km x 8km chunk of "land" for US$195), it's not a hefty outlay, so they can afford to be risky with it. On the other hand, if it does take off for whatever reason, they have a leg in the market and can capitalize on it. Why not do it? Cheap outlay f

      • A smart investor will not put his money in something that has the risk of becoming valueless. Evidently, Linden has made many people very confident that their world will be not just up and functioning but thriving for a long time to come, and therefore its land has legitimate value in the same way that anything else might.

        The risk here isn't in that what you "purchase" would become valueless; that happens when you buy stock in a company that goes bankrupt.

        The risk here is that you are buying virtual real

    • Re:Blurring the line between real and virtual (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @02:44AM (#18476805) Homepage
      I think trying to create an economy that allows for proper speculation while at the same time being completely under another company's control, it like asking water not to be wet. While there's clearly a monetary value to virtual items (like selling MMORPG-equipment on ebay), it's temporary. They could change the rules at any time, but that'd destory gameplay so you can be fairly sure the powerful sword you bought today is a powerful sword tomorrow. That predictability is the only thing that gives it value. It's not just a matter of regulating the content itself, SL could do all sorts of tricks like making TARDIS-like housing, choking the amount of new users which would force a price drop, rearrange the map/view/default starting locations to make the "center" be somewhere else, anything and everything. By the time you have it regulated in well enough, it'll be about as fun as investing in the stock market. Take it for what it is, it's basicly an e-penis. As long as you pay more than Joe Average (both for starters and in upkeep), you'll have this fancy thing to show off to your friends. This speculation is in that SL will be the next big e-penis thing and that it'll somehow be a status symbol to show how much money you've wasted on this. How can you possibly regulate the value of a SL property when the only value it has is perception? Might as well try to regulate the market for pet rocks.

      • How can you possibly regulate the value of a SL property when the only value it has is perception?

        All things in a system ruled by the banknote have values based only on percieved faith in the economic system(theoretical promise to pay gold..etc). The SL economic system is not backed by the faith of enough real people to make it reasonable to trade in for the wise man, hence the GP is actually correct. Both the real and the SL system are "nothing", but the "nothing" of the SL system is far more volatile. If people wanted to only to show-off, then very well.. this maturity of understanding (ironic isn't

    • It's the worst kind of speculation we can have, worse than speculating on the stock or commodity market. If you buy a bunch of stocks on a company, and if the market crashes, you still own bits of that company, and the company may be just doing well, making a profit every year.

      Not if they've gone bankrupt. They you are left with nothing. In the real world.

      -Grey [wellingtongrey.net]

    • When people are too addictive to games such that the line between reality and virtuality is blurred, it starts to get into a dangerous point. Life suddenly becomes all about speculation, nothing is real and no productivity is gained for human societies as a whole.

      The same could be said about the stock market or any other hyper reality system.

      Actually, the stock market itself is nothing but computers, lots of paper, and a bunch of guys screaming at each other on a floor. Isolated from the rest of the world i

  • The real question is . . . (Score:4, Insightful)

    by GeneralAntilles ( 571325 ) <General_Antilles@m a c . c om> on Sunday March 25, 2007 @12:15AM (#18476235)
    Who the hell actually plays Second Life? I seed tons of stories on /. and digg about it, but out of all the incredibly geeky people I know, none of them plays Second Life (or at least they wont admit to it).

  • This made me check my calendar. (Score:4, Funny)

    by fredmosby ( 545378 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @12:34AM (#18476319)
    The first thing I did after reading the summary was check my calendar. April 1 is still a week away though. Maybe they're just trying to get ahead in the April fools market.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ewhac ( 5844 )
      That has to be it, because it is in all other respects absolutely crazy.

      Schwab

  • I don't really care about any Second Life news that don't feature flying penises.

  • Do any of you actually use Second Life? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lewp ( 95638 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @01:13AM (#18476509) Journal
    Do any of you actually spend time in Second Life? I'm not talking just popping in and poking around once in a while (I've done that), I mean you spend significant amounts of time in the world, you've actually invested some time and energy into making your character your own, and maybe you even develop content for it. I'm more interested in people who are more into the actual enjoyment of the world rather than speculators or people strictly trying to sell their wares.

    The reason I ask is because so many companies seem to be on the bandwagon of this thing, but my friends are almost uniformly tech savvy early adopters and I don't know anybody who's ever logged into it other than to check it out and laugh at it. I've got nothing against it, and if anybody uses it I'm not going to laugh at you or anything. I may not see the appeal, but I don't see the appeal of a lot of things the average person likes. I just haven't seen anybody else who really likes it either, and that's made me question its popularity other than as a kind of inside joke.

    I do think it's a great concept, and I'm sure true virtual worlds will be all the rage someday. I'm just suspicious that anybody actually sees this as a good enough implementation to really start spending time there. I've heard the furry community has taken up residence there to some extent, but honestly when I log in I hardly see any concentration of people anywhere, furry or not.

    • Re:Do any of you actually use Second Life? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Mondo1287 ( 622491 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @01:38AM (#18476577)
      I've seen the press for this roll by for the last couple of years. Finally after seeing this post I said well I better see what all the hype is really about. I, like your friends, installed it and laughed. Anyone remember MTV's Tikki VRML world from about 10 years ago? Well I was instantly reminded of it. Someone at Coldwell must be delusional, or Linden Labs paid them a heafty sum and gave them free land. It's the lamest thing I've ever seen as far as modern content goes. Is this what they mean by Web 2.0? I think I'll be sticking to my first life with the occational raid in World of Warcraft. Who has time for a second life anyway? I just can't believe businesses are pumping money into this, or is it just media fluff? There is just no way this is going to be very profitable for anyone but Linden Labs. Any company looking to diversify into a market like this really ought to consider sticking to the real world.
      • I think the reason is because it is the only game that lets them invest. Investment companies are ALWAYS looking for new, hot markets to expand in. Given the massive rise in gaming, I'm sure they want to get in on that as well. Ok so you can buy stock in game companies, but you know the hedge fund managers are looking at the whole buying and selling of virtual items. It's not feasible to do in most games, since the companies outlaw it and thus it is kind of a black market activity. However Second Life encou

      • Re:Do any of you actually use Second Life? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by cruachan ( 113813 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @05:38AM (#18477287)
        It's easy to miss the point of Second Life, because the eyecandy is nowhere near the same level as WoW or similar. Graphically it's certainly around desktop game circa 2000 and the Lindons certainly do have a bit of a blind spot about upgrading it - largely because they seem predominantly focused on server-side issues at the moment.

        However SL isn't really a WoW competitor. It's more like IRC in 3D - think of it as a chatroom where you can actually do things with the other people there. And of course virtually *everything* in SL has been constructed by the people in it. True the building tools have limitations and there's vast amounts of crap. but equally there's some very imagenative stuff too. The scripting language is by no means a toy too, even though that has some major flaws.

        It's also an interesting question who does play it. I see several groups :-

        1. Newbies. Vast numbers of people sign on, hang around the public welcome areas briefly, do a little touring then never play it again. It's quite common to see later reactions from them on /. and the like saying 'I looked and the graphics were crap' - which misses the point about SL being a social thing as above.

        2. Wankers. Literally. A friend of mine who owns a SL club believes 50% of signups do nothing else but cybersex fot the first month. I think she's proberbly right.

        3. Designers, Builders, Coders. Although the tools are limited with imagination there's a lot that can be done. SL seems quite a common outlet for amateur designers, coders and 3D artists. It may not be cutting edge, but you tend to get a lot of attention and feedback. If you're a professional coder then SL is well worth a look as it does have potential and some of the Lindons actually hold open office hours so you can talk to the game designers directly if you wish.

        4. Roleplayers. There's large communities of roleplayers - most of whom spend 90% of their time in roleplay sims so will never be encountered by newbies. A quite common scenario is for a group to jointly buy a server, construct an enviroment, then play in that. Sort of like design your own game and play it using SL simply as an environment to do that. Roleplay covers a wide range from extreme characterization to mild 'wouldn't it be nice to live in environment X' types. Tends to be very hardcore players who spend a lot of time in SL.

        5. Social players. Similar to roleplayers in that they have a community of friends but without the roleplay angle. Again these people hardly ever go near the common meeting places so a newbie will never pick up on them. A large part of the 'core' SL players are in this group.

        6. Others - musicians, speculators, educators etc etc

        People can belong to more than one group of course. Myself I am uncertain about the future of SL. Against it it has

        a. Relatively poor graphics
        b. Architecture limitations - the *bloody* asset server is a major pain point. It's not clear how far it can scale. The 50 avs in a sim limit is laughable for example.
        c. It has a certain reputation in some influential quarters
        d. The Lindons appear to be a bunch of bloody hippies :-). Certainly their business methods need to take a step up.

        But for

        a. Because the world is user constructed and designed to be at a fundemental level - and not given, as in WoW or other games, then in theory it can evolve. Games with Everquest, WoW, Eve etc cannot move forward in the same way.
        b. It is one world and not sharded
        c. It does provide enough tools that there is room for professional level interest in it.
        d. It's totally generic
        e. It has an established user base of people with graphic, building and coding skills who can jointly take it forward as the tools and capabilities improve. Real first mover advantage that.

        On balance I think it likely to be here to stay and evolve as the prime metaverse. However I expect it to be the first among many (possibly with interconnections) and remain a minority interest for many years yet. It is worth your time though to look at it on a deeper level than simply 'ooh the graphics are crap' or 'it's just full of wankers'.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by DaleGlass ( 1068434 )
      Yep, I do.

      I've been using SL for a little more than a year so far. Went there with the explicit idea of that I'd probably script something, as the idea sounded interesting. So I got a SL account, and now it got to the point I pretty much have a monitor dedicated to it.

      I use SL mostly as a glorified chatroom, and don't move around much, primarily hanging around in Luskwood. If you want a concentration of furries then check it out, but have in mind that right now it'll be quite empty, as most of the populatio

    • Do any of you actually spend time in Second Life? I'm not talking just popping in and poking around once in a while (I've done that), I mean you spend significant amounts of time in the world, you've actually invested some time and energy into making your character your own, and maybe you even develop content for it. I'm more interested in people who are more into the actual enjoyment of the world rather than speculators or people strictly trying to sell their wares.

      Count me in. I've been spending 1 t

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jthill ( 303417 )

      I spent some time on it a while back (1.09 or so). I like the 3d-modeling interface; it's got its warts, but it's flexible and reasonably intuitive. Getting around takes very little getting used to, and flying is fun (but see below). The physics are arguably adequate. The community has some talented landscapers, architects, artists, vehicle designers, clothing and body designers ...

      I hear their simulator architecture has scalability problems. The descriptions I've read of it make me believe that's tru

  • Really, I think some people need to get a First Life [tm].
    • Get a First Life [getafirstlife.com]

      Call this post redundant if you like, but some things clearly bear repeating...especially to people dumping fortunes on something with a completely imagined value.

  • Is SL wants it real, then.. lets give them real.. (Score:3, Funny)

    by JackMeyhoff ( 1070484 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @02:08AM (#18476663)
    Virtual World War? Virtual riots? Virtual pillaging? Virtual squatting? Virtual Crime? Lets let the value of land plumet as it would in those real life situation.
  • This is 100% about publicity and not money. They state that any and all profit will simply be reinvested into SL...

    OTOH they do want to make the process of buying a house or land or whatever inside SL easier and more trust-worthy... maybe they will become trusted brokers for transactions and help people avoid being swindled due to ignorance of how SL works?

    I look forward to more companies establishing helpful services within virtual worlds. Would be even more amusing to find companies like Toyota putting ch
  • I have a balloon payment coming up on my castle and it's value has dropped in half since the trolls burned all the surrounding forest. You know things are bad when gaming and internet based entertainment is as stressful as the real world.
  • When you buy a tract of land in Second Life, can you capitalize it and stick it on the balance sheet under GAAP, since it will generate revenue in future periods (in fact, much of the publicity benefit would likely come after your venture were established for a while)? If so, is it depreciable or treated like real estate? Or do you have to expense the whole amount to begin with anyhow?

    /IANACPA

  • Virtual Goods and Virtual Property (Score:3, Insightful)

    by hypnotik ( 11190 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @09:09AM (#18478345) Homepage
    Something always strikes me very odd about conversations about Second Life and their ilk here on Slashdot. Invariably someone decries the concept of buying "virtual goods" and renting "virtual property".

    Let's step back a bit here... What is the difference between "software" and "a virtual shirt", or "digital music"? Are they not both just some pattern of ones and zeros? Sure, a virtual shirt only makes sense in terms of Second Life... But for me this is the same as buying digital music that can be played on some hardware device. Or buying software that can be run on some subset of computers.

    Virtual land... Who would rent "virtual property"? What sense does that make? Perhaps we should ask all those that rent space for web pages?

    That being said, I think Second Life is kinda daft in its implementation, but the concept is very very cool.
  • Back in the 1980s, I was very enthusiastic about these 2 and 3D worlds. Older slashdotters may recall terms such as 'Virtual Reality' and such. Fast forward to today and it is not hard to notice a consistent flaw in people who rely upon electronics communications and escapist realities such as WOW, Second Life, MSN etc. The problem is these provide a barrier to genuine human interaction where our 5 senses come into play. So, such people become socially inept and in the eyes of those of us who have some valu

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by syrion ( 744778 )

      I think that you may be confusing correlation and causation. If I recall correctly, back in the late 90s there was a study of personality types of people who used the Internet extensively. It found that introverts tend to use internet-based communities a great deal more than extraverts. In particular, the INT* types (on the Myers-Briggs scale) were particularly common. It's a mistake to think that this means that someone must be rude and cold, but social interaction is not generally an introvert's stron

    • Maybe. I think you're being too broad brush. I know happily married people with active social lives who do all sorts of "connected" things, including online gaming.

      *MY* problem with these online worlds (the freeform ones like SL) is that they are mirroring the real world too closely. Second Life has space hoarding land barons? Boy, that makes me want to jump right in! :-( Oh, and there's ideological extremists who will harass you? Sign me the fuck up! Furry pr0n! Goody! Politicians setting up shop, and thei
  • Move along, nothing to see here.
  • This is big big news. It means that if you own any shares or interest in Caldwell Banker, then it's time to sell before this news gets out.
    • Hardly. They could spend a couple of $1000 and do what they are suggesting and still make back their money after a couple of months. Wouldn't even cover the normal money they dump into renovating an already good house in real life.

      Apart from the ability to offer houses at reasonable prices in SL, they could for example design some houses that are on market. People could tour a representation of a load of them and then figure out which one they might want to waste their time on in real life looking at.

      Simila
  • Last weekend I finally decided to see for myself what 2nd Life is all about. So after downloading the 2nd Life client, ran through the vast tutorials before finally getting to the public area.
    I spent about 10 minutes flying around before I realised there's nothing going on. Many people seem to have wasted large amounts of time creating some complex 3D models of houses and miscellaneous other junk, but for what? Maybe its just me but I don't get it. There doesn't seem to be any point, objective or benefit of

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by CronoCloud ( 590650 )
      I have said this before:

      SL is what the "player" makes of it. It has no goal, other than what you set for yourself.

      Me, I hang with the SL fashionistas. I've done a bit of scripting with gadgets for the SL fashionistas in mind. I wander around and visit interesting places now and then, go listen to music now and then.

Slashdot Top Deals

In order to dial out, it is necessary to broaden one's dimension.

Close