Reading time: 8 minutes

The recent history of digital technologies is marked by failures that have transformed our lifestyles: the Web in the early 1990s, social networks in the 2000s and smartphone which consolidated the mobile Internet as the backbone of everyday life.

In 2021, a new promise was made in the public debate: metavers, presented as the next major change in the digital environment. This vision, propelled by the Silicon Valley giants and embodied by Mark Zuckerberg, intended to create a global virtual space, persistent, immersive, where our interactions would be as natural as those of the real world.

However, a few years later, it must be noted that this announced revolution did not take place. The metavers did not conquer the general public and is now in a state of uncertainty.

What explains this gap between ambition, discourse and reality?

Should we conclude that an idea that is too ambitious or simply premature is failing?

To answer these questions, it is necessary to retrace the emergence of the concept, to analyse its technological basis, to understand its potential uses, but also to assess its limitations, dangers and future prospects.

Metavers is not only a technical subject: it is also a social issue, a cultural, economic and ethical debate.

The origins of the concept: from science fiction to technological discourse

The word metavers in 1992 Snow Crash, a science fiction novel by Neal Stephenson describing a futuristic world in which individuals escape from dystopic reality to live in a Ultra-realistic virtual universe.

As often in the history of technology, fiction has preceded innovation. For almost three decades, the concept of immersive universe remained confined to the cultural imagination: novels, films, and especially video games, until it was taken over by technology companies in the early 2020s.

The accelerator of this reappropriation was the announcement of Mark Zuckerberg, who made the metavers the central project of the company renamed Meta. To him, the metavers had to become « the successor of the mobile Internet », a space where human interactions would free the physical boundaries of screens, giving rise to a world populated by avatars, virtual houses, 3D workspaces and entirely digital activities.

Other actors: Microsoft, Epic Games, Roblox, Nvidia, quickly engaged, nourishing the idea of an inevitable movement towards this new dimension of the digital experience.

Immersive experience based on immature technologies

In its most ambitious form, the metavers is based on the convergence of several technologies: Virtual reality (VR), the augmented reality (AR), the Haptic interfaces,artificial intelligence, cloud computing, the blockchain, and even 5G/6G networks necessary for an instant rendering of the environments in 3D.

Theoretically, these technological bricks had to allow a total immersion, where the user would no longer look at a screen but would really enter the virtual world.

However, the technical constraints are heavy. The VR helmets remain voluminous, expensive and tiring to wear. The graphics available on the current platforms remain far removed from the promised photorealism. There is no interoperability (ability to circulate between different virtual worlds). As for the networks, they do not yet have the ultra-low latency and the power required for a totally fluid and continuous experience.

This technological reality, which is still embryonic, has slowed the adoption of metavers before it can convince users.

A Use Hard to Impose: A Revolution Without Clear Use

Unlike the smartphone, which immediately imposed itself as an indispensable tool, the metavers did not find any reason to be strong in everyday life. The uses presented: virtual meetings, immersive concerts, purchases of digital goods, are not convinced by their necessity. For most users, existing solutions (Zoom, WhatsApp, traditional video games) already largely meet their needs.

Many companies have also tried the experiment, imagining virtual meeting rooms or professional events in the metavers. But returns were insignificant: costs were high, implementation complex and value added very low compared to traditional collaborative tools.

Even the most developed platforms (Roblox, Fortnite, Decentraland) are used mainly for entertainment, not as an alternative to real life or as an extension of the social world.

A cultural and social rejection: humanity facing its numerical limits

The Covid-19 pandemic has paradoxically harmed the metavers. While the promoters of this technology saw it as the ideal solution for isolation, the general public, saturated with virtual communications, aspired to regain physical contact.

The idea of immersing itself even more in the digital world has become even less attractive as it referred to a form of escape that could evoke the withdrawal, loneliness or disconnection of the real.

This concern is reinforced by sociological debates on Digital addiction, mental health and The impact of screens on young people.

Metavers is often seen as an additional step towards a world where the border between real life and digital life disappears at the expense of genuine human interactions.

Risks and Hazards: A technology to be framed before it becomes necessary

Behind the initial enthusiasm, many voices warned about the risks associated with the emergence of an entirely virtual universe.

First, the metavers generates a considerable amount of biometric data : body movements, facial expressions, behavior, emotions. This collection paves the way for unprecedented exploitation of human privacy by technology companies, within a still unclear legal framework.

Secondly, the question of the security of minors, cybercrime, submerged harassment and digital identity control remains largely unresolved. If social networks have already highlighted digital drifts, the metavers could amplify its scope.

Finally, the metavers economy, often based on speculation around cryptoactive or virtual assets, raises major ethical questions about user exploitation, artificial rarity creation and opaque economic models.

The current slowdown: a shift in the technological industry

Since 2023, large companies have revised their priorities. The explosionGenerative artificial intelligence totally overshadowed attention to metavers. Financial resources, research teams and advertising investments have been redirected to the AI models, considered more immediately profitable, concrete and attractive to the general public.

Meta It itself has reduced its ambitions, repositioning the metavers as a secondary project compared to the AI. Microsoft prefers the AI in its professional products rather than immersive virtual reality. Applewith the Vision Pro, is oriented towards a high-end augmented reality, targeted, which does not pretend to create a global universe but improve individual experience.

The metavers, as announced in 2021, therefore seems suspended, waiting for a second breath.

What future for the metavers? A revolution may be delayed, but not cancelled

Claiming that the metavers is dead would be a mistake. Many major innovations began with a failure or premature craze. The metavers could come back in more modest forms, more integrated and more useful in everyday life: light AR glasses, immersive working environments for engineers, industrial digital twins, medical training in mixed reality, increased cultural visits.

In this scenario, the metavers would no longer be a parallel universe, but a continuum between real world and digital world, discreet, efficient, integrated with existing uses.

The real revolution could come when a generation of more ergonomic, affordable and efficient devices is available and interoperability standards have been developed.

Only then could the metavers fulfil its initial promise: to become a coherent, social, evolutionary and truly useful digital space.

A credible path to digital development

Metavers is a powerful idea, born in science fiction, carried by the technological giants, amplified by massive investments and nourished by belief in total immersion in digital. But this vision has come up against reality: insufficient technologies, unconvincing uses, cultural reluctance, ethical risks, and strategic redeployment to artificial intelligence.

However, the metavers is not condemned. There remains a credible path to digital development, but provided that we emerge from the total ambition of the beginnings to adopt a pragmatic, progressive and human-centred approach.

The question may not be whether if the metavers will impose, but in what formAt what pace, and with what impact on our lives.