Second Life: a game, a business, or a world?

 (Wherein the author paces back and forth, talking to herself).

My answer to the question "Is Second Life a game, a business, or a world?" is "Yes". 

A Game? Second Life has gaming elements, and it contains games. Linden Lab denies that Second Life is a game because "There is no manufactured conflict, no set objective".

A Business? Second Life is a business run by Linden Labs, and the fact that many of Linden Lab's employees are also Second Life residents does not obscure the fact that the company needs to make money in order to survive.

A World? Second Life is a world because it has virtual land and water areas that are connected to each other and that can be explored, and you can build a structure that resembles a home.

Saying Second Life is "a 3-d virtual world run by a large business in which the residents/customers create a large part of the content, and which contains gaming elements." though, is awkward. 

In the context of "Second Life is a world" if I think of it as a 'second home'  and when I read something like Mona Eberhardt's post "Interpreting Second Life's 2020 Metrics" I get uneasy. 

     - If Second Life is a game, I can lose.

     - If Second Life is a business, it can fail. 

     - If Second Life is only a 'virtual' reality powered by computers and not a real world, then it can disappear, and all my virtual lands, the silly things I bought, and my avatar and all its accoutrements disappear as well.

At this point I start experiencing a sense of existential dread.

Am I a resident, a gamer. or a customer? Again, the answer is 'Yes'. 

As for it being a game, after reading Mona Eberhardt's post and watching Torulf Jenstrom's talk on monetizing game transactions (Which was embedded in her post) I started wondering if Linden Labs was incentivizing me to spend more in Second Life. 

Torulf Jenstrom's Keynote speech at a 2016 Game conference in Helsinki, was titled "Let's Go Whaling!" and he talked about how game companies can get their players to spend money on IAPs (in app purchases) above and beyond the initial price of the game. This speech brought widespread disapproval from gamers, and from game makers (who didn't want you to know about this.) I cannot find any current mention of Torulf Jenstrom on the web now, but his speech is still generating comment.

If Second Life is a game, and I am a gamer, what kind of gamer am I?

Bartle has studied gamers and lumped them into four types: Achievers, Socializers, Killers, and Explorers. You can take the Bartle Test yourself here. 

Torulf suggests that you can monetize 'achievers' by offering items that make game-playing progress more convenient. (Example: tokens that let you 'undie' in a game - or a Premium membership that let's you get into large events more easily).

He suggests that 'socializers' can be incentivized by offering paid content that allows communication customization. (Groups, anyone? Voice morphing?)

'Killers' can be monetized by offering them weapons or equipment that give them competitive advantage. (Going Premium?).

'Explorers' can be monetized by offering to sell them more content to explore. (Wanta buy a region?)

So, am I being influenced to spend more because of something that is part of the game, or by something else? 

Some random, not yet coherant, thoughts:

Gamers can be influenced to buy "Loot boxes" in many games, and you can find gachas in Second Life that usually require multiple tries before you actually get what you want. But -  In SL gachas are produced by resident businesses, not by the lab. Is the way that Premium housing being distributed also a gacha? Again, 'no',  because you only get one house at a time, and you do not have to spend more on each try - just time.)

Am I being incentivized because I have 'Loss aversion'? (Here I would say 'yes' because if I don't pay tier I lose my home parcel.) I am also being affected by 'Sunk cost fallacy", which encourages me to pay for a premium membership so that I don't 'lose' the parcel with my home on it. (On the other hand, I could rent from another resident on a monthly basis and lose nothing except my home base if I don't pay my rent. Still, if my landlord doesn't pay his rent I'm in the same situation as if I hadn't paid tier. 

Am I willing to pay more for rare items? Yes; however, most of the rare articles are produced by other residents.  

Idea of  "Sunk cost fallacy". "I have bought all this furniture, so I need someplace to put it."

Am I being influenced by the "IKEA affect" - if you make players work for something they place more value on it. (Yes and yes - do I buy more at popular sales events if they are hard to get into?)

Am I influenced by 'Social proof' where a high-ranked player gets a certain item. Am I trying to keep up with 'the cool kids'? (Yes and yes - I keep trying to upgrade my avatar and her clothing and am embarrassed when I have to walk around in a system body and avatar.)

Do I suffer from FOMO (fear of missing out) - yes.

Torulf also characterized players as being 'minnows', 'dolphins' and 'whales' based on the time it takes them to make a decision.  He stated that being in a 'Hot state' where you need to make decisions quickly, is when you have fast reflexive thinking and instant gratifica†ion. Having more time to make the decision means slower analytical thinking. 

He states players are less anxious about making a purchase decision when they have fewer choices. 

Are we being positively reinforced for making purchases? I would say the recent live auctions during Fantasy Faire was proof of that, and also an example of 'hot state' thinking with instant gratification....(I almost bid on something and I envy the resident who got it).

Conclusion: Am I being incentivized to spend more money in Second Life? Yes, but I do not think it is a deliberate plan by Linden Lab, I think it is my human inclination to want to be more Barbie and have more possessions/land than anyone else.

That said, I need to remind myself that in the end I will have only my pictures and my good memories. This is also true of real life, and I have few regrets for most of my travel in real life. As my late sister-in-law wisely said "They can't repossess a vacation." Second Life will live on in the memories of those who 'inhabited' her.

Or perhaps it will be rebuilt in some new reality, and we will be like the suvivors of The Great Erase.