They will complain like crazy about how Second Life requires work, attention, effort and devotion, and how – because those are desirable human attributes – the people who play it must be better. But that’s like saying that if there’s two routes to get somewhere you want to go, and one is 5 miles and the other is 15 miles, then the one who picks the 15 mile route is somehow superior because they picked the option that involves greater effort.

The truth is that about 90% of the time, all that “work” you do (and money you spend!) on SL doesn’t actually generate an ultimate experience greater than just talking with like-minded people on a text-based talker, and occasionally meeting up with them for online gaming.

I think there is really too much obsession with the “number of users”, a metric that has, since 2007, been slowly replaced by “time spent visiting”. Specially on the Web, the “number of users” just becomes less and less important for marketing reasons, although it is certainly critical for system administrators, who need to tweak database usage or handle network traffic to allow for simultaneous connections, for instance

On the other hand, there is this keyword, “critical mass”, which means different things for different people. Any software house selling a 3D modeling application with associated content hosting would *drool* at the opportunity of having distributed 17 million copies and have a million users, on average, using their tool for, say, 2.5 hours a day, every day.

But strangely, that’s how Second Life is being used — and it’s felt as being “too small” or a “niche market”. Mmmh. Well, perhaps. Not everybody likes 3D user-generated virtual environments — simply because they’re a “novelty” after 15 years or so (another paradox!). Some studies show that visual perception in a 3D environment might be confusing for most people (not everybody is an architect or an artist, who *dream* in 3D!). Then again, that never stopped some 160 million users to regularly join 3D environments — and I have no clue on how many people actually play 3D games world-wide, but I would wildly guess a billion users.

The paradoxes just pile up. In a sense, I find it strange, but the truth is, we took 30 years to go from the unidimensional computer interface (the command line) to the 2D GUI on the “desktop” paradigm. That was a major shift, and one that took around a decade to become commonplace — and except for die-hard Unix users (who haven’t died out!), now we’re all convinced that the 2D desktop is far better than the 1D (or 1.5D) interface. Well, now a few of us believe that the 3D virtual world is a far better interface to communicate and socialise with other users than the 2D desktop. I guess it will take us another decade or three for that concept to catch up; namely, the current generation of techies will all have to be retired and lose their influence to allow “fresh new ideas” to catch on

My personal estimate, done around 2005, was that somewhen between 2010-2012, interaction through 3D virtual worlds would become commonplace. I think I was far too optimistic!… 2020 is a far safer date to see a more widespread use of the “3D Desktop” — hopefully, long after the Web 2.0 bubble also bursts, revealing the failure of the usual start-up model of “do a cool thing, get hundreds of millions of free subscribers, hit the news, get bought by Google or Microsoft” which seems to be the modus operandi of many (if not all) of the social networking “sites” these days.

Second Life is profitable right now, and has been so for several years. Its developing company, Linden, regularly announces yearly profits which are 3-5 times the amount of seed capital they had to launch the company. Second Life, although a child of the first dot-com bubble, and also unlike most of the Web-based experiences, does not require exponential growth to survive or even to increase profits — the growth of the usage of Second Life (in terms of hours-per-user or minutes-of-VoIP-per-user, or even of new 3D content created every day) even outpaces the growth in active users, although this trend cannot possibly be infinitely elastic.

Unlike others, I still believe that it’s worth comparing Second Life to either Facebook or Twitter, but also to eBay (since it’s also an online marketplace, just like Second Life…) and even YouTube or… regular TV. It’s not because they have “similar” uses — this is arguable. No, it’s just because they all compete for attention. A user logged in to SL for 1.5 hours a day will watch far less TV; similarly, if you spend hours playing FarmVille or uploading vlogs to YouTube every day, you will most likely have less time for TV or for playing games. While it’s arguable if the 1,400 companies and organisations in Second Life actually do make a serious difference (it’s estimated that the use of Second Life is still 99% residential), it’s clear that Second Life competes with a user’s attention for their leisure time. And at that it’s tremendously successful when compared to everything else out there.

Where’s the middle ground? People using the platform.

People log in to SL to make money; to advertise; to interact; to socialize; to network; to adventure; to date; to inform. They dance, swim, fly, fence, fire weapons, roleplay, run, sit, make love, eat (though eating and drinking in SL? Still mostly passes me by) and make merry.

The only real problem I see SL has? Linden Labs, who, under their current leadership, seem REALLY intent on monetizing the entire game and making sure no one takes a step without paying SOMEbody. This is not the game many of us signed up for, and we’re losing people in droves.

The people that stay are generally shopping addicts, casual players who log in an hour or so a night, if that, and the hardcore recreationists. I suppose I qualify as the latter, though I don’t spend nearly as much time in Caledon (a virtual neo-Victorian set of sims) as I used to; but it doesn’t stop just at the Victorian/steampunk border. There are people inventing alien worlds, undersea worlds, living fantasies (in the literary, as well as sensual meaning), creating wonder, horror and everything in between.

Is Second Life an easy platform to learn to use? No. Are there ways to make it better? Sure, but the Labs haven’t figured out how yet. Does the sense of anonymity poison on occasion, making everyday citizens a newcomer COULD turn to, often sneer and pass judgement on the ‘newbie’? Absolutely.

If people bother to get PAST all that, there’s a wide, diverse world in store. But I’m with you, it’s a lot to deal with, setting up, and it’s not easy, and a great deal of the time, the people who’ve been using the platform longest are the ones least likely to help new faces on the grid.

Still, are there reasons to log in of a night? Sure, or I wouldn’t be there. But will it catch on and become the latest MyFaceTwitterbook? No. Will it overtake World of Warcraft? Of course not. And I don’t think it ever will.

That being said, though, I don’t think that’s a bad thing…a functional space, with people paying for the server space, and interacting with users from around the world…this is not a bad place to be. It’s just never going to be HUGE.

The porn angle is way too overhyped, it’s far far easier to find porn on the internet at large and it’s just as easy to avoid it in Second Life as it is the internet at large. The prevalent use of Second Life is not for adult content, but stories such as that grab headlines more than Second Life being used to train hotel receptionists.

Second Life has a half decent music scene and gives people a platform, it’s good for guest speakers, I’ve seen Terry Pratchett talking doing a Q&A there and Cory Doctorow was there very recently, you get quite a high level of richness from events such as this.

However you’re right in saying Second Life isn’t as easy to use as facebook or Twitter, but for those who do invest the time, it’s a very worthwhile experience.

But it’s fun…And as Ann said, certainly for those with a higher IQ, beyond the welcome centres you tend not to bump into anybody who will really make you cringe, it’s a rich person’s Sims game.

While I do not wish to repeat what others have said, I will answer your question and bring the following to the table:

I’ve been in SL for nearly 3 years now, and attribute my own ease-of-adaptation to my comfort with technology. SL is NOT for the masses and it will be some time before virtual worlds will be “easy” for most persons.

SL is quite simply what someone makes it. Yes, the media quacks on about the lurid aspects, but the same can be said for everything else — how about those pornographic books and magazines so readily available at corner stores, grocery stores etc.? SL can be educational, creative, scientific… anything and everything. But therein lies the issue…

People NEED to be herded and told what to do. They are lemmings. They need to be spoon fed a system and given a goal. God forbid they are told to create their own sense of self or environment. SL is for a very niche group of individuals who have the desire and ability to create their wold. It will not have mass appeal. And it’s unfortunate the media hyped it up like it was the second technologic coming — because it’s not, and all of us who regularly spend time in SL have known this since day one.

So yes, three years later and I’m still there. I feel the applications of a virtual world are enormous and we’ve barely scratched the surface. Due to mismanagement and a train wreck of idiotic decision-making, SL will not be THE virtual world of the future, but until that comes along, it’s what we have.

Quoting from elsewhere, I wrote:

“SL is a business like any other and provided they continue to make a profit, they will be standing. The unusual aspect of all this is the fact that SL is a modicum of success not BECAUSE of LL but because of its residents.

Once LL has sufficiently honked off a high percentage of the hard core content creators in SL, and driven them to greener pastures (I am not referring to Blue Mars, but some unknown contender at this point), THEN LL will feel the burn and try to sell what is left of their company before they go under completely.

I wager this will all occur in the next five years.

Until then, I’m sitting tight and watching for the new “best” thing.

PS: I seldom give in to “the sky is falling” furor because LL has such a terrible track record, they will never actually “do something right” and have survived thus far (again, because of the residents).”

PS: It’s Linden Lab, NOT Linden Labs (not trying to nitpick, just inform).

But I do thank you for bringing this to the attention of your readers. SL is something worth keeping an eye on. Virtual Worlds, like the Internet, won’t be going away any time soon.