Drayke Newall
-
Posts
1,269 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Knowledge Base
Posts posted by Drayke Newall
-
-
8 minutes ago, Katherine Heartsong said:
To one point above, @Drayke Newall you said ...
The question fundamentally assumes that Maslow's theory is correct. I'm saying it's not, in any meaningful way, at anything more than a broad generalization, so the answer might be that it doesn't impact or help SL in any way at all. So the OP's question itself is irrational and can't be answered.
Fair enough and that's your prerogative to say as such.
8 minutes ago, Katherine Heartsong said:There are many more thoughtful user experience theories for gaming that SL could look at to increase retention, engagement, and create growth. Maslow may not be the best way to approach the issue.
Fully understand and agree that other theories should be looked at. I, coffee and others think differently on Maslow, which is probably very clear by now.
ETA
Perhaps it is a matter of whether a person has used or referenced Maslow's hierarchy before makes them believe it is correct. I have used it a lot in architecture and other fields, so of course I will believe it works and is correct.
That doesn't mean to say I will try to force someone to think the same way, however, in the case of these forums, I as, I believe you do, have the right to at least contribute to the discussion in an effort to edify ourselves on the matter. Who knows through such discussion someone could change my mind.
Sadly, it seems this thread is not discussion or learning of the topic but more about outright scorn of others ideas or personalities.
So as just like Coffee, I've had enough. Between certain individuals refusing to respond yet continue to tell lies about what I have said when they reply to others, and now some suggesting that I have an mental issue or a mental condition of liking to "beat them up until they agree" it just not worth it.
I feel sorry for those that only seem to think such negative things about others.
So after this edit, I'm out.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:
@Drayke Newall - please just allow people to disagree with you.
If you think people disagreeing with you is "unfair" or "unjust", or if you are in the mode of "OMG Someone on the Internet is WRONG, I better beat them up until they agree"..that's OK too.
If you want to have "the last word", that's OK too.
I'm just tired of it. 🙂
So you can post in an effort to refute my claims without saying you disagree (until now) yet I cant post refuting your claims? Its a discussion forum expect discussion if you post.
If you disagree with a post I have posted, say as such and move on, as will I. Just like both Scylla and I agreed to disagree and left it as that. Otherwise expect me or any other person to try and have a discussion with you.
That said, you cant also expect someone not to reply when you keep coming back to the topic and reposting over and over trying to refute them or post short posts like "..Maslow's Hierarchy has nothing to do with "Game Theory".
Then to say that I have an issue with allowing people disagreeing with me because you continue to come into the thread posting lines like the aforementioned. If you post something expect a response. If you disagree say you do and move on.
It is a forum, people can reply to your posts. If you disagree with the entire notion of the thread, with all due respect, leave it and dont post.
No wonder Coffee got fed up with the responses and attitudes in this thread and quit the entire forums.
That all said, fine agree to disagree.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:
The problem we're running into here is that Arielle and Drayke see SL as a game and seem to want to make it into one to a greater degree
I have asked you this before and you simply put a laugh emoji on it, which I guess is your attempt to bypass it as you cant find any evidence as such. So I will ask you again, WHERE have I stated in this thread I want to make SL more game like using this theory?
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:
Just because there is a situation where humans operate, does not mean there is an appropriate psychological model for that situation.
Why not? As I mentioned above in my last post Maslow's Hierarchy has been used in Architectural theory for decades.
10 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:New models cannot necessarily be applied retroactively to old theories and models, and vice-versa.
You do know that Maslow updated his theory. As have other more recent phycologists further updated it. Maslow added additional segments to his original 5 eventually becoming 8 and some have further updated it to 13.
-
1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:
The short answer is, because "that's now how Science works". You cannot take scientific theory / model "A" from one scientific discipline which applies to theory / model "B" from another scientific discipline, and then say "therefore, I must be able to apply "B" to "A" also.
Ah, yes you can. Take DNA hard drives. Their entire construction and theory is based from taking the theory of how DNA stores data in the body (biological science) and replicating that in a nanotechnological way to create a mechanical storage device that can store as much data as a human dna strand can (mechanical science). It was also by creating and using hard drives (mechanical science) that it was seen similar to DNA storage (biological science) that enabled them to use the theory to create the DNA hard drive (mechanical science).
But putting that aside, we are not talking about using Maslow's theory in conjunction with another field of science. We are talking about using his theory of human condition to create a system/tutorial or, dare I say it, game for the same human condition. To put it another way, the person plays a game because they want the middle of the pyramid, a sense of belonging, but to achieve that they first need to know how to survive in the game (navigation, abilities, etc) and feel safe so that they can achieve that.
I just cant understand how people are not getting this.
I was even taught how Maslow's theory relates to an architectural structure - a building, and that's Architectural theory not even game theory. For example at quick search here is an article of Maslow's updated Theory relating to architecture and interior design. You can even search for how it is used in architecture in the original hierarchy.
Are people going to suggest now that I can't apply Maslow's theory to a house or building design because a building doesn't need to 'eat' or the theory is out dated so doesn't apply? Despite the very theory being used in building design for decades?
1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:I have noticed in this thread that some posters are putting different entries, into Maslow's Hierarchy pyramid levels: adding entries to levels, moving entries between levels, and tellingly - even (jokingly) adding levels. The minute you do that, it is no longer "Maslow's Hierarchy of Human Needs". It is just some model which you are "making fit".
Yet, my examples do not do that, nor am I saying to do that. I have not suggested that anywhere in my posts. Nor did the OP or those arguing in favour of the OP.
As a different example, this pyramid uses the same Maslow's hierarchy, yet just words them differently yet still meaning the same. I.e. physiological needs is just another word for survival etc. They then provide a description on what each mean as far as a game goes.
I personally would have used safety instead of progress as it still works in relation to a game or system or in this case second life as a user still needs to feel safe, identity etc as previously mentioned.
By rewording the segments, it doesn't change (should be kept as safety) the fact that it is still Maslow's Hierarchy. It also keeps the theory that you need the lower sections to keep the higher ones. If a person can not navigate/survive the world, they can not improve gear (or feel the need for safety) as without the former the game/system/program and user couldn't advance, and so on.
-
2
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, diamond Marchant said:
My point is that Maslow is an unsound idea and there are better alternatives. That is the position of the HBR article.
But what does that point have to do with the topic? The topic isn't if Maslow's theory is relevant, unsounded or outdated. It is how that theory impacts game design and could impact and help second life. As yet, no person in this thread has countered the OP.
Posting a link to an article about how a Harvard business school says it is unsound or there are better alternatives because it doesn't work in a workplace, is not an argument when we are talking about the theory in relation to a game, or as a comparison between game developers using it in games and how that can be utilised in SL for retention.
Just like saying we dont eat in SL also isn't a counter as once again evidence has been provided showing that Maslow's theory and its adaption can apply to tutorials, e-learning, game design, etc.
The only way to counter it is to prove that game developers do not use it in games or the theory of it isn't adapted in some form to a game in an effort to help user retention, engagement, investment, etc.
47 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:..Maslow's Hierarchy has nothing to do with "Game Theory".
The problem with 'game theory' is that it can be applied to any form of field. Marketing, business, phycology, biology, Philosophy, etc. Don't believe me look here showing that it can apply to all fields of sciences, business etc. Game theory - Wikipedia
What people in this thread are basically saying is gamification, game theory or using those ideas in an effort to retain players (be it tutorial etc) cant apply to Maslow's Hierarchy as Maslow's Hierarchy is about 'RL stuff' and the RL human condition.
If, game theory per the wiki entry shows that it can be used in all form of sciences, then why cant the reverse, using those sciences to improve a users engagement, investment, fun, retention, help, etc be true?
-
1
-
1
-
-
38 minutes ago, diamond Marchant said:
I read It’s All a Game: Video Games, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, & Big Data | Acxiom and discovered it's a marketing piece for a company that sells big data services. My favorite part is "Ok, enough with the psychology… Enter big data"
Seeing as you edited your post after I responded...
I know it is, never suggested it wasn't. I even, in my post, conveniently stated it was data for marking games.
My point was in that example was that the hierarchy can be used elsewhere not a literal translation like you are interpreting it as.
38 minutes ago, diamond Marchant said:Also this marketing piece references this https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html
The section titled Critical Evaluation is interesting.
Still missing mine and others points.
-
3 minutes ago, diamond Marchant said:
What I do understand is that Maslow has been debated for 80 years and some have altered or adapted it to their needs. You might find this instructive What Maslow’s Hierarchy Won’t Tell You About Motivation
That's nice, but to use your own argument... "Also this paper is specifically about "workplaces". Second Life is not "a workplace".
If I cant adapt (as you have pointed out - SL isn't a game) evidence for an argument in favour that Maslow's Hierarchy does apply to Second Life using its use in the gaming industry to design games, then you cant then use an argument to try and counter my argument and evidence based on evidence arguing Maslow's Hierarchy isn't applicable because your evidence shows it to be not relevant and debated from a workplace perspective.
Cant have it both ways.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, diamond Marchant said:
Also this paper is specifically about "gamification" and "eLearning". Second Life is not "eLearning" and is not a "game" in the sense of having goals, rules, competitions, and winners/losers.
Well, apologies for posting something that focused on e-learning to a post where I was talking about tutorials. Where, you know, people are learning. Believe it or not, tutorials in games and e-learning do fall under the same umbrella.
Also, you did not look at the actual paper at all did you? Obvious when you have quoted words such as 'suggested' and 'assume' to which belong to a summary a random person (the article writer) made of the paper and words not mentioned at all in the actual paper.
You, like others, are also failing to realise that Maslow's Hierarchy can be adapted to systems that are relevant or can even be used as a basis for creating even a new hierarchy based on the same understanding of human psyche in relation to a said subject. Context is key and adapting it to that context is also relevant in the discussion.
Just because the pyramid says food under physiological or housing under Safety doesn't mean it needs to be taken in a literal sense, which seems to be the only way other posters have taken it. I have mentioned this before in a post but apparently that, like a lot of posts from people saying Maslow's Hierarchy applies/is useful, also fell on deaf ears.
For example, safety in an online environment can be such things as, is your RL identity safe in SL? Is your data safe in SL (aka copyright of content created)?, Can I be hurt? (i.e. think meta and their issue with the person complaining about someone touching 'their virtual self'). All of these fall under that same bracket of safety, however, are adapted to a context surrounding what second life (and other virtual worlds) is. Seeing as this thread has turned into a 'sex needs to stay hidden' thread, that 'safety' section on the hierarchy can even be applied to that, i.e. are under 16 year olds safe from adult content? Do they have access to it?, etc.
Those basics are the fundamental design choices in Second Life AND games, just as Maslow's hierarchy suggests. They are a necessary foundation for ALL of those other segments to be supported on. Without that statement in the ToS that copyright remains yours for user created content (licenses to use to LL) - aka SAFETY, second life content would be a lot less than what we have now affecting the self actualisation segment . Without that 'are teens safe from adult content', those educational institutions would not come.
As another example, here is a pyramid that was discussed as part of a computer game design conference that was modified using Maslow's Heirachy as a basis to form something to the context of gaming.
Here is a discussion on how it relates to using the pyramid to collect data on users and user types for game marketing or just game production It’s All a Game: Video Games, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, & Big Data | Acxiom
You may not understand it, or even not believe it, but games have been and still are created with data obtained through an understanding of Maslow's Hierarchy and that understanding utilised in a way to improve the user experience and engagement in said game.
But lets forget all about that as, like you said, Second Life isn't a game.🙄 The one common response here to explain away any notion of commonality Second Life has to 'that' word or any improvement from 'that' which could be adapted to SL to help retention or a topic 'that' is a discussion about in relation to SL.
If from that and previous posts you cant understand where those of us saying that hierarchy does apply, both as a fundamental foundational aspect of the core functionality of Second Life itself, right up to the learning aspect a new user goes through in an effort to not only teach but retain them, then I dont know how else to show it and to be honest there isn't much point to try.
Now I'm off to see a client about designing a house where the foundation allows to build a house safely, to give it's occupants a place of belonging where they can have respect from others and a sense of achievement to enable them to achieve self actualisation. Oh wait what am I talking about, Maslow's Hierarchy doesn't apply to a house or objects etc, its a flawed notion of a persons psyche. 🙄
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:
But the c-word isn't viewed as being quite as nasty there as it is across the Atlantic.
In Australia it isn't viewed as nasty at all. Almost to the point that it is replacing Mate which is saying something because everyone is mate in aus.
-
2
-
1
-
-
I'm all for all demographics to be represented. Even my posts on user types and meeting the needs of all of those I hope conveys that.
That said, like Coffee said, sex is shunned in SL and by LL whereas it should be advertised and shown off it is a major draw card to Second Life despite what people in this thread seem to think.
If you dont think adult content is what keeps the lights on in SL and has for years, then ask all the furniture content creators whether their general or mature rated furniture outsells or even comes close to their adult furniture content sales.
Go to marketplace and click search without putting any search terms in with GMA filters and then filter by best selling. Top items sold on MP and for many, many pages it is filled with adult content and bdsm, far outselling general or mature rated content.
It is the largest demographic in SL yet it never gets a mention in any form by LL?
-
1
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:
I think at this point we are sort of talking in circles, or past each other.
To be clear, I am not saying that there isn't some kind of dynamic at work that makes people feel in some sense "compelled" to do certain things -- upgrade their avatar, for instance. Of course there is. And that's probably something that should be built into the new user experience as a "lever" to motivate at least some to progress further on the platform.
What I am saying is that the Maslow model is an irrelevancy in this context (however apt or inapt it might have been in the context used by Rosedale).
I am going to use one last analogy in the hope that I can make clear what I am getting at.
Say someone points a gun at you in RL and is threatening to kill you. That is, literally, an existential moment, and your responses are going to be predicated on your awareness of that. This is a moment that fits at the bottom of the Maslow pyramid.
Now, say someone -- maybe even an NPC -- points a gun at you in a video game, and you realize that if you're "shot" you will lose your progress to that point, and all of the items you've gathered along the way.
There is something at "stake" in both cases -- in the video game, you probably don't want to start back at the last spawning point, and you don't want to lose that lovely grenade launcher you picked up before that. You don't want to be shot.
But what is at stake in the first case is so vastly disproportionate to the consequences in the second case that your responses will be entirely different. Using the first as a "model" for the second just makes no sense whatsoever; they mean entirely different things, despite the fact that the second is a representation of the first, and that there are negative consequences associated with both situations.
You're not "surviving" in Second Life; you are role playing survival, just as you are in a sense "role playing" sitting on a couch in your Linden home, or dancing at a club using animations.
So, yeah, by all means lets talk about "incentivizing" and "motivating" new sign ups. But drop this stupid and utterly inapplicable model. It's not the Maslow hierarchy of needs you're using: it's a virtual simulacrum of it that bears the same resemblance to the original that the virtual bullet bears to a real one.
As I said, we will have to agree to disagree. I see what you are saying, however, I and many others see it differently. Maslow's Hierarchy has been looked into by game developers and designers for many, many years and used as a way to not only understand why people play games but also to 'retain' a player in said game. It worked so well that the modern survival game is almost a replica of the Hierarchy.
Whilst yes, Second Life is a different form of game, the same Hierarchy is there that can be used in exactly the same way. Understand why a person plays and how to use that to retain a person. Just search Maslow's Hierarchy in game design and you will get plenty of writeups of people discussing it for game design all the way back to the late 2000's.
What Coffee posted is not new. Its old and has been working for developers for a very long time. Even down to the reason why that Mobile game forces you to pay-up after a certain time or make you wait.
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:
No, I I think making more little games @ these welcome areas is a lost cause. You may think you have some new good n better ones but I see them as lacking.
So tell me, please as I am at a loss. What little games do you think I am suggesting people play at the welcome area? I cant understand how a tutorial in your mind is a game.
-
2
-
1
-
-
31 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:
The overwhelming majority of people who start SL leave almost immediately.
This is true of all virtual worlds, we're just slightly better at holding on to a fraction of a percentage more. (This is almost certainly due to social momentum more than anything systemic or inherent to the platform. Having a friend here first significantly lowers the barrier to entry more than all other factors combined.)
Our needs .. as in the tiny minority who stay, have been met. Yours, mine, everyone in this thread. But we're the outliers.
I really can not overstated this enough. We are not representative. At all.
If I had to guesstimate numbers, way less than 0.1% last more than a single session here.
The massive turn over is in large part the driving force behind LL's two decade quest for "better people". They have solid numbers demonstrating the core "virtual world" concept's popularity, but something is so fundamentally wrong that literally no one stays.
Second Life is failing to achieve growth and has been failing pretty consistently since the initial bubble.
I think the easiest way to see how many people actually leave second life is through login numbers and sign ups. I dont have the latest numbers but in 2019 Firestorm said that roughly 540,000 unique logins happened consecutively on their viewer each month from 2017-2019 so say 600,000-650,000 for all viewers combined.
If we assume those 650,000 are the same people every month +/- the ones that login and never return it sounds pretty good. But then you have to take into consideration that from LL own admission there is over 350,000 new accounts created every month. Now even if say 50,000 of those were alts of existing accounts (and that's a stretch), that leaves 300,000 new registrations every month yet, the unique logins stay the same. Not to mention that by LL own admission there are over 70million accounts made ever.
So if the unique logins isn't increasing but 300,000 new accounts are created every month, that is an ENORMOUS retention problem.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:
But I think you need to understand that an equal number, perhaps even more, would hate it if SL turned into a game.
If you think any of what I have said implies me thinking Second Life should turn into a non fun competitive game, you have not only missed my point entirely, but have also not even grasped the point of what the whitepaper I linked was talking about or even what, I can imagine, Coffee is talking about.
I will compare Second Life with a game (oh no, the horror). Second life's first experience for the average new user is like a person spawning at the starting zone of WoW with 100 npc's around them with quest markers over their head and the developers decided to leave the user to work out which of those 100 quest giving npc's gives the very first quest to start the main storyline. Then, when they work it out and start their story, they have to log-out in a bush because all the PvPers will kill them as soon they log back in as the devs decided not to include a safe zone in to 'rest' at. All the while having no reward money or showing them how to earn said money to buy new things to help them in their adventure.
As it stands now any new person coming into second life lands at welcome island does a simple tutorial of 'this is how you move' and 'this is how you dress'. There is NOTHING in the past or present welcome areas that shows a person interactively WHAT they can do, HOW they can survive (i.e. make money) and WHERE they can go or how to get there. (The new one still stops way short). It is an abrupt and harsh end in the form of, here is the Mariana Trench now learn how to swim or is identical to the aforementioned analogy of WoW with 100 quest givers.
I in no post here or in any other thread have ever said SL should have a point system, be competitive, turned into a game at the exclusion of others for new users to be retained. I have, however, said that part of the new user experience should allow people to SEE (give direction and a goal) that fun games can be made and played in Second Life should they wish to peruse that as part of their adventure in SL. Yay, LL finally listened and added Laser Tag. Shame it wasn't a little more use of NPC's and experience tools but beggars cant be choosers.
I think a lot of the problem in this thread and others is that when someone mentions or compares a game with second life or suggests that Second Life adopt the minutest game system, certain individuals instantly think that people are suggesting to turn SL into a game. Every person has their own need when playing a game or a creative engine like second life that is there to make them stay. A lot of that, in my opinion, does fall into those two bottom sections of that pyramid, just as the ones above also do.
I remember a thread not to long ago where some where suggesting to add more scripting ability to create better more functional games in second life. Such a thing would not affect any person that didn't want to create said games or play said games in second life, but would have profoundly impacted the fun and retention of people who want to play or create games in second life. All hell broke loose as people, just as now, jumped up and down saying how dare people suggest a thing as would be turning second life into a game, when in fact it wasn't and would never affect those people yet, would meet the needs of those specific user types that wanted that aspect to improve.
-
2
-
-
26 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:
Everyone has things that they identify as "needs" that aren't really so. I "need" that book, or this new blouse. If I don't have this particular dress, I'll look shabby at the reception we're going to next week. I need this SUV because the neighbours laugh at my ancient hatchback. Etc.
If I don't eat in RL, I die. If I don't sleep, I will also die. If I don't have clothes and shelter, I'll likely be arrested and/or freeze to death in the winter.
These are needs, and they are the things that Maslow is talking about: having sufficient resources to avoid dying, and being able to live a safe, secure, and stable life with enough leisure (and money) to begin to branch out into other parts of human culture.
The relationship between Maslow's list of "needs" and your own is like the relationship between RL sex and SL sex, or RL dancing and SL dancing, or RL clothes and SL clothes: the SL "equivalents" are representations and analogues, not actual things. If you don't succeed at RP in SL, you watch a movie or read a book instead -- in other words, you engage in another cultural activity that is higher up the pyramid, just as SL itself is.
You are taking Maslows list literally based on what is written in the pyramid sections RL wise and not looking at it in a game based way. No one argues with you that SL players dont need food etc to survive. Second life is however a virtual world where in essence your character is what you are RPing. Sure there isn't the threat of death if your character doesn't get its basic needs of food etc, but there is the threat that if those basic needs of why a person joined for them to enjoy and participate are not met or they are not directed to means of finding those needs then their account will 'die' by not coming back.
All games are like this and that is what the link I provided on page 9 discusses in the white paper. Each user type has its own requirements based on that pyramid. Whilst some users can start higher up the pyramid, other user types cannot and start at the bottom to progress. Those that start higher up also gradually start to need those at the bottom to continue to enjoy the platform and stay. A circle of life so to speak and keeping in mind Second Life is a different beast to a normal game.
From that whitepaper listed:
"To summarise, Maslow and Pink state that an individual is motivated to act in a way that fulfils their needs, specifically if a need is particularly urgent. By linking a game’s mechanics directly to these needs, the game designer can motivate players to act in certain ways – this is the core of gamification."
That line from that whitepaper mentioned above says what I am arguing. Using the meeting of those 'needs' to motivate people to stay within Second Life. Second Life as a game has certain specific needs that users (different user types) feel are urgent.
In the case of a person joining for RP their NEED for them to stay playing SL is to have a mesh body and clothes that allow them to participate in that. The bottom of that pyramid. If that urgent NEED is not met then those people as you say can go read a book etc. But in not meeting that urgent need, Second Life does not retain that user as they move elsewhere. By not meeting that urgent need of those lower basic pyramid sections for that user type, retention is not possible.
Likewise, a person looking for relationship (sexual or not) will start higher up on the pyramid and they dont at the first instance need those lower parts of the pyramid like shelter, security and clothes. But just like that white paper suggests, eventually if those lower requirements aren't met, they are unlikely to continue to participate either as eventually they will find that especially in sl, adult activities require things of which a full circle envelops whereby they then need the shelter (private secluded area, lindens, 'gear and certain avatar parts' to continue to participate in their chosen reason of joining sl.
The only user type that fits outside of the pyramid and goes to the top right away and stays there with no requirements of the lower sections or needing to go back to them is an explorer who by the nature of SL requires nothing except content to explore.
It is thereby in the interest of Linden Lab to direct those other users to something that allows them to meet that urgent need. If that is showing them by interaction in a tutorial how to create something they can sell to make lindens to buy the item (or create it themselves) or if that requires LL showing in their welcome area ways for people to earn those Lindens to buy those items to meet their needs then that is what needs to be done to direct them.
Now you say that you agree and have no problem with those things I mentioned the Welcome Area needs. You perhaps think that that like me will help retain players. The difference is, I am basing those welcome area changes I mentioned on what user types play sl and their needs to be met to be retained based on that pyramid.
You may say that SL 'needs' are just 'wants' as they are not required for 'living' based on that pyramid but what I, others and that whitepaper linked are saying is that those wants, in the case of the game, turn into something a user 'needs' to stay active and participate (alive) in Second Life.
So in this case I think it is a matter of agreeing to disagree.
-
6
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:
Money trees are gone but is there anything out there to take their place?
Well there are the fishing games that give lindens however those are locked after a certain time whereby you need lindens to purchase bait or land to grow bait.
The only one that I could recommend and would suggest Mentors recommend for new players (and any other players) needing lindens is Crystal Craze. Basically you get a hud and basket, use the hud to tp to places that have crystals and then collect them and go back to the hq to 'cash out'. They have anti grief and anti-botting built in as well. It runs the same as the money tree just with crystals and modernised.
Lots of older accounts play Crystal Craze and Fishing, as well as Linden Realms, but Crystal Crave and Linden Realms are the best for new players.
-
1
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:
So these things are "needful" only by analogy with RL; they are not actually necessary to one's survival in SL.
I agree that perhaps some people do not 'need' these things for retention in second life, however in my experience a lot of new people I have met do want those things. There were plenty of 'hotels' in second life a few years ago and still a lot now where new players basically can get a free room to live in. They are always full of new players and almost impossible to get a room now if they haven't closed up shop already.
As to clothing, yes there are always going to be those that keep the ones they are given or nothing at all, however there are also plenty (if not more) of people who are the opposite.
Now I by no means can say I have talked to every new person that has ever come into SL as no one here can say either. The vast majority though that I have met have always asked the three following things over and over:
- How can I get lindens
- Where can i log in and out safely
- How can I make my avatar look better
Now you say that no one needs those things to survive SL which in is basic form is true. When however a person doesn't get those things and leaves, to me that says the opposite. When those things are the primary requests of new players and them leaving or they see a stigma around them as new players looking like they do, to me that is the point when the 'when' becomes a 'need' and SL has always been at that point. This is why LL have never been able to solve the retention issue as they ignore that the vast majority of things to do in SL do 'need' those basic things. LL didn't make it mandatory, the users did.
10 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:Where I would object is if they were made to be needful here. In other words, if new residents were compelled to find shelter, or buy new clothing (including freebies) in order to continue further into the platform. That is the implication of Maslow's pyramid: that one must first obtain these bare essentials before proceeding further up the ladder.
No one is asking to make such things mandatory, but aren't they already mandatory now, driven by the user? There will always be people that dont need such things. There will however be people that do. So lets look at the latter people as far as the pyramid goes and colour code the interactions based on the pyramid colours.
If a new person doesn't have a home and they log out at a random place do they have the next tier in the pyramid 'safety/security'? No. They are subject to possibly logging in on a griefer, a person completely naked, a sim that no longer exists, a sim that no longer is owned by that person that allowed them to be there, a sim that is full (get booted to social island), etc.
If they dont have better clothes do they feel safer when people call them a noob, ignore them, dont allow them in sims? No. If they then dont have the financial security, can they then buy better items to wear and a better body so as they can then go to those places they are interested in or popular without being ridiculed/kicked out? No. Sure there are other places to go, but if those aren't the popular places they are interested in why stay? If they are insecure about themselves in RL, this will reflect in SL as they would want to look as good as they can to not feel insecure etc.
If those people feel insecure about themselves and their appearance due to not having better clothes or the lindens to buy them can they then move to the next level Belonging?
Say if a person heard SL has good RP or saw they have a harry potter themed RP region and joined for that. Can they belong to that RP community without Lindens or in theme clothes? No. They will get rejected at the places they are interested in as they require specific clothing and body and theme that require Lindens to purchase. Can they move up to the next level 'Belonging' which is friends, relationships, belonging to a group/family etc? No.
That person that is interested in SL because of RP leaves as they cant participate in that RP without the clothes, lindens etc. That person that is insecure or shy leaves because they cant find a place to feel safe or not be ridiculed etc. There are many other such instances. I know when I first joined i was insecure. Luckily Money Trees were still a thing and freebie items had the same quality as store bought items etc so I went around collecting Lindens and freebies so as I can look decent enough to even try go to a club etc.
-
2
-
2
-
1 hour ago, Rowan Amore said:
I suggested a few years ago that new residents could earn tokens of some kind by completing certain objectives like the ones you've mentioned. Then, instead of purchasing Ls right away, they could spend those tokens on items in the New Resident store. We know LL now has token capability (casino chips) so why not use those more.constructively.
They did this in the welcome area 2 versions ago, so one before their auto attach hud one. They offered a token each time they completed the 'tutorial' which was similar to what it is now click a button etc. The store they had though was very small and offered not good quality items. I got my pair of shoes there i still wear on one of my alts. Cost 2 tokens for the shoes and i think you got a total of 10 all up.
Could buy hair, basic set of one female and one male outfit parts, etc. It didnt work as the offerings you could use the tokens on were very limited and basic. No user created things either. Their freebie store they provided around 2006-2010 was better.
-
1
-
3
-
-
52 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:
But the OP's remarks are premised on a discussion of Maslow's hierarchy, and the idea that the lack of "needful" things -- the equivalent of food, shelter, clothing, etc. -- makes SL seem less "valuable" to noobs. And that's a very different model than what you've described here.
Not really as the premise is still there and those 'needful' things would indeed make SL more valuable as the investment is there, scarcity, possession, etc. Sure some cant be covered such as food, but then wouldn't that encompass stimulation of the mind in a gaming sense?
Take clothing for instance, most new players have that need or desire from the get go to get better clothes. The making of system layer clothes or tattoos as part of the clothing tutorial in some way meets those needs. As would a tutorial using the shopping region at the welcome area and marketplace to show how to buy, unpack, dress, etc.
The shelter has already been answered by the OP in the form of Linden Homes of which, whilst you cant force a person to buy a Linden Home/Premium, you can for example take them on a tour of the linden homes or even better offer a 14 day free trial of the linden homes ONLY without any other premium perks. This gives them the feel of shelter with the option to continue with it via purchasing premium or the 'plus' subscription for only mainland or look for other shelter options. Of course providing them through maybe a hud that auto attaches after their 14 days are up showing them other options such as how to navigate the land auctions, land sales search etc. This gives them the full tutorial of the whole land ownership covering all aspects and then leaves them with the option of how to proceed.
The safety and security comes as Prokofy mentioned, through ownership of land and a tutorial on how to secure your land if you want. Additionally, security and safety can also be in the form of financial security and safety. This is where they can offer places in the Games section of the tutorial on how to earn money through Linden Realms, Crystal Craze, etc. Or they can offer it as part of the tutorial where someone makes their 'tattoo' or 'object' and through the next tutorial shows them how to sell that item on marketplace.
I think Coffee is correct in that, those bottom things are essential to making SL feel more valuable to someone. Sure I wouldn't have used that specific pyramid 'as is' as it is more driven to RL psychology and needs to be adapted to 'games'. The problem is that people in the thread are taking it as a literal RL interpretation for a game which you cant do. That said, people have merged Maslow's hierarchy and the gamification idea I mentioned together for a gaming perspective.
For example: Connecting Gamification and Motivation Theory | theHRD (thehrdirector.com) . That link shows how the two and how they are relevant to 'players'. It also touches scarcity (along with possessions) which you highlighted earlier and which they place in that bottom section of the Pyramid.
-
2
-
3
-
-
6 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:
SL needs the flexibility to cater to those who, like you, might have preferred goals and challenges, and those who, like me, just wanted free form play and the ability to explore and socialize.
Therein lies the problem though. Does Second Life really cater to all user types? Would its existing userbase allow for it?
Anyone who reads Marczewski's Gamification will see that users are no different in SL than in a game.
The reasons people play games and their user type according to him are the following:
- Socialisers (interact and socialise with people) - Same as Second Life
- Free Spirits (Explore and create) - Same as Second Life for both explore and create
- Achievers (looking to improve, challenge themselves and overcome them) - Same as Second Life
- Philanthropists (help others or do things without reward) - Same as Second Life
- Players (want games, rewards, Role Play) - Same as Second Life
- Disruptors (grief) - Same as Second Life (unfortunately)
All of those user types are in SL. Does SL really cater to all of those adequately? In a sense yes, but also no.
I know, for instance, the mere suggestion that Second Life cater to a gaming user is met with scorn, such as this thread where people are outright opposed to the mere suggestion that SL cater to such needs even though, and I may be wrong, Coffee's original post didn't state to 'gamify' SL (turn it into Minecraft), but to instead try and adapt the new user experience and after to something that will give engagement and direction. The desire and tools to survive the wilds of Second Life.
Does that form of engagement need to be a game. No. It could be as simple as giving a person direction with a possibility of an end goal. For example look at the current and past welcome areas. They offer the following experience:
- Create account
- Login and rez
- do tutorial
- congrats you completed a vague tutorial
- what are you still doing here?
Sure the new area has a section labelled 'Create' or 'Games' but other than offering a very basic tutorial of what to do and not to do that is where it ends. There is a harsh and abrupt end to it.
Now everyone here is saying dont gamify SL etc, but fail to realise that gamification doesn't necessarily mean quests, points, achievements etc. Gamification could simply mean not limiting the tutorial to one region. Look at the new welcome area, the tutorial is on one central region, yet everything else is split. You learn about creating yet to actually create something you need to know firstly what a 'sandbox' is and secondly need to know that one is at the starting area.
Wouldn't it be better to make the tutorial experience over the entire 9 regions. Start at central region and do your basic tutorial of wsad, etc, and from there each other region connects based on content. Go right to learn how to create, located in the sandbox and explains how to build with basic prims/mesh in the sandbox where a new user can actually experience building. Then this links them to portals that may go to Builders Brewery for 'advanced building tutorials and out of world building' or direct them to other tutorial regions like shopping and dressing, clothing creation with BoM.
Put simply, they have done the basic tutorial and then can experience the actual thing as they go through the rest of the tutorial. Such a space offers a game like experience and meets the need of that bottom section of the pyramid in the OP. They get the achievement experience by creating their first object, buying their first item, making a new clothing BoM item, etc. All that in the first hour or two of their visit. All with or without a point system.
The final region could be the Motown region where they are then invited to a party/concert at that region at night or sometime in the week that celebrates and welcomes them to SL. It doesn't need to be live, could use 'bots' that are on stage but play music through the Motown stream.
The process wouldn't be much different to Minecraft that Coffee mentioned in the OP. Tutorial, learn to build, create clothes, wear them, explore, find, etc.
All that gamifying the starting experience without making it a game. All that experience, wonder, interaction, direction without making SL a game. All that near identical to Minecraft's starting experience without actually being a game.
-
1
-
2
-
16 hours ago, Gabriele Graves said:
I would start to fix things by accepting the email address of the account for login instead of user name. The user name could then removed completely, using just the Display Name which is the most flexible option and supports some characters from different languages.
The Display Name would become mandatory and set to the existing username initially but still allowed to be changed with existing rules.
By now all scripted systems much surely be using the UUID of the account to store data about avatars and those that aren't are already broken due to name changes anyway. The username functions could just return the display name so that they continue to work.
With just those changes I feel it would be much improved.Never going to happen as then LL would loose not only income due to loss of change last name requests but also a premium perk. If they make the Display Names to be charged USD to change or added to the premium perk in replacement of the username, then there will be uproar as 99% of people use a display name and change it regularly.
It is the same reason why LL would never allow an email address to be a handle with multiple accounts linked to that handle despite the huge benefits to the userbase and to a lesser extent LL, loss of income.
As to reusing last names, couldn't care less. Most last names back in the day were chosen not because a person liked them but because it was the best offered in the list at the time.
-
56 minutes ago, Jaylinbridges said:
And of course there will be fps changes as you swing the cam around to pick up new objects in the draw distance.
What do you mean by 'new objects'? If it is downloading those 'new' objects from the server to the cache, then you have completely missed the point of what I was saying.
It's pointless arguing anyway. I, like her had the same lag when moving around even though everything was downloaded to the cache. I too decided to stop and cam around due to that reason. It is also why I picked up on the 'issues' I mentioned previously as I was trying to work out where the lag was coming from.
Just because you didn't get lag doesn't mean others didn't.
-
1 hour ago, Jaylinbridges said:
The number of avatars has nothing to do with your initial landing lag.
Actually the number of avatars does impact the lag experienced in your initial landing. As does those that tp out and in, cross regions, use scripted objects, collide into physical objects etc. Even the effect of multiple avatars stacking on top of each other at a landing point and hitting into each other causes lag by affecting the server physics allowances.
Those little discs you see that move people away at the landing point are not just for personal space issues.
1 hour ago, Jaylinbridges said:Once the region in your draw distance is loaded in cache, there should be no lag.
You also seem to not understand (over and over) that lag doesn't just mean server to user lag due to downloading assets to your cache. Those assets of the whole region dont just load all at once from your cache in your view in a load and forget fashion. Lag can also be felt when the fps gets to low.
Even little things that you probably dont know about such as the frustum occlusion culling or the subscribe and unsubscribe object killing that second life uses. This requires the viewer to send data from the viewer to the server so as the server can tell the viewer what assets to load and unload.
This 'lag' FPS drop can be noticed quite easily by standing in one spot and spinning around as your computer hardware processes what the server is telling the viewer to load and unload from the viewer cache and view. The greater the complexity of the object or higher the texture and the higher your graphics settings (and limit of your computer hardware), the greater the fps drop and more lag felt. That data sent can also be seen in the UDP Data Received in the statistics bar and the network section (packets in and out and objects KB/s) as the packets are sent from the server to the viewer as you spin around.
That is just one other form of fps drop that can happen not to mention the lag produced server side. There are many, many other ways SL gives the user the feeling of lag and an fps drop that dont exist in other games.
So no, whilst there is initial landing lag, there are lots of other reasons why @Sam1 Bellisserian experienced the lag described.
-
1
-
3
-
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Why doesn't SL water have waves and swells?
in General Discussion Forum
Posted · Edited by Drayke Newall
Since when does 'server limitations' have anything to do with water effects in SL? Blame LL's GLACIAL movement in doing any meaningful update to the graphics engine, rendering code, viewer rendering, windlight (removal of features rather than adding), etc or just making a new viewer with a proper modern rendering/graphics engine.
As to the op's question... yes it is possible. You will however have to wait for the TPV to be released. A shame a TPV creator team of 1 or 2 can start doing what a 200+ staffed company like LL cant.
Here is the water and a new 'water prim' that is shown off in the Crystal Frost viewer alpha - a viewer using unity.