Assignment 9: Joyce Lee (jl579)

Second Life as a technology used for collaboration has both drawbacks and advantages that are inherent in its structure, in being a massively multiplayer virtual world with an immensely vast internal map (distinguishing it from most online multiplayer games.) As a large collaboration between players to build a world, Second Life succeeds. Its avatar customization and the opportunities for players to immerse themselves in the world attracts people to the game, and Boellstorff has shown that veteran players are very welcoming to new players, or "newbies." Creativity tasks are therefore supported by Second Life.

Prof. McLeod also showed us that it was possible to conduct experiments in Second Life, as shown in one of the rooms of her 'House of Flames'. Even though one may think that actual physical presence is required for a test, her example proved otherwise. However, this is not true of all small-group activities.

As a whole, I believe small-group activities would be lacking in Second Life. In small groups, 'face time' is exceedingly important, and especially if working on something, having problems such as the aforementioned 'lag' and 'afk' status constantly impeding real-time conversation or progress may make relations more strained. Granted, the teleportation mechanic helps mitigate the negative effects of being in different virtual spaces, but teleportation is not enough (teleportation to some other player also requires prior communication first, based on the professor's demonstration.) It is similar to being in a group together, and having one of your members constantly zoning out - less work gets done that way. The physical limitations of Second Life, in the fact that players are simply not in the same literal place as each other, also impedes collaboration tasks that require members to check on each other's work after tasks have been delegated. In addition, because Second Life is a game in it of itself, the opportunity to slack off is too tempting for a serious work environment.

Generally, Second Life seems to work for large, open voluntary collaboration activities. The art galleries that Prof. McLeod showed us, for example, work because the contributors are driven by personal desire to work on the project. The large scale of Second Life's player base ensures that enough work ultimately gets done to constitute a proper gallery. Interviews such as the ones that Boellstorff carried out for his research would also work, since it is conversation-based, and does not require both parties submitting a proof of 'work done' at the end. Both of these examples are situations that still normally 'fit' into the frame of the Second Life game system - conversation is one of the basic functions supported, as well as creation.

Take that one step further, however, and for small group collaborations that are more "work" than play, it falls short. In this case, by "work", I refer to tasks such as word processing, collaboration activities that require real-life demonstrations, showcasing of physical products, etc. The lack of similar place and time makes coordinating too difficult in such a tight community, and the 'game' atmosphere lends itself to an initial impression of something not "business-like" to begin with. For now, at least, I believe Second Life is better suited to collaborations that rely on creative expression or 'verbal', textual communication.