And here we are. Welcome to episode two of Lost in Immersion, your weekly 45-minute stream about innovation. As VR and AR veterans, we will discuss the latest news of the immersive industry. So let's go. And Fabien here, you can talk now. Thanks. Thanks. Cool. So this week, the topic that I want to discuss with you guys is so the link between AI and how this will, I think, help the emergence of metaverse, like a real metaverse, not just one single world as we have a lot of them right now, but very like interconnected and populated worlds. So last week, OpenAI, which is the company was doing, one of the leading AI company was doing the famous ChatGPT that is, was currently only a web UI. So you had to go on the website to be able to interact with ChatGPT. And last week, they released the model available as an API. So what that means is, I think we will see a lot of applications coming for that. And the link with metaverse and real world is that it's very easy now to give a behavior to an avatar, to like a persona in a virtual world. And users can interact and discuss with that persona. So you can have, in a very few lines of code, you can define, you know, if you are in a game, you can define, let's say, like a warrior with all the qualities. And it's very easy to do, like a few lines of code. And in the same kind of, like, you can define a technician and you can define, I don't know, a magician, you know, this kind of stuff. So, yeah, that's, I will stop here for now. I'm just opening to you guys and what you think this will bring and you think to make a good move towards like a more connected metaverse. Seb, what's your input on that? We lost you for a few minutes, but I guess you understand what Fabien was talking about. Sure, I am. Well, I think it opens a lot of creative ability to try on a lot of different options and then decide the one the creative guy wants to try. But it's, yeah, it's great to have the opportunity to test different designs, for example, for pictures, 3D models, and see which one the graphics want to go for. I think before it was more drawing, so one guy drawing something, testing it in 3D, then going back. I think that kind of opportunity is great. And that's really, like we said before, it's a tool that needs to be handled and discovered more and more. What about you Guillaume, what is your thought? Well, on the talking part, because Fabien was talking more about the avatar and artificial people that we could talk with in the metaverse. What I saw is that sometimes there is some discussion that are getting out of the road with some really, really weird answers by the AI. So I think we still have some work about this to avoid some political or ethical problem that the AI could go, could express. But on the AI part, the most impressive thing that I'm seeing right now is the 3D auto-generating assets from 2D photos and pictures. I think, indeed, this is a great way for us to build some better metaverses because the 3D asset generation is the hardest one. It would require a lot of 3D artists and the budget would simply explode. But if we have this kind of tool that can generate really quickly some very nice 3D assets, we can achieve this whole metaverse idea of something very, very big or a very huge environment that it's really hard to apprehend right now because of the amount of work it would require. So Fabien, if you want to conclude on this, on your idea. Yeah, I will conclude with two things. One is, I just remember now, actually, that there is a company was doing called Opus AI. They are working on text-based 3D world construction. So just enter your text like, I want a forest and boom, a forest will appear in the virtual world. So to same direction as you, it will help the construction of worlds. I totally agree with how AI could go sideways if it's not aligned. Some people even think that it's one potentially existential risk if the AI is not aligned with, I mean, we've all seen Terminator. And lastly, there is also a theory called dead internet theory where there will be no real human in a metaverse. It will be only like AI agents interacting with each other. So yeah, I think it's a good thing to think about. Yeah, the main, I think the main problem here is the database you're using to make the AI learn. We saw that depending on the input, it really changed the output of the, and the behavior of the AI. So maybe someone will have to decide which kind of database is agreeable or not depending on the results. So Seb, if you want to, do you want to add something more or maybe you can bring your subject? I think my subject is a bit related to what you were saying. It's about the fact that Facebook Meta released, well sold 20 million headsets and that should open a big market for VR experiences. But I think the issue is still the cost to make a new game, a new concept, a new, yeah, a new game requires a lot of graphics, a lot of knowledge to do that for this kind of device. And I think right now the issue is that on their store, there is not that much application, that much game and not a lot of AAA games, AAA games that sells out from the others. So what's your thought about that on your side? Fabien, if you want to start. Yeah, that's very interesting is they sold 20 millions, but so why are we not seeing like VR as like a mainstream, not mainstream, but close to mainstream platform? An issue is maybe content indeed. I even saw an article where the title was something around like Meta is a game company, but they don't know it, which I think is funny. Also, the difference between do Meta want to be a company who's doing VR for work and for industry related topics or for the family, for the game. So yeah, that's a lot to think about. And I think we will see this year how it will play out with all the different actors and how they will perform. And as you said, Seb, yeah, how the content will follow. Great. So just to, I think we saw the same article and there were things that 20 million in the same number of sold GameCubes and Xbox in the world. So you can have the image of what it represents for real. So as you say, I think that the VR headset hardware is not the problem anymore. As we can see the price is right. The performances are really good and people are buying them in Best Buy here. So here you can buy them pretty much everywhere. And as you say, Seb, the real issue is the content for everyone, because as you are seeing, people are not using their VR headset for more than six months apparently. They are just selling them back on eBay or Marketplace. And this is one of my conclusions. I'm doing a Metaverse conference in a few weeks and this is my conclusion is that it's time for professionals to take the train and bring on some very interesting and life-changing applications, because now we can see that game is not enough for VR headsets to live. We talked about PSVR 2 last week because they now are bringing AAA games, as you are saying, Seb, so we will see what's going on. But I think gaming is one dimension of the VR users and now it's time to bring the other dimensions which are work, training and services, because this will make the real change and will make people come back to their VR headsets if it makes their life easier on an everyday basis. If you can go to the bank in VR instead of going there in the real world and it's a real pain, I guess people will use their VR headsets to go to the bank and it will make them keep their VR headsets. So if you want to add something about this last element. Yeah, maybe the fact that Meta released the Quest Pro for that to target more the pro market, but right now the device for me is just an upgrade to the Quest 2, but not a pro headset that will make that move, changing the market to a more pro market. I think that's still missing an upgrade, mostly on the mixed reality view and the fact that the camera is low quality right now. So I think that's what remains to change and maybe the Apple one will change that. I think this could be a business mistake if they are still thinking that the hardware is a problem. They will keep bringing some new high-tech VR headsets, but obviously this is not the issue now. They should focus on bringing on new content. And what do you think about the Quest Pro that is now 500 bucks less than a few weeks before? They are now $1,000 instead of $150. It's a pretty quick price change because it was released a few weeks or a few months ago. It's not that long. So what kind of message does it bring to people? We don't know the estimate of how much they sold, but I think they did not sell as much as they wanted. So maybe trying to lower the price and sell more to companies so they can equip more than one people, maybe a complete team to work together in VR, that requires the headsets to be lower in price to be able to buy more for a company. For a company, $500 is not that much. I don't think it would change anything. Well, when you multiply by 10 or 20, the number of devices starts to add up. For small companies, it's your thing. But for the bigger ones, it doesn't make sense. Yeah, but then the headset is still lacking applications that are really useful, like you said, for sharing content, sharing ideas, applications, and that's still required to prepare some 3D assets, some 3D stuff. Maybe with adding some artificial intelligence inside of the application will help for that and help create concepts quickly and share that concept with other people. I hope it will. Fabien? Yeah, I think it's interesting. Is it like an economic problem? As you said, Seb, they didn't sell enough, so they reduced the price to sell more. Or do they, on purpose, want to help individuals to buy, to have easier access to VR? Maybe that could be the case as well. I want to go back a bit on what you said. I think for individuals, I wonder what you think as well. Is social networks in VR, like VRChat, which is super popular here in Japan, is it also a driver of VR adoption? Or is it still like a niche? Because VRChat is one of the most popular. I can go to a party in VRChat. So, yeah, it's a very alive community. Seb? Can you hear? I'm not sure about the usefulness of that. Myself, I'm not using it that much. So, yeah, I have some doubts right now. Maybe with the Quest Pro, that helps because you have the feedback of the user with their eyes moving, their reaction. But right now, with the Quest 2, for example, that was sold at 20 million. I feel that's missing for this kind of experience to make sense and have some real usage. You see avatars, but they're not reacting to the user movement. So, it's like disconnecting from the reality and what you want to have, like with FaceTime or someone you can talk to, like what we are doing right now. So, that's, yeah, that makes two cents around that. What about you, Guillaume? Well, I will just jump on this topic to bring something that it's more about the the image that we are making ourselves of VR. Because in most of the articles or videos about VR, we can see a bunch of people wearing VR headsets and they seem to be completely isolated. And in the common sense, people think that VR is an individual experience and it encloses the people inside a virtual world and they are not seeing anything apart from their things. And the main warning, maybe, is maybe to change this idea that VR is just for an individual. And as you are saying, Fabien, the VR chat is a really live community. And we should present VR as a social experience where people can meet and interact with others instead of just playing one game in the VR world and completely it's as a solo experience. Maybe best by changing that we can bring the youngest generation or our generation, we're not that old, but to experience VR chat. Because of all the people that I'm talking about VR and who has their own VR headsets, very few of them experience VR chat. Maybe most of them are saying, what are you talking about? Well, VR chat is there from 2014 or something like that. They came up with the first DK1, so it's a very established service. And when they are trained, they are discovering a whole new world of what VR can bring on the table. And I think this is a presentation or a way of representing the use of VR that we need to change to make people experience this platform. And as you were saying, Fabien, I'm sure that this, like VR chat, can have a lot of success. We did a professional event in VR chat for, for, it was a job convention. And there was like 50,000 people during three days. And most of the companies that came here to hire professionals, they found a good fit. So you can see that by bringing tools that are not used for this kind of stuff can work very well. And I think we have all the keys right now to make this social VR experience be bigger than it is right now. But you were saying that in Japan, people are using VR chat a lot. Can you explain what kind of uses they are doing with that? Is this, like you say, they are replacing real social event by VR ones? Or can you be more specific? Yes. So there are some hybrids even, but most of them are only on VR chat. And I think it's because or thanks to COVID. I'm not sure what word to use in that case. But during COVID, a lot of people were alone and isolated. And VR chat actually helped people connect. And there was a huge increase in the usage of VR chat during the pandemic in Japan. And I'm not an expert in Japanese culture. So I might say something wrong here. But a lot of people are also just isolated in Japan by themselves. So I think it's a good fit of allowing people to express themselves as they want to in a safe space. So there are even some movies that were recorded in VR chat. Some people talk about how they met. I think the name is We Met in Virtual Reality or something like that. So yeah. From what I can see, it's really seen as a positive, a very cool place to be in VR. I think this should be the main reason why there are a lot more people using VR chat because the image of it is cool. Because people are willing to go there and willing to meet because they know their friends or maybe their friend-to-be can be on that platform. So I'll bring my own topic, which is about Japan as well. So it's a very good thing. Just let me get my notes up. So it's about the metaverse and the approach that some Japanese companies are making as they are bringing an agreement on the creation of the Japan Metaverse Economic Zone. So just for you to know, for those that I know, it's Mitsubishi, Fujitsu, Sampo. They are all great names and big players. The idea here is to bring interoperability between them, which is the main key of the metaverse success. So this is just the agreement. Once more, the agreement between companies is the key for the metaverse to work. They need to have this certification and agreement between them for the metaverse to work. I think this is a huge step forward from the Japanese companies towards the real representation of what the metaverse could be. They don't really know the representation, how it will be brought to the public, but we can guess it will have some gamification or a nice way of bringing it to the public. So what are your insights about this? What do you think about this new agreement? Do you think it will bring the one and only metaverse vision or is this one step forward to the metaverses? I saw a conference where people were saying that there would be one metaverse per continent. So there were the European, the American one, the Asian one, and you could jump from one to another, but it will never be one and only metaverse for a regulation and law reason. It was a governmental conference and they wanted to address the security and bringing some laws and regulation to their own metaverses. So here you are, there are lots of things to discuss, I guess. So Fabien, if you want to start. Yeah, I agree. I think it's very interesting to see that a lot of initiatives are going into regulations and agreements and more out of the buzz kind of actions. It's interesting to see that a lot of these companies are on the financial side. So I'm sure there will be digital currencies and things like that into that metaverse. And also I totally agree with you on the gamification part, especially because the consultant for the Japanese government who is helping this initiative is someone who used to work for Square Enix. So I'm sure he's bringing some gamification into this. But yeah, again, I think it's maybe not the metaverse as you were saying, but it's a step forward into interoperability. I think, if I remember correctly, they will have cities in that metaverse that we could interact and move between. Yeah, they're bringing the idea of a magic passport for you to go from one city or metaverse A, B, C, D from one another. I think this is to answer the limitation of our architecture. We can't have like four million people in the same instance right now. So I think that they are just bringing the smart move to make the things in motion and bring this idea to everyone. But they are making a step-by-step approach. And this is really, really smart. Yeah, so I think Japan used to have that image of innovation. And in the last maybe 10, 20 years, not that much. But the government is really pushing innovation right now, open innovation as well. And they are like a very lively startup scene here. So yeah, let's see how it plays out and hope for the best. But yeah, what do you think, Seb? I think like you said, both the interoperability, it's a key point to make that working because definitely there won't be one metaverse, but several metaverses and several ways of joining different metaverses. So there needs to be like a regulation on how to jump from one to another without losing your data, your avatar or stuff like that. So there needs to be common ground on how the application are developed. So you don't have to log into a different account every time you want to move to another metaverse and try something else. You need to be free of your movement and move from one to another quickly. And also from different kind of device, from your phone, from your PC, Mac, from your VR headset, Mixed Reality headset. And all that needs to have common rules to make the interaction common also. So when you jump from one metaverse to another, the way to interact remains the same. So yeah, it's a nice step forward, but just one brick that needs to... And the other country, the other player needs to join on this effort to make that common ground together. Okay. Well, I will ask you a last question. I talked about it earlier, but what do you think of the initiative that governments would like to manage or to bring this metaverse initiative by themselves? Do you think... Because if we are making the parallel with internet, we can see that a government was way behind what was going on, and we can see that private companies are now owning the internet per se. Do you think they would like to... They won't do the same mistake by letting a big company take on this metaverse initiative and bring this governmental approach more earlier in the process? What do you think about this? Yeah. This is a bit political, but yeah. I think the question should be asked. Yeah. I really think actually that it should be a collaboration. It should be a collaboration. If it's only government, then what happens if the government changes? The rule will change. Governments are, as you were saying, very slow to react. It's a huge machine. Companies and startups are more flexible and they can change really quick. So I think it needs a collective approach with governments, regulatory startups, and maybe universities as well, researchers, and maybe community as well. So a way to gather this into a collective intelligence that will help. I think the view of the metaverse is something that is welcoming and co-creative. Sébastien, the last word of this stream? Yeah. I think it's a nice idea to have the government involved and regulate stuff right from the beginning, but I think they're already a bit late in the process. Unless there's a huge rule on the creator, like LGBT or stuff like that, to control privacy of the user right away from the ground, and maybe have some fees or... Yeah. They need to find a way to control the companies because right now I don't see any regulation on that, and anyone can build their own metaverse on their own. Yeah, I think the regulation will be tough to put in place, but that's great they are thinking about it. I'm not sure if they are not too late already, but it doesn't mean they cannot implement regulation afterwards. I think, just to finish this conversation, the main topics they were talking about were about social meetings and artistic creation in the metaverse. They were not thinking about the industrial one, and this is, I think, the same mistake they are making again and again by forgetting that what brings this metaverse or internet forward are industrial or professionals, and they are just avoiding this because maybe it's too hard to make everyone work together, but they are taking a road that, for me, is not leading... Not anywhere, but not where we want to go. So, they'll need to readjust. It's less... Of course, it's less funny to work with an industrial company than an artistic one, or creation, and so on. It's harder to communicate with that, and I think this is one way of... The political part is working right now. It's lots of communications. They want to show something quick. As you say, Fabien, because they are changing, they can change very quickly, so they need to make a point, and unfortunately, working with bigger ones or bigger companies can take years, and on the lifetime of a government or a political professional, it can be hard to apprehend because it's a long-term vision, especially right now when we are talking metaverse. More and more specialists are talking about a 10-year or more journey, and for lots of people, it's too long for them to realize, and they just want short-term solution, and I guess the Japanese approach is the right one because they are bringing this short-term, quick results approach, and they will show the world that there is something to do, and it can bring more players or startup or community, as you are saying, Fabien, to the table, and it will, of course, be a great way to bring this metaverse or these metaverses quicker and more efficiently in the future. So, this is 45 minutes, so we are on time for our second episode, and I would like to thank you both. If you want to add a final word for everyone? No, thank you. I think this was a very funny discussion. I guess we will bring these topics again and again in the future. So, thank you all, and we will see everyone next week at the same hour for the same 45-minute stream. So, bye-bye. Have a nice week. Thank you. Bye, guys.
