Is the Metaverse really the future of the internet? If it is, should it be?
The technology conglomerate Facebook Inc. is now called Meta Platforms Inc. (Meta for short). Meta’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg says that this change is part of the company’s plan for developing what he calls the “Metaverse,” an innovative, surround-yourself technology. The social media platform Facebook will still keep its name, and the corporate structure will stay the same. Additionally, Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger will remain unchanged.
This announcement comes as Facebook experiences heavy public scrutiny after Frances Haugen, a former employee at Facebook, disclosed thousands of incriminating documents to Congress, federal financial regulators, and the media. These internal documents outlined how the company continued to expand their offerings despite knowing the dangerous effects its products have through hate speech and misinformation. Critics of the name change believe Facebook wanted to distract the public from the current Congressional investigation into the company. Even Zuckerberg himself acknowledged the fortuitous timing of the announcement, but argued that this transition to Meta is imperative since “the future won't be built on its own.” This is not the first time a company has rebranded itself during times of public criticism. One example of this being the oil and gas company BP rebranding to “Beyond Petroleum” after public outcry against the company’s severe negative impact on the environment. Frances Haugen also criticized Zuckerberg’s plan for the Metaverse, saying it will be just another addictive platform for users, where Meta can take even more of consumer’s personal information and give Zuckerberg another online monopoly.
But what even is the “Metaverse?” Zuckerberg describes it as the internet coming to life. It is not just a screen someone looks at, but instead is a “virtual environment,” with interconnected virtual communities. Within this new environment, people can meet each other, play games, call into meetings, shop, and use social media. This world will be accessible through virtual reality (VR) headsets, augmented reality (AR) glasses, smartphone apps or other devices. Meta plans to lose $10 billion in 2021 and even more for the next several years acquiring the technology needed for the Metaverse. The company has already made some significant purchases, such as acquiring the virtual reality company Oculus in 2014. Oculus was originally created for playing video games, but Zuckerberg’s vision for the company’s technology goes far beyond video games. He wants Oculus’ technology to contribute to the new, immersive lifestyle of the Metaverse. Other strategic acquisitions include the VR company “Within” for over $500 million, as well as the gaming companies “Unit 2 Games” and “Bigbox VR.”
One brave soul, Joanna Stern, attempted to spend 24 hours in the current stage of the Metaverse. Stern is a journalist for the Wall Street Journal, and she investigated what it would be like to live in this new digital world for an entire day. She began her time in the Metaverse by playing games since that is currently the most popular use of VR. To have some social interaction, Stern used the app called AltspaceVR, which allows her avatar to interact with other avatars in virtual venues. She then made her way to a virtual comedy club, where she said the club looked “so obviously fake;” however, her interaction with others felt very real. She compared the interactions to an AOL chat room.
When she went to bed, she used a guided meditation app within the VR headset to help herself fall asleep. When she woke up, she completed a virtual workout through the app Supernatural, and afterwards, she attended work meetings through multiple VR platforms, including Spatial and Horizon Workrooms (Horizon was developed by Meta). Joanna enjoyed being in the work meetings, saying that it did feel like she was sitting across from the people in the room. After reflecting on the last 24 hours, her only complaint was what she called “Metaverse-fatigue,” saying that being in the Metaverse is fun “if you don’t do it for four hours on end.”
Stern says that big tech companies are spending so much money on this technology since there is an opportunity to build a revolutionary online platform that encompassess all aspects of human life. However, companies have historically spent millions of dollars marketing new products before there is a proof of concept. Tech companies aim to forecast the future so that they can grab a market before other competitors, but just because demand for a product should arrive does not mean that it actually will. One notable example of this being 3D television in 2010. Big corporations, like Samsung Electronics Co. and Sony Group Corp., were certain that 3D television was going to revolutionize the entertainment industry. However, consumers did not respond well to the technology. Customers thought the glasses required for the television were uncomfortable and the experience was quite underwhelming.
This framework is similar to Zuckerberg’s Metaverse, with VR headsets being notoriously awkward to wear and the excessively futuristic notions of a new digital world. It is possible that the Metaverse will become another example of investors and executives drowning in opportunity, while not considering the actual demands of ordinary consumers. Meaghan Fitzgerald, a product marketing director at Meta, recognizes these possible issues and more. She says that Meta needs to focus on the privacy and moderation aspects of the Metaverse, while also making sure headsets are smaller, more comfortable, and have longer battery life.
Because of the type of extensive infrastructure and capital expenditures it will require, the Metaverse will take many years to come to fruition. But many prominent tech experts believe that the actual Metaverse will look quite different than what Zuckerberg has laid out thus far. At the augmented 2021 World Expo conference in Santa Clara, CA, Zuckerberg’s Metaverse reveal was the main topic of conversation. Many keynote speakers described their views of what the Metaverse would look like, but almost all of them said that they did not agree with Zuckerberg’s vision. They criticized the idea of having an enclosed world with a VR headset since it blocks out the real world. They agreed that a 3D immersive Metaverse is possible, but thought that mixed realities or extended reality (XR) headsets would be a more plausible path. Developers said that the trend in the industry is to create platforms that are open instead of closed, as well as work across multiple devices.
XR and AR can be used without a headset, including on apps within smartphones, tablets, and personal computers. However, the speakers at the conference pointed out that the most immersive experience for XR and AR will be through goggles or glasses. But this is still a work in progress, and it will take many years to develop this technology and bring it into the mainstream. Additionally, a recent Morgan Stanley research note argues that market adaption of the virtual world won’t occur until Apple begins developing VR and AR products. The bank based this assumption on surveys conducted with upcoming VR/AR companies.
I believe that the speakers at the World Expo conference are spot on. Mixed reality and augmented reality are the most feasible direction for a potential Metaverse. Consumers still find virtual reality a niche subset of gaming and online interaction. To make the Metaverse a concept that encompasses work activities, social life, and other everyday activities, the platform should be open to the physical world, not enclosed in a virtual setting. VR is undoubtedly the most immersive form of simulation, but the market is far from ready to adopt it for mainstream use.
The best (and most entertaining) example of how the public currently views Zuckerberg's Metaverse is by a travel company called “Inspired by Iceland.” When Zuckerberg first announced the Metaverse in a video released in late October, he praised the Metaverse for being able to connect people and allowing them to have “the feeling of presence… with other people.” Inspired by Iceland decided to capitalize on the inherent irony of a virtual world being marketed as a substitute for human interaction by making a video for Iceland tourism called “Icelandverse.” In the video, a Zuckerberg look-alike explains how people in Icelandverse can enjoy “enhanced actual reality without silly looking headsets.” The video goes on to talk about Iceland’s “completely immersive” experiences, like being with real humans and watching “skies you can see with your eyeballs.” The trolling video received overwhelming positive feedback online.
The Icelandverse video might be a lighthearted parody, but there is a lot of truth to its message. The new advances in virtual reality are astonishing, and there are many valuable uses for this technology, such as in healthcare, construction, and military training. However, its current trajectory for consumer use is unsettling to say the least. People already experience a sense of detachment from the world in the current online sphere, so being completely immersed in a virtual one would unquestionably enhance this sense of detachment. I believe that fostering physical connections with others is an integral part of being human, so to substitute this with virtual interactions would do far more harm than good. Because of this, I believe a transition to a VR Metaverse is both financially and socially reckless. But only time will tell. Maybe the VR Metaverse will be the mainstream online sphere 10 years from now. Maybe it will expand genuine human interaction instead of suppressing it. Nevertheless, one thing is clear: whatever online world people inhabit a decade from now, Meta will do everything it can to be at the forefront.
