gmane.education.libraries.autocat

Re: Second Life--game or virtual reality?

At 02:38 PM 5/15/2008, Becky Yoose wrote:
>As another gamer on board, I see SL as a virtual world since there is no
>definite goal to SL like you would find in a game. There's no boss to fight,
>dungeon to raid, or world to save. Even the Sims has the goal to keep your
>Sim happy and alive. SL does not have any defined storyline or goal to play
>out. It's basically a user-created virtual world where users can do pretty
>much whatever they want.

The lack of a defined storyline or goal to play out does not, by itself, 
make something not a "game".  Take, for instance, playground activities 
such cops and robbers, or cowboys and indians, or (as I liked to do in 
grade school) "Lost in Space" and "Star Trek". There is no "goal" or 
scorekeeping involved, but they meet the primary definition of "game" as 
found in the online Merriam-Webster Dictionary:  "activity engaged in for 
diversion or amusement : PLAY"

Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Bibliographic Services Dept.
Northwestern University Library
1970 Campus Drive
Evanston, IL  60208-2300
email: kmr@...
phone: (847) 491-2939
fax:   (847) 491-4345 

***********************************************************************

E-mail AUTOCAT listowners:             autocat-request@...
Search AUTOCAT archives:  http://listserv.syr.edu/archives/autocat.html

(Continue reading)

headers

Becky Yoose | 16 May 04:16

Re: Second Life--game or virtual reality?

Maybe it was the company that I kept when I was a child, but usually those
playground activities had the goals of catching the others and not getting
caught by said others all before recess was over. And scores were kept,
which led to some heated contests later on in the school year.

The definition of game from Merriam-Webster does define part of what SL is
for some users: play, diversion from their first lives. Nonetheless, as
others have pointed out, SL's function is more than a diversion. Meetings,
conferences, book readings, music concerts, political campaigning, social
research, attending class (SJSU's virtual campus) - even IBM has offices in
SL, among other businesses. Sure, you can try and do that in a MMORPG, but I
would bet that MMOs, even though their environment is non-liner and gives
the gamer a lot of freedom, might not be the best place for these activities
to take place. I have yet to see a weekly status meeting for a first life
business in WoW.

Cathy makes a good point about SL as being a CMS with the option of
synchronous and asynchronous interactions. That makes a whole lot of sense,
especially when you look at all the educational institutions that are using
SL for their classes.

On 5/15/08, Kevin M. Randall <kmr@...> wrote:
>
>
> The lack of a defined storyline or goal to play out does not, by itself,
> make something not a "game".  Take, for instance, playground activities such
> cops and robbers, or cowboys and indians, or (as I liked to do in grade
> school) "Lost in Space" and "Star Trek". There is no "goal" or scorekeeping
> involved, but they meet the primary definition of "game" as found in the
> online Merriam-Webster Dictionary:  "activity engaged in for diversion or

(Continue reading)

headers

Joel Hahn | 16 May 17:03

Re: Second Life--game or virtual reality?

Back in the early 1990's (if not earlier), some MUDs, MUCKs, MOOs, and
the other M* text-based role-playing games--the forerunners of the
modern MMORPG, like Second Life--were used for chat, meeting up with
friends across the country, classroom meetings, and other such
real-world activities.  That's nothing new.  The only differences are
now there's pictures in addition to the text, and there are a LOT more
people (and organizations) taking part.  The presence of pictures and an
increase in scale shouldn't impact the description & classification.

In my opinion, Second Life is, at heart, a gigantic role-playing game,
just one in which many people choose to role-play "themselves" (a
past-time my friends did with paper-and-pencil role-playing games at
least back into the 1980s, if not earlier) and use as a chat medium to
conduct real-world activities.

Players can change their in-game "avatar" to a blue-skinned elf, their
avatar can fly, the "world" consists of a fictional planet that is
chiefly made up of lots of little islands, players use pretend money to
conduct business transactions (even if it now can be converted back and
forth into real-world money, that's no different from World of Warcraft
players trading real money to a friend for in-game armor, or video
arcades using tokens rather than quarters), they can go to an area of
the "world" where they can solve CSI:New York mysteries.

In other words, it is a giant game of "let's play pretend."

However, that does not necessarily mean it *should* be qualified by
"(Game)", just that that qualifier is an appropriate one.  Given the
emphasis on "virtual world", perhaps "(Imaginary place)" would be more
appropriate?

(Continue reading)

headers

Heidi Hoerman | 16 May 17:02

Re: Second Life--game or virtual reality?

Only recently have I started to wander Second Life as we (USC's library 
school) now have a library there.  (For experienced second lifers, it's on 
eduisland).  I am now of the opinion that "game" is far too limiting a 
concept.  Virtual reality is much more to the point.  Yes, there are those 
who play games in SL just as there are those who play games at a local 
coffee house.  You can do anything in Second Life.  

Why would one want to, you might ask?  Well, I am considering when to move 
distance ed discussions to second life.  One of the problems with web-
based discussion is that the online meeting and classroom systems just 
don't do too well if one wants to see the participants.  Yes, we could use 
web cams for a bunch of students but not twenty or thirty-five or more. 
Having all those windows of faces open just wouldn't allow enough space 
for the things we need to look at.  And a cacaphony of multiple 
microphones isn't a very good thing either with ambient noise where each 
student is located being broadcast to all.

Right now, I use webcam/mic out and chat in for the students.  It works 
fairly well but it is very difficult to encourage class participation or 
to call on individuals.  You just can't "see" the raised hands and curious 
looks.  And names labelling single-line communications just aren't as 
memorable as actual people.  So, what to do?

In second life, each student can build an avatar that looks like them (or 
what they'd prefer to look like).  The student could make the avatar 
shrug, raise its hand, talk (using mic or chat box), etc.  I can have a 
screen or whiteboard for demonstations, etc., and each student would "see" 
the class from his/her own avatar's perspective.  Now they just see me, in 
a little box, looking like a blue fish (cheap webcam).  In second life 
they could see their fellow students, overcoming a great deal of the

(Continue reading)