Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The metaverse is bullshit

outline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 780 posts

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#231

Post by bombcar »

mlindner wrote: post #220
Zanni wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kids prefer messaging because it's asynchronous, not because they prefer text.

I have a much younger cousin who's in their teens. Teens of today prefer text messaging because they don't have to show their face. Even when my cousins video chat they don't like to show their face and will aim the camera in other directions despite being in video chat.

I feel nobody “likes” video chat beyond small children and grandparents- I know I always endeavor to have connection issues.

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#232

Post by Jasper_ »

wruza wrote: post #224
verve_rat wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without the "concept of physical movement" how will "food" get to your "house"?

Are we "talking" about 2040 or 2140?

I'm not going to be alive in 2140 but I'd bet we won't have broken the laws of thermodynamics by either 2040 or 2140.

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#233

Post by tsimionescu »

noduerme wrote: post #124
Jasper_ wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're just describing multiplayer video games. We've already had those for more than 20 years.

Well, yeah. Honestly, a massively multiplayer GTA V or Red Dead 2 would basically be the whole Metaverse concept. The only differences would be: (1) You aren't there to complete missions; there's no storylines and it's totally open-ended. There are no writers, and (2) The spaces and content are created by anyone, not a central company, and (3) You can go from GTA world to Red Dead world to tons of other worlds withou…

We already have games almost entirely like this, and the market is clear: no one plays them, to a good approximation. People play games to compete or cooperate on specific goals. This idea of sandbox multi-player interaction is only a gimmick that's interesting a few weeks tops, then the vast majority leave to play Candy Crush or Fortnite where they have clear goals.

If they want to meet with friends and hang around, real life contact just can't be beat. That's the reason why virtual persistent worlds are ultimately bullshit (as opposed to game worlds where you have an actual game to play, be that chess or matching colored gems or killing other players).

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#235

Post by nunodonato »

b0rsuk wrote: post #135
Jasper_ wrote: post #52

> In a September 2021 Washington Post interview, Tim Sweeney imagined the future of advertising. "A carmaker who wants to make a presence in the metaverse isn't going to run ads," he said. "They're going to drop their car into the world in real time and you'll be able to drive it around. And they're going to work with lots of content creators with different experiences to ensure their car is playable here and there,…

I'm patiently waiting for the desktop metaphor to die. I'm a very happy user of i3 (tiling) window manager and it's beautiful how efficiently it uses space. Meanwhile in the "desktop metaphor" world, interface designers have settled on fullscreen applications (skype, even music players) and tabs. Because no one wants to bother moving application windows around with mouse. i3 is explicitly for power users, but someone…

So if I just use every window in maximized mode, what's the big advantage of i3?

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#236

Post by bombcar »

input_sh wrote: post #195
emodendroket wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's really my question with almost everything related to crypto, "what is decentralization actually adding here?" It's cool, I guess, but it's wasteful.

The only argument I've heard is the ability to transfer items between games, but that leads me to more questions than answers. Why would an asset designed for one game make sense or look good or feel at home in a completely different one? Why would companies make one of them and sell it for a million bucks instead of trying to convince more players to buy it in a shop for two bucks? Is the mechanic of a weapon gonna…

Games already allow transfers in some cases - and usually in the exact opposite of decentralized - for example Nintendo and their Amibo or Pokémon with loading previous generation saves.

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#238

Post by freshhawk »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #194
Jasper_ wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say a sizable majority play Gran Turismo because it's a fun test of skill -- learning the controls of an intricate machine, the layout of the game's tracks, and achieving some form of mastery over it. And I'm also sure some people play it for the fantasy of doing car racing in a safe environment, which is a very dangerous, expensive, and inaccessible sport for a lot of people. So, perhaps I misread Tim Sweeney's…

>Tim Sweeney is basically saying "hey, look, this is the future, you can put your car in a video game" to Mercedes, who has already been doing this for years. I think the idea is that the Metaverse will give you as close to the real experience of being in that specific car as possible, a video game won't do that because any car placed in a video game must be subservient to the goals and mechanics of the game. The rea…

I guess my main question here is: why will it be so close to the real experience?

Why wouldn't everyone make it the most engaging virtual car driving experience they can find, what incentive is there to make it "real" in this useful way?

I mean, I get that it's necessary for this to happen for the whole pitch to make sense, but it's just nonsense. Why these weird religious beliefs about 3D stuff, including product placement, which seem to magically behave differently than the 2D versions we've been living with for decades now.

I am just incredibly confused by this. Is it like NFTs where we aren't supposed to believe the cover story and the wink-wink acknowledgement of the grift is a in-joke/cultural thing?

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#239

Post by tsimionescu »

benatkin wrote: post #108
Jasper_ wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say a sizable majority play Gran Turismo because it's a fun test of skill -- learning the controls of an intricate machine, the layout of the game's tracks, and achieving some form of mastery over it. And I'm also sure some people play it for the fantasy of doing car racing in a safe environment, which is a very dangerous, expensive, and inaccessible sport for a lot of people. So, perhaps I misread Tim Sweeney's…

I thought modeless was wrong and that you weren't discounting the experience of driving, but rather the experience of driving a mediocre car. However, with your followup comment, it seems you're discounting the experience of driving. Suffice it to say that plenty of people genuinely love driving, both in video games and in the real world. Flying won't make driving obsolete any more than mountain biking has made hikin…

I think they are discounting that there would be anything new at all in a "Metaverse" offering driving compared to what exists today in gaming. Of course you can have fun with virtual driving, there already exists a plethora of ways, from realistic-ish high speed racing in Gran Turismo to wacky racing in Mario Kart to realistic-ish long-form driving in Truck Simulator.

Re: The metaverse is bullshit

#240

Post by meheleventyone »

codingdave wrote: post #118
Jasper_ wrote: post #52

> In a September 2021 Washington Post interview, Tim Sweeney imagined the future of advertising. "A carmaker who wants to make a presence in the metaverse isn't going to run ads," he said. "They're going to drop their car into the world in real time and you'll be able to drive it around. And they're going to work with lots of content creators with different experiences to ensure their car is playable here and there,…

Roblox will be looked back upon as the MS-DOS of metaverses, yet people go gaga over any vehicle you can make. They (mostly kids) spend an absurd amount of hours just jumping from one place to another to prove they can without falling. They spend real money just to turn their hat a new color. Entire genres of games and activities exist basically to just move around, jump on a few things, see numbers get bigger, and s…

People already drive cars in VR, in multiplayer with force feedback steering wheels and chair based motion platforms with a fairly decent but not perfect simulation. My main gaming activity right now is flying WW2 aircraft in VR in big multiplayer fights.

This is one of the articles main points this decentralised universe of cool shit you can do already exists. The question is whether interoperability actually brings anything useful.

Post reply on HN