Infrastructure // PC & Servers
Commentary
1/31/2007
02:24 PM
Mitch Wagner
Mitch Wagner
Commentary
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Second Life Is Hard To Use -- Is That A Bug Or A Feature?

Second Life is hard to use. Everybody knows it. I've logged something like 20 hours on SL in the past week and a half, and I'm still a consummate klutz. SL needs to be easier to use -- but not too easy, because if it was easy, it would undercut the nature of the world and remove one of its most appealing qualities.

Second Life is hard to use. Everybody knows it. I've logged something like 20 hours on SL in the past week and a half, and I'm still a consummate klutz. SL needs to be easier to use -- but not too easy, because if it was easy, it would undercut the nature of the world and remove one of its most appealing qualities.

Yesterday I met up with John Jainschigg, who works for the programmers' magazine Dr. Dobb's Journal. He and his colleague Brad Russell showed me some of what DDJ is doing in Second Life. John also showed me some tricks for getting around and looking around in SL, including one trick involving holding down the control, alt, and shift keys while simultaneously using the mouse.

Which brings me to the point of this blog post: There is no reason why anyone, under any circumstances, should have to hold down the control, alt, and shift keys while simultaneously mousing around. It's just too much to ask of any human being.

Second Life is just plain hard to use. Everybody who knows anything about Second Life knows that. Even people who love Second Life are frank about it. Journalist Wagner James Au (no relation to Yrs Trly) writes: "For anyone who is not a committed techie, early adopter, hardcore gamer, someone with very specific goals, or entering with an experienced guide, the current Second Life interface is intimidating and obscure, and almost perverse in its learning curve, easily two hours at minimum; much, much more for any real proficiency."

To which I respond: Two hours? Au is a smarter fellow than I; I think I've spent almost 25 hours in SL over the past week and a half and I'm still a complete spaz.

The other major usability problem SL has is that it's hard to find things. When you first arrive in the world, you fumble around until you find the Search function. Click on the "most popular places" tab and you're confronted with a list of what appear to be about a billion sex clubs and casinos.

There are many players at Second Life -- called "residents" in the game culture -- who make a point of greeting newcomers and showing them the ropes. Tateru Nino and Dirjha Summers, who I've mentioned frequently in these posts, are two. And, if your Google-fu is mighty, you can find many Web sites and blogs that will guide you as to what's going on in SL. (Some of my favorites: Baedeker, Au's New World Notes, the Official Linden Blog, and Second Life Insider.)

But, still, it's confusing.

SL has its own language. Residents talk about rezzing, sims and builds, about places that are laggy, about RL, about avies and alts.

Second Life provides orientation areas when you first log into the world, where you can get instruction and practice in using the world. But they're not as helpful as they could be. Indeed, I was in the orientation area a half-hour before I even realized I was in an orientation area. How's that for confusing -- I mean, an essential part of good training is that the student should actually be aware that he's being trained....

Clearly, SL needs to be easier to use. Much easier. And there needs to be some kind of beginners' guide to places to go and things to do. Something that you're handed as soon as you arrive in the world.

But Second Life shouldn't be too easy to use, and it shouldn't be too easy to find things.

I take a small pride in knowing that control-alt-shift-mouse trick, the way people are proud of catching a big fish or making a solid drive in golf. Clay Shirky, faculty at the interactive telecommunication program at New York University, writes, in an essay about virtual worlds and online role-playing games: "If all you knew about golf was that you had to get this ball in that hole, your first thought would be to hop in your cart and drive it over there. But no, you have to knock the ball in, with special sticks. This is just about the stupidest possible way to complete the task, and also the only thing that makes golf interesting. Games create an environment conducive to the acceptance of artificial difficulties."

(By the way, I'm quoting Clay out of context. Grossly. His essay is an argument why Second Life, and worlds like it, will never be anything more than a niche activity, practiced by only a few people. It'll never be mainstream. I don't agree, but it's a great essay. Go read it.)

One of the points of Steven Johnson's excellent book Everything Bad Is Good For You is that in contemporary computer games, like Grand Theft Auto, figuring out how to play the game is part of the game. When we were children, we picked up a board game like Monopoly, learned the rules, and then started playing, but in a video game, you start out not knowing how the game works and what you're supposed to do, and figuring out how that stuff works is part of the play.

And that's why Second Life shouldn't be too easy. Because if it were, it would cut down on the fun of figuring it all out, learning from other, more experienced players, and sharing what you know when you get more experienced.

There's a lot more to Second Life than that. There's socializing with other players, building things, enjoying the things that other people have built and created, and doing business online. But learning is essential to the enjoyment of the world.

P.S. "Rezzing" means to build something, or make it appear in SL. "Sims" are simulations, or areas of Second life that are fixed up to look like something -- a museum, a house, ancient Rome. I'm pretty sure that a "build" is pretty close in meaning to a "sim" -- it's a reference to what's been built in a sim, rather than the location. A sim that's "laggy" means it's slow, generally because it's popular and the servers are struggling to keep up. "Avies," are "avatars," your alter ego in Second Life -- mine's Ziggy Figaro, IM me and say howdy if you're in-game. And I'm pretty sure that "alts" are alternative avatars: each individual, human user can have multiple avatars.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
hmmph
50%
50%
hmmph,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/2/2013 | 6:54:42 AM
re: Second Life Is Hard To Use -- Is That A Bug Or A Feature?
I really disagree with the main conclusions of this post. Here it is almost 7 years later and... SL is STILL really, really hard to use and to learn. That's just freakin' ridiculous on its face. But when the author says "But Second Life shouldn't be too easy to use, and it shouldn't be too easy to find things.", ummm... no. So that's how we should think of software usability (even a game)? Make excuses for the fact that the designers and implementors of it seemed to make it almost impossible to learn on purpose? I think not. And "And that's why Second Life shouldn't be too easy. Because if it were, it would cut down on the fun of figuring it all out, learning from other, more experienced players, and sharing what you know when you get more experienced. " ummm... no. In the year 2013 we should be past making excuses for crappy software that doesn't have an ounce of usability thought put into it, or on top of that, their seeming unwillingness to take the time to make clear, understandable instructions available for all the glorious capabilities they infuse into their fantastical software in their mystical white robes (would it kill them to take a few freakin' minutes to produce detailed, step-by-step videos on YouTube, for pete's sake? (And don't even talk to me about the quantity, quality, and up-to-dateness of the videos about SL that ARE out there on YouTube - they're pathetic.).) That's been a peeve of mine for a long time when it comes to software - understand that I've been writing code since 1974 and have been a fulltime, professional software engineer for over 30 years now. It is painfully apparent to me that Second Life is a bunch of crap hacked together by scriptkiddies over the last 15 years who couldn't write reliable, user-friendly software if their lives depended on it. (Even though, as previously mentioned, IF ONLY **SOMEONE** AT LINDEN LABS WOULD TAKE THE TIME TO MAKE ACCURATE, UP-TO-DATE, STEP-BY-STEP, EASY TO UNDERSTAND VIDEO TUTORIALS OF ALL THE MOST COMMON FUNCTIONALITY, THEN IT WOULD BE ONE **THOUSAND** PERCENT EASIER, LESS FRUSTRATING, AND MORE ENJOYABLE EXPERIENCE.) Now... here's the punch line: I have been using SL for over 10 years, am using it today and having a lot of fun in it, DESPITE all of the previous comments. How do ya like them apples? Only, over that 10 years, I've gotten so frustrated with SL about 50 freakin' times that I've wanted to throw my PC through the window and STOP using it, until I wait a few weeks for my blood pressure to go down and then I return to it. So why do I keep using it? Simply because there's no better VR alternative. THAT'S IT. But NOT because I adopt the "oh, it's hard so that's a badge of honor" and "it being so hard to learn is part of the fun of it" b.s. To adopt that attitude, is, in my opinion, simply letting the creators of the software off the hook for (1) making it inherently hard in the first place, and (2) their unwillingness to take the time to make easy to understand "how to" tutorials. Now (1) may be water under the bridge (and actually, I will, from the standpoint of a software engineer, actually confirm that it IS water under the bridge, because the likely millions of lines of code of the product at this point and its complexity does indeed make it IMPOSSIBLE to change that factor). But (2)? Come on people. How hard is it to make good tutorials? NOT. THAT. FREAKIN. HARD. As I've learned each and every thing over the years that I know how to do in SL now, I've considered taking on that challenge myself for a few of the most common things, only... THAT SHOULD BE LL'S FREAKIN' JOB, AT LEAST IF THEY ACTUALLY DO WANT A LOT OF PEOPLE TO USE THEIR FREAKIN' SOFTWARE INSTEAD OF IT GOING OUT OF EXISTENCE. Plus it's pretty darn frustrating introducing friends to SL and spending that first few hours with them showing them how inane and difficult it is to do certain things, and having at least 50% of them give up even WITH an experienced person walking them through it (if I had a nickel...) Well, that's the end of my rant. The bottom line is that it simply is not acceptable to just "take" stuff like this (how hard it is to use/learn SL) and excuse it (Stockholm Syndrome, anyone?). Rather, makers of software, ANY software, should be held accountable for its crappiness. And after all, isn't holding them accountable for it the only way for it to get better (at least a little bit, over time, plus dragging good learning materials out of them)?
Server Market Splitsville
Server Market Splitsville
Just because the server market's in the doldrums doesn't mean innovation has ceased. Far from it -- server technology is enjoying the biggest renaissance since the dawn of x86 systems. But the primary driver is now service providers, not enterprises.
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
InformationWeek Tech Digest September 23, 2014
Intrigued by the concept of a converged infrastructure but worry you lack the expertise to DIY? Dell, HP, IBM, VMware, and other vendors want to help.
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
InformationWeek Radio
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.