Google has finally gotten into the virtual reality market with Lively. As an early member of the Boston Computer Society’s Virtual Reality Group circa 1993, I have a longstanding interest in virtual worlds and keep up to date with SecondLife and to some extent MMORPG’s like WorldOfWarCraft as well as avatar-based chat.
Google thinks Lively will encourage even more people to dive into alternate realities because it isn’t tethered to one Web site like Second Life, and it doesn’t cost anything to use. After installing a small packet of software, a user can enter Lively from other Web sites, like social networking sites and blogs.
The Lively application already works on Facebook, one of the Web’s hottest hangouts, and Google is working on a version suitable for an even larger online social network, News Corp.’s (NWS, Fortune 500) MySpace.
I haven’t gotten to a PC to try Lively yet. I’m not expecting too much gee-wiz action, but it Google’s attempt at going after the customized avatar market could certainly have a ripple effect on avatars, chat and virtual dating companies. Notice how I didn’t say SecondLife? Lively is based on rooms. Don’t think of this as a complete immersive environment in a web browser. You can’t fly around, yet.
Here’s a shot of Lively. Not bad. The customization looks fair. Looks a lot like IMVU. No wonder, Lively’s head of 3D, Mel Guymon, was one of IMVU’s five co-founders. Google offered to buy IMVU in October 2005, right about when development on Lively started. All of the co-founders rejected the offer except for Guymon, who later left the company to work at Google.
Established four years ago, IMVU did not come out of stealth mode until just a few weeks ago, announcing that it had reached over 20 million registered users and that it now offers 1.7 million items in its virtual goods catalog. According to VC firm Menlo Ventures, IMVU generates $1 million in revenue per month through its micro-payments economy. The service offers virtual credits which users can purchase and spend on user-created goods.
Worlds In Motion, a new blog to me, has the details. IMVU landed $9 million in VC money in 2006 and only recently came out of beta.
Here’s a list of the most popular rooms in Lively, after being online for 24 hours or so.
WeeMe is simliar. I’ve always liked Yahoo Avatars. I’m not 12 and I use IM all day and haven’t really cared about being able to move about much, but by now I though Yahoo would at least let my avatar sit down. He’s been standing for 4 years and must be tired.
What does this mean for OmniDate when you can create a similar environment in the browser based on Google API’s, platform and data-sharing?
I worked with a startup that wanted to do browser-based immersive 3D environments for advertisers similar to Flash back in 2000. We had a solid toolkit, compelling experiences and a good team, although in the back of my mind I knew that Flash would continue to improve and as computers got more powerful, it would be harder and harder to fight Flash’s 90-something percent adoption rate worldwide. I have the same feeling about Lively and a number of virtual-dating applications.
Omnidate is obviously more focused on the dating market, with built-in interactivity in the form of quizzes, customizable audio and flirts. I would hope can integrate with dating sites to leverage the data in people’s profiles as well.
Lively is going to be more of a platform for many different types of virtual/avatar/chat applications. It will be cool to see it running on my iPhone at some point.
One big difference between Omnidate and Lively is that Google has no plans to sell advertising in Lively. But that doesn’t mean you can’t wrap the experience in ads. Figuring out how to read the metadata in Lively and tie into Google Adwords will be key.
I wonder how long it will take for someone to replicate key Omnidate features in Lively and make it widget for social networks, blogs and dating sites?
More on Lively.
