Ebbe Shrugged
No witty by-line can do this justice
Apparently Second Life denial has reached a level rivaling Fox News pundits and distinctly at a right angle to reality itself.
In a recent announcement, �OnLive reports they�ve seen a very positive response�, and they will be offering the SL Go app for a mere $9.95 a month.
Meanwhile, in the land we like to call reality, this is what constitutes �very positive response�. A snapshot taken of the SL Go actual rating and comments, notwithstanding the conflict of interest, bought out phony 5 star ratings.
Ok, so... right angle to reality.
Bring this up to Ebbe on Twitter and he passes the buck.
Well, they had positive responses and people were mostly just mad about the pricing, which Onlive adjusted today! Also... go talk to them, they made it, not us.
What. the. fuck.
Obviously paraphrased because if they can�t be bothered to be genuine at all, then I think I can get away with a satirical paraphrase that�s at least more accurate than literally everything out of the OnLive camp so far.
Ok, yeah... so pointing out just how screwed up this is on all levels isn�t going to win me any brownie points. But c�mon, this is so far over the top and in the land of make-believe that King Friday and Lady Elaine Fairchilde are now part of Welcome Island.
It�s not the price. At least not oversimplified to that extent. It�s the lack of being able to justify that price in the face of pre-existing options that are far cheaper ($2.50 flat fee) and in the face of already paying monthly for Premium, on top of buying L$ to buy stuff in-world.
The problem is charging to access something they are already paying for, so they can pay some more after that, and probably pay more after that. The problem is that Linden Lab authorized a third party to use their intellectual property and logo in relation to a product that is far overpriced and seen as price gouging � which in turn makes Linden Lab and Second Life look bad. And in an effort to seem like they aren�t price gouging, they (OnLive) rearrange the pricing to remain price gouging.
Passing the buck like it�s not your problem... when it really is... while repeating the whitewashing of OnLive... is just mind numbing. It�s your logo, it�s your company image, and it is being laughably and negatively misrepresented in public by a third party. This doesn�t look bad on just OnLive... it makes Linden Lab look bad because their logo is on it.
Let�s look at some actual comments:
Pay to play I already pay a premium for Second Life, not going to pay again per hour. This is a joke.
Have to create an OnLive account. OK this was dumb. You have to create their account to use it I guess. Ill stick with my Lumiya and from other reviews sounds like its a better deal anyway.
are you kidding me ? I spend enough in SL in one login let alone pay by the hour ...this should be free. ive waited for a viewer and they give us this crap. not only am i ticked but this just shows what Linden lab thinks of us faithful users. im sticking with Lumiya Viewer its priced right and I wouldnt mind spending $20 for Lumiya when they hammer out all the bugs! [paying for SL Go?...] I would rather develop a crack habit.
But it�s the price... and OnLive fixed that with a mere $9.95 per month subscription... right? Only if they�re betting that nobody is able to do basic math.
That�s the problem... they didn�t fix anything. They selectively interpreted the situation (and apparently Ebbe likes that interpretation as well), just like they did in creating SL Go to begin with. If anything they made it worse. Let me give an actual idea of what the problem is:
1. Charging $9.95 a month is only marginally better than $2.95 an hour.
2. Monthly fee ignores that people are paying the same for Premium already.
3. Monthly fee ignores that Lumiya viewer exists for a flat $2.95
4. Monthly fee ignores that SL has a freemium model where people spend money for L$ on top of Premium accounts.
5. Monthly fee ignores that the demographic target is also likely paying sim tier
This is what a �very positive response� actually looks like in the real world. I present the ratings and comments for Lumiya viewer on Play Store. Notice how the big graph is on the top with 5 stars and not at the bottom for 1 star?
Almost a full on viewer. For a flat fee of $2.95.
And the �alternative� is $9.95 per month. Because.... it has... a little extra polish?
Flat... fee. One time. Versus monthly subscription of $9.95 for something a little shinier. After they attempted to charge $2.95 per hour (price gouging).
They�re still keeping the $1.00 per hour option... which means they�re seriously holding onto the hourly fee.
Let�s work this out... a little math.
I pay for Lumiya... $2.50 for a nearly complete viewer. At the end of the year, I�ve spent $2.50 for a near full functional viewer. I might not have... uh... particles or something.
I install SL Go... I pay $9.95. At the end of the year, I have now spent $119.40 for a viewer that is a little prettier. And you really think that�s better? $120.00 a year to use a viewer... versus $2.50 flat fee.
Right angle to reality... people had a problem with the price, but OnLive fixed that today... by making it $120.00 per year.
God help me if I�ve opted for the $1.00 per hour option... given the average number of hours an SL user would be logged in. You�d spent that monthly fee per day.
So... uh... yeah, in a roundabout way this is about price.
Pretending to solve it by going from $2.50 per hour down to $9.95 per month just becomes insulting.
$2.50/flat versus $119.40/year
But then the whole part about the CEO of Linden Lab just passing the buck about it and regurgitating the whitewash...
Dude... it�s your problem. Your logo is plastered on it. Somebody authorized it. It is missing the point at every possible turn and attempting to bullshit their way into being successful by simply ignoring reality and the actual situation, hoping if they just keep pretending like everything is fine, and they get a couple of �SL Celebrities� to sell the line of bullshit, that people will blindly jump on board.
This looks bad on Linden Lab because it is authorized and associated with it.
This is what Linden Lab is now associated with. And you�re ok with that, and even making it a point to justify it by reading the prepared statement from OnLive.
So why am I brow beating Ebbe?
As poignantly asked by Adeon Writer on Twitter.
Because literally any other CEO in a similar situation would be listening to the customers and not regurgitating the line of bullshit when they should know better. Linden Lab authorized the use and representation of their intellectual property by a third party � that third party is beholden to Linden Lab in the event of negative or poor representation of that brand � Not the other way around.
Any negative representation is a direct correlation to the brand/company that authorized it, and so when SL Go charges $2.50 per hour for something that their customers can get for $2.50 flat, and then are told OnLive made it �better� by lowering that fee to a meager $120 per year for what they ostensibly could get for $2.50 one time, it makes the company (Linden Lab) look very, very bad. And so, by direct correlation, that makes Ebbe Atlberg look very, very bad... and only makes it a thousand times worse when he passes the buck and justifies it by spitting out the prepared statement from Onlive.
Some of us apparently can do math. I�m pretty sure $2.50 is lower than $120.
And also the realization that the sort of person who would actually be the demographic for SL Go are the same people already paying for Premium accounts in SL on a monthly basis, paying for sim tiers, paying for L$ to buy things in-world, and -
If you think they�re going to shell out another $120 per year for a fsking viewer when it�s sitting side by side with a $2.50 Lumiya viewer, you�re...
Delusional... doesn�t even... begin.
Arrogance doesn�t even begin to cover this. Flatly saying they�ve received a very positive response when they clear as day have not, and attempting to push it off on just being $2.50 per hour price issue, and then saying they fixed it by charging $120 per year, roughly the same as what people are already flipping paying for the Premium account in-world, not including additional L$ purchases, and not including the likelihood of monthly tier payments...
Hey, we heard you�re pissed off about us having the balls to charge you $2.50 per hour to use a viewer on your tablet, so we�ve decided to cut you a break and charge only $120 per year. Oh, and we lowered the hourly fee to $1.00 per hour just in case you change your mind. On top of your pre-existing Premium Account fee. And all the money you spend in-world on L$. And the monthly tier payments... but remember, Particles!
Go ask Onlive why they�re making Second Life look like a bullshitting, out-of-touch, price-gouging, delusional joke in public. Because Ebbe sure as hell isn�t going to answer you with anything but a prepared statement written by OnLive.
Yeah, I�m being rough on Onlive and Ebbe about all of this.
Because at this point, the bullshit has reached epic proportions and is inexcusable.
Ok... I�m done. There is so much stupid at this point that I concede.
It�s unsalvageable.
download file now