Second Life On Life Support?
December 23, 2009 | Posted by Chris Cotter 
Once upon January 2007, I was called upon to put together a presentation on something they called, “Second Life.” It was the latest in a line of social media platforms that were “revolutionizing” the web, and everyone seemed to think Second Life was the one platform to rule them all. News bureaus even assigned reporters to the Second Life beat. But fast forward to almost three years later, and you hear about Second Life about as much as you hear about Crystal Pepsi.
So, what happened? Did Second Life go the way of Friendster? Is it now digging up worms in some unmarked internet grave somewhere next to Geocities? I had to know, and so I ventured to find out.
It turns out, for all the lack of fanfare, Second Life is still alive and kicking. In fact, Linden Labs (the company that dreamed up Second Life) CEO Mark Kingdon claims that approximately one million global users log in every month, that those users spend about 40 million hours “inworld,” that from September 2008 to September 2009, repeat users grew 23%, and that Second Life’s virtual economy “will exceed $500 million this year.” Plus, about 1400 organizations leverage the world’s 1′s and 0′s, including “IBM, Northrop Grumman, and the University of Texas.” They’ve even created an enterprise version of the platform that organizations can set up independently and use to interact across the globe, without ever having to leave their offices.
Of course, one million users and 23% repeat growth may sound significant at first blush. But when you consider that as of September of this year, Facebook boasted a staggering 300 million users, and that from February 2008 to February 2009, Twitter’s user base grew 1382%, things start to look slightly bleaker for the former media darling.
The fact is, Second Life requires an pretty intense amount of time investment. Admittedly, I’ve only spent limited time “inworld,” but the time I did spend was mostly wasted trying to figure out how not to walk in circles and how to find anything but my feet to look at. In otherwords, unlike other “social” platforms like Facebook and Twitter, Second Life isn’t exactly the easiest to use. You need to put in the time to figure out how it works, and to find your own “inworld” niche. And even when you do, I’d estimate you’d need to spend a good hour to two hours at a time time really get anything meaningful out of your experience.
Even more importantly, while there are many practical and PG rated social uses for it, Second Life has become known for its abundance of internet sleaze. And while I’m not naive enough to think that any web platform is safe from “adult content,” it stands to reason that if one of the most prevalent uses of something is pornagraphic, that thing will only attract a certain clientele.
And so, Second Life has become what many might call, “marginalized.”
But for all of it’s “hurdles,” Second Life still holds some substantial value, and it seems like Linden Labs has realized this. For organizations and universities, it is an innovative, efficient, and slightly more personal way of conducting meetings, trainings, seminars, classes and more across the globe. An archaeology class in Texas could easily interact with an archaeologist in Egypt, just by logging in and meeting up. A project team could easily hold a brainstorm with participants from California, New York, London, Tokyo and pretty much anywhere else with internet access [IE - not South Dakota...kidding 
]. So it’s not like it’s completely irrelevant.
Still, I think it’s safe to say that for the time being at least, Second Life remains on the back burner of the internet’s hot stove.
Now, how about you all – have you used Second Life? If so, do you still use it regularly? What did you find to be the best and worst aspects of the virtual world? And where do you see it going in the future? As always, I’d love to hear your insight!!
Categories: Second Life, Social Media, Uncategorized, Virtual Worlds | 
Tags: | 
22 Comments »
Chris,
I agree completely. Second Life is, and always has been, a version of the SIMS with social media capabilities added.
I recall seeing a presentation on Second Life, given by a corporate librarian around 4 years ago. Excitedly, she showed how, in about 10 minutes, she could get her avatar to walk into a virtual library, walk around, climb a ladder and pull down a reference book. She talked of how this would be how information would be accessed in the future. I asked her a simple question; if I could find the same content source in about 10-20 seconds using Google, why would I spend 10 minutes having some avatar try to retrieve it?
Outside of its porno elements (which i don’t fully understand, but hey, to each…), Second Life seems to be a niche product that could be entertaining to geeky types but has little mainstream application for consumers and none for business (other than simply using it as an ad platform to reach its users).
I’ve made wrong calls on a few platforms (at one time, really thought Facebook could be a strong b2b platform, pushing aside LinkedIn), but I called Second Life as a niche platform for geeks from the start.
No surprise to see it has been marginalized.
What i do in First Life? If i am not logged in? Pfew just the same if I am not online.
Being online is becoming crucial in daily life as I have to do my banking and social networking.
This time I have an extra element and that is in 3d.
I can walk through places i might visit in RL and get the taste of the culture. I co-operate with big firms on innovation, have a laugh and a dance with people all around the world. Attend a class for foreign languages. Exploring the creations of many great artists, attend virtual a seminar on world issues and other interesting subjects. Admiring the songs and voices of people that might never be heard.
(and respect for them to) just a normal user of the internet and loves to connect with extra a 3d enviroment.
When I am stuck at an airport of what so ever I can still attend all the religions churches, mosques, temples or other places.I can debate. I can create.
With other words endless possiblitiy and personally I love the development of not only in technical sence but also the inner side of human kind as this world lets us meet!
And yeh when I turn off the computer as I say I just do the normal daily thing only extra is i visit some of the global friends that i might never would have met.
This is not a word of geek
Dear Chris
I am sorry to hear that you consider the “limited time” you spent in Second Life to be wasted. You obviously were not lucky enough to meet people who would point you to some really amazing unique experiences you can have in Second Life.
I, myself, wouldn’t be back to Second Life after my first (also quite difficult) hours there, if it wasn’t for one friendly avatar who shared with me some art places and demonstrated how he makes his own virtual art. I was trilled and stayed to see more.
For two years I had a privilege not only to observe but also actively participate in creating of a new form of art. I am happy to see how the importance of virtual art grows, how it gains respect with real life art community. This process can’t go fast, we are talking about presenting very new experiences, it takes time to comprehend and internalize those things. But the first results are spectacular.
For example, a well known art festival Burning Man has a virtual representation in Second Life called Burning Life. It attracted over 25,000 unique visiors from all over the world during one week in 2009. This was a celebration of new art, new forms of communicating, new ways of self-expression.
As you pointed out) this platform becomes important for universities and colleges. For example, take a look what the University of Western Australia had achieved in only a few months http://uwainsl.blogspot.com/
May be it doesn’t grow with rates of FB or twitter, but may be it doesn’t have to? may be the nature of this media requires more effort, more creativity, more abilities? and may be it is a good thing at it attracts more sophisticated skilled users? As one of the SLers I don’t mind this fact.
As I said, I think you were not lucky to find really interesting things in SL. I would like to offer you the chance to fix this. Just come to Second life and contact me (White Lebed) – I will show you some things that might change your mind and inspire you to write quite a different article
Best wishes!
I plan to attend a couple of live music shows today, a duo from Argentina and a singer from Portugal at 12PM and 2PM SLT (Pacific time). Drop by if you are on line and grab a seat (right click and choose Sit) so you won’t have to bother yourself with walking. http://slurl.com/secondlife/Madhupak/26/223/97
Second Life is not for everyone, granted. Facebook is popular because it is easy. Anyone with half a lick of sense can use Facebook. Google even tried to put together a 3D world with Lively and failed. The fact is that Second Life makes money. Second Life has added a dimension to my real life and my business that did not exist before. I attend class, prototype new ideas, and the list goes on and on. I think its time for the people that gave up early give Second Life a second chance. People always write off what they do not understand. Why learn something new like a new software program, or why even read a book? Go ahead and just turn on the television and hypnotize yourself into buying some worthless piece of plastic. Second life is brilliant and way ahead of its time. This is not a game, people (it can if you want it to be). Second Life is what you make it, just like real life.
First, I think it’s a poor comparison matching 2nd Life to Facebook or Twitter. They are entirely different platforms altogether and require little to no thought or effort to participate. 2nd Life does require time and discipline, that latter virtue often lacking with regard to using the other aforementioned applications.
I suppose it’s easy to proclaim 2nd Life id on life support given the paltry amount of research effort put forth. It also seems to be fashionable to bash anything that a casual Internet user can’t grasp in 60 seconds–like Twitter or FB. In these two cases, a pulse and rudimentary typing skills are all that’s required for basic interaction. 2nd Life, not so much.
Any Internet-born application can become whatever you want to make of it I suppose. For a scribe who is merely looking to meet an reporting assignment, the pithy half-arsed expose’ seems just about in-line with this knowledgeable reader’s expectations.
First off, thank you all for your comments! Although several of you took issue with some of what I mentioned, I’m glad you all added your personal experiences to provide a different perspective.
I just wanted to respond to a couple of things…
Number one – in comparing Second Life to facebook and Twitter, all I was trying to do was to point out the differences in numbers. I certainly didn’t mean to imply that anyone should forgo using it because it doesn’t have the statistics of facebook or Twitter.
Number two – as you may have noted, the post title had a question mark at then end. I actually made a point to show that the medium is not dead. BUT, for most users, as the numbers show, it isn’t exactly what everyone expected it would be.
Number three – I certainly didn’t mean to offend anyone who has found it to be a valuable and enriching experience. I’m glad you all enjoy your experiences with Second Life, and I didn’t mean to discourage anyone else from signing up and enjoying some of the same experiences.
That all said, I think many of you took this post further than I meant it to go. All I was trying to convey is the state of Second Life, which is that it has become a kind of niche platform. That doesn’t mean it has any less value. It just means that that is where it is today. Plus, I wrote this for a “lay audience,” not the experienced Second Lifer who already knows all they need to know about Second Life. So if it struck you as “paltry” or “half arsed,” I’m sure that’s why.
Again, thank you for all your comments,
What a load of dribble. Your lack of understanding of this medium is immediately apparent when you compare a platform like Second life to social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook.
As you admited, you only spent limited time “inworld” yet you still feel justified in publishing your uniformed opinions. It’s clear that you have written SL off solely based on a few unfavourable mainstream media articles and10 mins spent in world trying to work out where your up arrow key is in your keyboard.
Let me offer you an informed opinion from someone who has been in Second Life for 8 years and who now earns a very nice middle class salary from my “inworld” efforts.
And that opinion is….you are wrong.
Porky – technically, if you read what I wrote, my “lack of understanding” was by admission. And if you had bothered to read my previous comment, you’d have seen that I was not comparing Second Life to Twitter or Facebook, just providing numbers from those other sites to put Second Life’s numbers in perspective.
Make no mistake, I am not insulting you or any other user for using and enjoying Second Life.
But I’m curious as to what “opinion” you felt I was expressing?
If it’s simply my opinion that Second Life has been marginalized among other platforms, then I don’t think anything you just said even addresses that opinion at all.
Also, just because you think I “don’t understand it,” doesn’t mean I even have to. As I said in my comment above, I’m glad you and others have found valuable experiences in Second Life. For you, it sounds like it’s been a great endeavor. But you have to remember that just because YOU enjoy it and YOU understand it, that doesn’t mean everyone else has to enjoy and understand it as well.
I don’t think this author knows anything at all about Second Life nor did this author perform the necessary due diligence in fact finding. The article is just a negative anti-advetorial. The author doesn’t even know the name of the parent corporation that is nicknamed Linden Lab (not labs) but is really Linden Research Inc. Just what is the motivation to write such an article?
Had this author spent any time doing solid research it is unlikely any of the metrics listed would be used. Facebook is a crappy looking flat screen 2D web site used to collect personal data that is then sold. Most likely facebook should not even be allowed in Europe given the laws there that would make facebook illegal to operate. Facebook cannot be directly compared to Second Life. it is just not the same. Second Life is immersion in an alternate reality while facebook is strictly 100% commercialized data mining real life data collection and spam operations.
Second Life could benefit by advertising on facebook, myspace, youtube, and other areas of congregation where there are a lot of eyes to see the ads. But the ads would need to be compelling. As with any other ad. And yes Second Life is definately for really smart people that can learn real fast. This means Second Life is squarely in the above 120 IQ bracket. It makes no sense to market Rolex in a welfare line. So perhaps linkedin is a better place to advertise Second Life. Now myspace is entertainment oriented so there is a serious match there for advertising if the advertising is for entertainment venues.
Second Life is not a load up, log in, and instant nirvana at all. But for those that seek 3D entertainment it is a pretty good thing. Also Second Life, at this time, protects identities and is also a great place for people to be themselves while the reality show over on facebook would get many a LGBT type person murdered or fired.
A lot of the people in Second Life are there to create art. I seldom go anywhere or interact with anyone other than an occasional customer that has a question or needs some customization or special thing for a loved one. I am always working on something if I log on. Creativity is the life blood of Second Life. If your brain is not wired to get entertainment or some other value that Second Life provides then good. It isn’t for you. But that still doesn’t mean it can be compared to facebook. It just isn’t the same.
Oh and up until this week Linden Research Inc. was not marketing Second Life in the entertainment sector. But they are running some google ads on youtube now. Who knows how the membership will be affected now that actual advertising is underway. Might go way up. Just have to wait and see. I have never seen Second Life marketed so this will be interesting.
Oh and they are cooking up a simplified user interface for the casual user. Should be a lot easier to figure out when they release that. But the real barrier to entry is that Second Life has no real place on an iphone. It is graphics intensive and requires a computer of the $1000 USD or more variety. But there is an iphone app for basic non graphical stuff like messaging and taking care of business.
Since a huge chunk of facebook is kids in various third world countries there is another huge chunk of people you will never see in Second Life. They are not even old enough. Again apples and oranges. The differences are too numerous to really get into.
How many universities did you visit in Second Life? Did you happen to drop by any NASA locations or the space museum location? How about the Naval Undersea Warfare division? Did you pop in there for a visit? Did you visit any themed areas? Did you even bother to get out of the welcome area? Second Life is a really big place. I have seen but a small fraction in my nearly 3 years.
Try it again sometime but maybe arrange for some tours or guidance. Don’t be afraid to ask how things work or where things are.
Ann, this wasn’t an article about using Second Life, just a quick look at where it is in relation to where it was expected to be.
Did you read any of my previous comments before you posted this?
The point Ann and others are making is comparing the growth rate of Second Life to Facebook and Twitter is like comparing the growth rate of a rosebush to a giant redwood. There is no comparison since they are totally different.
I do find it always unfortunate that the lesser informed are writing articles such as this at the prodding of others, when such information is best disseminated by those “truly in the know”. But that is the peril of media, and has only proven how unreliable as a source of information it is. Be that as it may…
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.
Secondlife would be far more popular if they didn’t keep stomping on their own customer base.
The company has terrible support, constantly raising fees and for all the touting they do to enterprise it’s neither a place that’s secure for content, privacy or capable enough to hold large meetings.
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.
You make some fine points about your experience in Second Life Chris and that’s the important point, it’s your experience. I agree with you about the time investment but for those prepared to invest time there is a richer experience than say via facebook or twitter, an interesting point to note is that Linden Lab use both Facebook and Twitter for communication too.
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.
There are quite a lot of people out there using social media. This constant idea that one is only allowed to use one or another is really pretty amusing. I have accounts with Twitter, Facebook and Livejournal. They serve a function of keeping me in touch in an immediate way with varied groups of people.
I am very active in Second Life, actually met the man I married this last October there. And interestingly neither one of us was participating in “marginalized” activities! In fact we are members of a number of thriving communities devoted to Neo-Victorianism and Steampunk. I work in a PG rated orientation area for newcomers in Caledon, with a wonderful tutorial and helpers available to assist newcomers in getting their feet beneath them
I suggest to the many folks who feel qualified to discuss our virtual communities without any real investment being made that you should spend some more time before feeling qualified to publish a review of our communities. If it is not for you, that is fine – but you do NOT know enough about us to publish assessments.
I am now also involved in Blue Mars, another exciting virtual world that will add new dimensions to social interactions. There are many such platforms in development now, which would indicate to me that people who have made a genuine investment think the concept and technology are both viable and exciting.
I am interested in the many “You’re so WRONG!” comments you’ve gotten. Myself, I’ve been in SL nearly four years now, and I’ve noticed articles on it do broadly tend to break down into two camps: one side thinks SL is a flash in the pan, the other thinks it’s the new age of communication and interaction.
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.
Well, recently I have seen some people considering that Twitter is a tool “only” for a niche market, since it “only” has, well, 70 million users — a mere trifle.
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.
I find it quite amusing; Ann OToole’s description matches exactly the attitude of the typical SL player, and is totally out of touch with the actual situation.
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 love this. this is wonderful.