Copying my post from the other thread where he put this:
The Metaverse Is NOT Collapsing. Here's Why.
We have a problem.
About half of this is analysis is so flawed as to be completely the wrong way around.
Metaverse is almost certainly never going to become a dominant thing like The Oasis in Ready Player One. Nor will the combination of various different VR worlds.
Why?
Because VR equipment, and quality you gain using it, just isn't that great. The headset is bulky and somewhat uncomfortable (at best), you have to stand up and move around in a real-world environment, the control wand(s) are vastly more limited than hands, etc, etc, etc.
Also, technology can only solve these problems so far, without going into
massive costs. Omnidirectional treadmills, especially one with the ruggedness and responsiveness you'd need to keep up with a VR system? That's going to be thousands of dollars just to manufacture, much less install.
By comparison, a decent webcam and microphone is 40-60 dollars, and decently-large wide-screen TVs can be had for about $200. Almost every advantage that a VR environment gives you for meeting people over a distance, a fraction of the cost, and can be used for all the other things a modern screen can be used for.
And this is before we get into people who have nausea issues, people who just don't like the technology, the potential issues with hacking/system interruptions, etc, etc.
There's also the matter of skillset and competency. Using VR technology effectively is a skill, one that takes time to learn, time that could be spent on other things, some people have little or no aptitude for, and others will disdain to develop even if they do. Comparatively, if you're competent with a smartphone or computer (basically mandatory in a modern business environment), you already have the know-how to activate a video conference call, and you conduct yourself the same way you would in a business meeting IRL.
That video basically just looks at the positives, and not at the
many reasons why VR rollouts failed in the past, and are probably destined to only ever be a modestly-sized market throughout the future. VR is a good gimmick for some types of games, has some use for virtual tours, and if the technology becomes mature enough and cheap enough, it might develop into a role like game consoles, where many but not all homes have at least one system, but how much use it sees varies massively.
And, of course, that video
also ignores the fact that
not all jobs are white-collar. You can't install a plumbing, wiring, a furnace, an AC unit in a virtual environment. Even if androids capable of reasonably mimicing the full suite of human physical capabilities come into existence,
moving them around would cost the same amount as moving a person, and you
again would have the problem of it taking a skill to use them effectively.
All of these problems, better technology can alleviate to some degree. In the long run, technology may be able to outright
solve these problems. But not in a time-frame that can rescue the amount of money that Facebook is investing in the Metaverse.
Finally, the single biggest problem with the metaverse, is that
it just is not that popular. I'm a Computer Nerd. I hang out with Computer Nerds. I also hang out with book-nerds, have family and friends who are more outdoors-and-hunting types, people into theater, people in different parts of the political spectrum. About the only social strata I don't have social contact with are the 'trendy cool' types.
And I don't know
anybody who uses the thing. I don't know anybody who's used Metaverse or a similar service
even once. I know people with VR headsets, but they are exclusively used for a few games, and not all that many of them.
Most people simply do not see something like the metaverse adding anything meaningful or substantial to their life.
Discord, Skype, Zoom, the legacy messenger clients, forum boards, conventional video games, conventional voice and video calls, all of these things offer the most important things the 'Metaverse' offers, and most people just are not interested.
Obviously,
some people are interested, as the service does get
some use, but it looks a lot more like people trying 'the new hot thing' than something that's growing to dominate the market.
The video-maker draws a comparison between the iPhone and preceding pseudo-smartphones like Blackberry, but fails to really follow through on it. Blackberry did the same kinds of things the first iPhone did, but on a lesser tech base, and at a high enough cost to make it prohibitive to most people. The iPhone took off, and
very visibly became the new industry standard, forcing other companies to catch up and offer similar products within a timeline of a year or so. Also, the iPhone came out before Apple completely trashed its brand name among techies; Facebook's name has been mud for years now.
Metaverse has done no such thing. It's a footnote to most techies, it has no 'must-have' capability that other platforms aren't offering, it has no quality-of-life upgrade over what people were using before.
There's just no compelling reason for people to want it.
I do agree with the video that a lot of powerful people want to use it as a tool to exert more power and influence over others.. I just don't think it's going to be an
effective one, not on the scale big tech is used to operating.
As a straw poll, who here has ever used Metaverse, who has the equipment to use it themselves, and who actually uses it regularly?