The Web3 Metaverse Index, the first-ever ranking system for blockchain-based Virtual Worlds, has just gone live, and we couldn’t be more excited.

The Web3 VW industry need an index for a number of reasons. First off, this area of the larger Metaverse has 66 platforms at various stages of development, all claiming to be the “latest and greatest.” This makes it challenging to identify businesses with true good products and better prospects for success. Along with a variety of user experiences and engagement mechanics, other business models are also being used.

The Market can be more clearly understood and the stronger proposals can be distinguished from the weaker ones by being rated against a set of criteria. Additionally, because there are so many platforms in development, the Index makes it possible to compare the active and in-development markets fairly because it places more emphasis on the potential of future success than on present performance. Additionally, it offers some pointers for responding to inquiries such

Which virtual worlds are best for my brand, marketer?

User: Which free-to-play Virtual world offers the best user experience?

Where should I buy virtual land, asks the investor?

We frequently receive inquiries like this from media strategists, marketers, and increasingly, real estate and investment firms.

Now We chose eight important standards to gauge virtual worlds against in order to build the Metaverse Index. We have spent more than 15 years researching these factors in the Web2 industry, and they apply just as much to the developing Web3 market. We are also perhaps the best-positioned company to identify and quantify these factors.

Here are the eight criteria we used to evaluate each Web3 VW, ranging from 5 (Excellent) to 1 (Poor).

Experience in Senior Management

To find out whether senior management teams at each company have prior expertise launching online games and virtual worlds, commercializing products, and creating engaging user experiences, we looked at their makeup. The senior teams of several of the platforms on our list include renowned AAA game studio employees and seasoned gaming executives. Other businesses only identify people as CTO who have blockchain or cryptocurrency experience and who are avid gamers.

You can argue that you don’t know what you don’t know, yet in certain instances, the true costs associate with launching a virtual world have been grossly underestimated or underappreciate. Companies in this category have receive lower ratings than those with management teams that are both experience and balanced.

Business Model Assessment

Different types of virtual worlds are being create. Some are “Open-Worlds,” which means they provide a variety of experiences and “reasons to engage,” like building, playing games, going on quests, interacting with people, and owning land. A developing tendency is to “play to earn, create, move, socialize, and collaborate.” Due of their sustainability and, in certain cases, the fact that pay walls are being built into every aspect of these business models, they pose problems in the medium term.

These platforms received a lower rating from us than those that are producing more “free to play” content. In this market, we are aware of what works and what doesn’t. Platforms that actively promote User Generated Content (UGC), foster social interaction, and offer clear user pathways receive higher ratings.

Target Market Identified

The virtual world aims to be all things to all people, or is it focus on a certain genre and target market? When virtual worlds create a platform that is target to a certain genre or interest group, like art, music, or sports, they are more likely to succeed. On the other hand, portraying a virtual world as a place where you may engage in activities like gaming, socializing, running a business, creating a home, collecting NFTs, leveling up, and generally doing “anything” is not a recipe for success.

There are already a lot of these platforms available, and generalist worlds have their place. These businesses receive lower ratings than those with more clearly defined target markets since trying to appeal to everyone with everything is no longer a viable business strategy.

Visual fidelity

Better graphics don’t always equate to better virtual worlds, but when it comes to bringing the next wave of users into the Metaverse—users who have less experience with them—we think that having more realistic and high-fidelity graphics gives them an advantage over those who have lower quality environments.

A dedication by the corporation to create a growing environment and user experience may also be shown in the development of a distinctive brand identity for a virtual world, whether it be on a stylized basis or theme to the genre. In general, it is extremely clear which businesses, as opposed to others who are utilizing common design tools, actually care about the enterprise. Higher scores in our index are award to virtual worlds with higher quality graphics.

User encounter

Please remember to consider the user experience. No, it is insufficient to merely invite users to “Join our world and purchase our NFTs.” Virtual worlds that are heavily user-focus will see early success in terms of user base expansion and engagement. Numerous Web3 virtual worlds require the integration of a crypto wallet at the time of sign-up, with no other way to sign up. ‘Out of the gate’ paywalls cause a ton of churn and friction, which is bad practice. The ease of driving the avatar, creating content, and traversing the world is crucial to the user experience.

Once more, senior management teams without members with expertise in usability, community development, or user journey curation have been observe. All virtual worlds that are still in development receive a score of 1 (as there is no way to evaluate them) unless they have a playable demo that illustrates the user experience. As soon as an open-beta version is ready, the score will be change.

Initial Investment/Sales

Businesses in the Web3 virtual worlds market are in varying phases of funding, sales, and finance. Some have already begun trading their coins on exchanges, which have funded their activities. Others have successfully closed land sales or NFTs to raise money for development. Some businesses have chosen to use VC and investor capital to put their plans into motion, while others are still in the early stages of funding. Overall, we evaluated the companies’ success in obtaining equity capital and/or generating funding from the sale of virtual assets, and we graded them accordingly.

Framework, Strategy

It was concerning to see that the final task listed in each virtual world’s roadmap, “Launching our Metaverse development,” and an excessive amount of emphasis on goals centered around financial transactions (Phase 1, 2, or 3 landsales or NFT releases), when we studied the whitepapers of each virtual world on the market (yes, we have read them all).

The beginning of a virtual world’s journey, not its conclusion, means that more businesses in this industry need to think beyond the debut. The virtual world’s constant development, including new features, locations, and login incentives, must be taken into account. Platforms that have taken post-launch VW development into account have received higher ratings than those that have a shorter time horizon.

Brand Compatibility

For businesses in the Web3 development services market, creating a virtual environment that appeals to real-world brands is a crucial success factor. In order for freshly developed virtual worlds to grow, brands bring followers, admirers, and an audience. As a result, the status of the world as a whole becomes important. In this situation, closed-worlds have a significant advantage over those that are open-worlds. From a media strategy and brand viewpoint, graphic fidelity and user experience are also significant factors in this. Virtual worlds that prioritize these factors receive higher scores than ones that are less ideal for real-world brand integration.

The post The Web3 Metaverse Index is Now Available appeared first on Barron Teump.