Meta’s dream doesn’t have legs

“Legs are coming soon!” That slightly baffling statement was, more than anything, what lingered after Meta’s Connect this week, an annual event from the parent company of Facebook. People were, understandably, confused.

In fact, the message, tweeted from a Meta account was simply announcing that users’ digital avatars in the company’s virtual world will soon literally have legs. (Up to now, they were just floating torsos.)

The legs in question are, in truth, slightly less silly than they sound. What Meta wants is for its virtual game world Horizons to, not just be an idle curiosity, but, instead, to become a kind of 3D Facebook — that is, you put on your VR (virtual reality) headset, log on and meet co-workers, chat with friends, play games and so on.

How to make someone feel embodied or present in virtual spaces is actually an intriguing question, and one necessary thing is to feel connected to your virtual body. Hence: legs.

But as Mark Zuckerberg touted his most recent innovations at the event — the new, Meta Quest Pro headset, $1,499 (U.S.), with increased fidelity, and partnerships with both Microsoft and Accenture to bring productivity apps to Meta’s virtual reality — there was more than just an arched eyebrow or two about the digital appendages; there was outright doubt about the future of the company.

Bloomberg claimed “Zuckerberg’s $1,499 Headsets Won’t Help Meta.”

TechCrunch was more pointed, writing that “it’s painful how hell-bent Mark Zuckerberg is on convincing us that VR is a thing.”

A day later, Business Insider was altogether more direct, simply saying” “It’s time for Mark Zuckerberg to step down.”

Put more plainly, Meta’s push into virtual reality has impressed few.

The criticism may be stark, but it’s not wrong.

Zuckerberg’s plan to remake Facebook into Meta is a moon shot of exactly the wrong sort: misguided, built on arrogance, and all too likely to fail.

What is happening here is that Zuckerberg is desperately trying to find and own the next big thing — not just a new product, but a new platform that becomes indispensable.

If that’s what you want, the metaverse as a concept makes a sort of sense. It is predicated on the idea of the “digital twin” — that one builds out a kind of mirror digital version of the world and the things in it. Then, using tech such as virtual reality headsets, one “enters” that digital world and experiences ostensibly real things: connections, commerce, entertainment.

You can see why, as a billionaire tech CEO, the idea is so appealing.

Just as someone creates a digital social network on which people now do all kinds of things, they transfer the idea to 3D and then own the new virtual space.

It’s the logic of what some people call platform capitalism: that the future of big tech isn’t building individual products but owning platforms on which others build businesses.

But for that to make sense, you have accept on faith that people do, in fact, want to do what they do on Facebook, but with a virtual reality headset, instead.

It’s an idea that seems deeply misguided for a number of reasons.

The first is simple efficiency. Why would you go to the bother of donning a virtual reality device and “walking” to a work meeting when you could just run a Zoom call? Why “socialize” with people in something like a virtual rave or party when the experience is less immediate and enjoyable than other options, digital or real? VR puts up roadblocks for simple interactions that can be better achieved in other ways.

Second is the issue of whether people actually want these things. While the appeal of Instagram is obvious, it is much less apparent that, as Facebook’s event suggested, people want to “celebrate the new year” or “toast marshmallows together” while sitting alone in a room wearing a VR headset.

What Zuckerberg and Co. seem to be grossly miscalculating is that it appears that no-one has asked the basic question key to all business endeavours: “what problem does this solve for consumers?”

Instead it feels like Facebook has asked itself “how can we translate our dominance in social media to the emerging field of VR?”

To be clear, the “metaverse,” as a concept, is genuinely intriguing. Imagine, for example, the boon it will be to architecture to be able to walk virtually through buildings before they are erected, and think of the possibilities for virtual medicine!

Immersive digital 3D worlds are undoubtedly interesting.

But interesting doesn’t equal the next multibillion user digital platform.

In assuming that the metaverse is going to be the next great social consumer space, Zuckerberg is promising a digital Eden, while leading his company down the garden path.

Meta’s avatars may soon literally have legs, but Zuckerberg’s metaverse dreams almost certainly do not.