Pictured: A nightclub experience… in Grand Theft Auto V Online
While the "Is Second Life a game?" argument has basically gone since SL launched, reader "0xc0ffea" (who also co-hosts the largest SL community on Reddit) posts a fresh perspective: Whatever SL is on an ontological level, not treating it as a game has contributed to its lack of evolution:
SL users and, more importantly, its developers need to play more games.
There is a shocking disconnect when switching between SL and modern games (even 7 year old games like GTA5). By comparison, SL barely runs, fundamentally fails to operate as a social platform the moment you get a few people in the same location (or try to converse in group IM), lags to hell and back, and it's users have been conditioned to blame each other for the overall poor experience.
A little gaming makes it very apparent that SL's technical woes are not caused by that one person who dared to wear those shoes with that hair, happened to have a scripted attachment, or had the audacity to load slowly.
"SL is not a game" has been a handy excuse to gloss over it being architecturally stuck in the days of single core processors.
Here's why, she goes on:
While it's very true that the dynamic nature of the beast makes many game optimizations impossible, it doesn't block everything accomplished in 15 years of technical progress (or negate the need for innovation).
If SL were seen as a game, at least by its creators, then perhaps we would have seen more time and money devoted to advancing and developing the platform. Perhaps skipping the whole Sansar debacle (it's not a game either!)
It's no accident that SL's early explosive growth was during the time Linden Lab were pushing the boundaries of the sandbox formula, and likewise no accident it's been in slow decline for a decade as the focus switched to reinforcing the boundaries.
At the start, the argument could be made that SL wasn't a game, it was the metaverse, a whole new internet. Today .. it's absolutely a game, whose users routinely slam into the sandbox's walls.
And all of this seems roughly right. I'm not technical enough to get into the guts of the architecture question, but from an end user perspective, it's madness that the SL user experience feels like an old sandbox MMO slapped onto a 3D editing platform slapped onto a web browser. But then again, if Second Life is not perceived as a game, then longtime users can come to accept that strange mismatch.
On a similar front, 0xc0ffea is right about SLers (both users and developers) needing to play more games. If they saw how smooth, intuitive, and immediately fun the best of them are, they would have a higher standard of expectation of what Second Life can and should be.
Leave a comment