Thursday, March 27, 2008

Survey results for virtual worlds collaborative use

Results from a virtual world collaborative use survey undertaken by the Virtual Worlds Consortium for Innovation and Learning, Special Interest Group on Virtual Worlds, the Serious Second Life Group in Boulder, and the MetaverseU Network of Stanford University, have been published under the title: Virtual Worlds and Collaborative Work: Survey Results.

Survey sections are titled: Participants Profile and Background; General Issues and Questions about Virtual Worlds and Collaborative Work; Collaborative Work in Second Life: Now and In the Future; Collaborative Works Using Virtual-World Platforms Other.

The participants were mostly virtual world users or advocates, mostly with a Second Life affinity. There seemed to be a lot of unfamiliarity with other vendors. But there's some interesting surprises I found, such as: the preponderance (read enthusiasm) of business responders vs those from academia; management being seen as a hurdle to virtual world adoption; overwhelmingly positive outlook for Second Life for educational use but uncertainty that it will do as well for business collaboration.

It's a fairly brief document overall so certainly work a look. Though not necessarily comprehensive, it was thought-provoking, especially where I tended to disagree with the majority. It certainly made me think twice about my own opinions.

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

I know the avatar I'm talking to isn't real. But is she real?

Presence can be costly. It's a lot of overhead to consider. And one has to figure that the virtual world never sleeps. Logging into Second Life at different times, it takes on a European, Australian, or Asian tone. Companies have to figure that a visitor might pop in at any time.

Which is why AI avatar "bots" are being developed that can take on that overhead instead of having a real person. They work quite cheap - free in fact beyond their build cost and they don't take breaks. The initial ones are likely going to be fairly simple responders but there are rumblings of some very savvy ones (see Artificial Intelligence Applications in 3d Virtual Worlds) that can do a credible job of mimicking the responses of a real person.

This of course undercuts one of the basic presumptions of virtual worlds, that an avatar represents a real person. One of the interesting aspects of virtual worlds and MMOs is that people tend to treat an avatar at face value, as if they were what they appeared to be. If that avatar appears to be a human man or woman, you, as a virtual world user, would probably respond accordingly. Imagine a virtual world where someone can seed avatars to make a space seem more popular as if other people really found it engaging, making you think twice about stopping to take a look around at the offers. This is already being done in MTV Virtual Worlds: when an event doesn't draw in enough people, bots are seeded to dispell the impression of unpopularity. Or that person chatting you up and that seems so interested in your latest real world shopping adventure could be a bot mining you for buying trends. Or your new "friend,", taking advantage of how viral marketing works, just swears by Eau'dee'doh perfume or MuskOxen deodorant.

"Cogito ergo sum" doesn't quite sum it up any more, does it?

Thursday, March 20, 2008

We are who we're not


Second Skin is a new documentary that examines the lure and some of the dangers of virtual worlds, specifically the MMO games: World of Warcraft and Everquest.

Judging by the trailer, it appears to be in the same vein of other documentaries, like Trekkies and Darkon, movies that gave us an intimate glimpse into the lives of people who are so drawn into fantasy worlds, that their fantasy lives become dominant factors in their real lives. It is understood and shown that for many, these events are purely fun and casual. Not everyone has the same degree of fascination or hunger for an alternate existence. But the true focus and power of these films is when we meet people who's fantasy lives become so excessive, they supersede anything else. Trekkies highlights social groups and individual lifestyles that gravitate around the Star Trek universe, showing how the Trek franchise and fan numbers have increased with each decade, where Darkon explores a live-action roleplaying and wargaming group born out of the success and interest in Dungeons & Dragons and fantasy-embellished history enactment. Though both movies show associated individual pastimes, what is ultimately underscored is that these are both social phenomena. Even individual pursuits mostly take place within a larger context: individuals associate in groups that congregate in even larger groups which ultimately engage in large-scale annual or semi-annual events.

I think part of the fascination with these movies is that they are in part cultural anthropology and in part, geek-voyeurism. We get to peek into lives that for most of us are very different. For many viewers, I think there is a trap that they can somehow feel superior for being so non-geeky, or at least less a geek. And yet, say what you will, for Darkon especially but even for Trekkies, the emphasis seems to be highly social and to bring about friendships, bonds, and human interaction. And this counters a commented upon trend in modern culture that people are becoming more insular and less community oriented than preceding generations. So regardless of how you might approve or disapprove of the lifestyles of the people shown, they are meeting and interacting with others, often in the flesh, forming life bonds and exercising social will. Socially, they will have succeeded in functioning in ways that many people who might disparage or judge them have yet to achieve in their own lives.

That said, Second Skin seems to show a different short of community altogether. Though virtual association can precipitate a real world gathering for romance or group meetings, for the most part the interaction is befitting the medium and done solely through virtual selves. Missing is the "meat-space" physical engagement and association of Darkon or the showcase of club and convention gatherings that underscores much of Trekkies. Though participants in both these group phenomena embellish their social interaction through virtual mediums, for the most part virtual or Web interaction functions to support and enhance real-world engagement. For those shown in Second Skin, it seems to be more the opposite: rare as they are, real world engagements seem to underscore and reinforce the main activities, which are solely virtual. If true, the effect in some cases would be to push the person back into the virtual medium as the basis for generating more such social contact.

What happens when alternate reality becomes more important and more meaningful than just a casual activity? All three films examine this question of obsession. The core physical activity of Darkon shows the most real engagement of self. Alternate reality is compartmentalized and though it drives a lot of activity outside of the events and might be one of the most important things in a given life, there is clearer distinction between fantasy self and the real world. With Trekkies, though we are given to understand that there is a broad range of engagement, we meet several individuals for whom the alternate world of science fiction influences not only their pastimes, but crosses over to become part of their dress, work, lifestyle, life choices, even their sex lives. It's really hard to judge by a short trailer, but with Second Skin, it seems to show people for whom their real world selves are not necessarily subsumed physically by the alternate reality, but where the real world itself is largely irrelevant because it has no meaning to a virtual existence. I'm guessing the folks shown in Second Skin share much of the same needs for acceptance, social status, success, and wealth with those in Darkon and Trekkies, factors that might very well be missing from their real lives and which are certainly missing for some of those shown. Mentally then, the only way to achieve these is solely virtual for the most part. And so their alternate lives tend to, I suspect more so than in Darkon and Trekkies, become dominant to the exclusion and proper functioning in the real world, according to how much they feel they need the rewards provided solely in their lives as lived through alternate realities.

There is another, perhaps even darker aspect to be shown as well. Though commerce and merchandising are a big part of all such activities, one of the lives reviewed in Second Skin is said to be that of a "gold famer." This is usually, but not exclusively, a person from Asia who works long "sweat shop" hours in front of a computer to feed their own hunger by feeding the world hunger for virtual goods, or the virtual currency to buy virtual goods. Since for many people, virtual status equates to real status insofar as they're concerned, there is a real market for such goods. A New York Times article last year estimated that the money generated from such sales was then $1.8 billion. Given the growth of virtual worlds overall, and the large numbers of new children's virtual worlds funded by commercial and media giants, one can expect that number to be much higher and to only increase over time.

Second Skin is currently being shown at the South by Southwest (SXSW) Film Festival, where I believe Darkon made its debut. I have high hopes, that like the other documentaries mentioned, I'll soon be able to see it for myself on either the Independent Film Channel or via a video rental service like Netflix. Hopefully like those other fascinating perspectives into alternate reality and social groups, Second Skin provides an insightful, non-judgmental, and carefully balanced glimpse into real lives. I understand that most people who were featured in these documentaries felt the portrayal was fair and were mostly flattered by the attention. I hope that such is the same for those who are letting us get under their Second Skins.