ThreadBoard ArchivesSite FeaturesActiveworlds SupportHistoric Archives |
more There (Community)
more There // CommunitykfJan 13, 2003, 6:40pm
Here is more information about there:
http://www.prod.there.com/about_press.html especially: http://therecorp.there.com/press/jpg/ When I look at those graphics, I start to wonder why here is a discussion in the newsgroup at all about them <g>. Moreover, when I read things like (taken from http://www.azcentral.com/news/reuters/stories/NET-TECH-THERE-DC.shtml): The company has a two-pronged approach to revenue: an undetermined monthly membership fee and revenue from the sale of goods and services within the game, such as Nike shoes and Levi Strauss jeans. Already, it is recruiting for an ``online sports activity coordinator'' and an ``online fashion activity coordinator,'' people who the company said must be experienced online users with a knack for making new members feel welcome. Players will be able to use virtual funds called ``Therebucks,'' which they can earn in various ways or purchase directly via credit card, to buy clothes and other accessories for their avatars. Among the company's investors are 3DO Co. (Nasdaq:THDO) founder Trip Hawkins, CNET Networks Inc. (Nasdaq:CNET) co-founders Halsey Minor and Shelby Bonnie, DoubleClick Inc. (Nasdaq:DCLK) Chief Executive Kevin Ryan and Wired magazine founder Louis Rosetto. The company's board of directors includes Levi Strauss & Co. Chief Executive Phil Marineau and Jim White, general partner of venture capital firm Sutter Hill Ventures. <<< This didn't work in the past, it won't work now, but THERE... kfJan 13, 2003, 6:46pm
.... is is quite hard to take this serious at all
(http://www.ipo.com/venture/press.asp?p=ONI2&prid=2760) when reading marketing bubbles like ... "Levi Strauss & Co. has long used the Internet to reach consumers in innovative and compelling ways. There's immersive communications environment uniquely brings to life two benefits of the Internet that consumers value most: communication and community," said Patrice Varni, Director of Digital Business at Levi Strauss & Co. "When There wanted its members to be able to wear Levi's jeans, we were excited to participate. There provides a compelling new way for consumers to interact with the Levi's brand. We thought it was a great fit for debuting our new Levi's Type 1(TM) Jeans -- a bold new take on jeans in a breakthrough online community." In addition to its relationships with leading consumer product companies, There, Inc. is announcing a partnership with ATI, Inc., the leading retail seller of computer graphics cards. ATI will bundle There with its industry-leading Radeon graphics cards, and will partner with There, Inc. to upgrade computer labs at schools. "There is bringing advanced graphics to the mass market, which will introduce consumers to the power of ATI's innovations in a powerful way," said Dave Orton, CEO of ATI, Inc. "We're impressed with the visual quality the There team has achieved on relatively low-end hardware, and look forward to collaborating on ever more realistic versions of There." <<< [View Quote] kfJan 13, 2003, 6:49pm
<g>
PS: "There" must be doing something right. It's the number one topic in the AW news groups. The next year or two will bring some interesting competition for 3D-VR users. <<< http://www.3dvrweb.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=135 brantJan 13, 2003, 8:06pm
I was reading through this article and came across the following:
"One of the following video/graphics cards: ATI Radeon (except for VE), ATI Radeon 7200 or ATI Radeon Mobility 7500 or higher; or an nVIDIA GeForce or nFORCE graphics card." Hardly a wide selection of graphics cards. Earlier in the article: "Unlike high-end PC games, which require cutting-edge PC hardware and broadband connections, There is accessible to the mass market consumer." This software requires graphics cards, and an extremely limited selection of them, so how can it be accessible to the mass market consumer? I agree with what you said. There and Second Life are (at present) nothing more than a lot of PR. Until I try out a release version of either, I'm not believing any of this hype. It reminds me of that Cyboria everyone was boasting about as the "replacement" of AW :) -Brant [View Quote] carolannJan 13, 2003, 10:02pm
It really said that about mass market consumers? I missed that. I received
this from them when I applied for their (There) beta: "We're sorry, but according to your survey, your computer does not currently meet our minimum system requirements." My PC has the following: 1.6 GHz Pentium 4, 512 MB RAM, nVIDIA TNT2 M64 64 MB video card, using DirectX 8.1, and cable modem. I have 28 GB free on one of my 2 hard drives alone. I have Windows XP SP1. Not the fastest or newest...but I would say their is a "mass market" below that yet. [View Quote] zeo toxionJan 13, 2003, 11:08pm
I didn't read most of the other replies but..
Beta minimum requirements are often much higher then they will be intended at public release. I guess it's easier to test when you don't have to worry about lagging or slowness? You also won't have to worry about the testers having hardware problems or incompatibilities so they can focus on actual bugs in the software. -- Zeo [View Quote] sk8man1Jan 14, 2003, 1:58am
I had a lot higher than their minimum system requirements, but I got
rejected because of my NVIDIA Riva TNT2 Pro Card (Which is almost as good as the GeForce3) and their minimum is NVIDIA GeForce... It's by the same damned company and I still got rejected... the card is as good as or better than the minimum of a GeForce card (Any... GeForce1,2,3 or 4...). Looky here: http://www.creativepro.com/hardware/home/1091.html and here (this one is a comparison page...): http://www.creativepro.com/company/hardware/3439.html -Sk8man1 (346035) [View Quote] count draculaJan 14, 2003, 11:53am
I tried to sign up also, but it seemed the minimum was 800Mhz ( which it
told me after I had applied). I do not understand why it simply could not state it somewhere in the beginning so I would not have bothered filling in the form. CarolAnn seems to have double the minimum required, so that should be enough. Furthemore I think beta testers SHOULD be avarage people with not the fastest and best computers. Enormous lag and slowness IS a bug in any programm. A bug that people seem to ignore, assuming everyone has 2,4 GHz. Any programm should run smoothly on the minimum requirements. Any programm having 800 Mhz as minimum cannot reach the mass market in many years, especially if it is slow and buggy upto 1,8Ghz(?) and even support only a few 3d cards. It is kind of sad that programm makers makes programs that use more and more resources, instead of focusing on making the programms good and effective. In a few years a normal minimum requirement for games will probably be 3Ghz, so all those who next year spend 3000$/? on a new computer will need a new one again. Drac, stuck with my 333Mhz P II, ATI-Antique. zeo toxion <zeo at activeworlds.com> kirjoitti viestissä:3e23630b$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com... > I didn't read most of the other replies but.. > > Beta minimum requirements are often much higher then they will be intended at public release. I guess it's > easier to test when you don't have to worry about lagging or slowness? You also won't have to worry about the > testers having hardware problems or incompatibilities so they can focus on actual bugs in the software. > > -- > Zeo [View Quote] kfJan 14, 2003, 12:25pm
Well, from the pictures you can see that they are using some particle
features in their graphic engine (can be seen eg. at the jetpacks blast), which will then require a DirectX7 capable graphic card - those are Geforce 2+ and Radeon 7000+ (for Dx8 it would be GF3+, I think). In AW, you have as a fallback the software emulation, something they obviously do not have in There, thus the Dx7 capable cards as a minimum. However, even the recent onboard chips (which is, btw, the vast majority of graphic equipment that is sold in the USA) will fulfill Dx7 requirements - how fast it is then, is another question, though... Whether you have now 800MHz or 733MHz is more or less an academical question - differences are too small to make a noticeable difference, as a rule of thumb, a human notices only a double CPU speed as "definitely faster" (wheras the mainboard settings and drivers alone can make a bigger difference than CPUs of double/half speed). I'd rather made a difference in processor architecture, eg. "required Pentium3/500+ / Celeron xxx+), which would be a more sophisticated and senseful selection when it comes eg. to SSE/2 processor capabilities or caching speed and technology. But anyway - with these requirements, There will neither target the mass market (which does not have such an equipment) nor the gamers (which will smile about these requirements and demand a better, actual, technology), and the number of people in between won't make up the 150,000 customers they need (an amazingly high number, btw, almost higher than any VR community that has existed yet, but, given the graphics, it is quite (sub)standard). The project aims, with no doubt, at ecommerce, and there has not been a single product yet who even came near a break-even following such an concept. Potential buyers do not bother to start their computer to go shopping, neither will they want to pay 10$/month as an entrance fee to a shop. Funny is their intonation of "women", because they state a well known fact (for many years, there has been research about it even years ago already) as a new finding; in ALL interaction-oriented chat worlds, you will find more women than men, and in ALL competition-oriented worlds, you will find more men than women - and nevertheless, both types do not attract the other gender in more than marginal numbers. IMO, a classic marketing attempt to blow sand into investors eyes. I had been invited to There many months ago, and the proposal by then was even more and more open ecommerce oriented; I personally do not like this (when I want to buy something, I go into a shop, but not into a VR world where I cannot look close at and touch an article) and so it did not raise my interest at all. Thinking more about it, there was also a project of Randy Farmer once which pursued the same goal - I guess some of those VR projects have started before the ecommerce bubble bursted and only come now, after years, up with what they were working on. They will tinker their original ideas to match the current market more, but basically, these are all still old ideas and won't survive a significant amount of time in this form. [View Quote] builderzJan 15, 2003, 4:41am
If they really want to aim for the "mass market," I think they should
aim for ease of use (i.e., about the same level as AOL). Most people are used to e-mail and IM programs and it may be a big step going to a multi-user 3D environment. Also, I honestly don't see why they don't just release a version for consoles. I mean, the Xbox (Live!) already has 150,000 subscribers (though not all will buy There and use it), an Ethernet port, and a voice headset. Heck, it is even close to the recommended system requirements with regards to CPU power and graphics (it has a GeForce in it). -Builderz [View Quote] > But anyway - with these requirements, There will neither target the mass > market (which does not have such an equipment) nor the gamers (which > will smile about these requirements and demand a better, actual, > technology), and the number of people in between won't make up the > 150,000 customers they need (an amazingly high number, btw, almost > higher than any VR community that has existed yet, but, given the > graphics, it is quite (sub)standard). builderzJan 15, 2003, 4:49am
Is it possible to "fudge" your specs on the beta application form? ;)
Your system is close or better than the recommended hardware requirements (except for not having a GeForce). The only way they could probably tell the difference is if they have something coded into the program that won't make it run if your system hardware isn't what you say it is or the software "phones home" to their servers and they can check your system's specs somehow. -Builderz [View Quote] facterJan 15, 2003, 8:18am
[View Quote]
It may be "just as good" but it is an older model, and may not actually support some of what I would presume to be custom graphics that There offers - remember, with the introduction of Geforces, the programmers gained thea bility to actually access the hardware of the video card with specific coding - this is probably why a TNT card is not suitable for using There (T&L _+ directX assortments, remember, the TNT was originally designed for direct X 6&7). Also, remember everybody, in two years time, when There is actually *popular* (or gone altogether) those minimum specs will be archaic - it is the function of all recent games and entertainment software to program for the highest spec possible, because they know that by release those specs will already be what most hardware vendors offer as a bare minimum - and in all honesty, if you dont upgrade your PC at LEAST every two years, then you should not proclaim to have such heavy graphics uses for your machine, because anyone who is serious about software and PC's knows that it is essential to upgrade your entire machine every two years (18 months at the optimum). F. x.neocube.xJan 15, 2003, 9:36pm
[View Quote]
I do not understand this crap... I have a plain 3d accelerated video card, 1.8 Ghz Pentium 4, 30 Gig HD, 512 MB RAM... and I got accepted? So what is wrong with all of your specs? Please help me understand that. x.n.x kahJan 17, 2003, 10:58pm
Software particle systems have been around for years, and quite a few good
ones too. The graphics (wether they were conceptual or screenshots) you provided a link to certainly don't warrant such advanced graphic cards, a plain D3D supporting HAL should do fine. There are no indications of framerates anywhere on those shots either, so this might be running at 0.1fps for all we know, or maybe it was rendered in 3D Studio Max. You could achieve this (except particle effects and vehicles) in AW, even if it might be slow on most systems, since AW isn't very well optimised... I sure hope Shamus and 9 9 9 will work on improving performance after 3.4 is released, even though I somehow doubt it. I agree with your views on ecommerce, and the unrealistic businessmodel. There are no successfull ecommerce ventures that have charged for access, and I doubt this will catch on either. Just go look at !M at rt or whatever the world's called, it's completely void of people and nothing's changed for years. The bundling concept also failed in AW's case, and as you may know, ended in a lawsuit. There are some big-shot names on the investor list, some okay-looking "screenshots", but nothing more. I doubt they'll achieve their 150k paying user goal unless the earth's population increased dramatically (and resources, riches, etc increased at the same rate, which is never going to happen) within the next two years. It looks like an okay program, and if they beat AW to the bush regarding vehicles, performance (judging from those sys specs, that doesn't sound all that likely, though) they might have some AW users "convert". KAH |