Web in world or world in web?
My commentary on MyMiniLife seems to have prompted a few responses on blogs. The question at hand, basically, is whether the virtual world of the future will be an immersive 3d environment which includes web content on surfaces within the world, or whether it will be new capabilities for the Web, displaying worlds within web browsers.
I think it’s safe to say that the former is more the classic view of the Metaverse — more like Snow Crash, more like the vision that folks like Linden Lab are working towards. Indeed, with acquisitions like Windward Mark, we see Linden continuing to emphasize their vision of being an immersive simulation environment. They’re not alone; over at Delzo’s Avatarian, we see this case being made:
I, however, believe that while Flash clients may be where the internet is heading next, it will not stop there. When you look at computing history, you see games evolving from Spade Invaders in 2D, to Half Life in 3D. Windows went from 2D Windows such as Windows 3.1 to Vista which has now has 3D spinning windows.
It’s just human nature to evolve our computing and entertainment tools to be more like real life. I don’t think it’s far off track to assume that the web itself will someday be presented in full, glorious 3D.
But 3d is a red herring here. The question isn’t really whether the interface will be 2d or 3d (I think it’s safe to say that there will be elements of both). The question is actually whether it is the web that subsumes virtual worlds, or whether virtual worlds subsume the web.
At heart, this is a question of whether the virtual world, or the eventual metaverse, will be immersive or not. And I have to say, as someone who enjoys roleplay, who has worked on building immersive worlds, who reads like crazy — immersion is losing. Most of the supposedly immersive worlds are not, and as VOIP usage continues to rise, we can expect these worlds to get even less immersive.
In practice, we’ve seen plenty of things that have made incursions into the supposed immersivity of virtual worlds, over the years. A large part of this pressure has come from the fact that most virtual worlds were games, and therefore we have seen tons of external tools that violate the sanctity of the game’s illusion.
The flip side of this is to embrace the lack of immersion. Stuff like Whirled and of course, all the other worlds that I jabber on about endlessly here lately, are embracing the web side, and not trying to be immersive-eat-your-desktop sorts of apps. Instead of the web being a window inside the world, the world is a window inside the web. This means you still have access to your iTunes, your Trillian, your email, and so on. And of course, many platforms like this will likely have the web in a texture within the world (that is a window on the web).
For an example, check out the 3d engine demo over at Outsmart Labs, which shows a 3d chat room with avatars done in Flex, with the ability to put Flash and Flex on the walls. Over on their blog, they speak of “rich Internet experiences” and their goal is to release something called OSVirtualVillage, for use in business apps.
When the pressure is on game developers to make sure that their apps run in windows rather than full-screen, I think it’s safe to say that users value having all the rest of the Internet available while they traverse their virtual worlds. The most natural way to do that is in the browser, without even a client install, or as little of a download as possible. And I think that’s a huge part of what the lightweight Flash MMOs are tapping into (and a point that Kaneva, with its 180MB client download, missed).
Mobil Avenue puts it well:
As with many developments to come in the 21st century we are entering a yes and era leaving either or thinking rightfully where it belongs – firmly rooted in the past. Virtual World’s are no exception. It is healthy to see the growing competition that exists for attention between both camps. Each have a place and a role to play within the third wave of the web.
The wildcard in all this, of course, is mobile devices. But that’s a post for another day.
19 Responses to “Web in world or world in web?”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
(Feedster on: second life) 05/22 09:00 Exporting Jurisdictions – the Other Way (Feedster on: metaverse) 05/22 08:08 Channel 4 Radio Launches in Second Life (3pointD.com) 05/22 08:07 Web in world or world in web? (Feedster on: metaverse) 05/22 08:06 Evening Metaverse (Feedster on: metaverse) 05/22 06:39 In need of mentor/society/whatever (Feedster on: entropia universe) 05/22 06:32 SecondLife How To Make Money In Second Life
Web in world or world in web. He brings up a good point about the 3D Web. We’re all concentrating on the idea that someday soon we’ll be staring into an immersive world, getting real work done, leaving behind all our of terrestrial Internet apps. But the evidence suggests that
I guess I’m inclined to believe that there will be a number of forks in the road ahead for virtual worlds. Some devs and players will choose to take one path, others another. I suppose a challenge will be to decide which paths (and how far down them) still qualifies as, well, a virtual world. The webby asynchronous (and as you also point out “windowed”) view of the v.world seems like it can’t help but be a path well taken. I recently cited ‘Sword of the New World’ and the ‘multiple-concurrent-avatar’ thing smacks of an RTS bent that I think will be another path that some will go (and arguably many are already – multiboxing).
I think there are going to be a lot of forks in the road. Personally, I think this is all good stuff. Why not be liberal minded and support all the interesting journeys?
While I didn’t intend to dismiss Flash as a vehicle for virtual worlds outright, I did intend to point out that it’s simply that…a vehicle.
I also didn’t intend to throw out a “red herring” such as arguing 3D over 2D for virtual worlds. I was simply exploring where we as humans have always taken our media to 3D. It’s going there, and in some cases it already has.
Right now, virtual worlds are on the web. I subscribe to the idea that the web will eventually be in a virtual world. Otherwise, you have to believe the browser itself will never evolve.
Perhaps the final shift away from a page display metaphor (and thus the web browser as we know it) will happen when we’re handed stylish mobile overlay displays, also known as enhanced reality systems. When the main function of the web is to work in a three dimensional context then it makes sense to move the entire web browser to a mainly three dimensional metaphor.
Until then, 3D views should take their place alongside the rest of the media in browsers by working well with the rest of the 2D page.
The concept of living in an online universe has barely even been scratched by software developers. So often designers get caught up in improving old concepts, when there are potentially innumerous possibilities for improving our current way of participating in a 3D world. Like most, I am always anxious to see what comes next out of this monolith of an industry. Maby one day, integration of different facets of life will be simplified by being incorperated into an online virtual application that lives and breaths just like our physical earth, changing with what environment people apply with a click of their mouse.
There was a time not too long ago when “surfing the Internet” was considered a deeply immersive activity that was going to replace TV/radio/bowling/etc. as the favorite pastime of civilized people everywhere. Things didn’t quite turn out that way. Nowadays, the Web is less about full-immersion surfing, and more about being lightweight and flexible in order to fit into our busy lives: RSS readers, browsers on cell phones, GPS devices, etc.
VWs will undergo a similar evolution, from full-screen apps that demand your whole attention, to lightweight windowed apps that negotiate for your attention, to multi-channel worlds that you can access from a browser, cell phone, kiosk, etc. whenever you feel the need. VWs will find their audiences by becoming more accessible, not more demanding.
Thanks for the link to 3D flash.
Sigh, people invent the wheels of 3d soft renderer again and again,
if look back at the history of computer graphics, we can see people
have done this in assemble language, Fortran, C/C++, Java… It is
normal while we are in stone age, but we have been in the age of GPU.
It is a pity that Adobe/Macromedia didn’t add a 3D feature in AS3/Flash9,
sounds near-sight to me.
What will happen if MS add the 3D render ability in SilverLight?
Simplicity of interaction – 3D just happens to be simple for 3D oriented minds to deal with. Although it could be argued that Expose beats Vistas spinning windows for simplicity of interaction. Thats where full-3d desktop interaction falls down – currently the technology to translate the physical portion of interaction into the 3d environment sucks. It requires more than just technology to solve as well, we need ways of tricking the mind to reconcile conflicting 3d environments.
Web-page-worlds are simpler to interact with – there’s no theoretical limit to the complexity of the game, but loading a web page is simpler than loading, patching and directX – what? I can’t surf as well as play?
On top of that its not a binary question. There are several parameters – immersion, content-type, art style, ease of interaction, requirement of time with a the population spread across them. Some will resonate more with some people than others, so you will have a multiplicity of world types with varying populations.
Mobile devices are some of the most complex to interact with – primarily because of their limitations. Once you learn texting isn’t so hard, but it’s not simple. Which makes it much like a unix command line.
This is a simple, the issue is being made way too complex.
I remember back in the days of VRML and all of these predictions about 3D desktops and so on. Why isn’t this great 3D internet here? Its all about usability. I don’t need 3D to read and write e-mail. I don’t need to walk down a hall and open a door to launch my web browser!
3D is great in games. Games are about entertainment. The 3D is the smoke and mirrors that tricks our minds into believing we are in a fantastic world when we are just really clicking over, and over, and over, again getting no where.
Stop for just a moment and consider flash. 2D or 3D flash itself has serious problems. I build web sites and internet businesses for a living. I don’t touch flash. Why not? Its great glitz and glamor for high paid web designers but it does little to improve a visitors usability or quest for information. Wild new user interfaces might be great for bmwusa.com, but would it contribute a single thing to google or yahoo?
3D replicates the real world. If you don’t need to add an extra layer of time and effort into the digital world, why do it?
3D world fantasies aside, 3D will remain critical for entertainment, gaming, and simulation. Companies will increasingly promote their products in 3D, a “digital showroom.” However, the ideas some virtual reality futurists have predicted for decades are more than a bit short sighted and completely lacking any practicality.
[…] (via Raph) is where I think the operating system interface should go. Mac OS X, Windows Vista, and the Beryl […]
web in VW or VW in web…does it really matter?
obviously the answer will change as time and technology evolve to meet the needs of the users.
I have for some time now been convinced that the real issue with 3D immersion (beyond the obvious HW/BW/interop issues) is I/O devices. when you think about the basic premise of 3D it really involves our brain’s ability to process things better in 3D (just like color vs BW) so eventually most everything we do to interact with information will benefit from moving to 3D spaces. Continuing what others said here – the real change here would be devices that will enable true 3D output and input (e.g. haptic gloves and VR glasses and eventually brain implants). Although some of these devices are approching critical performance barriers, they are still far from fully developed. All the “3D” that we use now is a mere projection and canot fully exploite the power of “real3D”.
As per the old adage of “I dont need 3D for reading text or scheduling appointements…” – are you sure? are you REALLY REALY sure? Do you even know how a 10th generation 3D_MS_Outlook would be? could 3D (+the I/O i mentioned) be used to view and manage conflicts and or resources? and as for reading – that is probabaly the only true 2D information there is. It is such since, of all our visual skills it is the only one that is formally learned (unless you go into Chomskyian generative grammer…) so isnt really part of our hardwirin/firmware. So IMHO in a real 3D environment text could still effectively be projected on 2D surfaces (a la Minority Report). That being said – did anyone try to develop a 3D based written laguage…
MC
Looks like the human-machine interface devices are enroute via the US DOD…
“Darpa says it expects to have prototypes in the hands of soldiers in three years.”
http://www.wired.com/gadgets/miscellaneous/news/2007/05/binoculars
And the “intel inside” brain chips aren’t far behind…
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20797780-12332,00.html
Granted, this tech is still in the shadowy realm of darpa,
but so was the internet once.
[…] back to my main point. In this post Raph gets on to the subject of ‘immersion’ – yes, one of those academic terms that […]
And then there’s Joost. They have an encouraging amount of content but the app wants to take over your entire desktop at a time when watching tv on the web is increasing, and the idea that people watch tv to the exclusion of all the other distractions is waning.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see companies like Joost take note of web-games like Whirled, and start to allow that themselves to become part of the users continuous partial attention stream.
[…] Raph’s Website: Web in world or world in web […]
/pizza
And for those who don’t know the reference, see here.
Yay for immersion. Or not.
[…] 3D Web | Second Life | Technology I just finished reading an insightful post by Raph Koster titled Web in world or world in web. He brings up a good point about the 3D Web. We're all concentrating on the idea that someday […]
[…] Your page is on StumbleUpon […]