Has the Metaverse really failed? Or has it never been fully tested?

Before judging the Metaverse, we really need to “Enter” it

It's not enough to simply look in from the outside, read headlines, or try it for five minutes. The Metaverse must be inhabited and thoroughly experienced. Otherwise, judgment will come before the experience.

In the last few days we have been reading again, the funeral of the Metaverse. Articles that decree its end, that speak of a shattered dream, of a failure foretold, of a mistaken vision. But a question naturally arises: Before writing that the Metaverse is dead, was it actually lived? Was it actually used? Was a headset worn every day, for weeks, not just for a half-hour test?

Because the feeling, reading certain pieces, is clear: who writes peeked into the Metaverse, he did not inhabit it.

Trying a headset is not using it

Il Meta questLike any disruptive technology, it's not immediate. It's not a phone you turn on and master in five minutes. It's a different way of being digital, with adaptation times, physical limitations, and new cognitive logics.

Metaverse: Loading. Never had an experience. Opinion posted anyway. Is it really a failure or a missed connection?

Anyone who talks about nausea as a structural defect immediately betrays their inexperience: the nausea goes away after a few days of useIt's a known, physiological, temporary phenomenon. Anyone who actually uses a headset knows it. The real problem today isn't that, but weight, the pressure on the nape of the neck and eye sockets, the discomfort for more than one or two hours at a time. Legitimate, concrete, real criticism. Not slogans.

Yet, despite these limitations, the level of maturity achieved is far from negligible.

Apps, games and worlds: it's not the desert they describe

The apps are there. The games are there too, and many of them are excellent. when designed natively for virtual reality, not as a simple transposition of experiences designed for traditional PCs or consoles.

The Internet was not born orderly.
Social media was not born mature.
The Metaverse is no exception.

Virtual worlds — well-constructed ones, with a logic, a direction, a goal — are interesting, engaging, often surprisingThere are certainly a lot of amateur, improvised, embarrassing worlds. But this is not a failure of the Metaverse, it's simply the reflection of the users' creative freedom, the same one that filled the web with horrible sites in the 90s. It wasn't the Internet's fault, and it's not the fault of Meta.

The real issue: work, not entertainment

The critical point, that one is unresolved, is another: digital workToday, the Metaverse struggles to truly integrate with the production workflows of a PC or laptop. Remote desktop is suggestive, it has a "wow" effect, but as soon as you try to edit a video, write a complex email, work on Canva or a timeline, you realize that it is not yet practicable, if not relying almost exclusively on voice commands.

Yes, this is a real limitation.
But limit does not mean death. It means road still open.

Here the criticism is correct. But it is not the same as saying that everything has failed: it is the same as saying that the road is not over, and that's a huge difference.

Zuckerberg as an easy target

Pointing the finger at Mark Zuckerberg Today it's all too simple. It's become the favorite sport. But there's a truth that should be acknowledged: he had the courage to believe it, to invest when others were watching from afar.

It's a story we've already seen.
At first, people laughed at electric cars.
The idea of ​​bringing the Internet everywhere via satellite was laughed at.
Then reality did the rest.

It's a story we've already seen. Elon Musk he was ridiculed when he talked about electric cars. Tesla It was considered an expensive utopia. Even satellites for the global internet seemed like science fiction. Then the facts belied the eulogies written too soon.

Budget cuts? Maybe it's called Artificial Intelligence.

There's talk of a reduction in investments as a sign of surrender. But what if it were a strategic reallocationToday there is a technology that absorbs resources, energy and priorities: theArtificial intelligenceAnd imagining the Metaverse without AI is like imagining a smartphone without the internet.

Those who actually use a headset often ask themselves:
Why isn't there a built-in AI to help me here yet? Why doesn't it translate conversations in real time?

In virtual worlds, language is a huge barrier. English dominates. An AI that translates voice interactions in real time would break down one of the biggest limitations of the social experience.And this is just one example. The Metaverse and AI are not alternatives: are destined to converge.

Declaring the Metaverse dead is intellectually dishonest.

Criticism is legitimate. Indeed, it's necessary. But doing so without really getting into itWithout using it daily, without distinguishing between structural limitations and solvable problems, it becomes a fashionable exercise. Today, it's fashionable to demolish the Metaverse. Tomorrow, perhaps, it will be fashionable to regret it.

And there is also a respect due to those who use it, to those who work there, to those who have invested time and money in it not out of fanaticism, but because in those experiences he sees real value.

Keeping on dreaming is not a mistake

As children, we dreamed of digital worlds, alternate realities, shared spaces beyond the screen. Today, those things exist—imperfect, inconvenient, and improvable. But they exist.

Connecting to the Metaverse… loading.
Maybe, this time, it's worth waiting for it to end.

Maybe the Metaverse isn't what we were promised. But it's not even what we want to hastily dismiss todayTechnology doesn't grow by following the headlines. It grows through trial and error, slowdowns, and restarts.

To stop dreaming right now would be the real failure.