I had never seen Second Life being played before (other than here), but the thing that immediately hit me during Professor MacLeod's lecture was how easy it is to meet up in Second Life. She simply told the class her avatar's name and within a few minutes, several class members joined her in her office area. This ease of access obviously makes it easy for distributed groups to find each other and act together. It was mentioned how companies such as IBM already use Second Life to hold virtual meetings and other organized activities. I think that Second Life could serve as a more "professional" chatroom. It would be much easier to create a virtual classroom or lecture hall inside the game than in an IM program. Also, simply positioning avatars in certain ways can affect how people will behave. If the instructor was standing in front of a crowd, it would be clear they were in charge. Conversely, everybody is equal in an email thread or chatroom, for better or worse.
However, there are clearly drawbacks to using Second Life for collaboration. As always, deception is an issue. Professor MacLeod's avatar's wings were clearly fake...but what if she had appeared as a fifteen year old? Or an old man? We discussed avatars in 2450, and all of those pitfalls definitely apply here. Also, while I said the game could be a "professional" chatroom, it's important to remember that that isn't the same as an actual conference room. There will be less incentives to behave and be respectful if the offender can hide behind a virtual avatar.
Professor MacLeod also discussed different norms on Social Life. I've never played it (is "played" even the right term?) so I was a bit lost. As a result, newbies that don't know the jargon or the customs might be left behind. While one of the strengths of Second Life could be a close-knit, easy to assemble community, it needs to be in balance with not excluding outsiders. Overall, though, it seems that using the game would be an interesting way to shake up a group's routine. Even if it isn't ideal for all settings, I can definitely see how it might be worth trying out.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I think it depends on what time of group is using Second Life... for something like IBM it seems to make sense because there are so many people that not everyone can meet at once. Either way, the start up costs are pretty high in terms of learning the norms and slang and the system in general. However, using it for a small group might not be worth the trouble.
ReplyDeleteYeah I agree with you that using SL to hold virtual business meetings holds potential. It is certainly more formal than an IM chat box. I think this is because of the visual cues SL would provide, given that the virtual room resembles a real world conference room, and the avatars are appropriately dressed in business suits. I think a 3D simulation of a real-world business meeting would prompt people psychologically to behave as they would in a real meeting. I think in such a case, the fact that there are high start up costs, as Emily mentions, makes the whole process more formal. You don't just sign on to AIM and start a chat room. You have to sign on to SL, have it load, and then teleport yourself to the location. This sense of "going to a place" that SL provides could make for a convincing experience.
ReplyDelete