Some more updates on the interaction design front of Linden Labs. The focuspoint is the introduction to Second Life, and it’s steep learning curve. After Linden Labs announced their new User Experience Program, and one of the main targets of the new CEO seems to be to really improve the experience of Second Life over the course of 2008, the discussion surrounding the poor interface of the Second Life Client seems to have hit the blogosphere again. Which would obviously be good news for the Lab if they cared to listen.
Tateru Nino of Massively posted this great, great article of her taking a a friend trough the Second Life orientation program, showing some massive bloopers on the Labs part and rightfully wonders how the retention rate of Second Life is still 10%. As far as the report goes, even the most experience MMORPG user will have difficulty adopting SL’s clumsy attempt of introduction - as if they intentionally tried to keep users away from the platform. (I thought the orientation hud still referring to the old interface was truly one of the highlights).
‘Where is the Chat button?’ she asked, as I returned with coffee, ‘I don’t see it here anywhere.’
I leaned over and looked at the screen. Sure enough, the HUD referred to the ‘old school’ user-interface, rather than the current one. I explained this.
‘So, you’re telling me that in all the time since the user-interface was updated not… wait. How many people work at Linden Lab?’
Steve of ‘Connecting the Dots’ blog has a similar experience, and highlights why Second Life would not be your platform of choice for collaboration right now. It simply takes to much effort to even get the people to work with the interface, before even attempting to work with each other:
To use SL in a business setting for casual use isn’t practical (I’ve tried) since the training and learning costs are too high and get in the way of the intended reason and outcome of getting together to collaborate in the first place!
All in all it’s obvious there is a lot of work to be done for ‘M‘, and before they get started I really recommend them browsing trough this great article on ‘Social Interaction Design‘:
“Social interaction design is the design of social media. It encompasses Web 2.0 design practices and tools as well as a kind of social practices-oriented approach to user experience and interaction design. Social interaction design is the design of user and social engagement with social technologies. Because it’s for the world of web 2.0, it’s neither pure design theory nor straightforward engineering”
My key piece of advice would be the age old ‘keep it simple stupid’. Prioritize the basics, make a smooth learning curve to getting around (chat and navigation). People will be naturally curious about the secondary layer of information such as avatar customization and camera manipulation as their knowledge progresses.
Another suggestion would be to add storytelling to your tutorials. Though I realize perfectly well Second Life is not a MMORPG, but a simple ‘lifeline’ story will help put all the actions into perspective, and make it actually seem logical (instead of random tasks you might need lateron). Storytelling illustrates the goal before the task which will motivate the user to finish it.
I’d even consider taking the first steps of new users out of the online environment, and add a tutorial session into the client. This controlled, scripted environment can learn the user the basic controls of navigation and chat without being interrupted by newbies, lag, server crashes, off line grids, and the overall limitations of Second Life’s natural scripting language (LSL).
Posted on: April 28, 2008 | Share on:
Suzanne Aurilio
said on April 29th
Thanks Rick for the compilation. I’ve been putting thoughts together on similar issues, namely why would a faculty member use SL to do x when we have several other tools that do x easier, better and more effectively.
Mine is an institutional/organizational perspective that takes into consideration the fact that users (faculty at first) are challenged on many fronts with SL. In the meantime I’ve got a eval account on Qwak. The metaverse is vast. :)
Rick van der Wal
said on April 29th
Thanks for commenting! I’ve been meaning to get Qwaq going in a small collab test here as well. The Sketch up integration is really, really great and I’ll certainly give it a more thorough testing once I find the time :)
800,000L for best SL Interface Designs | Digado said on June 6th
[...] Second Life struggles with Interaction Design [...]
Dusan Writer
said on June 8th
Just picking up this thread from the triple links back from my own. Just as an FYI - we’ve been running Qwak for 5 months now. And while it was great at that initial learning phase part of the game and, sure, you can open PowerPoint and Word documents and so on, every one of the people I’ve brought into it eventually asked “Um, how come I can’t change how I LOOK.”
It’s intriguing - Qwak is as bare bones as you can get. People ask for simple and it’s simple. And while maybe they wouldn’t survive the first hour of SL, having survived the first hour of Qwak what I get is: “I want more.”
Which speaks of course to improving the first hour of SL and doesn’t speak so highly of ’simplified engines’. Qwak is fine for a pick-up meeting - quick review of a document, maybe, or at-a-distance group meeting to review a presentation…but otherwise it’s an empty husk of meaning.
The power of the more complex worlds is meaning - identity, expression, presence, and tools to be able to visualize increasingly complex concepts. If you can get them past the first hour, they won’t be left wanting for more…they’ll be left wanting for more direction through limitless choice. I’d rather face that wall than the wall of “Yeah, well, this is all there is.”
Suzanne Aurilio
said on June 9th
Great thanks for that FYI…I see your points (the big and the small). My understanding was more elaborate avis could be designed in QWAQ. Not so?
There may also be a bit of an apples and oranges syndrome here. Let me explain.
Could we agree for a moment that SL is a world and QWAQ is an environment? If we did, then I’d argue next that the learning context in which one or the other is applied is critical, as are the learning goals or outcomes of the situation. Call me post-edupunk, I’m beyond the irreverence towards these issues.
I’m not a functionalist with blinders on, but come on. My context is large, public university, who like most, is dealing with record numbers of students who want a better life. We’re working with an industrial model to make that happen, so I’m compelled to talk about these as educational technologies in the first round of faculty professional development.
After that, well we’ll see. :)
And the winners are… | Digado said on August 13th
[...] Cassini (me!) After writing extensively on Dazzle, and how the interface wasn’t solving the problems it could be solving, I had to put my money where my mouth was. I focussed on creating the interface [...]