How mainstream are we?

Probably - yes. The only thing people here do have in common is that they tend to be more IT literate than average.

Esoteric now???? That's a bit strong! A select few of us maybe......

I thought this was going to be a poll.

.

You make a very good point.

Let's re~evaluate. Mouseclicking to cook stew for a pixie, versus all that's possible here?

*thinks for a moment*

Yep, I *really do* think that smarter, creative people will overwhelmingly pick SL over FreeRealms.

Am I being arrogant?

Perhaps even shamefully smug?

YES.

But it's honestly what I think.

Thought about it; but my last hurried poll was the best argument for personal mediocrity I'd ever put forth, so I went for discussion this time...

I can has pie?

um ... perhaps it's just meant for children?

I think SL is just about as mainstream as virtual worlds are going to get for the time being at least. What is often mistaken for drama on these forums is in itself a mark of the sheer breadth of participation and creative investment by the residents as far as I'm concerned.

I haven't 'met' such a misguided and utterly wrong-minded bunch of a-holes since the days when I decided the syllabus of my art school was so sadly inadequate to the aspirations of the student body.

Or was it the other way around?

Or is it just me?

The problem is that all of these things require social support - which is a scarce resource, and has an economy (the attention economy). Without that, you create your unique avatar but nobody ever comments; or you run your school, but nobody shows up.

Since for everyone who has this kind of support, at least two (and probably more) people have to be providing it, this kind of experience cannot be universal on SL. In fact, by necessity, it will be the minority experience. Now, that's ok - those staying in SL probably are happy with their experiences, I agree. But arguing that the socially supported experience is representative of the "standard" SL experience is simply wrong, and claiming that the unsupported people don't count because they leave and thus don't count as active players is just a fiddle.

I'm also familiar with the standard easy-counterarguments, as follows:
1: "No-one is stopping them" - no, because economies don't work by stopping people, they work by making them fail (the world economy wouldn't be in such a mess now otherwise!);
2: "They need to market more" - fighting harder for a scarce resource doesn't cause it to stop being scarce;
3: "People can take it in turns" - theoretically true, but people are (and don't want to be) that organised, and so this never, ever happens. Ever.

What MMORPGs like FR do is to work around the attention economy by providing activities that are independant of others, or by creating in-game incentives that make people spread their attention around. Even that doesn't work too well - a common complaint about FR is that there's no point saving up gold and SC to buy fancy avatar clothing because there is practically no social interaction in-world and so nobody really cares what you look like.

Desmond - I think you're tacitly assuming that any "smart, creative" person would win in the attention economy. Unfortunately, as long as SL only appeals to those people, that surely won't be true; you can't build a society of alphas.

/me sighs.

We had that thread a couple weeks ago, Yumi.

And the thread didn't make the problem go away. Besides, this isn't asking for discussion of the problem - merely pointing out that it still exists, and has consequences. And one of those consequences is that people would rather brew stew for a pixie.

Surely the dream virtual world will be home to both free realms type worlds and allow the creative freedom of Second Life.

Be my guest.

/me hands you a ladle and a chef's hat.

Yumi: the problem either doesn't exist or it's insoluble. You can pretend to solve it for some people some of the time, and maybe you're one of the people who can be satisfied with a fake solution... for a while, but to really solve it requires changing the way you think. Because the problem isn't in the world, it's in the mind.

Sure, but again, just because it's insoluble doesn't stop the consquences catching you. And Free Realms - if indeed its popularity figures aren't exaggerated - demonstrates that the mainstream _can_ "be satisfied with a fake solution" (or rather, they may not be wholly satisfied, but they can accept it's the best they're going to get).

It's like asking why anyone plays Guitar Hero instead of playing in a real rock band.. I'm sure they'd love to be a rock star.. but for most people it isn't going to happen, whereas they can play Guitar Hero right now.

Is it a problem with the world? I don't know. Does SL want to be mainstream? If the answer is yes, then I guess it's a problem with the world.

The problem with mainstream is that it moves fast and has a limited lifespan.

Typically, the early adopters will kick start a social networking fad. By the time it goes mainstream, a competitor is already in beta. By the time mainstreaming is complete, the early adopters have usually left to the "next big thing."

MySpace/Facebook is a great example.

Twitter/Plurk is another example.

SL is still a bit ahead of its time, high volume live streaming is still not ready for prime time in a lot of places. In fact, it generally sucks on a wireless connection, which is a problem with an increasingly mobile user base. When LL figures out a way to make SL work wireless and without high-end hardware, then it will mainstream.

A very similar issue was raised by a journalist recently, I can't remember the publication, it might have been The Times or The Guardian but he was basically saying Second Life has the suits moving in now and the early adpoters and creative types will be looking to move onto the next big thing.

If someone would actually produce the Next Big Thing, I'd be thinking of moving on, but nobody seems to even be trying.

Hmmmph.

Linden Labs has managed to produce the Model T, it ain't perfect, shifting gears is a nightmare, and cranking it up is a pain, so everyone else seems to think they're better off making a better horse instead...



But, hey ,look at those avatars and shadows!

I think there's lots of trying, but no one has yet overcome the problem of live streaming, changing content within the bandwidth limitations. In order to move that much data, you need bigger pipes. I don't think we will see a true competitor with mainstream potential until there is some kind of technology break through that allows live streaming to function flawlessly at a wireless hot spot with the graphics capability of a netbook. The mainstream is going low-profile and mobile. The stereotype of the gamer in a dark basement with a $1000 graphics card is being replaced by people who want to jump online at the mall food court, the coffee shop, on lunch hour at work.....

free realms wouldnt let me play as jumpman lane so iquit. no other point to be there. did metaplace as beta but just dont see the apeal like R. harper, the herald, or T. foxchase (who sent me a beta invite! yay tizzeh!). Freerealms (made by my FAV company SONY) was just too kiddy and no JUMPMAN NO ME. Metaplace too steep a learnin curve to end up withtheircrap result

That's not the problem at all. The problem isn't technical, it's political. It's getting the flock out of the way of the flocking users, the way Linden Labs did, and letting all users, of all levels of skill and sophistication, do interesting things with the raw clay of the world.

It doesn't matter how cool it looks, if it's just another kindergarden playground like AOL or MyFaceBook. It doesn't even have to be as good looking as Second Life. Something with the visual quality of Lively would be fine (the look, not the feel, the user interface sucks)... but not wit the restrictions on what the user can do in-world.

Actually, I think it matters a great deal how cool it looks. The problem with lively was not just that it was sanitized, but that it wasn't very cool. It has to be cool to attract the early adopters, and the early adopters make it cooler. I think Lively was just too lame visually, that was certainly my turn off and most of the negative commentary I heard was about the visuals. It looked and felt like a kiddie product.

The lack of coolness in Lively wasn't "it doesn't look cool", it was "the user interface stinks, and there's no user created content even though they promised it". You don't like the kiddie look, that's fine. I didn't mind the kiddie look at all, what I minded was that it was a sealed box, all you could do was change the pictures on the outside, there was no "there" there.

It attracted a huge number of early adopters, the problem was that it didn't give the early adopters any way to do anything to make it cooler.

I went to youtube and searched for free realms videos, and it appears you have not fairly represented the game.

For example, here's a video of combat gameplay. Where in SL can you do this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oicM6u8Cxk0

It's probably not for the make-dresses-and-build-another-mall crowd, but then SL isn't everything to everyone, either.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=&search_query=free+realms&aq=f

Now, I like making scripted, artistic objects, so I'll stay in SL until something better for my task comes along, but I won't pretend the world is full of people like me.