mysitenotyours.com

A question often asked by those that have never entered a virtual world is “Why would anyone spend their time in such places?” Rather frequently that question is followed by a comment like “They should stop working on their Second Life and get a first one!” or some other variation on the theme.

So why do people play Second Life? Why do they play World of Warcraft? Why do they enter into any virtual world at all? Isn’t the real one enough for them? Or are they just loners, scared of real human interaction?
The main reason anyone enters these worlds is a social one. Being in these worlds is a very social experience. I know, this seems to fly in the face of perceptions, right? I mean, those of you that do not play are probably picturing a pasty troll sitting in his basement, never seeing the light of day, just killing orcs and never talking to anyone except, perhaps, the pizza delivery guy.

Yet this perception is false. The reality is that being a part of these worlds has a massive social aspect. These worlds do not work, in fact, without this social structure.

First, let’s look at games like World of Warcraft. The idea of “soloing” – or playing the game by yourself – is not unknown. But it is difficult, if not outright impossible, to get through the more difficult aspects of the game without a team. To this end, players can team up with other players in order to face a far more difficult challenge than they could on their own. These teams are not usually random either. Really good teams are made up of diverse “classes” of characters that can each bring something different to the team. For example, one class might be the team’s healer. The healer won’t fight any creatures, but will stand a little away from the fighting and heal his or her comrades while they do the fighting. Other classes are warrior classes, they will obviously do the fighting. But not all fighting classes just raise a sword and hit something. Some might cast spells in order to do damage from a distance because they cannot get hit much without “dying”. Others fight hand-to-hand, and can take more damage, so they stay close up so that their spell-casting friends can avoid being hurt.
The scenario above is a simple one too. Teams can get every complex, with each team-member assigned to do a very, very specific thing in each fight. This level of teamwork would be envied in the real world.

So how do people find teams to fight with? One way is to join a guild. Guilds are very large groups of players (sometimes hundreds of players) that come together to share resources, to find people that want to team up and to just talk -because the game isn’t always about fighting. Sometimes people become friends during the course of the game and so spend time in guildhalls or other meeting places just to chat. After all, if you make an in-game friend who lives on the other side of the earth, seeing them in person is not a likely event.

The result is a massive world full of wizards, warriors, evil goblins and … a massive social network.
Second Life, on the other hand, is a little different. There are no battles of good vs evil. Second Life is modeled after our first lives. There are shops, cars, homes and more. So why be in Second Life if it is so much like the first one?
In this case the social aspect of it is the whole reason it exists. People are in Second Life to interact with other people. That interaction could come in the form of a conversation, a sales transaction, teaching a class or just about any other way you can imagine. However, while you might know some people in the town you live in, odds are not everyone shares your interest in, say, cats that wear sweaters. Yet in Second Life you can find lots of people that love cats in sweaters. You can even argue with people from a rival group of some kind. Say, people that love cats in hats.

Others use it for more serious purposes. Like IBM. IBM has multiple “private islands” on Second Life where they can hold events for their employees. They even have meeting centers where actual business meetings happen. This allows for IBM workers located around the world to “meet” in the same room. They have found that doing this is better than a simple conference call because after the meeting ends, people stick around to talk to their colleagues, just as they might do in a real-world meeting.
Should these virtual worlds act as a social replacement then?

No. Consider it an enhancement. It is fantastic for those that live far apart. They can interact in many more ways than the phone, e-mail or instant messenger allow for. Yet it is not a replacement. There is still no facial expression. There is no chance to shake someone’s hand. Huge parts of what we consider “human interactions” are missing in virtual worlds.
Yet you cannot think that everyone that spends time in these worlds is a loner. Odds are they have many, many friends in the virtual world. It is just that instead of their names being “Sally” or “Fred” the names are “Jabberwocky281” and “GoblinKillah.”
Now, there is a huge thread that does connect Second Life and World of Warcraft together: they are, in the end, entertainment. When you watch TV you see the people on the screen act out their lives and are entertained by this. In World of Warcraft you can actually be the character. You can write their story yourself and interact with others writing their tale of adventure and heroism (or of villainy if you are so inclined).

Consider the joy in that – have you ever watched a TV show and wished you could be part of that world? Or that you could at least write an episode or two? If so, than these worlds might be for you. In Second Life you can create a sitcom of your own design. You can have your character, or “avatar” as they are more commonly called, do just about anything you want. The result is that you are making your own entertainment, not just letting Hollywood dictate the entertainment to you.
Right now with the writers’ strike going on, perhaps there has never been a better time to check out these virtual worlds. Who, after all, is better at writing a story you would like to see than you yourself?

Besides, isn’t an interactive form of entertainment better than a passive one? Television is about as passive as you can get. I love television, don’t get me wrong. I am not condemning the medium. In fact, I really want Chuck and Pushing Daisies back on the air soon! C’mon people! Settle the strike already! However, as wonderful as TV can be, other, more interactive forms of entertainment can be better. Reading is more interactive since you must picture the settings, the people, everything, in your mind. Online entertainment allows you to take some of the pictures in your mind and express them right there on the screen in front of you.

In the end, we all have our ways of both interacting with people and entertaining ourselves. No one form is better than the other (unless you really do put sweaters on cats). So next time you are lamenting that new episodes of Heroes are not forthcoming check out an online world. You might be surprised at what you find there.

Note: this was written by me and originally posted on the Rising Tide blog.

Matthew Uncategorized

If you visit Google Labs on a regular basis (and really, who doesn’t?) you might have noticed a recent addition: Lively.

Lively is Google’s answer to Second Life: A virtual world where people can interact on-line in rooms that are already created or created by themselves. The rooms hold up to 20 people at a time. These avatars can chat, place furniture and do some interaction like shaking hands, hugging and smashing people with giant anvils.  More on that later.

This project, like so many others, is a result of Google’s “20 percent time” policy. Google workers spend 20% of their time at Google innovating and creating new products.

So is this some kind of “Second Life Killer”? No. There is no currency or a way to create new content for the world. Avatar creation is also very limited. There are not a lot of choices or ways to make the avatar really stand out. Second Life, in theory, allows thousands to interact at once while Lively only allows 20.

The biggest difference is that upon creating a “room” in Lively it can be embedded in a blog or other Website so that others can visit the room and, in theory, learn more about the creator and their personality. Another difference is that it works in IE or FireFox (Windows only right now) and doesn’t require a whole separate application like Second Life.

Additionally this works with Facebook accounts. So I could go into my Facebook account and create a room that my friends can see and interact in. In fact for the purposes of research for this blog (at least, that is the excuse I am using) I will be doing that. Facebook friends, you have been warned.

I did, briefly, enter the world to get a better idea of what it is like. Keeping in mind that this is Beta, the avatar creation tools are very limited, except for hair styles. It has a lot of hair styles.

The first room I entered was a small island that had, inexplicably, the song “If” by Bread playing. That song played over and over and over. That song does not deserve such a high level of replay.

After walking around and being confused at the large amount of furniture strewn around the island (the game does have furniture that can be placed around by users) I left. I moved on to a room that was a recreation of a room at the Google Headquarters. It was there that I was struck by a giant anvil by an unknown assailant.  My avatar was squashed for a bit, but he recovered.

I only spent a short time in the world, enough to get an idea of the controls and what it all looked like. At this time I will spare you a review until I can spend more time in this world. Needless to say I will be keeping a close eye on this entry of Google’s. Not everything they have done has been a hit to be sure. However, when Google is involved, it is always worth watching.

Note: this was written by me and originally posted on the Rising Tide blog.

Matthew Uncategorized

If there is one thing Wikipedia has proved, it is that a pretty good reference of information can be built using the mass mind of people around the world, contributing to their online encyclopedia. Sure, there are mistakes, but thanks to their mass-edit concepts, many of those mistakes are then corrected by others who know better or who just plain watch to ensure solid fact-checking. It is far from perfect, but more people are using Wikipedia as a resource than Britannica online.

With that in mind, more and more things are getting the “wiki” treatment. But perhaps one of the more interesting concepts is the idea of architecture and city planning taking advantage of mass collaberation over the Internet.

Studio Wikitecture is attempting to do just that. They are gathering together people from all over in order to design buildings and even do city planning. Of course, ideas can be thrown together and discussed. The real trick is in applying these ideas.

To build an entire building would cost a rather lot. And would an investor really want to pile money on this concept? A mistake in Wikipedia might mean a lower grade on your term paper. A mistake in a building design could lead to a structural collapse.

With that in mind, the group is doing what everyone else seems to be doing these days: Turning to Second Life. They have created a group in Second Life whose purpose is to design and build buildings using this mass mind concept.

Using tools they and i3Dnow created, members of the group (which anyone can join) can build objects or vote on existing objects and designs. This YouTube Video shows this concept in action. I highly recommend watching it. Not only is it cool, but I have simplified things a bit. This video shows how it works in more detail.

Recently the group entered the Open Architecture Network’s Asian Challenge. The OAN is part of the Architecture for Humanity project, which is committed to improving living conditions world-wide. The group did exceptionally well, taking Third Place as well as the Founder’s Award for their innovative design methods.

Are we looking at the future of building design? Of city planning? More? Perhaps. This is still very early on and certainly the buildings haven’t yet been built in the real world. Still, this somehow feels momentous. That in some way the concept of mass collaboration is now going further than gathering knowledge; steps are now being taken to use this knowledge and apply it.

Note: this was written by me and originally posted on the Rising Tide blog.

Matthew Virtual Worlds

In last week’s post I mentioned Wikipedia and its use as a resource. I had also mentioned that it isn’t always accurate. However, this isn’t due to a lack of diligence of its contributors.

If anything, the contributors care a bit too much sometimes.

You see, when you visit a Wikipedia article, you may notice some tabs across the top. Three of them – “Discussion”, “edit this page” and “history” tell you a lot about a given article. History shows you the past versions of the page, when they were changed and who changed them (minus an ID it will show IP). Edit this page allows you (yes YOU) to edit a given entry. Discussion is just how it sounds – a discussion on the article.

In some cases the “facts” are in question or are different depending on point of view. So what happens when “facts” collide? An “edit war” – where different people keep changing “facts” back and forth based on what they perceive the reality to be.

Some things are basic enough facts that no one (seriously) argues them. If you step off of a cliff with no form of support you will fall. If you stay out in the sun too long without protection you will get burned. And we all know that the Tiger is the most powerful cat in the world. Or do we? This article alone has over 500 edits done to it, many of them having to do with this very question. Are they really stronger than a lion? How about a bear? Ok, so a bear is not a cat, but shouldn’t this be discussed and mentioned and argued ad nauseum?

If you agree that this is one of the most burning questions of our time, than head on over to the Tiger entry on Wikipedia to join in on this, the most serious question of our time.

If, however, you feel that the argument is silly then head on over here to see more of the lamest edit wars in Wikipedia history. A very very funny look at the most “burning” questions of the day. Also, for the record, a bear could totally beat a tiger. I mean, come on, this is even a discussion?

Note: This was written by me and originally posted on the Rising Tide blog.

Matthew Technology

McDonald’s has recently launched a virtual world aimed at kids that enjoy their Happy Meals. Located at happymeal.com this world is built for kids to interact in.

It is currently still in Beta – so it is a touch buggy. However, if you want your kids to have a good time in a virtual world while learning how awesome hamburgers and fries are, this is the place for you!

The game itself is free. However, they do give additional bonus objects and prizes if the kids enter in codes found inside of their Happy Meal from McDonald’s.  So have no doubt, this exists to get kids to beg (even more) for Happy Meals.

There is also a vote going on to name this new Virtual World. The options are (and I am making none of these up):

1. Scaddlmon (McDonald’s with the letters all mixed up)

2. McD Zone

3. McDonaldlandia

4. McD Island

5. McWorld
The site appears to be “safe” for kids in terms of their personal information. They don’t ask for much. The child can make a friend list and talk to those friends, but only through pre-set phrases (at least at the moment).

Now, I have a 3-year-old daughter. Whenever we pass a McDonald’s she gets excited and starts talking about how we should stop at “Old McDonald’s” - like the song … ee yi ee yi oooo – I know it is spelled MacDonald in the song. I have tried this argument. It fails. Anyhow, she wants to stop not because their food is any good, but because they have those play areas for kids. This leads to a long, drawn out conversation in which I say “No” and she asks why and I say because the food is terrible and she argues that it isn’t and I explain that it isn’t healthy and she explains that she can play.

And so the conversation continues.  For a really, really long time.

In a couple of years when she is online playing games (I am realistic about this, I figure it will happen about then) I can have the continued joy hearing about Old McDonald and their awesome virtual world called Scaddlmon and how we need to buy Happy Meals so that she can get her avatar a new hat or something.

So I have that to look forward to.

It will be interesting to see if this venture works for McDonald’s. Are kids ready to socialize in a virtual world? Will they want to go to one connected with McDonald’s or will they want one connected to Second Life, which they see their older brother and sister playing? It should be interesting to watch and see if this type of venture becomes a successful marketing tool.

Note: This was written by me and originally posted on the Rising Tide blog.

Matthew Virtual Worlds

What if there was a virtual world that looked an awful lot like the world right outside your window? A photorealistic world where skyscrapers towered above your head. One where every window you see really has a room behind it. What if accessing this world was as easy as pointing your Web browser or even your cell phone to a site that hosts this information – with no software to install at all? Sound to good to be true? Well, it very well might be true.

LivePlace.com briefly had a video showing such a place on their site. The video was taken down not long after TechCrunch found it and contacted one of the apparent owners of LivePlace.com, Brad Greenspan (he is one of the co-founders of MySpace).
However you can still see this incredible video at TechCrunch’s site, located here.

Not only is this world stunning in its looks (it really is quite realistic looking) but the claim is made that it requires no software installation to run. This would mean near-universal access, with Windows, Mac and Linux all able to access the same world.
Additionally they claim everything is rendered in real time. So what does this mean? It means that the world is not a static one that is simply waiting for people to see it. It is literally being drawn and redrawn as people access the world, make changes to it and even simply walk around it.

Normally this takes a lot of computing power on the part of the user. However, the technology that they are using means that the rendering is done on their side of things and requires little computing power on the part of the device accessing the world. That is why they claim that even a web-enabled cell phone could visit.

It would be easy to see how a world this realistic with this level of accessibility could break virtual worlds right into the mainstream. This could be a massive breakthrough. Assuming that this is whole concept is real.

Of course, this video was posted on their site with no real context. No one from LivePlace is talking and the video is now gone. So for now, we just have to hope that this glimpse into the world is real. Until then, this is just a cool video showing us what virtual worlds might be like in the months and years ahead.

Note: This was written by me and originally posted at the Rising Tide blog.

Matthew Virtual Worlds

In movies and television there is an idea known as “product placement.” In addition to hitting you with advertisements your favorite characters in movies and TV are drinking coca-cola and eating McDonalds, not to mention using a Macintosh computer.

The result, the advertisers hope, is that you too will use these products. Not just because your favorite actor is using it, but because it is an everyday object – something that you see all the time and therefore become conditioned to think of as “normal.” If, for example, you see everyone on TV using Macs you might assume that in the real world a huge number of people are using them too. This might then, in turn, get you to want and perhaps buy a Mac.

This same strategy is also used in Virtual Worlds. Second Life and There.com , for example, are huge pervasive worlds that also have a lot of real-world products in them. Avatars can wear K-Swiss shoes, for example. In this way, it has the same effect as it does in movies and on TV – while walking around these worlds you see people wearing those K-Swiss shoes. You might then later see that same shoe in a real-world store and decide that you want it. It looked cool in the virtual world, so why not this one? Or perhaps your avatar uses that shoe and you want it so that you can match your avatar. Whatever the reason, you find you want it.

Recently There.com has signed deals with 4 new retailers.  What is making these entries interesting is that they are not building giant islands or areas devoted to their products. Rather they are making these products available for avatars to buy or get through other means in the virtual world in general. No need to go to K-Swiss Island – they are not going to have one. Instead, you can go to a shop on There.com and get the shoes.

The buying experience will feel more real as a result. This form of advertising may prove to me much more successful, as a result, than devoting an entire island to Coca-Cola (as Coke in fact did on There.com).  This, then, is much closer to what is already being done in movies and on TV.

Others have also tried this in the past and I feel this is a better route to take. After all, a McDonald’s themed world or portion of a world doesn’t interest me in the slightest. However, integrate everything into the existing virtual world, rather than creating a whole new area or world, seems smarter and makes the experience feel more realistic. Realism, odd as it may seem to some, is what people are going for in places like Second Life and There.com.

Note: This is written by me and originally posted at the Rising Tide blog.

Matthew Virtual Worlds

Believe it or not, there is a segment of society that makes a living (or at least a side-job) gathering items in Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games (MMORPGs) and then selling them for real money. So, for example, they might gather up tens of thousands of in-game currency (typically “gold” and “platinum”) and then resell it to other players too lazy to gather the money themselves or just too rich with actual cash to know what to do with it.

This “industry” has been around quite a while now. At first, it started with actual players who had created an avatar who had a lot of items and cash that were either leaving the game or just wanted to make some extra bucks. A former co-worker of mine did just that on Asheron’s Call back when that game was at its peak in popularity. He sold off his money, weapons, armor and characters for real-world money. He earned enough to buy a nice car with the money. That is correct: He bought a car by selling fake, in-game items.

Now, however, this has turned into an industry that makes money; A lot of money. A recent study done by Manchester University puts the money earned as high as $500 million dollars. Games like World of Warcraft, Everquest, and Lineage are all plagued by this problem.

The study also admits that because this selling of gold and items is, at best, border-line legal the number could be much higher.

These “gold farmers” (as these people are called that gather up in-game money only with the intent of selling it later) are in laborers coming out of China. These “farmers” are paid about $150 per month to gather up gold to resell for actual money. It is believed that there are 400,000 such people employed world-wide with 80% coming from China.

Now, being caught engaging in such activities does mean that the account-holder loses their account. But it is hard to prove, particularly if they are selling via a parent-company.

Anyone who has spent any amount of time playing MMOs knows about gold farmers. They send in-game spam shouting about how they have money and in-game items to sell cheap. They send out e-mail spam as well. So knowing that this happens is not a surprise. Seeing how large it is, however, comes as a huge shock.

In my mind it was one thing when my former co-worker sold off his on-line stuff and bought a car. He didn’t play the game with that intent – he was just done playing the game and thought it would be a great way to get some extra cash. No harm done, just some people with more money than sense bought his stuff and all sides were happy.

However, this gold-farming as a profession takes the concept too far. These are not people playing for the enjoyment of the game. These are people playing as a career to raise money and items for other people who for whatever reason want the cool stuff more than they want to actually play the game.

Worse, it is turning into some kind of sweatshop in developing nations.

So is there a solution for this problem? Not really – trading items in-game (for other in-game items) is a legit and large part of any MMORPG. So policing this by the game companies becomes difficult. Perhaps they could monitor those that seem to be trading too often?

But beyond that, those that play the games need to take responsibility and not buy items like this. Get the items through in-game trade or by playing the game. Purchasing powerful items, in-game currency and even high-level avatars just wreaks the game for everyone else (and believe me, everyone knows who you are when they see you, a level-50 guy, asking how to do basic tasks) and is now, officially, socially irresponsible.

Note: This was written by me and originally posted at the Rising Tide blog.

Matthew Virtual Worlds

Second Life has been used for a lot of things. It has been used by IBM to hold meetings, or for architectural organizations to create test homes or to sell products or test market products. Now, however, it is being used for another purpose that I must admit, never would have occurred to me: To train Border Guards.

Canada is now using Second Life as a training tool for their border guards. As you can see in this amazing video, they have set-up a simulated border crossing where the guards-in-training ask the person attempting to cross the same kind of questions they would ask in a real-life situation.

So rather than just hearing about it in class and then taking a test based on it, now they get a hands-on look at what it is really like, but without endangering the border by having the trainees at real crossing stations.

So has this been successful? Since implementing this program students taking the “interview skills” portion of the test have shown great improvement. The average score went from 58% on that portion of the test to 86% - a 28% improvement. That is a huge improvement.

Clearly using Second Life as a training tool is working exceptionally well in this case. I am sure that other nations are following this news closely and I have no doubt that others will soon follow down this path.

Once dismissed as something for “geeks” and “just a game”, virtual worlds are again proving their worth in the real world. Now they are even helping to protect our borders.

Note: This was written by me and originally posted at the Rising Tide blog.

Matthew Virtual Worlds

In most all virtual worlds it is possible to own virtual property. That can come in the form of virtual land, clothing, furniture a house even a virtual-based business. Some people end up with a lot of virtual property that in real-world dollars adds up to a fair sum.

So what happens when someone dies in the real world, leaving behind all of this virtual property? Considering that people actually make a living selling items in these virtual worlds, this is becoming a serious issue.

Swedish-based Mindark is looking at this very issue. They are looking at arranging wills for people that play their game. To be clear: These are real wills – not virtual ones. That way property in their virtual world goes somewhere without legal wrangling over a virtual estate.

Yes, we have reached this point.

“There is land in the game of considerable value, which if the player would die, is uncertain who would claim [it],” says project manager Carl Uggla.

That is true. What is also true is that if there is something of considerable value, governments want to tax it.

Enter: The Swedish IRS.

They are looking to tax virtual items. Not just real money made from those virtual items, but the virtual items themselves BEFORE they are even turned into real world money.

I must admit, the Swedish tax code is certainly tech-savvy!

The Swedish IRS says that in doing this it “validates” the business. I guess this means businesses that are not taxed are not valid. I am sure all of those non-taxed businesses are quite sad to hear that.

I understand taxing actual dollars made from the virtual world businesses but taxing virtual dollars?

I guess it is true what the late US President Ronald Regan once said about government’s role in business, “If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”

I can only hope the other governments of the world are not looking to Sweden for leadership on this. Otherwise I can only imagine the “fun” new tax forms as World of Warcraft players try and figure out if their Sword of Corruption is tax deductable because they earned it while playing the game at their day-job.

Note: This post was written by me and originally posted at the Rising Tide blog.

Matthew Virtual Worlds