InformationWeek’s sneak peek at Metaplace
We have lifted the NDA for one person: Tom Claburn of Information Week. And “Metaplace Readies Virtual World Platform” is the resulting article.
Congrats to the (many!) users whose work got spotlighted by the reporter! 🙂
It would be a mistake to see Metaplace exclusively as a game environment. The platform also has a strong social component, even at this early stage with its limited audience of testers. When the doors open, Metaplace may end up competing not with the likes of Second Life or Habbo but with Facebook. To imagine how that might happen, consider how some Metaplace testers have been streaming music into their personal worlds using programming hooks to Last.fm. Others are trying to implement music composition in their virtual spaces. Really, if data is available online, there’s probably a way to access it and present it on Metaplace. That means that worlds can duplicate many of the functions of Web sites, albeit with a different user interface. …
Betting on the masses, as opposed to the technically proficient, to produce compelling virtual worlds might seem like a risky decision. There are still people who can’t accept that an army of amateurs has produced something as useful as Wikipedia.
But Koster is undaunted by such concerns. “If we give people access and freedom, we’re pretty sure they’re going to surprise, shock, and astonish us with what they go do,” he said. “Honestly, it’s been happening to us on a regular basis.”
One Response to “InformationWeek’s sneak peek at Metaplace”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I’ve been a fan of the potential of Metaplace since the TechCrunch video last year. Without knowing more details about Metaplace, the possibility to significantly lower barriers for less tech savvy, but heavily creative individuals, to contribute valuable/quality content to a virtual world is exciting. I’m a little unclear of what content will actually be a part of the marketplace (interior designs versus a working last.fm jukebox for your house?). Regardless, the flexibility and simplicity of the tool set opens a lot of doors for people who might not otherwise ever create anything in these types of settings.
With that said, there are also 2 initial questions/concerns that come to mind. First, with social value being the largest driving factor to participate in, and continue to contribute money to these types of experiences, where will users be able to measure their social status fairly & impartially against the largest community possible? If I’m purchasing rare clothing or decorations for my “crib” I’ll want as many eyeballs on it as possible that understand the value of those items within the context in which they exist. E.g. If a thousand people, 100 from 10 separate worlds, see me wearing the most sought after cowboy hat from “West World” and only 100 of them from West World know the value of that cowboy hat, the social value and in direct proportion, the amount of $ I’m willing to spend to acquire that item is significantly less than it would be if I had a Metaplace hub that puts all of my acquisitions within the context of everyone participating in Metaplace worlds (with the assumption that an “official” hub would offer an even playing field).
The second would be similar to the frustration of trying to find quality content. When you open the floodgates for UGC contribution to anyone and everyone, the only real automated tools you have to police that content is content rating systems and usage/download tracking, neither of which I’ve seen used with complete effectiveness. My most recent example of this is searching for good iphone apps that aren’t games (ugh!). How would users find the best content without having to rely on trial/error (separate from friend recommendations & 3rd party review/rating sites)?
A 3rd question would have been based around one of the top reasons for Lively failing, item rarity, but that’s a subject in itself.
“Betting on the masses, as opposed to the technically proficient, to produce compelling virtual worlds might seem like a risky decision.”
There is no risk at all. People love their own babies.
Depending on that as a revenue generator works pretty well for the OB/GYNs. It is a little less reliable for the day care workers.
But amateurs have been making virtual worlds for almost two decades now. What has been missing is transparent, easy server-side software for MMOs and here is where standards could be very helpful to the marketplace.
Anyway, it is the wrong question. The web was built by amateurs for amateurs and regardless of the media-type, eventually the cost of providing amateur content goes to near zero.
I still have to ask what I’ve asked Ondrejka: what is the actual saleable value of these that can keep a VC interested once it becomes apparent that with IP-unencumbered tech, amateurs can get beyond server-barrier businesses and roll their own? The market isn’t quite there because it is still WYSIWYGering itself into profitability, but that is changing.