| The author seems to be falling for a kind of a fallacy. First, I can’t believe the author can call the metaverse bs because it would be nonexistent or would soon die: it is already nascent and seems to be growing by the mere fact people (some of them influential) are pushing for it, as he points out himself. Consequently, we are left with an ethical viewpoint: internet of text has more virtues than vr or blockchain, games are more creative (thus, beautiful?) if closed worlds, etc. Allow me to call is the “down to earth” viewpoint.
I should also mention the calling out on private interests driving the metaverse developments, but allow me to stay concise. I can definitely relate to it, but, in some sense, this criticism sounds like a lack of respect for future humans who might feel like this metaverse thing is actually improving their lives. It’s a bit like criticizing a religion in front of a believer: that’s rude and often not conclusive. At that point or the discourse (as a better conclusion to the article), I’d be more interested by reading some ideas to concretely promote a different vision for the future of the internet and games.
What else can we suggest, as programmers, designers, … that could be convincing to people to follow the “down to earth” path? |