Focus on the Metaverse Failure
The Metaverse Debacle – Lessons for Architecture
Remember when every big name in architecture was scrambling to build within the Metaverse? That virtual reality world launched by Mark Zuckerberg's Meta promised to be the next big thing. Firms like Zaha Hadid Architects, BIG, and others jumped at the chance to design "virtual cities" and offices, all fueled by cryptocurrency and adorned with NFTs. Even non-architectural brands like Jose Cuervo couldn't resist getting involved. The hype was undeniable.
Why the rush? Well, tech companies and consultancies were promising astronomical growth. McKinsey envisioned the Metaverse generating $5 trillion in value; Citigroup went even further, suggesting it could be worth a staggering $13 trillion! This was meant to be the successor to the internet as we know it.
But it turned out to be a whole lot of nothing. The Metaverse wasn't just a disappointment; it was a colossal flop. It's not that it underperformed or simply needed more time– practically nobody was using it.
Just how bad was it?
Reports revealed that Decentraland, a major Metaverse platform, saw a measly 38 daily active users. Meta's main product, Horizon Worlds, apparently pulled in a grand total of $470 globally. Let those numbers sink in. The Metaverse wasn't just struggling – it was practically nonexistent.
With hindsight, perhaps we shouldn't be surprised. Nobody seemed to have a clear answer for the most basic question: What's the point of the Metaverse? Was it for business meetings, social events, or just reliving a 1990s version of Second Life (without even the fun of having legs)? Not even Zuckerberg himself could provide a compelling reason. Yet, that didn't stop architects from chasing press releases to showcase their supposed cutting-edge involvement.
This epic failure has real consequences. Investors got burned, people lost jobs, and countless hours were wasted. One would hope Meta, those overhyping consultancies, and trend-chasing architects learned a hard lesson in credibility. However, history shows us that hyped-up technologies come and go (remember NFTs and the cryptocurrency craze?), and yet the pattern continues.
Architecture, a field with such a strong foundation in the creation of physical spaces, seems to perpetually fall for the latest shiny tech trends. This fascination appears quite selective, however.
When Tech Hype Meets Utopian Dreams
The Metaverse fiasco isn't the first time architects have been lured in by promises of technological revolution – and it likely won't be the last. There's something about the idea of technology as progress that seems particularly appealing to our field, despite ample evidence that the two don't always go hand-in-hand.
Think back to the 1960s obsession with the "megastructure" – those monolithic, multi-use buildings that promised nothing short of self-contained utopias. Or the '80s and '90s craze for "intelligent" buildings, their futuristic designs hinting at a revolution in the workplace. Yet, megastructures proved inflexible and often dehumanizing, while those "intelligent" buildings were merely office blocks with needlessly complex systems that aged badly. Now, we've witnessed the Metaverse flame out before it even truly ignited.
The common thread is this: architecture's fascination with technology often trails behind the tech world itself. By the time these concepts filter into architectural ambitions, they're already considered outdated ("megastructures") or even mocked ("intelligent" buildings) by the tech industry. The term "Metaverse" itself echoes Neal Stephenson's 1992 dystopian novel Snow Crash – a work intended as a warning, not an aspirational blueprint.
Architecture and Tech: Learning from the Metaverse and Embracing Real-World Applications
Perhaps architects should start taking cues from the often-overlooked tech workers. This is the group creating the advanced renders, models, and intricate software that drive architectural production, yet their voices remain muted compared to the celebrated lead architects.
These workers were likely seeing the cracks in the Metaverse (and Web 3.0 as a whole) long before many of us did. Historically, architecture hasn't been known for listening to those it relies upon, nor those it claims to design for. Maybe it's time for that to change.
It's also time for architecture to move beyond the simplistic equation of technology with progress, and stop pursuing utopian dreams disguised as tech trends. Of course, this doesn't mean dismissing technology altogether. Architects have a critical role to play in shaping how technology is integrated into our built environment. However, perhaps this role lies less in chasing the latest flashy headlines and more in critically engaging with the real-world applications of technology.
The Metaverse may have been a resounding farce, but there are valuable lessons to be extracted from its wreckage. It's a reminder that as a profession, we need a healthier, more discerning relationship with technology – one that serves real needs and improves lives, rather than chasing empty hype cycles.
Beyond the Buzzwords – Architecture's Role in Shaping the Future
Virtual reality (VR) itself holds genuine potential for the architectural profession. Far from being useless, VR has been employed effectively in areas like acoustic design, where simulations help clients experience a space and its soundscape even before construction begins. Museums also increasingly utilize VR as an educational tool, offering immersive explorations of architectural landmarks around the world.
Furthermore, the idea of virtual social spaces predates the Metaverse craze. It draws inspiration from both science fiction and the early, open-minded vision of the internet as a boundless public commons. It's worth noting that Zuckerberg's monetized version of "the future of the internet" isn't where people, especially the younger generations, seek out these shared online experiences.
Today's youth gravitate towards platforms like Roblox, Minecraft, and Fortnite. These spaces, while often controversial, facilitate creativity, customization, and online community building. Big brands like Gucci and Nike recognize this and are finding ways to integrate within these existing virtual worlds.
PRchitecture: The Disconnect Between Mainstream Architecture and Online Creative Communities
So, where does architecture fit into this picture? Outside of the occasional quippy remark about buildings needing to be "more like Minecraft," mainstream architecture – often led by figures over 40 – hasn't fully engaged with these dynamic online communities bubbling with creative energy.
Perhaps this disconnect exists because mainstream architecture primarily serves established institutions and wealthy individuals. It's a field shaped by capitalism and prestige, less likely to prioritize the spaces where everyday people, and especially the youth, choose to spend their time. This disconnect reveals a missed opportunity, as some of the most vibrant experimentation in architecture-adjacent fields is happening online.
Of course, there might be a simpler and somewhat less generous explanation: cynicism. The social media era has fueled a trend in architecture where the priority is less about built work or theory (the traditional mainstays of the profession), and more about generating PR-friendly content. It's about buzzwords, eye-catching renders, and attaching the latest hyped-up trend (be it climate solutions or the Metaverse) to one's image. This phenomenon is what I like to term "PRchitecture."
Reflecting on the Metaverse Collapse: Architecture's Tech Dilemma and Path Forward
This chase for virtual relevance comes at a price. The embarrassing collapse of the Metaverse should serve as a moment of reflection. The astonishing disconnect between those staggering trillion-dollar figures pushed by marketing firms and the dismal reality on the ground reveals a deep problem in how we perceive technology's role in our profession.
The current iteration of the tech industry – increasingly defined by cycles of overhyped promises and outright scams – offers little of lasting value to architecture or society at large. Its cycles of rapid expansion and collapse are destructive, and its relentless drive towards financialization threatens to undermine the creative process itself.
Architects shouldn't fall prey to the tech industry's attempts to profit from creativity. Labor exploitation in the name of "disruption" is already happening with the misuse of AI tools. The sooner the architectural profession grasps this dynamic, the better protected it will be.
The Metaverse may have been a resounding flop, but it has the potential to be a transformative learning experience. Will the profession genuinely change its approach to technology, or will it simply move on to the next hyped-up tech trend, hoping for better results? Only time will tell.
Image Credit - The RIBA Journal
Rethinking Progress and Challenging Power
The Metaverse mess highlights a deeper question about not just technology, but about how we define progress itself as a society. For far too long, architectural discourse has accepted an uncritical view that conflates technological advancement with inherently beneficial progress. This ignores the countless ways that technology, without careful and intentional use, can exacerbate inequality, harm the environment, and undermine human connection.
Take the idea of "smart cities" – urban environments packed with sensors, surveillance equipment, and tech-driven automation. While such technologies might promise efficiency, the question remains: efficiency for whom and at what cost? Whose interests are truly served by hyper-surveilled cities where individual actions are constantly tracked? Whose voices are excluded from the conversation when technology dictates urban planning?
Tech and Power in Architecture: Advocating for Human-Centered Design
These are not novel questions. Urbanists like Jane Jacobs taught us decades ago about the importance of placing people and their needs at the heart of urban environments. Technology can certainly be a tool, but it should never replace human-centered design principles that prioritize accessibility, inclusivity, and a sense of community ownership.
The underlying issue is one of power. Architecture is inherently entangled with power structures, be they economic, political, or social. Yet, for a field that claims to serve the public interest, architecture often seems surprisingly unwilling to challenge the agendas of those in power.
The tech industry, with its immense wealth and influence, loves to portray itself as a disruptive force for good. But as we've seen in countless examples, from labor exploitation to privacy breaches, the tech industry's priorities lie in profit and unfettered control, not in genuine societal welfare.
This isn't a call for architects to turn into Luddites, rejecting all technology out of hand. Rather, it's an invitation for a more critical engagement, one that acknowledges the limitations and potential harms of technology as much as it celebrates its potential benefits.
True progress doesn't lie solely in the latest software update or VR headset. It lies in ensuring our built environment – both physically and virtually – fosters equitable access, sustainability, and fosters human connection. Architects need to move beyond being passive consumers of hyped-up tech narratives and become active critics, shaping how technology serves the real needs of communities.
The Hype Trap: Technology’s Illusions in Architecture
It's tempting to dismiss the Metaverse debacle as a unique anomaly, a foolish gamble bound to fail. However, it fits within a worrying, recurring pattern where the hype cycle of the tech industry outpaces reality. Remember the frenzy surrounding NFTs? Or the unfulfilled promises attached to cryptocurrency, once touted as the revolution that would upend finance as we know it?
The truth is, technology alone can't solve architecture's most pressing challenges. We face a global housing crisis, widening wealth inequality that shapes our built environment, and a looming climate catastrophe. No amount of virtual land or blockchain-based buildings can magically fix these problems.
Technology, when used thoughtfully and with clear goals, can be a valuable asset in addressing these challenges. Data-driven analysis can help us understand existing urban patterns and build more efficiently. Advanced materials and construction methods can play a role in sustainable practices. However, technology must serve the greater goals of social justice, environmental responsibility, and human well-being within our built environment.
The Metaverse hype was fueled by a desire for escapism - the lure of a virtual playground free from the burdens of the real world. It's a desire rooted in understandable anxieties about a world rife with problems. Yet, the solution doesn't lie in further detaching from reality, but in doubling down on our efforts to improve it.
Refocusing Architecture: Addressing Real-World Needs Over Virtual Escapes
Architects have a unique responsibility in this endeavor. Our work shapes not just buildings, but the very spaces in which human lives unfold. This power should not be surrendered to tech companies that see our field as just another revenue stream. That's the wrong lesson to learn from the Metaverse fiasco.
The right lesson is this: Our profession needs to develop a savvier outlook when approaching technologies, guided by an unwavering commitment to creating spaces that truly serve people and communities. This calls for both introspection and a willingness to shift long-held assumptions.
A Call for Critical Thinking and Real Solutions
Perhaps less time should be spent chasing press releases and curating a social media image tied to buzzwords, and more time should be invested in fostering critical thinking among the next generation of architects. Instead of jumping to design the latest shiny virtual world, perhaps we start by listening to communities facing urgent real-world challenges that need addressing right here, right now.
The Metaverse turned out to be a costly illusion. It's time for architecture to wake up from the tech industry's hype-induced dreams and to refocus on the tangible needs and aspirations of the communities it promises to serve. Let's build a better future grounded in reality, not a virtual escape from it.
