Personally, Second Life has yet to really grab my attention. I had to create an avatar and set up an account for a project for my other class. My first experience on Second Life was not very positive. It was hard to use and I did not know any other avatars. There were many commands and buttons that I had no idea of what their function was. It took me forever to even figure out how to get my avatar to move and how to sit in a seat. In addition, I always thought Second Life was a place where you could really express your identity through your avatar, but I found that many people had the same avatar with just different variations of the same clothes. Maybe you can change your avatar as time goes by and you gather more materials, but I have not gotten to that point.
However, on the other hand, I think Second Life can definitely have its good points. Because it is collaborative you are able to work with other people, whether it is for work or purely social reasons. For example, as McLeod mentioned in her lecture, there are projects and centers, such as Metanomics and the Avatar Identity Research Center. There are also creations and builds, such as the Gallery of Reflexive Architecture and Acheron.
I find that Second Life has aspects of it that can be very beneficial, but only if you know what you are doing or if you know other avatars in the game. The collaborative programs are great if you need to work with others far away. Being able to build is also a good way to express yourself. However, I think if you do not know your way around Second Life or your Internet is slow then it could just take longer to get some things done as a collaborative group.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
i think that oftentimes people assume that a virtual world simulation modeled upon our real world is the best way to accomplish some tasks, when often it's not at all efficient. I think that, for tasks specifically related to Second Life and virtual worlds, Second Life would be an appropriate medium in which to conduct these experiments and analysis. But as far as real world tasks, I am unsure whether or not Second Life would be appropriate.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that the actual flexibility in Second Life is overrated. I have participated in the world and found it to be far less immersive than Boellerstoff would have you believe. My avatar was not as customizable as I would have liked, and I found most of the user generated content to be rather trite.
Second Life may have been hard for you to use, perhaps, because you aren't used to computer gaming in general? Second Life has many protocols that are common in computer games, (how to move, how to communicate, etc.) People with experience pick these things up very quickly - I sat next to a player who had just created her account, and she got used to the controls with relatively little explanation, and just a little experimentation.
ReplyDeleteThat aside, however, what specifically do you think Second Life would be a bad use for? Collaborative projects seem to succeed on Second Life, but also recall that these collaborations are limited to virtual creations that will exist in the game only. Should artists want to come together to create something in 'real life', would it be impossible to use SL to collaborate? (Would it be possible, for example, for one artist to be creating things at the site, and the other using Second Life to instruct people working on his behalf from a remote location? Would this be efficient?) What do you think?
I couldn't agree more- My first experience on second life was similar and very frustrating. It has discouraged me from returning. And I agree that it can definitely be beneficial in the collaborative aspect- I think the collaboration of many individuals can lead to more creative ideas and products- but again, you have to know what you're doing. As Prof McLeod said, newbies are the bottom of the barrel and I found that not many people are welcoming and accommodating to them.
ReplyDelete