Yesterday, I attended a workshop on the topic of the Metaverse. Although I was initially skeptical about whether this topic is still relevant, I decided to participate anyway. Here are my impressions and thoughts on the topics discussed and their implications.
Expectations and Reality
At the very sight of Workshop-description, the question arose for me whether the Metaverse is still a hot topic. Interest in the workshop was moderate, which could also possibly be attributed to the beautiful weather and the European Football Championship. Although the moderator made an effort to present the topic engagingly, much of the content presented was strongly reminiscent of the discussions and predictions that were already circulating four years ago.Recurring Arguments: The Evergreens of the Metaverse
It was striking that many arguments and statistics that supported the financial success of Metaverse highlighted, had hardly changed. It was repeatedly emphasized that companies should invest in metaverse solutions so as not to lose out. This rhetoric seems to have remained unchanged for years, even though the actual successes of these technologies have so far been limited.The Metaverse as a Niche
The metaverse, despite all the attention it has received in recent years, remains a Niche within VR technology. Although the concept of social interactions and meetings in virtual worlds is interesting, it has many fundamental challenges that hinder its widespread adoption. These aspects are often glossed over in presentations.Ergonomics and User Experience
A central challenge is the VR Ergonomics. While it has been claimed that meetings in the metaverse are more intense and personal, I questioned this. For many users, interacting with avatars feels rather unnatural. Despite advances in avatar technology, such as Apple's „Personas,“ the experience often remains distant with common VR headsets. The avatars are depicted in a comical or anatomically strange way. This has a lot to do with the performance limitations of the headsets. While this technical explanation is understandable to anyone who has dealt with real-time 3D, it doesn't make the situation any better. Another aspect is the discomfort many people experience in virtual environments. So-called "simulator sickness" is a known problem that remains unsolved. This significantly impairs the usability of VR headsets for extended sessions and represents a significant barrier to widespread adoption. Incidentally, Apple was also unable to solve this problem with their Apple Vision Pro headset.More exciting and tangible use cases. It doesn't always have to be the avatar.
While the metaverse has received disproportionate attention, there are many other areas within VR technology that offer significantly more tangible and exciting applications.Simulations
VR offers enormous advantages in the area of Simulations. Whether in medicine, where surgeons can train for complex procedures, or in aviation, where pilots experience realistic flight simulations, the possibilities are diverse and have clear practical benefits.Entertainment
The entertainment industry has already begun to tap into the potential of VR. From immersive video games to virtual concerts, VR enables experiences that are not possible on traditional media platforms. These applications are not only exciting but also already widespread and successful.Training
In the area of Training also offers unique possibilities. Companies can train their employees in safe, controlled environments, which is particularly advantageous in high-risk professions such as firefighting or the military. These training methods have proven to be extremely effective and offer clear added value.The virtual world has more to offer
The virtual world has much more to offer than comical avatars meeting for virtual coffee in sparsely designed 3D worlds. VR technologies enable profound, immersive experiences that go far beyond simple social interactions. They offer innovative solutions in various fields such as Education, Medicine, and Industrial Manufacturing, that have the potential to fundamentally change the way we work and learn. Do we need the metaverse for that? Not necessarily.Do we need the utopian metaverse narrative?
A central question that arises is whether we really need the utopian narrative of the metaverse to get people for Virtual Reality and inspire people about spatial computing. Do we have to exaggerate and conceal disadvantages to convince our audience? Or is it our task, as experts in this field, to comprehensively inform the public about the strengths and challenges of the technology?Honesty and enlightenment
It is essential that we, as experts in the field of VR and spatial computing honest and transparent communicate. Instead of raising unrealistic expectations and concealing potential disadvantages, we should present the technology in all its facets. This includes both the impressive possibilities and the existing challenges. By painting a realistic picture, we build trust and enable users to make informed decisions. This will ultimately lead to more sustainable and broader acceptance of the technology. Exaggerations and unrealistic promises may generate attention in the short term, but in the long term, they could lead to disappointment and skepticism.Retreat from the Metaverse Narrative
Interestingly, many companies that previously heavily invested in the metaverse narrative pushed by Meta have now distanced themselves from it. Meta itself rarely talks about it anymore. Apple completely avoids the term „metaverse“ in relation to their VR headset. This suggests that inflated expectations and market realities often don't align.Conclusion
The workshop once again made it clear to me that the metaverse remains a polarizing topic. While the technology has undeniably advanced and offers clear advantages in certain areas, it remains a Niche within broader VR technology. The focus on the metaverse has led to other, far more tangible and exciting applications of VR often being overshadowed. The discussion about the metaverse remains exciting, and it will be interesting to see how this technology continues to evolve in the coming years. In doing so, we should always strive to convey a balanced and realistic picture of the possibilities and challenges of VR and spatial computing.Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Because the prerequisites are missing that mass adoption would require: comfortable devices for long-term use, content with a clear everyday utility, and platforms that can exchange content with one another. At the same time, specific XR applications work very well alongside this—just without the metaverse label.
The same for years: market forecasts for distant points in time, references to youth platforms, the analogy of the early internet, and individual showcase projects. What is striking is that arguments and figures have hardly changed, even though the technology has moved on.
Simulation and training – medicine, aviation, industry –, planning and design reviews, therapy and rehabilitation, as well as entertainment with games and virtual concerts. There, the benefit is measurable and the application is clearly defined.
Because it does not depend on resolution, but on the conflict between seen and felt motion. Even high-end devices do not completely resolve this; it can only be mitigated through the design of the application—no forced camera movements, stable frame rates, fixed reference points.
Because it raises expectations that none of the products fulfill, and after the hype has died down, it does more harm than good. Today, both are talking about concrete features—mixed reality, spatial computing—instead of a future virtual parallel world.
Yes, when overblown promises lead to disappointment and subsequently result in the rejection of even functioning applications. Honest categorization benefits the industry more: showing what reliably works today instead of selling a future that no one can schedule.
