What’s the scoop on this? Is it a Sims clone?
CNN quotes the operators of this site as saying that “There” is not a game, like “The Sims”, but more of a virtual universe. It is trying to be a pay-for-play neighborhood/chatroom type thing with no real goals beyond the socializing.
Troy
OK, so The Sims Online is The Palace 3.0 and There is The Palace 4.0. Why do people not learn from history?
Hasn’t every attempt at this so far failed miserably?
Fact is, There is a bit different. You can pay to have your own content put into the game and such.
At this point, I don’t even want to take a guess at how successful There will be, but it’s got potential. I’ve been “accepted” into the beta, and now I’m waiting for my “here’s how you get playing” email. We’ll see how that goes.
I dunno, Tom. I’d seen that article a few days ago, but only now did I really go through it, and it seems troubling…
The rates are expected to fluctuate as testing proceeds, though $1 now buys 1,787 Therebucks or about one-sixth of the price of a virtual dog – available in two breeds – or a buggy.
Or, a virtual dog costs $6. Hmm. I doubt people want to pay money for Project Entropia items when they have some (seemingly remote but available) opportunity for renumeration - so I doubly doubt it here.
The company, which has secured $33 million in funding through venture capitalists and 84 employees, says it can break even with just 150,000 subscribers. Executives say they have enough funds to last two years.
So, if it doesn’t get 150k subs within two years (shaking magic 8 ball, signs point to “no”), what happens to my $6 virtual dog?
Executives also promise an open platform so that anyone with programming experience can create everything from a new planet to a new outfit.
Bringing the grass root modders to … a platform where they have to pay monthly to experience the new content they spent time on? Sounds kind of iffy to me.
[edit] – checked out their site, apparently you are supposed to be able to make money (virtual, I think) off the items you create. [/edit]
“Not a game” means “We’d really like some VC cash.” It’ll be interesting to see if they suddenly become a game when they need to put it on store shelves. =)
Or, a virtual dog costs $6. Hmm. I doubt people want to pay money for Project Entropia items when they have some (seemingly remote but available) opportunity for renumeration - so I doubly doubt it here.
I was talking to my friend who works at NCSoft the other day, and he said that the practice of paying small fees for online goodies is, in fact, something that works out well there. People in Korea will pay for new outfits, face options, toys, etc. It’s hard to say if it will spread here.
So, if it doesn’t get 150k subs within two years (shaking magic 8 ball, signs point to “no”), what happens to my $6 virtual dog?
The same thing that happens to your 1000 hour Dark Age character if the company goes under. I think that guy’s more likely to sue him than the $6 dog owner.
Most interesting quote in the article:
By downplaying competition, There hopes to attract women to its universe, which is roamed much like the legendary computer game Myst. In fact, some areas look and sound like the mythical Myst island with the constant chirping of birds and distant roar of surf.
What an odd statement. Clueless reporter perhaps?
Now if people could sell the stuff they make on there for their own profit then that would be cool.
That’s just nutty. But look at their ruler, Long Duck Dong, or whatever that loco bastard’s name is. Are Koreans rolling around in money?
I guess I can see the attraction of pretend buying objects and dressing my avatar up with imaginary items using the earnings from my real life dull job, but as a persistent online activity? Its like flushing cash down the toilet. Of course, America is chock full of morons looking for something to waste their money on. So maybe it will fly.
I guess it is the idea of “virtual property” I cannot wrap my tiny brain around. Magic the Gathering was a big enough waste of time and money (not to mention, eventually, a racket) when I had actually physical property for which I had paid. Owning cards online, continually feeding the card beast, and having to run a program to view said property is too much of a virtual stretch for me. I guess There is not aimed at me either. And by “me” I mean a sane PC gamer.
South Korea is. And their leader is no nutjob.
You do know there are two Koreas, right?
Troy
South Korea is. And their leader is no nutjob.
You do know there are two Koreas, right?[/quote]
Don’t confuse the boy.
It is trying to be a pay-for-play neighborhood/chatroom type thing with no real goals beyond the socializing.
This doesn’t distinguish it from Sims Online. It is Sims Online.
South Korea is. And their leader is no nutjob.
You do know there are two Koreas, right?[/quote]
Don’t confuse the boy.[/quote]
Yes, dammit, I know there are two Koreas - East Korea and West Korea, duh!?! The Vietcong were from the East, but luckily everything is OK over there since Jimmy Carter and his Habitat for Humanity tore the wall down when he was doing the Salt II treaty. I bought a brick from that wall for $99.99 on E-Bay with a genuine Certificate of Authenticity signed by Adolf Hitler so I know of what I speak.
I was simply not sure which Korea was the one that was GaGa over Lineage, WC, AoE, et.al. or if it was both when I made my little jokey joke. I knew one of the Koreas must have a little money for Lord British to defect to NCSoft, but I guess I did not pay enough attention as to the exact location (N. or S.) of the insane numbers of gamers they profess to have. They are nuts over their games and nuts for paying $15.00 in real cash for a rasberry beret so that their African American avatar can prance around like Prince in the Korean version of the Sims: Hot Date expansion.
Today, I can thank my lucky stars that there are a number of friendly posters around that will not hesitate to call me on something when I step outta line. 
Hahaha, good stuff. Good stuff indeed!
I am curious what gaming goes on in North Korea. Like you said, South Korea is completely nuts over it, but the only thing I’ve heard of North Korea involves mass starvations and a nuclear ‘crisis.’
I just got my “you’ve been accepted” email as well. From what I read on the site it looks like we should be getting our notifications to start playing around the 15th, or a little later(the beta test hours are expanding). I’ll try not to run your dog over with my dune buggy.
some old info i remember reading in the WSJ:
Online Game Hopes to Convert
Virtual Cash Into Real Revenue
By DON CLARK
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Will people pay real money to help virtual characters buy make-believe stuff?
A Silicon Valley start-up called There Inc. plans to test that premise – and create new sources of revenue for online entertainment in the process.
The closely held company has spent $17 million and more than four years building an online world that is designed to let users take the form of simulated avatars that can move, chat, have fun and flirt. Besides monthly user subscriptions, There hopes to be paid by companies such as Web portals and ski resorts to build themed virtual destinations for promotional purposes or to produce revenue. The company also hopes the U.S. government will buy a simulation of the terrain in Afghanistan for use by military commanders there.
The company’s monetary policy is even more striking. Like “The Sims Online,” which was just launched by Electronic Arts Inc., There will give users ways to earn fictitious currency that they can spend on virtual homes, entertainment and goods. For example, members are expected to try on and buy virtual shoes from Nike Inc. and apparel from Levi-Strauss Co. at animated kiosks in There, and buy real-world items by clicking on an Internet link.
In the virtual world created by the start-up There, characters explore, flirt and play, sometimes with virtual pets, in a range of exotic settings that includes a dark forest, a tropical island, a city in the clouds and a replica of ancient Egypt. They can chat and display emotions based on typed commands.
The key difference in There: Users will also be able to trade real money for play money, using credit cards to buy additional “Therebucks” beyond those they earn or those that come with their subscriptions.
There, of Menlo Park, Calif., decided to make currency sales a key revenue source after a user test in the summer of 2001 that offered $100 cash honorariums to 300 users. The company tried offering the users the chance to trade some of the real cash for fictitious currency. “Something like 50 or 60 of them converted some or all of their $100 to buy more Therebucks,” says Tom Melcher, There’s chief executive officer. “We were astonished.”
The 80-employee company, started in 1998 by a Stanford University computer-science Ph.D. named Will Harvey, is discussing its plans for the first time this week at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. It will begin registering users for its first public test, which will begin in mid-January, and expects a formal launch in the third quarter.
There is just one sign of the shifting boundaries between real and virtual economics. Some users in popular role-playing games, such as Electronic Arts’ Ultima Online and Sony Corp.'s EverQuest, already make real money by auctioning off characters, weapons and other objects.
MindArk AB, a Swedish computer-game designer, has discussed a free online game called Project Entropia that would let players buy objects to use in their adventures, and even take money out of the game. In South Korea, NeoWiz Corp. operates a popular animated chat service that lets users buy virtual clothes and other goods for their two-dimensional characters.
Trading game currency for real dollars is a touchy topic, partly because it could give affluent players an advantage. In Sims Online, for example, characters earn currency called Simoleans for selling virtual pizzas, artwork and the like, or working cooperatively with others. The Sims “rewards players for what they create within the community, not for the wealth they hold in real life,” says Jeff Brown, an Electronic Arts spokesman. “The fun is in building up your character, not in buying a happy ending before you start.”
Linden Lab, a San Francisco start-up that is building an online community like There’s, called Second Life, also shies away from selling virtual currency outright. “The greater majority of people would lose interest, because then the experience would start seeming like a bad copy of real life,” says Philip Rosedale, the chief executive officer.
Controlling exchange rates and prices for goods and services is also very difficult, which is why most real-world governments no longer try, says Edward Castronova, an associate professor of economics at California State University in Fullerton, who has written extensively on virtual economics. He nonetheless regards There as an interesting experiment.
“What are the macroeconomic implications?” Mr. Castronova asks. “We don’t know yet.”
Mr. Melcher acknowledges the potential for problems but believes that the ability of people to earn Therebucks will prevent currency purchasers from distorting the experience. There studied NeoWiz’s business model, and Mr. Melcher got some free advice from a friend, Dimitri Demekas, an economist and virtual-world buff who works on real-world issues for the International Monetary Fund.
The company opted not to limit the amount of currency in its economy but plans to set exchange rates and to influence prices through fees on virtual goods and services that users sell. It also plans to review users’ creations to minimize profane artwork and copyright violations. Mr. Melcher doesn’t rule out the emergence of secondary markets in virtual currency or goods outside There, but he hopes to reduce the incentive by offering a built-in auction function that could eventually enable real commerce to emerge if ground rules can be refined.
Unlike “The Sims Online,” where the imperative is to satisfy characters’ needs, such as food, comfort, hygiene and fun, There and Linden Lab style their worlds as virtual vacation destinations without gamelike objectives. Instead of the Sims’ god’s-eye view, they offer three-dimensional characters that can operate from a first-person perspective and look coy, sexy, angry or sad based on typed-in keyboard commands. There’s Earth-inspired environment is broken up into a lush island, a forest realm, a cloud city and a replica of ancient Egypt. Users can walk through those landscapes or ride dune buggies or “hoverboards,” which are like snowboards that fly. There recommends that players have, at minimum, a late-model $700 PC with a graphics card. A 56-kilobyte modem is sufficient, though faster connections allow conversations via microphone rather than typing.
Virtual flirting is expected to flourish. On New Year’s Eve and in the preceding daylight hours, the Sims Online recorded half a million virtual kisses – a process that requires two characters to agree – at 5,000 online parties, says Gordon Walton, an executive producer with the game.
Stalking and harassment have been key concerns since text-based online adventures emerged in the 1970s. To reduce the possibility, There and its predecessors have developed an “ignore” function so that users won’t be bothered by people they specify. There, which has raised $33 million in total funding, including $16 million from its employees, got advice from veterans in the field such as Amy Jo Kim, author of a book on online communities.
“If you can build a place that women love, the guys will show up,” Mr. Melcher says. “The reverse is not true.”
Updated January 8, 2003
There, of Menlo Park, Calif., decided to make currency sales a key revenue source after a user test in the summer of 2001 that offered $100 cash honorariums to 300 users. The company tried offering the users the chance to trade some of the real cash for fictitious currency. “Something like 50 or 60 of them converted some or all of their $100 to buy more Therebucks,” says Tom Melcher, There’s chief executive officer. “We were astonished.”
to me, this is the interesting quote: so giving users a free $100 and watching them turn it into There money is going to equate to users using their own money in the same way? i would have to say no, but people are strange.
be interesting to hear how it goes in the beta from those who are going to try it.
You remember all that??