On April 11, Meta published on its blog a conversation between Mark Zuckerberg and content creators for Horizon Worlds. The meeting took place in a virtual space. The participants discussed new ways to monetize content. Below I will briefly describe the content of the video and give my comments.
Mark Zuckerberg's central thesis:
For the virtual world to thrive, the economics of the metaverse must allow content creators to make a living.
Meta introduced a bonus program for U.S. authors in Horizon Worlds
Bonuses are paid for achieving goals. During the test phase of the program, the creators of the worlds where users spend the most time will be paid. Porn, substances, and violence are prohibited. As well as other tricky things you might think of.
The goals of the bonus program may change in the future. For example, to encourage the use of new tools or features that developers will launch.
In addition to the bonus program, Meta has had a special fund for encouraging creators since last year, amounting to $10 million. The funds will be distributed for:
- Competition to create the most popular world and use development tools.
- Accelerator to train selected authors from different fields and cultures on Horizon Worlds development tools.
- Funding for selected developers to create simple cooperative games.
The meeting showed examples of what can be done in Horizon Worlds and how to make money from it. You can:
- Organize events, such as collaborative meditation (which looks especially ironic if you think of meditation as a way to get rid of illusions).
- Hold training sessions on creating virtual worlds at Horizon Worlds.
- Work together on projects in a special Workrooms environment that supports voice chat, broadcast presentations, and other collaboration tools.
There were words about the inclusiveness of social groups and public recognition of each participant's contribution.
Features that creators would like to see in Meta's Horizon Worlds
The features that the invited creators mentioned as desirable in the first place:
-
The ability to materialize objects in virtual space simply by naming them.
-
Built-in ability to support your favorite authors with a subscription similar to Patreon.
-
Marketing support for talented authors as their talent for creating worlds is not always matched by their ability to popularize their projects to the masses.
-
The ability to create and import their textures into the world (this is a problem due to technical limitations).
These exciting features could make Meta's Horizon Worlds more popular.
Exciting information about Meta's Horizon Worlds I noted for myself
Before I read the Citi report on Metaverse and Money. Based on it, I have analyzed exciting information about Meta's Horizon Worlds:
- The Citi report on Metaverse and Money suggests that virtual worlds will be the successor to today's Internet. And accordingly, they will exist on different platforms (PCs, consoles, mobile devices, and AR\VR helmets). Its market is estimated at 8-13 trillion by 2030. Meta has chosen the niche of "metaverse in the narrow sense" (VR only) with a potential market of 1 trillion by the same timeframe.
- Many metaverses will be divided by technology, country, or application area. Of the applications, Meta seems to have chosen the business tools segment (corporates) and has moved a bit into the consumer (commerce, small business) and entertainment (gaming) segments. In this field, they will be battling with Microsoft.
- Horizon Worlds will probably be in the low-end segment due to performance limitations in terms of the technology used. But if cloud gaming gets off the ground, there is a chance to see cutting-edge graphics on helmets. Streaming from a local PC is another possibility. But it doesn't look like the company is looking in that direction yet. Aleksandr Agapitov announced another project focusing on advanced graphics and ambitions to become a gaming universe only this year.
- The technical platform through which people will access the metaverse also matters. A VR helmet is not the friendliest device in this sense. The Citi report estimates the average time per day for VR helmets and other screens. And they're not in Meta's favor: 15 minutes to 1 hour for helmets vs. 4-8 hours a day for cell phones. I have both devices and can confirm that being in the Oculus Quest 2 for more than 30 minutes is tricky. Whereas the usage time report on my iPhone consistently exceeds 4.5 hours per day. Yes, the sessions are shorter, but there are few things (other than work) that can stop me from sitting at the screen for 2 hours straight.
- As I've been studying the features and differences of existing metaverses lately, I noticed the avatars in Horizon Worlds. They have two peculiarities: they have no legs yet look very lifelike. The consequences of the lack of legs in the metaverse have yet to be realized. Features such as hand or finger gestures, head-turns relative to the body, some facial emotions, and smiley animations in the space next to the avatar create a more profound sense of the other person's presence next to the user. The proximity of an avatar in a virtual area provokes a higher level of mutual trust. Compare this mentally to chatting, voice calling, and video calling. Which interaction helps you create more trust in communication? And more trust in the business world means a higher rate of relationship development. A very subtle but important point for project success.
This is what I have noted for myself.
My findings of metaverses
I have 2 conclusions:
- The Metaverse will be a solution with specific technical and scriptural limitations. But Meta has some advantages because of the implementation of its platform.
- Whoever helps creative people and businesses make money in the metaverse will win in any niche.
I have some other interesting articles you can read about metaverses: