| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (21)

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 12:18AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
SL is a chat program with graphics.

Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 12:29AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yup, filled with crazy people who take it WAY to seriously.
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 1:12AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Both valid answers, despite them contradicting each-other. Certainly many users don't concern themselves with the content-creation and publishing aspects, or use it as a part of their businesses.

Very similar descriptions were used in the early days of film, when it was considered to be a meritless set of "flickering images on a white wall", which was mostly considered to be largely the product of crazy people who took it too seriously. We understood the stage, certainly, musicals and plays -- but cinema wasn't like those. It took decades for both audiences and filmmakers to understand the medium enough to develop it to stand on its own right.

Then television came along, and similar issues resurfaced. A new and different medium with new rules that everyone had to learn and contextualize before it made any sense.

Are you old enough to remember the prevailing attitudes about telephones? "Why don't you get off the phone and go and have a *real* conversation with a *real* person?" As a social tool, the telephone itself was considered without merit until comparatively recently -- The Internet is still groping towards that level of acceptance, and its been around for more than 30 years.
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 12:26AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No one can be *told* what Second Life is. You have to experience it for yourself.
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 1:19AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
WoW is a chat program with graphics.
What, there's a game involved? You're kidding!
I'm not interested in playing a game. I just want to socialise :)
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 1:51AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Thanks for that thought provoking post, Tateru.

I've already given up defining Second Life, for it is more than just a "chat program with graphics" as the above reply said. IMVU or Lively is more of his description, IMHO. Second Life has more functions and freedom than that.

Just that statement shows how much people are so grappled with what SL is, they attempt to belittle its presence by defining it that way. Perhaps the poster does not have enough experience in SL to prove that it is more than a "chat program with graphics". Pity.

People will always want to put something in a neat little box and categorize it, but I am not sure how a huge world like SL can be categorized, nor would I want it tucked in a neat box and labeled into something. It would mean the end of constantly innovating, of making it open to how we want it to be.
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 1:51AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I suppose part of the point is that if all you use it for is "chat with graphics" then that's all it really is for you. As Feldspar pointed out above, World of Warcraft is chat-with-graphics if you're not actively playing the game portion -- and certainly not every player is.

I seem to recall that Everquest had quite a strong graphical chat audience in its time also.
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 2:06AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
And Tateru, your first comment is spot on! Smart answer...:)
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 3:37AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Skype is a chat program with graphics too :P

Asking "what is second life" is like asking "what is art" - there's a medium there, there's what people do with it, and there's the relevance and focus it has to different people in different contexts.

Ask an artist, an art critic, and the average joe "what is art?" and you'll get very different answers. Amongst those undeduacated in art a discussion of the various processes and media will feature prominently - among critics and artists who deal with art every day, the actual tools and methods only feature when they're relevant to what's discussed.

The uneducated public and press tend to see virtual worlds like they see art - there is meaning in it for sure, but the tools used to make it are a large part of the mistique. So you have avatars, chat, and build stuff - the primary tools tell us little about the experience of actually inhabiting them.

Arguably all virtual environments are art in some form, even inhabiting your avatar can be seen as performance, so it's no surprise that explaining what they actually are requires a sophisticated vocabulary and experience. But if you don't talk about the tools - what have you got to point at?
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 3:57AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
With only a couple decades of virtual environments, we lack much of the grammar and the vocabulary to efficiently discuss and evolve the medium. The same thing happened with the evolution of film, and the evolution of television.
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 11:56AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Second Life is a virtual world space with real-time personal interaction via avatars--with the pretense of an economy. It is a money making machine for Linden Lab (some say they are putting $1 million in the bank each month) selling virtual land with the fantasy of free market capitalism. I agree with Pav that is a place for exhibitionism (yay, finally you can get naked in the street and scream and no one calls the police). Second Life will be remember as the first most eccentric commercial virtual world. It won't be remember as the best or the biggest.
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 7:02AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"That's why it annoys the crap out of people sometimes."

Isn't that the truth! I haven't ever been able to figure out why even people who spend a lot of time playing online games feel the need to scoff at other online games. It seems rather insecure of them.

Meanwhile, I'll go back to enjoying my first and second lives to the fullest, whatever category I fit into.
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 8:50AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nothing brings 'em out like a "What is [insert virtual world or social networking technology here] piece. Slow news day already?

I think the "What is the Internet for?" is a good retort, but only so far as it goes. The Internet /was built for a purpose/ as was Second Life. The WWW was a solution to a problem (cf. CERN) but Second Life must be considered - thus far and by description if not definition - a solution looking for problems.

Finally, FWIW and with all respect, I don't agree that we "lack much of the grammar and the vocabulary to efficiently discuss and evolve the medium" as Tateru points out. More to the point, I don't believe it is that lack which holds virtual worlds back. There was a point in "the evolution of film, and the evolution of television," where each was close to failing - especially television (you can look at the recent Discovery Channel documentary on the history of late night talk shows for an example) when those mediums were in dire risk of failing because they *weren't making money.*

They pulled through, eventually, but will virtual worlds?
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 11:22PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"The Internet /was built for a purpose/..."

Really? What is that purpose? Is there an RFC? And do you limit yourself to that purpose?
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 10:03AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Thxs, brilliant !
Referring to you, we translated your post in french : http://www.community-chest.com/2008/10/14/au-juste-cest-quoi-second-life/
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 12:47PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wait...

There's a tool that shells eggs?

No really - there is? I never knew that.
Seriously.

Heheh... cool.

Okay, and SL is simply to me "the grand social experiment."
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 4:09PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Thats one of the questions I'm asked most by residents on Help Islands and Welcome Areas. So many new residents come to Second Life looking for the 'game experience' aspect. They want to know what is there to do, once they understand there is no 'winner' and 'loser', no trophy or gold star to acquire. I try to draw comparisons between RL and SL, only that here your imagination is only limited by your skills to produce your SL dreams.
Thank you again, Tateru, for posting such a well thought, and concise essay on a timely question. Much appreciated.
Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 8:41PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm not scoffing at SL. There is no rancor intended when I say "SL is a chat program with graphics". I am not trying to belittle it. I play a lot of online games, and philosophically I'm an easygoing "whatever works for you" kind of guy.

But let's call a spade a spade. One thing that has always driven me nuts is how SL'ers keep on using these grandiose terms and descriptions in reference to SL. A 'sanitation engineer' is still a garbageman. (And there's nothing wrong with being a garbageman - let's just use plain language).

Reading through the responses has been very interesting. And I'll say this, Tateru's initial response ("Both valid answers...") was very well stated. However he killed me with his later comment "we lack much of the grammar and the vocabulary to efficiently discuss and evolve the medium" - what an absolutely ludicrous statement.

Another example of silly SL statements: "No one can be *told* what Second Life is. You have to experience it for yourself." - what a bunch of nonsense. This is the kind of stuff that makes me cringe.

I've said in the past that I don't think SL belongs on this blog. But to be clear, I harbour no ill-will towards it or its users. I am just not a fan of the hyperbole that tends to flow from its devotees.

:)

Reply

Posted: Oct 14th 2008 9:55PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Your comment is perfectly valid. For you, SL is whatever you think it is.

But I reject the notion that you can tell me what SL is for me.

There has been so much hyperbole surrounding SL it's not funny. Tateru's posts are typically not one of the places I find it, though.

It may be true that you already have the language - grammar and vocabulary - to express yourself with regards to the use of SL, but many other people lack that language. As a user of online games, you have the advantage there. If you have also been using SL for a couple of years, no doubt you have become accustomed to the language used. However, there are still many people to bring into the fold, if you like.

I'd love to see SL have it's own blog. Perhaps then people would stop mistaking it for a game, and be open to other ideas about what SL can be.
Reply

Posted: Oct 15th 2008 6:15PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"SL is a chat program with graphics"

I spent two hours in world last night and didn't chat.

I must be doing it all wrong.
Reply
| 1 | 2 |
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Joystiq

WoW

TUAW