Philip Rosedale: The Metaverse Isn't for "Everybody" & Meta Shouldn't Succeed at Making It

Here's a new interview on Axios with Philip and veteran game industry journalist Stephen Totilo, with some bombshell quotes like these:

• Of the metaverse, he says: “I think what we've learned — and somewhat with some sadness, given the work that I've done, I would have to agree — is that it's not for everybody, and maybe it's never for everybody.”
• And of Meta’s chances of succeeding with their new metaverse project: “Well, I hope they don't.”

He goes into detail on both points further in the interview, including his thoughts on why the Metaverse is never for everybody -- which I concur with, but only to a certain extent:

Just as he experienced with "Second Life," Rosedale says, "there still arises this weighty question of what is it that's going to cause, you know, normal people, a lot of the time, to be willing to go into these online spaces?”

I actually agree with Philip on this point, but then again, I never saw "everybody" as the sensible target. I mean, if you consider ROBLOX, Fortnite, Rec Room, VRChat, and yes even Second Life as being Metaverse-like platforms, you're easily talking about 500 million monthly active users. And if you agree with Julie Young that Free Fire is a nascent Metaverse, that's 500 million+ active users more, which gets us to over 1 billion active users. (None of which, I hasten to add, are in Meta's version of the Metaverse.)

And if 1 in 8 people in the entire world are already active in Metaverse-ish platforms, isn't that already "everybody" enough?

Comments

[Kitty Revolver]

While the stats may look impressive how many of each of those platform is counting the same person multiple times? I would think there would be decent overlap but also what is the attrition rates of the metaverse ROBLOX and Fortnight once the younger adult gets tired of the platform? Is the Metaverse trying to incorporate “real life” into the the digital space, but honestly, I don’t see “everybody” wanting the metaverse no matter often they play. At the end of the day, gamers log off. I don’t think most people want to live their entire lives in digital spaces, because you have to eat, your av can’t just substitute the physical act of eating (people could be attached to feeding machines that activate when your av eats, how many people want that). There’s a lacunae between the digital space and the real world.

The only metaverse that people want to engage with is the internet and if Second Life proves anything, no one is really interested in “virtual worlds” except for just a few people.. Teens playing fortnight might say otherwise but they haven’t experienced much of anything in the real world. The world is much more an exciting place then digital representation can ever replace. There might be people that actively want the promises of the metaverse/singularity (because this is what is the driving force for the tech billionaires). Maybe we just need to stop conflating “virtual world” as metaverse and vice versa. The metaverse is the Internet no fancy equipment needed.

[camilia fid3lis nee Patchouli Woollahra]

Put it this way:

in the real world, we all each live in some different and separate part of the Earth. You can take a trip on various transport methods to shift your location to some extent if you desire.

But the thing is, not everyone will necessarily want or need to make a larger shift than that accomplished by a short car/bus trip or a walk or bike ride.

The same thing applies to the Metaverse: even if you offer interoperability, there's always going to be a group everywhere who is mostly content hanging around a small part of the metaverse rather than having to experience every single major bit of it.

There will be travelers, and there will be homebodies. Doesn't devalue the existence of a world any more or less that the latter exists. They're content with what they have access to, and it's in no way demeaning that they decide not to go wild all over it.

[Cindy Bolero]

Unfortunately, the public is terrified of the Meta concepts, which ruins it for the existing metaverse. Now fewer are going to learn or experience the benefits of virtual worlds because they'll associate it with a demonic Meta.

Reactions have been: "It comes from Satan", "Our kids are doomed, "We'll all be pacified and lose touch with reality, therefore easily controlled.", yet people are in Zoom and other apps every day metaversing doing work, club meetings, classes, parties, family gatherings, etc. We don't see Zoom controlling peoples lives and losing touch with reality.

[Alex D]

What a journey. One thing is clear from decades of VR and VW product innovation (failures and successes): you can't make people use/buy something unless it solves real 'jobs to be done.' No matter how much we love the connections that are unique to virtual worlds, or the immersion<>empathy correlation, the platform doesn't solve all problems for everyone. It's shocking that FB is bucking decades of Silicon Valley new product development wisdom with a top-down PR push.

When P says "I hope they don't [succeed]" I read that as a statement about creativity and freedom, almost a throwback to the original vision of a beloved public utility, open, ubiquitous, one that supported unlimited expression and connection. If FB's metaverse becomes ubiquitous, what does that say about what the internet has become and who controls our experiences on it?

[Wagner James Au]

"While the stats may look impressive how many of each of those platform is counting the same person multiple times?"

There's likely some overlap between say ROBLOX and Fortnite for sure (I'd estimate 10-20%), but likely very little overlap with Free Fire which has little usage in the US/Western Europe. And overall it's still a butt ton of unique users!

[Kaylee West]

As sad as it makes me to say it, none of my colleagues at the university see the metaverse (whatever form that might take) as being a "place" that that they would carry out any of their duties as academics in. It is a novelty that they are curious about, but once their initial curiosity has been satisfied they are generally not interested in returning. The same seems to hold for my students, many of who actually say they enjoy our lessons in SL, but mostly never return once the lessons are over. I am guessing that unless employers mandate the use of the "metaverse" for work, there won't be widespread adoption beyond enthusiasts. I hope this won't slow down the amazing developments going on with all of the technologies associated with the "metaverse".

[Adeon]

> “Reactions have been: "It comes from Satan", "Our kids are doomed, "We'll all be pacified and lose touch with reality, therefore easily controlled."”

Good. Don’t convince these people to try VR. I do not want to talk to them.

[Mondy]

I love VR, I enjoy Secondlife. I log in to Secondlife almost every day and use my VR headset almost every day. Yet I dislike almost every other Virtual world I've tried. I'm not really sure why. Maybe because most of them rely so much *on* VR, even when they have a desktop option available too. Or because if I log into VRchat for example, everyone wants me to voice and I've only ever voiced with people I'm comfortable with, close friends and people I know really well.
I don't *require* total immersion and for me, when I enter the Secondlife metaverse it's an escape from Real Life. Zuckerberg's vision seems to be about joining them at the hip and combining what we do in RL and the metaverse together.