Winimasker
W
Winimasker
What kind of metaverse do you foresee? Could be for everything, including not only and not exclusively games.
-
🏆 Texturing Contest #33 is OPEN! Contestants must re-texture a SD unit model found in-game (Warcraft 3 Classic), recreating the unit into a peaceful NPC version. 🔗Click here to enter!
-
It's time for the first HD Modeling Contest of 2024. Join the theme discussion for Hive's HD Modeling Contest #6! Click here to post your idea!
Metaverse in/from your sight
- Status
Hosted Project: WME
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2008
- Messages
- 2,181
As far as I know, use of the word "metaverse" shows how Facebook and other manipulation technology has control over everyone's thoughts and communications. Lots of people are using this word to describe the future, because use of the word was boosted or encouraged by someone or something. Unfortunately, the word seems almost meaningless as far as I can tell. The Facebook company wanted to rebrand as Meta and make everyone say the word "metaverse" to justify it, so presumably they did exactly that, which is what led to a future where you were asking this question.
From what I could tell, rebranding the Facebook company to the name Meta was partly a decision that was made in order to make people forget about how bad Facebook is and distract people from discussing the corruption of this corporation. So, given that people talk about the word "metaverse" now rather than the corruption of a corporation that controlled their thoughts and led them to talk about that, I think that the science and technology future of this planet is more likely to be a corrupt and bad one. It seems more likely than not. Discussing the word "metaverse" is a good example of this.
Various information aggregators and communicators have attempted to express to me what "metaverse" means in their own terms. For some of them, it is another way to justify excessive investment into the bizarre financial bubble of "cryptocurrency." The premise would be that in a future where everyone is already online, now all their stuff will be on a blockchain so that they can trade it all the time, perhaps between systems. Most of these ideas are objectively not going to work in the long term. Gaming companies like Blizzard have an incentive not to put their digital in-game items on a large public digital cryptographic ledger -- doing so is slower to process, and it would be inefficient to rate-limit the amount of imaginary in-game items that can be sold. Diablo Immortal is a good example. Players can spend $120,000 to reach max level because there is an infinite amount of arbitrarily invented nonsense for the player to collect along the way. If that stuff was all in a "metaverse blockchain," then it all would not work for its monetization design because it would by definition be "scarce" (hence the reason for trading on the public ledger) and that same digital scarcity would make it harder or impossible for each individual player of the game to spend their own $120,000 on a cheap server data unlock in order to level up.
For still other people, maybe the "metaverse" is not about cryptocurrency but moreso about Mark Zuckerberg's sadistic idea that when my mom goes out to do gardening in her yard, she should be wearing an augmented reality headset so that a bunch of her friends VR-chat style could bother her and talk to her and advertise to her in the augmented reality while she weeds the plants. But this really is sadistic, and real people live better lives if they can do what they want offline, sometimes.
Or maybe people believe that the metaverse is not going to be always online, but rather be the "Heroes of the Storm" of modern society that takes all of its characters and caricatures and plops them together into one fundamental imaginary virtual world. However, if that actually happened, it would seemingly entail the death of all other digital worlds that were not encompassed within the one virtual world that took over. Given how incredibly easy it is to make custom virtual worlds in programs like the Unreal Engine, or even the Warcraft III World Editor from 2002, the idea that all digital worlds would cease to exist or share common code within them is an idea that basically would depend upon the loss of the human freedom of anyone to tell a Personal Computer what to do. That's surely not a future that I want to see, but maybe other people see it differently.
So, I guess for me it feels like the "metaverse" is a corrupt set of loosely correlated marketing scheme(s) pushed into this world by bad actors so that they can profit off of common delusions fed to the upper middle class, or something like this.
From what I could tell, rebranding the Facebook company to the name Meta was partly a decision that was made in order to make people forget about how bad Facebook is and distract people from discussing the corruption of this corporation. So, given that people talk about the word "metaverse" now rather than the corruption of a corporation that controlled their thoughts and led them to talk about that, I think that the science and technology future of this planet is more likely to be a corrupt and bad one. It seems more likely than not. Discussing the word "metaverse" is a good example of this.
Various information aggregators and communicators have attempted to express to me what "metaverse" means in their own terms. For some of them, it is another way to justify excessive investment into the bizarre financial bubble of "cryptocurrency." The premise would be that in a future where everyone is already online, now all their stuff will be on a blockchain so that they can trade it all the time, perhaps between systems. Most of these ideas are objectively not going to work in the long term. Gaming companies like Blizzard have an incentive not to put their digital in-game items on a large public digital cryptographic ledger -- doing so is slower to process, and it would be inefficient to rate-limit the amount of imaginary in-game items that can be sold. Diablo Immortal is a good example. Players can spend $120,000 to reach max level because there is an infinite amount of arbitrarily invented nonsense for the player to collect along the way. If that stuff was all in a "metaverse blockchain," then it all would not work for its monetization design because it would by definition be "scarce" (hence the reason for trading on the public ledger) and that same digital scarcity would make it harder or impossible for each individual player of the game to spend their own $120,000 on a cheap server data unlock in order to level up.
For still other people, maybe the "metaverse" is not about cryptocurrency but moreso about Mark Zuckerberg's sadistic idea that when my mom goes out to do gardening in her yard, she should be wearing an augmented reality headset so that a bunch of her friends VR-chat style could bother her and talk to her and advertise to her in the augmented reality while she weeds the plants. But this really is sadistic, and real people live better lives if they can do what they want offline, sometimes.
Or maybe people believe that the metaverse is not going to be always online, but rather be the "Heroes of the Storm" of modern society that takes all of its characters and caricatures and plops them together into one fundamental imaginary virtual world. However, if that actually happened, it would seemingly entail the death of all other digital worlds that were not encompassed within the one virtual world that took over. Given how incredibly easy it is to make custom virtual worlds in programs like the Unreal Engine, or even the Warcraft III World Editor from 2002, the idea that all digital worlds would cease to exist or share common code within them is an idea that basically would depend upon the loss of the human freedom of anyone to tell a Personal Computer what to do. That's surely not a future that I want to see, but maybe other people see it differently.
So, I guess for me it feels like the "metaverse" is a corrupt set of loosely correlated marketing scheme(s) pushed into this world by bad actors so that they can profit off of common delusions fed to the upper middle class, or something like this.
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
- Messages
- 721
i agree with the above post about metaverse being facebook's VR/AR marketing scheme but i do agree with the spirit of your question that the future will be AR.
I imagine the fusion of gaming and sports with AR tech like Microsoft Hololens. Just imagine the warcraft map can materialize with AR tech and you can play with people around you or online. Or you want to play something as simple as tennis and have your AR hardware track score and out of bound balls. Maybe something more fancy like the AR can generate visual terrain in a soccer field for players to have a fantasy style battle all generated by AR. That is the implication I see for gaming but currently AR hardware is still too expensive for it to become popular. Once it does become affordable, I'd imagine this scenario to take place.
I imagine the fusion of gaming and sports with AR tech like Microsoft Hololens. Just imagine the warcraft map can materialize with AR tech and you can play with people around you or online. Or you want to play something as simple as tennis and have your AR hardware track score and out of bound balls. Maybe something more fancy like the AR can generate visual terrain in a soccer field for players to have a fantasy style battle all generated by AR. That is the implication I see for gaming but currently AR hardware is still too expensive for it to become popular. Once it does become affordable, I'd imagine this scenario to take place.
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2022
- Messages
- 1
Metaverse concepts could include anything, games include. I think it will be mainly focused on virtual and augmented reality. And also it will be a place to connect and interact digitally.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2012
- Messages
- 1,307
F
- Status
