Conceptualizing the Metaverse: Historical Trajectories and Theoretical Foundations

The term “metaverse” has evolved from a niche science fiction concept to a central frame for industry strategy, academic inquiry, and public discourse about the future of digital life, yet its definitional boundaries remain fiercely contested, and its historical roots are often misrepresented as a recent invention tied to Meta’s 2021 corporate rebrand. To lay a rigorous analytical foundation for this volume, this chapter first traces the concept’s historical trajectory from 1970s cyberpunk literature and early virtual world experiments to its current framing in industry and academia, clarifying core definitional boundaries between the metaverse and adjacent concepts including virtual reality (VR), digital twins, Web3, and the digital public sphere. It then identifies the core technical and social attributes that distinguish metaverse ecosystems from earlier digital spaces, before introducing the four interdisciplinary theoretical frameworks that underpin the book’s analysis: spatial sociology’s theory of produced space, mediatization theory, digital sociology’s framework for online identity and community, and political economy’s analysis of platform capitalism. A systematic review of existing scholarly literature on virtual worlds and digital society identifies four critical research gaps that this volume seeks to address: the limited integration of analyses of virtual spatial structure, digital identity power dynamics, and metaverse-native economic systems; the underrepresentation of non-Western metaverse development cases; the erasure of marginalized user experiences; and the lack of empirical comparative research on metaverse governance models. The chapter concludes with an outline of the book’s analytical structure and core research questions.

Historical Trajectories of the Metaverse Concept: From Cyberpunk to Mainstream Discourse

The conceptual lineage of the metaverse stretches far beyond the 1992 *Snow Crash* novel by Neal Stephenson, which first popularized the term to describe a persistent, shared 3D virtual space where users interact via digital avatars. To understand the metaverse’s current form and future potential, it is necessary to situate it within a longer history of experimental virtual world development, iterative technological innovation, and shifting cultural imaginaries of digital life.

Pre-Internet Precursors (1970s–1980s)

The earliest precursors to the metaverse emerged in the 1970s, alongside the development of early networked computing. In 1978, Roy Trubshaw and Richard Bartle developed *Multi-User Dungeon (MUD)*, a text-based virtual world that allowed multiple users to connect via early packet-switched networks, explore shared virtual environments, interact with other users, and create in-world content. While MUD lacked graphical interfaces and immersive sensory features, it established two core metaverse attributes that remain central today: persistent shared space and user-generated content (UGC) [^1]. The following year, 1979’s *Maze War* became the first 3D networked game, introducing first-person spatial navigation and multiplayer interaction in a 3D environment, laying the technical groundwork for later graphical virtual worlds.

The 1980s saw the convergence of these technical experiments with cyberpunk cultural imaginaries, which framed virtual worlds as sites of both utopian possibility and dystopian control. Stephenson’s *Snow Crash* (1992) built on these cultural currents to coin the term “metaverse,” describing a virtual reality-based successor to the internet where users could work, socialize, and accumulate wealth, while also warning of corporate monopolization of virtual space and the erosion of digital autonomy. This dual framing of the metaverse as both a site of emancipatory potential and capitalist exploitation has structured all subsequent discourse about the concept.

Graphical Virtual Worlds and UGC Experiments (1990s–2000s)

The 1990s saw the first wave of graphical virtual world experiments that moved beyond text-based interfaces to realize Stephenson’s vision of immersive 3D space. In 1990, Lucasfilm Games released *Habitat*, a graphical virtual world built for the Commodore 64 and accessed via dial-up modem, which allowed users to create customizable avatars, build and furnish virtual homes, trade virtual goods, and even participate in in-world democratic elections to set community rules [^2]. *Habitat* established the template for user-generated social virtual worlds, and its emphasis on user agency and community governance prefigured later debates about metaverse decentralization.

The mid-1990s saw the launch of *Active Worlds* (1995), which extended the virtual world model to allow users to purchase and develop virtual real estate, creating a proto-virtual property market. In 2003, Linden Lab launched *Second Life*, which became the first commercially successful metaverse platform, with a peak of 1 million monthly active users in 2006. *Second Life* introduced a fully fledged endogenous economic system, with its native currency, the Linden Dollar (Linden Dollar, L$), pegged to the US dollar at a floating exchange rate, and a robust market for user-created virtual goods, real estate, and services; by 2006, top creators on the platform were earning over $100,000 per year from virtual asset sales [^3]. *Second Life* also hosted early experiments in virtual governance, education, and political organizing, including a 2007 virtual congressional hearing on digital identity regulation, and a 2008 virtual presidential campaign rally for Barack Obama. While *Second Life* declined in popularity in the 2010s due to platform mismanagement, technical limitations, and the rise of mobile social media, it established the core functional template for social metaverse platforms: persistent shared space, UGC, endogenous economic systems, and user-driven community formation.

Mainstream Inflection Points (2010s–Present)

The 2010s saw the metaverse transition from a niche experimental space to a mainstream industry priority, driven by three key inflection points. First, in 2014, Facebook acquired VR headset manufacturer Oculus for $2 billion, signaling the tech industry’s first major bet on VR as the primary access terminal for the metaverse. Second, in 2017, the launch of *Fortnite* by Epic Games introduced a mass-audience metaverse model built around free-to-play gaming, cross-platform interoperability, and regular live in-world events; by 2023, *Fortnite* had over 500 million registered users, and its 2020 virtual concert by Travis Scott, *

接续前文，2020年Epic Games旗下《堡垒之夜》（Fortnite）举办的虚拟歌手Travis Scott“ Astronomical”全球演唱会，成为元宇宙从技术实验走向大众文化消费的关键拐点：该场演唱会实现了1230万同时在线用户、单场活动总观看时长超2.7亿小时的纪录，后续Ariana Grande、Marshmello等艺人的虚拟演出累计触达超5亿用户，更打破了物理空间的场地、容量、地域限制，让元宇宙的大众化价值首次得到验证。除娱乐场景外，《堡垒之夜》还逐步构建了跨平台的UGC生态：通过2020年上线的虚幻引擎《堡垒之夜》编辑器（UEFN），普通用户可自主开发游戏模式、虚拟场景并参与收益分成，截至2023年，平台UGC内容贡献者超700万，创作者年度总分成超10亿美元，其跨主机、PC、移动端的互通能力，也首次实现了大规模用户的跨终端元宇宙体验，解决了早期虚拟世界对高端硬件的高度依赖问题。

这一阶段的技术迭代与文化普及，直接推动了2021年元宇宙概念的主流化爆发：2021年10月，Facebook宣布更名为Meta，提出“All in元宇宙”的战略方向，计划未来10年投入超1000亿美元构建元宇宙生态；同年，微软推出Mesh for Teams混合现实协作平台，将虚拟Avatar、3D空间会议引入企业办公场景；英伟达发布Omniverse数字孪生平台，将元宇宙技术拓展至工业制造、城市治理等B端场景。截至2023年，全球元宇宙市场规模已达520亿美元，用户规模突破4.5亿，其中60%的用户集中在亚太地区，标志着元宇宙发展从西方主导的单一路径，转向多文化语境下的多元实践。

不过概念爆发的另一面，是定义边界的极度模糊：大量企业将任何带有3D元素、VR支持的互联网应用都标注为“元宇宙”，导致概念通胀严重，学术研究与政策制定缺乏共同的话语基础。因此，厘清元宇宙与相邻概念的核心差异，是构建后续分析框架的前提。

Definitional Boundaries: Distinguishing the Metaverse from Adjacent Digital Concepts

现有 discourse 中对元宇宙的误用，本质是混淆了其核心属性与相关技术的功能边界。基于本研究的分析框架，元宇宙与其他相邻概念的核心差异可归纳为下表： | 概念 | 核心属性 | 与元宇宙的核心差异 | |------|----------|------------------| | 虚拟现实（VR） | 沉浸式显示与交互终端技术 | 是元宇宙的核心访问接口之一，但非元宇宙本身：元宇宙可通过AR、移动端、PC端等多终端访问，且核心是“持久共享的虚拟空间”而非“沉浸式显示技术”；单机VR应用（如《半衰期：爱莉克斯》）无社交属性与持久性，不属于元宇宙范畴 | | 数字孪生 | 物理实体的1:1数字化映射技术 | 是元宇宙的重要技术组件，但核心功能是对物理实体的模拟、监测与优化，面向工业、城市、医疗等工具性场景，而非面向人的社交、文化、经济活动；元宇宙可包含数字孪生模块，但核心是人的互动空间而非物理实体的映射 | | Web3 | 去中心化、用户所有权的互联网基础设施框架 | 与元宇宙是交叉关系而非包含关系：Web3