Is Second Life a game?

Oh yet another dig that is suppose to incite anger?

Report forum assholes.

That's okay. I probably wouldn't have grown up knowing him anyway, because by all accounts he was a bum, so the intervention by the 18-wheeler was probably not a bad turn of fate.

Still, as I said, the irony would be significant.

Blah, nm, TMI.

No I think thats like saying that SL is or isn't run on a computer.

And the ability to play games at no point appeared in my post - what I was talking about is that what second life is changes from person to person - because it is to them as they perceive and experience it...

Which is much like liking or not liking a particular vegetable.

Because it isn't a game to you - doesn't make that true for me, and that in turn doesn't make it not true for you.

Siggy.

You know, this entire 'debate' can be boiled down to a single statement which, if true for you, indicates a need for professional assistance (not necessarily psychological, but if the shoe fits...):

This is a real place where real life occurs.

This is the same issue/problem/debate that happens in many games, across many game forums. You have a subset of any playerbase that need to have what they do in these places hold deep meaning. The reasons vary, but almost always spring from a lacking in the real world that is met by the virtual one.

The problem I have with game developers that utilize this and feed both its development and strength is fourfold:

1) They design an environment where the illusion of reality may be sustained AND,
2) They design a dynamic wherein the 'reward' of false reality can only be maintained by choosing to continue one's suspension of reality and psychological investment in the game,
3) They design a system of play that rewards this break with reality on social and psychological levels and punishes (be it by access to content, status, rate of progression, etc.) any and all attempts to enjoy the game at anything other than the level of addictive play,
4) They create elaborate systems to check and balance any change in playstyle, both to reinforce addictive play as well as make exit from play as difficult as possible.

The MMO genre in particular are guilty of this.

Linden Labs itself is heading down this path.

Second Life is a game. By business, by nature, by every definition of the word. I feel for the people who choose to pretend this is not the case... moreso for the ones who did and have since had that illusion shattered. It is never pretty.

If Linden Labs wants to be other than or more than a game, they need to get their heads out of the sand and license their product so it can grow and become 'the platform' they claim they want it to be..... no child grows by being smothered by its parent.

Gee Cienna, if we didn't understand your position the first dozen or so times you told us, I think we do now, what with the psychoanalysis and pity stuff. Good grief.

Like I said before, tolerance is the key to this issue.

I could care less what the next person defines SL as, let alone make full character judgements about them if my definition differs from theirs.

To each their own I suppose.

And what exactly would "this" be? The forums? My desk? The IM conversation I am having right now in SL?

This all depens on what exactly the definition of "is" is.

...if people feel that their virtual life holds deep meaning for them, then it does.

Which makes my point -- the product offering is not where the meaning lies. The product is not the meaning. It is when people transfer meaning to the product that issues arise.

Thanks.

Issues for you perhaps.

One might say, that if you are affected enough by other people's viewpoints on an issue of this sort, that is, one which isn't so cut and dried for them as it is for you, so much so as to compel you to make insulting statements about their mental states, that you may be the one in need of "professional help". One might say that. But then that wouldn't be very tolerant or respectful of opinions that differ from their own, now would it?

I am fairly sure that the first several times you stated your viewpoint, folks understood where you stand on it. But reinforce if you must, and whatever you do, don't hold back or anything. Ok, then I will assume you didn't mean it when you very clearly insinuated that you think people who view SL are in need of a head examination.

Assuming the motivations of another is generally a good way to insure you never understand them.

As for the rest, let's just say you're missing the point.

As for what you're fairly sure of, you may wish to check your premise.

Words are not ineffective. People's use of words is ineffective. That ineffectiveness is becoming more and more pronounced now that it is considered cool to create your own meaning and hold forth that your personal definition of something is more important than whether or not anyone around you understands what you're trying to convey.

Personally, I see it as a sign of lack of thought. Communication is the process of conveying thought precisely to another mind. Language is one of several tools used to do so. Misuse, poor use, and abuse of language does nothing to support communication, and much to obstruct it.

In my opinion, people who hold personal definition as trump over communication may as well admit to indulging in linguistic masterbation. They really don't care if anyone else understands them or not, they just like hearing themselves talk.

To disreguard anyones opinion of what they call entertainment, fun or a game is a mistake IMO. So "game over" according to LL. Ok everyone step from behind the curtain and please use your rl names. Please take off your costumes, be it furry, baby, monster, vampire or elf. LL please take away the abilities in which some of us have viewed this as a game. Leader boards, development bonuses, burning life, which ever allows ppl to percieve this as a game/ a forum of entertainment.

Can we have it both ways? Well we could untill the rules were changed.

Cat

PS: by the way apparently i was not as "crazy, parinoid or dillusional" as everyone has suggested when I said LL would be in the linden $ business soon enough. I told you so again.

I'm not sure anyone would call you crazy, paranoid or delusional for those reasons.

Cienna, I have taken the liberty of placing in bold some of the ideas that I feel are important to the "not a game/is, too, a game" topic.

You have, I think, spoken accurately when you claim "people's use of words is ineffective," and, yes, language is but one tool of many in our communicative arsenal; it is, I think, the most complex and the most slippery.

However, language does not exist outside of its communicative role. As such, it can be considered to be 'community owned.' In addition, language, its denotations and connotations, shift constantly. The words and the syntax that comprise language are a constantly evolving, ever-changing organism. If we take this for granted, is there any way to ever "convey thought precisely to another mind"?

It seems to me that, in the assignment of the words "personal definition," you are simply pointing to the fact that you do not wish to be part of the group assigning a particular definition.



That said, I will retire to the bathroom with a copy of Webster's.

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.' 'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'

Alice was too much puzzled to say anything; so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. 'They've a temper, some of them - particularly verbs: they're the proudest - adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs - however, I can manage the whole lot of them! Impenetrability! That's what I say!'

'Would you tell me, please,' said Alice, 'what that means?'

'Now you talk like a reasonable child,' said Humpty Dumpty, looking very much pleased. 'I meant by "impenetrability" that we've had enough of that subject, and it would be just as well if you'd mention what you mean to do next, as I suppose you don't mean to stop here all the rest of your life.'

'That's a great deal to make one word mean,' Alice said in a thoughtful tone.

'When I make a word do a lot of work like that,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'I always pay it extra.'

'Oh!' said Alice. She was too much puzzled to make any other remark.

'Ah, you should see 'em come round me of a Saturday night,' Humpty Dumpty went on, wagging his head gravely from side to side, 'for to get their wages, you know.'

(Alice didn't venture to ask what he paid them with; so you see I can't tell you.)

From Through The Looking Glass
by Lewis Carroll

What if we do not take this for granted?

What if the changes in denotations and connotations, shifting constantly, are due precisely to the misuse, poor use, and abuse of which I previously spoke?

What if language is not evolving, but devolving?

Succinctly, if it is now impossible to convey thought precisely to another mind, it is simply because so many minds prefer setting up their own understanding of what a word means rather than use the common meaning, or to 'bend' it to another meaning and thereby, contribute to that misuse which degrades the intregrity of language and our ability to communicate all together.



Actually, I merely state that all this tempest in a teacup over 'what Second Life is' is just that, and that Linden Labs is not very savvy to have painted themselves into this particular corner.



Enjoy. (grin)

I didn't respond based upon what I may or may not think your motive is Cienna. That's a nice diversion though.

I responded based upon a sentiment in which you expressed that people who believe that "This is a real place where real life occurs." are in need of "professional assistance".

Not much to assume there, not much to read into. You response is like saying that if I witness a guy stealing an old woman's purse, that I am assuming his motives when I tell the cops that "he stole her purse".

If I play Literati with my niece (which I do sometimes) in Yahoo, is that not "real life"? It sure feels like it to me. The fact that we may or may not be playing a game is not a determinant as to whether or not our activites are "real". With every breath taken, what we do is part of real life.

Then you're still off-based. Kindly re-read that post until you are not... then we can continue.

(Hint: I didn't say that people who believe this are in need of professional assistance, I said "You know, this entire 'debate' can be boiled down to a single statement which, if true for you, indicates a need for professional assistance (not necessarily psychological, but if the shoe fits...): This is a real place where real life occurs."

When you can understand the ocean of difference between the two, you will understand why I say you're operating from your assumptions.

It's apparent that I am not the only one who is reading it in this manner. Perhaps the burden is upon the author to clarify then, rather than treat people who are not getting it as if they were assumptive nit-wits.

To me it appears to be an "if-then" statement.

If the following condition applies to you, then action "X" is advisable.

The only thing apparent to me is that you seem to be looking for an argument. Sorry, not happening. Feel free to continue assuming, and enjoy whatever feeling doing so gives you!

Arguments sometimes ensue because of misunderstandings and misinterpretations. That does not indicate a want to argue. I assure you I do not. What is paramount to me at this juncture is understanding what you meant. If you refuse to help me with that, then you are simply adding to the problem.

Clarification: I fully understand and agree with your points about MMOs promoting addiction. I have seen it first hand. My ex-roommate and his wife are EQ/WOW addicts and they cannot hold down a job nor consistently pay their rent on their own. I also agree with most of your other points.

What I am striving to understand is your first paragraph. I have asked a couple of other folks to take a look at said paragraph, and they have expressed that they do not believe I am misunderstanding you, yet you still say I am. A couple of other posters in this thread seem to be misunderstanding you as well. I am asking you to please clarify, and for the life of me, I cannot understand your resistence to do so.