CNet reviews Cyworld
And it ain’t pretty. It didn’t connect with this reviewer, who commented,
I think I am just more into having a simpler and more direct experience when I am on social networking sites like MySpace. Don’t get me wrong, I love customizing my page. However, I would never go as far as to create a pretend or mini version of myself or home. Though it may not be for me, Cyworld is worth a look.
Those of us who are immersed in the “avatar world” may find some aspects of the review a bit of a wake-up call. Among the points resented are the cost of microtransactions (“Social networking should stay free, and customizations should be a part of the site”), the presence of a virtual space at all, the way in which that virtual space curbs rather than expands creativity because of the limited art set…
Some of you have wondered why I keep mentioning sites like MySpace and Cyworld on ths blog, which has as a sort of unifying theme the world of massively multiplayer virtual worlds. It’s because I see a clear convergence, the sort of convergence that leads towards the sort of metaverse described in science fiction.
Clearly, though, there’s audience issues to overcome that are, if anything, bigger than the technical ones. And this review gives us a glimpse into what those are.
9 Responses to “CNet reviews Cyworld”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Hey Ralph, the convergence is pretty obvious I think.
What do you think of a secondlife meets habbo hotel
meets cyworld?
Kind of like those live chat buttons you see on websites, except you get a shared virtual space instead of just an AIM style chat
window.
Even in the days of text there were social MUDs, more or less. Places where people could create rooms or sets of rooms and have other users come over to chat in whatever setting they thought appropriate. I forget the acronym we knew them by but it was a direct outgrowth of MUDs basically. There were no monsters, no treasure, no levels, no adventure, but there was most definitely a virtual space, with avatars, and people controlling those avatars and interacting withing that virtual space. I knew a lady once who invited everyone she MUDded with to come join the one she used and chat with her and her other friends.
There’s no reason that this shouldn’t translate into the graphical era of multiplayer online virtual worlds, and I think the only thing that’s really held it back for so long has been the lack of tools to allow the users to create their own spaces.
So there’s definitely a convergence, and there’s always been one. I think the only reason we don’t see more of it now that the technology to do it graphically is available is that, as the review sort of points out, trying to wrap a business model around a user-administered social interaction-only virtual world is something that no one has quite figured out how to do yet.
>here’s audience issues to overcome that are, if anything, bigger than the technical ones.
Raph, Raph, Raph. Why do you see the world in terms of “me, enlightened game god and tekkie,” and “them, the issue to be overcome?”
There’s more of them than there are of you. And, could they be right? What if they’re on to something? Why do they have to be “overcome” as a “problem”? What if…it’s all good, and everything you’re used to making in your ancient craftsmen’s guilds of MMORPG games were in fact meant to get more shallow and more shallow and distend out further and further and modernize and moernize and get more and more clickable and merge with the great Oneness of Blingtardia. Who are you to stop progress, Raph?
People want what they want. They go on Myspace, they don’t go on litkicks.org
I mean, my Yahoo Messenger now has a little guy I can put headphones and a neat hat on and I can dress him up while I chat and also do interactive sketching with my friends and send them music clips. My God, what am I doing in laggy, crashy SL where I have to pay a fortune for land and push prims for a living. I could be having this rich, creative, interactive life on Yahoo or one of these other social offerings that are just going to get better and better — free, too.
Indeed! Except myspace DID do that, there is a business model there its just not transparent to the users, there is something being bought and sold, market channels and access are worth eh….200+ million to Fox. How long before you see a Myspace avatar customization and 3d immersive VW enviornment is a different story, why build that when you can sell access to 74 million users for 14 day free trials to…well lets see yeaterday was WOW, today I saw D&D Online. A 1% click through rate for 74 million users is pretty good….
So whats the ROI on a Banner Ad vs The ROI on building out a 3D immersive VW only 1% of the population might use, which requires maintenance and overhead costs and includes micro transactions (which violate the “free theme”)….
Prokofy-
I took the “audiance issues” comment to mean:
Whats your commitment and emotional investment in SL vs Yahoo as a community, as a user, as a player. What lasting effect and impact can you achieve in either. Whats your level of consumption of the content of SL vs Yahoo. Who do you miss more, the house you built in SL with all the nifty furniture or the little avatar with the hat.
I took the issues comment to mean these things need to be overcome when building a portal that will allow the user to not have “one or the other” but ALL of them.
Yeah, “audience issues” doesn’t mean “the audience needs to be fixed” but rather “the audience needs to be understood.”
Myspace = Second Life – Avatars – Sell-content-for-money-game
No, I’ve never wondered why you talk about these kinds of sites. I’ve spent more than an idle moment trying to figure out how to “fix” Neopets so it’s more of a MMO and less of a collection of flash game homages.
First up on audience issues is that more people will come if your content is perceived to be free.
Convergence in process…
NightScape Suites
They are using the MySpace thing to have the community help design their MMO. They are even calling this the beta test… Yes, I’m using it to track them and see what happens. Thought it was relevant.
It seems like what the reviewer had difficulty with was the limitation of customization with the tools he had.
For instance:
Myspace, while a much more primitive presentation than cyworld’s virtual universe graphicly, allows for a person to deliver a far more accurate expression of himself. Instead of pre made avatars, he can draw one, photoshop one, use a picture of a carton of milk, or simply his own RL picture.
Like the reviewer said, It’s not just some crazy looking universe were everything is stylized in such a way that it is impossible to conform with the person who is controlling the avatar.
Take ANY MMO Game. Eventually you were limited by the assets included. Even in the Sims, I would always feel closed in, unable to make my house exactly the way I wanted.
I think this leaves 3 options for Pioneers of the Virtual Universe (that I can think of):
1. Include an almost infinite amount of assets, so that users never feel limited.
2. Allow users to create their own objects, exactly how they want them.
3. The Right awnser.
The former is very expensive and the latter has been tried, and will never reach mass appeal due to technical expertise required.
Think about the internet. Think about the internets level of custimzation. Thats what eventually needs to hapepn. Its just a matter of creating the right tools, and I think myspace, cyworld, MMO’s are all heading towards accomplishing that.
Notice also that as Graphic complexity decreases, raw custimization increases. WoW less than Habo Hotel less than MySpace less than The Internet less than General coding less than Real life.
Well I guess now that I think about it real life does have some pretty complex graphics. =)
[…] Comments […]