Filed under: Fun, Internet, Google
Lively from Google going the way of the dodo
Not that we were huge fans of Lively to begin with, but I'm sure someone out there loved it. Right? No? Perhaps that explains Google's announcement that, "despite all the virtual high fives and creative rooms everyone has enjoyed in the last four and a half months, we've decided to shut Lively down at the end of the year." So grab those screenies before 2009 and your avatars and rooms go dead.
One or two of you may cry out in anguish as a few million vertices are silenced with the click of a mouse: "why Google, why?" Well, I'm sure it wasn't the fact that it was PC-only (and Firefox or IE7-only). Or that it wasn't the most stable thing Google has produced. Or that it was, ya know, like Second Life Lite but for chat. Because, clearly, the world needs a few zillion more Second Life-style chat clients, right?
If you are to believe Google, it's because they want to focus on their core business. You know, search and ads and apps that don't look like Animal Crossing. Besides, they can always roll this into Sketchup, so you could have a virtual barn raising. We can dream, can't we?
So, just how good at time waster games are you? Think you've got the stuff? Well, The World's Hardest Game 2.0 doesn't think you do.
Yes, amazingly, it's possible to have a sequel to a game called "The World's Hardest Game". It doesn't seem logically possible, since if the first one was actually the world's hardest, how could another one come along and share the moniker? It made me doubt the name in the first place. That is, until I tried the game.
The mechanics of the game are very simple. You are a small red square, ...
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
David said 2:07PM on 11-20-2008
"Going the way of the dodo" was a funny way to say it...good job.
Reply
Quikboy said 5:50AM on 11-21-2008
Pretty obvious it wasn't going to last. It was so slow, and I wasn't impressed.
Reply
Butler T. Reynolds said 12:34PM on 11-24-2008
Lively was even less interesting than my first life.
Reply