1  2  |   Order by index

Jan 4, 2002, 5:45pm

and then AW goes out of business and cannot afford to run the
uniserver....common sense people

[View Quote]

Jan 8, 2002, 5:27pm

Casay,

at last some one who points to the BIG mistake of a few years ago:
dropping the plans to embed the AW technology into web pages. In my
opinion , one of the biggest causes of AW's failure in implementing
advertising and 3D-commerce and getting revenue from it is the
isolation of a standalone browser. In spite of the slow down of the
last 2 years in this internet area, this is the way to go. Companies
as Macromedia, Viewpoint and Adobe have jumped on the wagon. Adapting
their technology to web pages (and keeping both developments
synchronised, AW browser and web plugin) would have been excellent. A
simplified AW browser, with no building but with more interacive
features in web pages; keeping their eyes open, being sensitive to
demand and not to their own dreamy thoughts would have helped them a
lot. Now that the axe is falling, I think that they might want to
reconsider this; instead, they chose the worst path they could chose:
(i) they ban tourists, their future citizens, and potential custommers
of world owners and of AWCOM
(ii) they make citizenship so expensive that many of their current
citizens (artists, creators, botmakers, world owners, businesses who
rely on people comming in and coming back in, and just
users/custommers) will be forced to leave. Not to mention the panic,
disappointment and revolt this is causing...

I wish AWCOM would listen and use their brains.

XelaG
an AW citizen who has spent most of his 3 years in AW creating bots
and other ammenities for AW and its citizens and tourists, for free,
with a lot of dedication and love, paying for his citizenship and
world to be able to test his products. And for whom doomsday seems
near: I can't afford the new prices... and my contribution to AW will
suffer from it, I'm afraid.

[View Quote] >My .02 on this issue ( Rick & JP I really hope you guys are reading this! )
>
>What AW should do and other thoughts.......
>
>Quit charging at all for citizenships and get ppl in there! I thought you
>hired a marketing person. Why aren't they generating advertising revenue?
>I'd think because your user total at any given time is low, too low to sell
>ad space. They have to be fighting a losing battle without having thousands
>of ppl on-line at a time.
>
>Go to Pogo.com and learn. See how MANY people are on that site and any given
>time. They don't charge. Why not see about making some kind of deal with
>them or someone to provide the games in 3D? What about games.com or EA? If
>you want to charge so much per month you better start providing some good
>content! Put the Gaming worlds and other types under world content sections.
>It's too easy for someone to come in, see a few really bad worlds and never
>come back. Games is where it's at on the Internet right now. Ditch the whole
>AW mall idea and also the 3D web pages for now. They are terrible imho
>anyway. All this can be done with the current technology. Get some Case's
>ladder leagues going in there. Get hundreds of ppl in game rooms at a time
>well, there's your advertisers and the $ from them instead of from users.
>Games, games, games and more games!!!!!!! Umm contact Hasbro!!!! ;-)
>
>Years ago you could have developed that ActiveX type control. At that time I
>had SEVERAL larger companies really interested in it all based on the
>intitial test version. Businesses could REALLY utilize that type of internet
>page.Instead you come up with boring "3D Web Pages" that don't in anyway
>compare and still require a huge download. The idea back then was to provide
>a small / quick to download 3D 'area' that could be used to show products,
>promotions, and / or for customer service. Many companies are using on-line
>chat for their customer support. How much better support can be given if
>done in 3d? A lot more! Call Dell, they do it and so does AT&T. I personally
>think that if's there's ONE thing AW hasn't done that they should have it's
>this. Now there's several java based 3D things on-line but still NONE that
>could compare to the ActiveX type ability you could provide, promote, and
>SELL!
>
>I think, AW is still the best 3D technology available at this time. I know
>how much time and effort all of us has put into it one way or another. I'd
>hate to see it die and unfortunately I really feel that would happen if the
>company decides to raise the citizenship pricing. This isn't Everquest! Stop
>and think why the people that have been here for years are here? Most of us
>aren't here for the 'chat'. We are here because we like to build, create
>something and share that creation with others.
>
>Build it and they will come, build the games, don't charge, they WILL come.
>Let the advertisers pay not the citizens!
>
>If you need more specifics on my thoughts, ideas and how to implement them
>just call or write. I'd be happy to share the thoughts. * I'd think that
>since you're 'paying' someone to do your marketing they would have thought
>of all this themselves!*
>
>Casay
>
>
>
[View Quote]

Jan 8, 2002, 7:22pm

Hi xelag:)
It's not my intention to start any argumentation, or to discuss the
things you have just reported, at all indeed. Probably I am not even
answering to you, I am even pleased when I meet you, I am only thinking.
And so I do not want to question wheather or not the new pricing can be
affordable or not. But I was thinking about the 9.95 dollars, this is
the price, we can't actually discuss it's value, well 9.95 is a few, I
men generally, I am not questioning if that is a lot for you or for
anybody else, just considering it's value. Well having said that, well
maybe people that loves chats think differently. Other people didn't
come here with the first intention of chatting, so you didn't nor did I,
....I am not sure, you've been here for so many years so have I, well
software we use are far beyond that 9.95... I am only thinking. So you
mean AW isn't worthing even that, you have been here for so many years
in a place you wouldn't even consider for 9.95, you spent here all that
time so did I, and many did, in a place that isn't worthing 9.95? When
things come for free, you don't ask their value you enjoy them, but when
you're asked to give your opinion about the value...so AW isn't worthing
9.95, this is it. All that technology and work spent over it, isn't
worthing not even that. It's not true, tell me I am dreaming, please.
icey
[View Quote] >Casay,
>
>at last some one who points to the BIG mistake of a few years ago:
>dropping the plans to embed the AW technology into web pages. In my
>opinion , one of the biggest causes of AW's failure in implementing
>advertising and 3D-commerce and getting revenue from it is the
>isolation of a standalone browser. In spite of the slow down of the
>last 2 years in this internet area, this is the way to go. Companies
>as Macromedia, Viewpoint and Adobe have jumped on the wagon. Adapting
>their technology to web pages (and keeping both developments
>synchronised, AW browser and web plugin) would have been excellent. A
>simplified AW browser, with no building but with more interacive
>features in web pages; keeping their eyes open, being sensitive to
>demand and not to their own dreamy thoughts would have helped them a
>lot. Now that the axe is falling, I think that they might want to
>reconsider this; instead, they chose the worst path they could chose:
>(i) they ban tourists, their future citizens, and potential custommers
>of world owners and of AWCOM
>(ii) they make citizenship so expensive that many of their current
>citizens (artists, creators, botmakers, world owners, businesses who
>rely on people comming in and coming back in, and just
>users/custommers) will be forced to leave. Not to mention the panic,
>disappointment and revolt this is causing...
>
>I wish AWCOM would listen and use their brains.
>
>XelaG
>an AW citizen who has spent most of his 3 years in AW creating bots
>and other ammenities for AW and its citizens and tourists, for free,
>with a lot of dedication and love, paying for his citizenship and
>world to be able to test his products. And for whom doomsday seems
>near: I can't afford the new prices... and my contribution to AW will
>suffer from it, I'm afraid.
>
[View Quote]

Jan 8, 2002, 8:03pm

...and then it was 9.50 dollars

[View Quote] > Hi xelag:)
> It's not my intention to start any argumentation, or to discuss the
> things you have just reported, at all indeed. Probably I am not even
> answering to you, I am even pleased when I meet you, I am only
> thinking. And so I do not want to question wheather or not the new
> pricing can be affordable or not. But I was thinking about the 9.95
> dollars, this is the price, we can't actually discuss it's value, well
> 9.95 is a few, I men generally, I am not questioning if that is a lot
> for you or for anybody else, just considering it's value. Well having
> said that, well maybe people that loves chats think differently. Other
> people didn't come here with the first intention of chatting, so you
> didn't nor did I, ...I am not sure, you've been here for so many years
> so have I, well software we use are far beyond that 9.95... I am only
> thinking. So you mean AW isn't worthing even that, you have been here
> for so many years in a place you wouldn't even consider for 9.95, you
> spent here all that time so did I, and many did, in a place that isn't
> worthing 9.95? When things come for free, you don't ask their value
> you enjoy them, but when you're asked to give your opinion about the
> value...so AW isn't worthing 9.95, this is it. All that technology and
> work spent over it, isn't worthing not even that. It's not true, tell
> me I am dreaming, please.
> icey
[View Quote]

Jan 8, 2002, 8:56pm

I would rather ask the question that way : "Is EACH MONTH you spend / spent in AW worth 9.50$?". Because that's the price we're
gonna have to pay for each of them.

Fox Mc Cloud

"icey" <icey at altavista.net> a écrit dans le message news: 3C3B6AAC.6040104 at altavista.net...
> ..and then it was 9.50 dollars
>
[View Quote] <snipped 110 stories of quoting>

Jan 11, 2002, 5:23am

Well, now it's after January 3, 2002, and yes, the activeworlds.com website
says that new citizenships cost $114 per year. Like most other people here,
I wonder if existing citizens won't soon have to pay the same $114 per year
after their current citizenships run out.

$114 per year is what people are paying to go online and meet with friends
in virtual worlds, plus interact with hundreds of virtual people (animals,
monsters, imaginary beings) and experience those worlds like a character in
a story. Here in Activeworlds, we can go online and meet with friends in
virtual worlds, but the only adventure we can have is that of building.
Millions of people are paying $114 per year to take part in virtual stories.
I don't think very many will pay $114 per year just to be able to build.

In a couple of months, Neverwinter Nights will be on sale. It too lets
people go online and meet with friends in virtual worlds, plus interact with
hundreds of virtual people (animals, monsters, imaginary beings) and
experience worlds as one were a character in a story. But it is doing
something radically new and exciting: once you fork over the initial $49,
you can visit the imaginary online worlds of NeverwinterNights for FREE. And
I said WORLDS, not world, because the NeverwinterNights box includes not
only an example world you can adventure in, it includes a TOOLSET that lets
you build, populate, and script your own world. The game's producers,
Bioware, plan to make their money later by selling additional objects and
avatars, not by charging you to visit the worlds you make with them. How
does ActiveWorlds plan to compete with this?

Sometimes AW fans say "but I don't want to play a game, I just want to build
an imaginary world and relax in it, meeting friends there". Exactly:
repeatedly killing monsters bores me, too. So I'm going to use
NeverwinterNights' toolset to build a world where I can relax with my online
friends, and a lot of scripted imaginary people, just to make the background
complete. All that for an initial $49, nothing more, except to hook my world
server into the NeverwinterNights network--which is also FREE.

I truly don't see how ActiveWorlds is going to compete with this, even if we
longtime citizens don't have to pay $114 a year. And if we do, ActiveWorlds
should consider giving every citizen that pays the $114 a P-50 WorldServer
with 10 users and 3 citizenships. Then at least we might be tempted to stay
around for the privilege of online building.

{You can read about Neverwinter Nights at http://www.neverwinternights.com
the official site. There are some independent previews and lots of
screenshots at
http://gamespot.com/gamespot/filters/products/0,11114,188666,00.html }

[View Quote]

Jan 11, 2002, 5:15pm

Well, looking on AW's side of things, this thing's geared specifically to
gamers and I imagine it'll be advertised as such. AW is well.. ok what
does it advertise to?

SW Chris

[View Quote]

1  2  |   Order by index