It was very interesting to learn how real money is traded in the ‘hood’ of the online gaming worlds such as World of Warcraft. I was fascinated with how there are cafes in China that hire online gamers working 8-12 hour shifts that generate real time money trading online game gears, acquiring objects from warrior monks and similar stuff. To a user like me this deepened my understanding of these online games, the worlds they create, and ultimately in monetary sense take part in creation of an Economy to its own paradigm.
The article’ Life of a Chinese gold farmer’ was a real gold digger. The guy who owned the café that hired online gamers generates almost $80,000 a year (RTM), that is a decent living for someone who has to hire online gamers at negligible pay rates approx 30 cents an hour and who are willing to put part of their lives in front of the screen for hours of a day, even though for some workers it may be finding their place in the cyber world simultaneously being able to make some money. Though it was very importantly noted in the article and that I also feel is important to be taken in consideration is when performing these tasks is to be aware of the line between work and play, and the real and virtual. But with today’s intensity of rapidly growing such worlds and MMORPGS, the line seems to be curving instead of demarcating and rather these activities are becoming parts of our lives, also as we see means of livelihood.
With this ideology is also the world of SL that has enhanced the experience and participation of users to a whole new realm. It was amazing how IBM had collaborated to virtual conferences with many people involved in its management and eventually its happening with hundreds of other members participating in the live conferences. The only hurdle though that I feel can be debated would be if when companies choose to such virtual conferences, could it or in this case did it breed the same quality of outcome that it would in case of a real time in person meeting. They did accomplish the monetary result and members were also quite pleased with their experience but the critic side of me still questions its variational qualitative experience taking in consideration the quantitative was accomplished. I am not against the concept of virtual collaboration I think its brilliant but I feel it is important also to consider the possible hurdles and if possible transform them to potential bearers. It seemed hard to believe that IBM could save thousands of dollars, infact the cost the company beared to collaborate virtually was only 1/5th of the entire cost a company would have beared had they had a real time conference and the difference is a substantial amount. I mean a couple of conferences a company does in a similar manner, those savings could possibly equate for allowing a company towards a whole new venture. That’s super!
