Tomi Profile picture
27 Dec, 25 tweets, 4 min read
1/ You might hear about the metaverse daily, but the concept remains confusing.

My framework for the metaverse: “the collective sum of all activity that takes place online” makes its profound impact on the world easy to understand with limited prior knowledge.
2/ Metaverse is sometimes thought of as a rich, seamlessly integrated alternate 3D universe, but that’s unlikely to ever materialize.

However, the Internet today is already facilitating countless meaningful human interactions and experiences that augment/amplify everyday lives.
3/ Life’s various constraints and the increasing convenience of the Internet are continuously driving more and more interactions online.

Online already dominates in quantity, so quality is increasingly going to determine the equilibrium of online vs. in-person interactions.
4/ The Internet has many issues (e.g., harassment), and they can be even worse than in-person.

However, you likely already understand the Internet’s value proposition, and how its reach and connectivity have potential to facilitate valuable interactions and experiences.
5/ The more niche your interests, the less likely it is that others in your physical vicinity share them.

For people struggling to fit in, the importance of finding a sense of belonging online can’t be understated – not to mention those living in oppressed countries or societies
6/ People have enjoyed meaningful experiences and connections with like-minded people online for years and years, and countless effective metaverses (e.g., IRC, Second Life, WoW) long predate the mainstream media’s metaverse interest of recent years.
7/ Spending time online used to be considered anti-social, and having friends you hadn’t met in person was almost a warning sign.

But as smartphones and social media were adopted globally, people began to understand how online interactions could be additive to their lives.
8/ 2020’s COVID lockdowns drove many previously skeptical adults online, essentially normalizing social interactions taking place on the Internet.

Importantly, people also started seeking out more immersive experiences than the already-common FaceTime call equivalents.
9/ The demand for new online experiences opened the floodgates for investment.

Now, all things metaverse are collectively raising billions in incremental capital and attracting some of the most talented engineers globally to work on developing the metaverse.
10/ As more capital is invested to develop better online experiences and complementary consumer tech, the metaverse becomes more immersive and will pass as a substitute for more in-person experiences, allowing for more social interactions and timeshare to move online.
11/ This is a flywheel that increases adoption in a positive feedback loop:

Investment -> more/better experiences -> more people spending more time online -> larger networks to monetize -> more investment...

The more immersive the experience, the better it is as a substitute.
12/ One-on-one online interactions are already convenient, but many group activities remain tricky.

However, once splitting larger crowds into sub-groups and moving between conversations becomes more seamless and convenient, attitudes are likely to (again) shift significantly.
13/ People often criticize online experiences by noting that they’ll never live up to in-person meetings, but convenience and constraints will drive more interactions online regardless.

The Internet offers social alternatives to otherwise solo activities (e.g., TV/movies).
14/ Removing the friction of travel can free up hours to socialize with people you’d otherwise not find time for – taking part in the metaverse can be completely additive.

As a result, aggregate time spent socializing online can multiply at the expense of non-social activity.
15/ One of the challenges holding the metaverse back today is the fragmentation of the Internet, i.e., how hard it is for non-tech savvy people to move from platform to platform, especially while keeping their circle intact.

Fragmentation is a tax on the number of interactions.
16/ Over time, it will become easier to move online experiences and interactions between platforms, somewhat akin to meeting for dinner before a game, and then going to drinks afterwards.

Moving platforms might feel hindersome today, but the experience will continue to improve.
17/ Countless smart people are working to not only improve each experience individually, but also to make the integration of, and transition between them more seamless.

Each development step will further increase the speed of the flywheel, driving more adoption and investment.
18/ Changes in demographics and consumer behavior also help.

As today’s children grow up, used to more activity taking place online and increasingly comfortable with technology, it is possible that fewer experiences need to take place in person to be perceived as meaningful.
19/ The need to earn a living still drives people offline for much of the day, but that is also changing quickly.

As growing demand for online experiences and services drives increasing online supply, more and more opportunities to make a living remotely/online will emerge.
20/ Making a living remotely/online may have sounded dystopian as recently as two years ago, but it is already commonplace for the millions who began working from home during the pandemic.

The economy as a whole is becoming less and less reliant on in-person interactions.
21/ Meaningful improvements in relevant consumer tech (cameras, mics, lighting...) will further help blur the lines between online and in-person experiences.

The Internet, combined with new tech, makes your home the new office/after work spot/restaurant/movie theater/classroom.
22/ The net impact on the world should also be positive – as more of education and work life moves online, the playing field will be leveled among those with access to basic technology.

Over time, this should help reduce inequality and improve quality of life in the aggregate.
23/ No one’s life needs to fully move online, and the level of participation doesn’t need to (and won’t) be uniform across society – to succeed, the metaverse only needs to augment and/or amplify people’s lives with meaningful experiences and human interactions.
24/ No single company can realistically build all the services people seek out online, much like no conglomerate controls all of your real-life experiences.

The metaverse will have to be a distributed collection of best-in-class online services and experiences.
25/ TL;DR: Defined as “the collective sum of all activity that takes place online”, the metaverse is already having a profound impact on the world – and social acceptance, incremental investment, technological improvements and demographic tailwinds will supercharge it.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Tomi

Tomi Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @tomi

10 Jul
1/ To help shine some light on the magnitude of the Counter-Strike ecosystem's issues, TO losses in 2019-2020 per public filings:
- ESL ~$80mm (incl. all games)
- BLAST ~$25mm

Combine team losses, and the ecosystem (excl. Valve) is easily losing upwards of $50mm/year.
2/ Worth noting that 2020 was actually the better year financially for ESL -- they were able to keep much of their sponsorships/revenue with significantly reduced costs, driven by layoffs and lack of offline events.

2019 was *worse* than 2020. Scary for return to "normal."
3/ Why are investors (note: not VC funds -- primarily family offices, strategics, etc.) funding this?

Assuming continuous growth (my pinned tweet's article explains some of the high-level rationale for industry as a whole), eventually this turns into a lucrative media business.
Read 20 tweets
9 Jul
1/ Thread: Some of the #IEM games have seemingly lasted forever, so I went through two extreme examples to understand the breakdown of time.

Summary: Counter-Strike needs rule changes to make it more viewer friendly for a growing part of the audience. @CSGO
2/ Astralis vs FaZe (nuke only)

Actual game: 1h 14m 38s / 71%
Freezetime: 15m 40s / 15%
Total game: 1h 30m 18s / 86%
Tech: 4m 30s / 4%
Timeouts: 4m / 4%
Breaks: 6m 26s / 6%

Total: 1h 45m 14s

Series ended 2-0, but lasted over 3h 7m (due to OT). #IEM
3/ Liquid vs mouz (inferno only) #IEM

Actual game: 1h 35m 58s / 70%
Freezetime: 17m 40s / 13%
Total game: 1h 53m 38s / 82%
Tech: 12m / 9%
Timeouts: 4m / 3%
Breaks: 8m 17s / 6%

Total: 2h 17m 55s

Series went the distance (incl. OT), and took over 4h 50m (!) to finish. #IEM
Read 12 tweets
14 May 20
1/ THREAD: I believe the increasing length of matches is becoming a problem in Counter-Strike.

Maps used to run at most 40-45 minutes with BO3 series often finishing in ~2h30. Now +4 hours long series are common, as we’ve recently seen with matches running late into the night.
2/ Various fundamental rule changes have led to a gradual increase in match length in the past years. There include increases in:

- freezetime
- roundtime
- bomb timer
- timeouts
- half-time break

While each alone is relatively minor, cumulatively the impact is meaningful.
3/ In addition, the modern economy in CS:GO appears to make matches more drawn out – teams don’t tend to get blown out because there are fewer save rounds, leading to an increase in rounds played per map on average, compounding the impact of each individual change outlined above.
Read 21 tweets
26 Apr 20
1/ THREAD: With sports on pause globally, there's talk about esports (competitive gaming) being a beneficiary, as many tournaments and competitions can be held online and thus take place, albeit in a different setting, regardless of restrictions imposed on society by COVID-19.
2/ Over the past few years, we’ve seen an increasing number of headline-worthy comparisons between traditional sports and esports, many of them comparing apples to oranges, at best, if we're being generous.
3/ Examples include comparing total unique viewers who tuned in even for a second across a week(s) long tournament on a free online live stream, to pay-TV AMA for a 3 hour game, or even worse – those who attended the Super Bowl in person.
Read 34 tweets
29 Dec 19
1/ THREAD: Weak 1H 2020 will put significant pressure on current FY2020 and FY2021 consensus estimates, which should weigh on the share price in the coming quarters and risk changing the growth narrative.

Other risks are merely the icing on the cake (disc: short). Image
2/ Following 31% q/q deliveries decline in Q1 (as US M3 backlog was exhausted and Europe deliveries had not started en masse), managed to grow deliveries sequentially from Q1’s low base throughout the rest of FY2019.
3/ Q4 will follow Q2 and Q3 in setting new deliveries records, this time at >110k, driven by geographic expansion, release of RHD M3 and expiration of various tax incentives (NL, US FIT).

However, will barely hit the lower end of its delivery guidance of 360-400k in FY2019
Read 26 tweets
25 May 19
1/ Finally read the Kotaku esports bubble article.

I'm obviously biased, with a vested interest in the industry (and teams in particular) doing well, but I think the text missed the mark in many ways.

Thread below, focusing on the team (arguably most criticized) POV.
2/ Much like with other fast-growing, nascent industries, there are of course plenty of bad actors (see e.g. @DenialEsports) who use the apples to kiwis comparisons (differing viewership metrics, full events vs. single games, etc.), but it doesn't mean it's standard practice.
3/ From my experience, the smaller teams (w/ most to gain) tend to play more fast and loose, whereas the bigger teams (w/ most to lose) tend to be more conservative with data, assumptions, etc.

Bad actors can exist anywhere, but faking numbers isn't a viable long-term strategy.
Read 22 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(