From Web 2.0 to the Metaverse: Analyzing the Evolution of Platform-Based Business Models and the Creator Economy PDF Free Download
1 / 178/178
100%
From Web 2.0 to the Metaverse:
Analyzing the Evolution of
Platform-Based Business Models
and the Creator Economy
Tesi di Laurea Magistrale in
Management Engineering - Ingegneria Gestionale
Author: Maria Lavinia Cappa
Student ID: 233363
Advisor: Prof. Christopher Lorenz Hesselbein
Co-advisors: -
Academic Year: 2023-24
i
Abstract
The metaverse is often portrayed as the next digital revolution, a space where people will
work, socialize, and engage in entirely new economic models. In recent years, metaverse
platforms surfaced as an emergent evolving digital ecosystem with the potential to reshape
economic interactions, user engagement, and value creation. While discussions about its
potential dominate both industry and academia, its actual business models remain under-
explored. How do metaverse platforms generate revenue? How do they foster new forms
of digital entrepreneurship? And in what ways do these models differ from traditional
Web 2.0 monetization strategies?
This research examines these questions by analyzing four major metaverse platforms
—Roblox, The Sandbox, Decentraland, and Horizon Worlds—through a comparative
framework that explores their governance models, economic structures, and monetization
strategies. It also delves into three case studies on Roblox, focusing on a user-generated
experience (Dress to Impress), a digital-native fashion brand (Blueberry Fashion), and a
branded metaverse experience (Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon) to demonstrate how distinct
business models and revenue streams emerge within metaverse ecosystems.
Findings reveal that metaverse platforms enable business models that diverge from tradi-
tional Web 2.0 frameworks, shifting from advertising-driven monetization to transaction-
based economies that center on virtual goods, digital asset ownership, and in-world com-
merce. A defining feature of this transformation is the evolution of the creator economy:
metaverse platforms allow creators to directly participate in economic value creation,
whether through user-generated content, digital fashion, asset customization, or virtual
real estate development.
Ultimately, this study demonstrates that the metaverse is not merely an extension of Web
2.0 but a distinct and evolving digital ecosystem, where creator-driven economies, immer-
sive transactions, and decentralized ownership models play a pivotal role. Whether the
metaverse will fulfill its disruptive potential depends on its ability to balance technological
advancement and equitable value distribution for both platforms and creators.
Keywords: metaverse, digital platform, business model, creator economy
Abstract in lingua italiana
Il metaverso è spesso descritto come la prossima frontiera dell’interazione digitale, uno
spazio in cui le persone lavoreranno, socializzeranno e interagiranno per via di modelli
economici completamente nuovi. Negli ultimi anni, le piattaforme del metaverso sono
emerse come un ecosistema digitale in evoluzione, con il potenziale di ridefinire le inter-
azioni economiche, lo user engagement e la creazione di valore. Sebbene il dibattito sul
suo potenziale domini il settore e il mondo accademico, i business model reali su cui si
basa restano ancora poco esplorati. Come generano ricavi le piattaforme del metaverso?
In che modo favoriscono nuove forme di digital entrepeneurship? E in che misura questi
modelli differiscono dalle strategie di monetizzazione tradizionali del Web 2.0?
Questa tesi esamina tali questioni analizzando quattro principali piattaforme del metaverso
—Roblox, The Sandbox, Decentraland e Horizon Worlds—tramite un framework che es-
plora i loro modelli di governance, le strutture economiche e le strategie di monetizzazione.
Inoltre, approfondisce tre casi studio su Roblox, concentrandosi su un’esperienza generata
da utenti (DresstoImpress), un fashion brand digitale (BlueberryFashion) e un’esperienza
sponsorizzata da un brand (BarbieDreamHouseTycoon), per dimostrare come emergano
business model distinti all’interno degli ecosistemi del metaverso.
I risultati rivelano che le piattaforme del metaverso abilitano business model che si dis-
costano dai tradizionali framework del Web 2.0, passando da strategie di monetizzazione
basate sulla pubblicità a economie transazionali incentrate su beni virtuali, proprietà di
asset digitali e commercio all’interno del mondo virtuale. Un elemento chiave di questa
trasformazione è l’evoluzione della creator economy: le piattaforme del metaverso con-
sentono ai creator di partecipare direttamente alla creazione di valore economico.
Infine, questo studio dimostra che il metaverso non è semplicemente un’estensione del
Web 2.0, ma un ecosistema digitale autonomo e in evoluzione, in cui creator economy,
transazioni immersive e modelli di proprietà decentralizzata svolgono un ruolo cruciale.
L’attualizzazione del suo potenziale dipenderà dalla capacità di bilanciare l’innovazione
tecnologica e una distribuzione equa del valore tra piattaforme e creator.
Parole chiave: metaverso, piattaforma, business model, creator economy
v
Contents
Abstract i
Abstract in lingua italiana iii
Contents v
Introduction 1
1 Literature Review 7
1.1 TheMetaverse.................................. 9
1.1.1 History of the Metaverse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.1.2 Definition of the Metaverse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.1.3 Metaversal Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1.1.4 Key Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
1.2 BusinessModel ................................. 26
1.2.1 The Concept of Business Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
1.2.2 Platforms: A Paradigm Shift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
1.2.3 Business Models in the Metaverse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
1.3 TheCreatorEconomy ............................. 34
1.3.1 Creators................................. 34
1.3.2 Platforms as the Backbone of Creator Economy . . . . . . . . . . . 35
1.3.3 The Creator Economy in the Metaverse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
1.4 ConclusionandGaps.............................. 42
2 Methodology 45
2.1 ResearchApproach............................... 45
2.1.1 LiteratureReview............................ 46
2.1.2 Platform Classification and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
2.1.3 Platform Selection and Participant Observation . . . . . . . . . . . 47
vi |Contents
2.1.4 Analysis of secondary video sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
2.1.5 Official Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
2.1.6 CaseStudies............................... 51
2.1.7 DataAnalysis.............................. 52
3 Metaverse Platforms 55
3.1 The Platform’s Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
3.2 Roblox...................................... 60
3.2.1 Background and Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
3.2.2 History.................................. 61
3.2.3 Platform Structure and User Accessibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.2.4 Core Experiences and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.2.5 Monetization and Virtual Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
3.2.6 User Demographic and Community Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
3.3 TheSandbox .................................. 68
3.3.1 Background and Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
3.3.2 History.................................. 69
3.3.3 Platform Structure and User Accessibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
3.3.4 Core Experiences and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
3.3.5 Monetization and Virtual Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
3.3.6 User Demographic and Community Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
3.4 Decentraland .................................. 77
3.4.1 Background and Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
3.4.2 History.................................. 78
3.4.3 Platform Structure and User Accessibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
3.4.4 Core Experiences and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
3.4.5 Monetization and Virtual Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
3.4.6 User Demographic and Community Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
3.5 HorizonWorlds ................................. 84
3.5.1 Background and Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
3.5.2 History.................................. 84
3.5.3 Platform Structure and User Accessibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
3.5.4 Core Experiences and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
3.5.5 Monetization and Virtual Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
3.5.6 User Demographic and Community Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
3.6 Discussion and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
3.7 Comparative Analysis of the Platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
4 Case Studies on Roblox 101
4.1 Dress To Impress: A Viral User-Generated Experience . . . . . . . . . . . 104
4.1.1 Context .................................105
4.1.2 Gameplay and Monetization Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
4.1.3 Virality, Social Media Influence, and Cultural Impact . . . . . . . . 106
4.1.4 Business Model Analysis: How Dress to Impress Generates Revenue 107
4.1.5 Implications for Metaverse Business Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
4.1.6 Discussion of the Dress to Impress Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
4.2 Blueberry Fashion: A Digital-Native Fashion
Brand ......................................116
4.2.1 Context .................................117
4.2.2 Gameplay and Monetization Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
4.2.3 Virality, Social Media Influence, and Cultural Impact . . . . . . . . 119
4.2.4 Business Model Analysis: How Blueberry Fashion Generates Revenue119
4.2.5 Implications for Metaverse Business Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
4.2.6 Discussion of the Blueberry Fashion Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
4.3 Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon: A Branded Metaverse Experience . . . . . . . 125
4.3.1 Context .................................127
4.3.2 Gameplay and Monetization Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
4.3.3 Virality, Social Media Influence, and Cultural Impact . . . . . . . . 128
4.3.4 Business Model Analysis: How Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon Gener-
atesRevenue ..............................129
4.3.5 Implications for Metaverse Business Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
4.3.6 Discussion of the Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon Case . . . . . . . . . 131
4.4 Final Discussion: How the Metaverse Provides New Business Models . . . . 137
5 Conclusions and future developments 139
Bibliography 143
A Appendix 161
List of Figures 167
1
Introduction
The metaverse represents one of the most discussed and fascinating as well as contro-
versial ideas of the contemporary digital age; it is a concept capable of catalyzing the
imagination of entrepreneurs as well as artists and innovators. It is often described as
the next evolutionary leap of the Internet, a kind of parallel universe in which individuals
can interact, create and live immersive experiences, overcoming the limitations imposed
by the reality of the physical world. Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Meta, has described
the metaverse as “the next chapter of the internet,” an environment where users can “be
present” in a totally new way, taking part in collective experiences that transcend time
and space (Meta, 2021).
Enthusiasm toward this concept is shared by many other technology pioneers. David
Baszucki, founder of Roblox, one of the largest gaming platforms, sees the metaverse as
a global, collaborative platform that can engage people of all ages in creative and inter-
active activities in completely revolutionary and unprecedented ways (Baszucki, 2020).
Cathy Hackl, a renowned futurist and consultant often referred to as “the godmother of
the metaverse,” describes it as a “convergence of physical and digital spaces,” capable of
revolutionizing sectors such as education, work and commerce (Hackl, 2022).
Enthusiasm about the metaverse is not just limited to the technology industry. In the arts,
figures such as Mike Winkelmann (also known as Beeple) and Krista Kim have emphasized
how the metaverse can transform digital art into livable and interactive spaces, expanding
the possibilities offered by traditional physical galleries (Kim, 2021).
However, despite such optimistic narratives, the metaverse remains a nebulous concept;
part of the motivation is also its nature of continuous evolution. Tim Sweeney, CEO
of Epic Games, has stated that we are “still in the early days of this development” and
that the metaverse will take decades to take shape in a meaningful way (Sweeney, 2023).
Philip Rosedale, creator of Second Life -considered by many to be one of the first suc-
cessful incarnations of the metaverse- has expressed skepticism about many of the high
expectations, which are often disproportionate to actual technological capabilities today
(Boellstorff, 2008). Similarly, Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, has also highlighted the
2|Introduction
infrastructural difficulties associated with building the metaverse, stressing the need for
hardware and software innovations to make a truly immersive experience possible (Huang,
2022).
The concept of the metaverse remains particularly elusive and difficult to grasp, both for
the general public as well as for many practitioners and researchers in the field; the under-
standing of the metaverse is hindered primarily by its fluid and evolving nature. Although
many of those involved in its creation and promotion have outlined extremely fascinating
and even utopian futuristic visions, the practical reality of the metaverse remains difficult
to grasp on multiple levels. In terms of associated technologies for example, immersive
technologies that tie into the metaverse, such as virtual and augmented reality devices, are
still perceived as somewhat removed from people’s daily lives, contributing to widespread
uncertainty about their tangible value and impact. (Garcia et al., 2023)
The difficulty of understanding the concrete utility of the metaverse is closely tied to
the challenge of translating its applications into real and immediate user needs. While
many proponents envision the metaverse as a revolutionary digital paradigm, its practical
adoption remains limited due to a lack of experiences that provide clear value to users in
their daily lives. Zhang et al. highlight that while industry leaders focus on grandiose
futuristic scenarios, everyday users still struggle to see how the metaverse can enhance
activities such as remote work, education, entertainment, or social interaction (Zhang
et al., 2023).
Although technological advancements are progressing rapidly, the gap between future po-
tential and present usability remains significant. This disconnect is further exacerbated by
the fact that many existing metaverse applications do not yet align with practical needs,
making it difficult for users to recognize their immediate value. García et al. similarly
argue that adoption is hindered not only by technological complexity but also by the
absence of compelling experiences tailored to real-world necessities. For instance, while
some platforms offer virtual offices and digital collaboration tools, these remain in an
experimental phase and do not yet offer a seamless alternative to established remote work
solutions that are currently in use(Garcia et al., 2023). Similarly, while the metaverse
holds promise for immersive learning, social networking, and digital commerce, these ap-
plications still require further refinement to achieve mainstream adoption. In this context,
the metaverse currently risks being perceived as more of a visionary concept than a prac-
tical solution. The challenge is to bridge the gap between transformative digital potential
and real-world usability, ensuring that metaverse experiences are not just technologically
innovative but also intuitive, relevant, and seamlessly integrated into everyday life.
|Introduction 3
Finally, the lack of a clear and unambiguous definition of the metaverse contributes to its
nebulous perception (Scholz, 2023). Experts from industry and academia still disagree
on what exactly the metaverse is or will be and what forms it might take in the future;
indeed, its nature is as fluid as it is speculative, and the absence of consensus among
practitioners in the field makes it even more difficult to give concrete meaning to the term
(Boellstorff, 2008). Ultimately, as Lindsey McInerney, a tech executive and metaverse
advocate, observed, “the metaverse is what we want it to be, but no one knows exactly what
it will look like.” (McInerney, 2023). The lack of a shared definition and the continuous
evolution of technologies and expectations make the metaverse a concept that is still under
construction, an entity that is constantly changing.
As mentioned above, the uncertainty is further compounded by the absence of an un-
ambiguous and shared definition of the metaverse. Scholars such as Dwivedi et al. and
Hesselbein et al. have noted that the term itself does not yet represent an established con-
cept, but rather a semantic field open to different interpretations (Dwivedi et al., 2022),
(Chris Hesselbein and Canali, 2024). For some, the metaverse is a persistent, shared 3D
space; for others, it is a new dimension of social interaction mediated by technologies such
as virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR). Dwivedi et al. pointed out that this
ambiguity reflects the inherent complexity of the phenomenon, adding that the metaverse
“is not yet a product, but rather a process in the making.” (Dwivedi et al., 2022). This
diversity of opinion, both among industry leaders and researchers, testifies to the difficulty
of envisioning such a complex and potentially transformative digital ecosystem. The lack
of clarity about the metaverse does not appear to dampen its general enthusiasm, but
it does make critical and reflective analysis even more essential. As noted by Lee et al.,
the success of the metaverse will depend not only on technological innovations, but also
on its ability to respond to human needs while balancing creativity, inclusiveness, and
sustainability (Lee et al., 2021). Ultimately, the metaverse is posited not just a technical
or business concept, but a vision that is progressively reshaping our expectations about
the future of digital interactions.
Despite the uncertainties surrounding its definition and adoption, the metaverse remains
a critical topic of discussion in both academic and industry circles. The sheer scale of
investment by major technology companies, combined with the proliferation of virtual
platforms, suggests that the metaverse is not merely a passing trend, but a phenomenon
with lasting economic and cultural implications (Dionisio et al., 2013). However, much of
the existing discourse is fragmented, with studies often focusing on either the technological
feasibility of the metaverse or its speculative future, rather than examining the concrete
business models that sustain its current development. Nevertheless, the concrete business
4|Introduction
potential of the metaverse, either on the level of metaverse platforms more broadly as well
as on the level of on-platform entrepreneurship, is one of the most important determinants
of its success or failure.
This thesis seeks to bridge this gap, and explore one particularly crucial dimension of
the metaverse, by focusing on how metaverse platforms operate as economic ecosystems.
Rather than treating the metaverse as a singular, unified entity, this study analyzes it
through the lens of digital business models, exploring how different platforms seek to
monetize user engagement, creator economies, and virtual assets, and thus attempt to
create an economically viable metaverse. This research is particularly relevant for under-
standing how companies, investors, and developers are currently seeking to translate the
metaverse into a sustainable and profitable industry. By identifying the mechanisms that
drive revenue generation in virtual worlds, this thesis aims to contribute to a more com-
prehensive understanding of the metaverse as an economically sustainable environment
rather than just a technological vision. An important part of exploring how metaverse
business models are emerging is understanding how such models build upon, extend, or
reshape and challenge existing business models that have been central to the rise of the
digital platform economy over the past two decades. One of the fundamental aspects of
the digital platform economy, for example, has been the contribution of user-generated
content, particularly by so-called ‘creators’ who produce and distribute content across
platforms, thus generating revenue both for themselves as well as the platforms on which
they operate (Poell et al., 2021). It is extremely likely that the actions, content, prod-
ucts, or services produced by users on metaverse platforms will be similarly determinant
in shaping the economic ecosystem of the metaverse (Hussain et al., 2023).
To examine this, the study is guided by the following overarching research question:
•How do metaverse platforms drive the evolution of digital business models?
This question is further explored through two subquestions:
•What role does the creator economy play in this process?
•How do revenue models in the metaverse differ from traditional Web 2.0 monetiza-
tion strategies?
This central question is explored through a comparative analysis of a selection of ma-
jor metaverse platforms, specifically Roblox, Decentraland, The Sandbox, and Hori-
zon Worlds. These platforms have been chosen for their diverse economic structures
and unique approaches to monetization, ranging from user-generated content models to
blockchain-based economies. As such, they can be considered as providing a represen-
|Introduction 5
tative overview of current experimentation with and emergence of business models at
the level of platforms in the metaverse. Next, in order to zoom in on the emergence of
business models on the level of the platform itself, this thesis conducts three case studies
to examine how platforms manage revenue-sharing mechanisms, user participation, the
monetization of content creation, and the rise of metaverse economies.
Methodologically, this thesis adopts a mixed approach, combining qualitative content
analysis of platform documentation (whitepapers, developer guides, and user policies) with
an ethnographic examination of real-world monetization strategies. This approach ensures
a structured yet flexible analysis, capable of capturing both the theoretical frameworks
and practical applications and development of metaverse business models.
The structure of this thesis is as follows. Chapter 1 provides a literature review, covering
metaverse definitions, historical developments, key technologies, business models, and the
creator economy. Chapter 2 outlines the methodology, detailing the data collection and
analysis approach used in this study. Chapter 3 examines selected metaverse platforms,
namely Roblox, Decentraland, The Sandbox, and Horizon Worlds, comparing their busi-
ness models and classification within the metaverse landscape. Chapter 4 presents the
case study analysis, exploring different monetization strategies through the experiences
of Dress to Impress, Blueberry Fashion, and Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon, followed by a
discussion on their relationship to Web 2.0 business models and the emergence of new
digital economies. Finally, the Conclusion summarizes the key findings of this research,
and then addresses various of its limitations, and suggests future research directions.
7
1| Literature Review
The objective of this literature review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the
metaverse and the existing as well as new economic models that underpin its develop-
ment. With the metaverse increasingly positioned as a transformative digital space, this
review explores its technological, economic, and social dimensions, focusing on the mecha-
nisms through which it creates, distributes, and captures value. Additionally, it examines
the integration of the creator economy into these virtual environments, highlighting the
opportunities and challenges that emerge in this rapidly evolving landscape.
To ensure a robust and reliable foundation, scholarly sources were identified through sys-
tematic searches on academic databases including Google Scholar, Scopus, ResearchGate,
and Web of Science. Keywords such as "metaverse," "business models," "creator econ-
omy," "metaverse platforms," and "virtual worlds" guided the selection process. The
inclusion criteria emphasized relevance, credibility, and recent contributions to the dis-
course on metaverse technologies and economic frameworks. This overview is therefore
based on a comprehensive review of academic literature, industry reports, and primary
platform documentation to ensure a well-rounded understanding of metaverse business
models. The literature gathered and examined included 93 different sources, precisely col-
lected and ordered by relevance to the topic. The sources analyzed include peer-reviewed
journal articles, academic papers, books, and conference proceedings from various aca-
demic disciplines that provide theoretical and empirical insights into digital platforms,
user-generated content economies, and metaverse monetization strategies. Additionally,
industry white papers, official platform documentation (such as Roblox’s developer guide-
lines and Decentraland’s whitepaper on its metaverse project), and reports from consulting
firms and technology research organizations were examined to gain insights into platform-
specific structures and emerging trends. To complement this, market analysis reports and
publicly available financial disclosures were also reviewed.
The review adhered to a rigorous process of critical evaluation, assessing the relevance,
methodology, and findings of selected sources. By examining both theoretical perspectives
and empirical studies, it identified areas of consensus, debate, and omission. Particular
81| Literature Review
attention was given to the intersection of the metaverse and economic models, highlighting
emerging trends and challenges. For example, the review analyzed how technological
advancements, such as blockchain and extended reality, intersect with the creation of
new business models and revenue streams. Texts that were overly technical, focusing, for
example, on specific engineering or computational challenges and that did not contribute
to an understanding of metaverse business models were excluded.
The literature review concludes by pinpointing several critical gaps. Notably, there is
a scarcity of studies that comprehensively explore how the metaverse fosters innovative
business models and revenue streams. Furthermore, limited research has so far been
conducted on the integration of the creator economy with metaverse platforms. These gaps
directly justify the need for this thesis, which aims to bridge these unexplored dimensions
and provide an initial insight into current developments in terms of metaverse business
models.
Structure of the Literature Review
To achieve its objectives, the literature review is organized into three interconnected
sections:
1. The Metaverse: This section provides an overview of the metaverse, as it is ap-
proached in the academic literature, tracing its historical evolution, defining its key
characteristics, and exploring some of the technological foundations that enable its
functionality. Concepts such as extended reality (XR), virtual reality (VR), aug-
mented reality (AR), blockchain, and virtual worlds are discussed as well as critical
components that support the metaverse’s virtual and immersive environments.
2. Business Models: The second section examines the literature on business models,
from traditional linear approaches to digital and platform-based frameworks that
have emerged during what is known as Web 2.0. Particular attention is given to
the unique economic mechanisms emerging in the metaverse, including decentral-
ized governance, virtual asset monetization, and data-driven personalization. This
section also explores how these innovations disrupt existing industries and introduce
new paradigms of value creation in the digital platform economy.
3. The Creator Economy: The final section focuses on the integration of the creator
economy into the metaverse, analyzing how digital platforms empower creators to
monetize their work and engage with audiences. Challenges such as economic in-
equality, algorithmic dependencies, and sustainability are critically examined along-
side opportunities for collaboration, innovation, and community-driven initiatives.
1| Literature Review 9
Through this structured approach, the literature review lays the groundwork for address-
ing the research question: "How does the metaverse enable the creation of new business
models and revenue streams?" By synthesizing existing knowledge and identifying unex-
plored dimensions, the review establishes a clear rationale for the thesis and its contribu-
tion to the academic discourse on the metaverse and its economic potential.
1.1. The Metaverse
The first section of this literature review aims to provide essential details about the meta-
verse. It begins with a history of the metaverse, tracing its origins in popular imagination
to its current evolution. This is followed by a section that seeks to define the concept of
the metaverse, taking into account all of the complexities involved in selecting a single
definition. The core technologies used to enable the metaverse will then be explained,
including XR, VR, AR, virtual worlds, blockchain, and AI.
1.1.1. History of the Metaverse
The concept of the metaverse, which is currently the focus of academic and technologi-
cal attention, has its roots in science fiction literature and the visionary speculations of
authors and innovators. Neal Stephenson introduced the term "metaverse" in his novel
Snow Crash (1992). In this work, Stephenson describes a three-dimensional virtual uni-
verse accessible via technological devices such as VR visors, in which users, represented by
avatars, interact in a persistent and shared digital world. Stephenson’s metaverse is more
than just a virtual space; it is an extension of real-world social, economic, and political
life in which people engage in interactive experiences such as trade, criminal activity, and
alternative subcultures. Despite the initial dystopian connotation of Snow Crash’s meta-
verse, Stephenson’s vision has been influential in cultural and technological discussions
about the future of virtual interactions. The ability to envision a global, immersive digital
ecosystem in which users can experience cyberspace as an extension of reality established
Snow Crash as a seminal work not only in cyberpunk literature, but also in the modern
concept of shared virtual spaces.
Although subsequent technological developments have not yet caught up with Stephen-
son’s vision, Snow Crash influenced contemporary cultural expectations and discussions
about the metaverse, predicting many of its features, such as the use of digital avatars
and the creation of a persistent virtual world. As Dionisio et al. stated, Snow Crash
had a significant impact on technological culture, serving as a milestone in the conception
of interactive digital worlds and foreshadowing many of the challenges and opportunities
10 1| Literature Review
associated with the idea of the metaverse that we are trying to realize today (Dionisio
et al., 2013). Even before Snow Crash, William Gibson in his novel Neuromancer (1984)
explored the concept of immersive digital spaces, coining the term "cyberspace." Although
his cyberspace was not the same as today’s metaverse, it was a significant step forward in
the process of awareness that virtual environments could be spaces for human interaction
and information exchange (Islam, 2021).
Later on also Ernest Cline’s novel Ready Player One, published in 2011, fueled the meta-
verse’s collective imagination by presenting a virtual world known as "OASIS", namely
a digital universe where users could immerse themselves in a variety of interactive expe-
riences: from gaming to socializing, from knowledge seeking to content creation, using
advanced technological gadgets. OASIS is a highly developed metaverse, a persistent
place that provides not only an escape from the pressures of the real world, but also a
deep integration of virtual and physical experience, with users’ daily lives intertwined
with digital interaction. User avatars, which are customizable and equipped with virtual
capabilities, are the primary mode of interaction in this shared space, which provides
numerous economic, social, and cultural opportunities. Cline’s vision goes beyond mere
entertainment, delving into the social, economic, and political dynamics that could emerge
in a metaverse-driven future. In Ready Player One, the virtual universe is not only an
extension of the gaming experience, but a microcosm that mirrors real-world conflicts
and challenges, such as social inequality, corporate monopoly, and individual isolation,
themes that have made the novel a work of social and cultural relevance. His influence
has not been limited to fiction, but has also had a significant impact on popular culture
and on the strategic visions of large technology companies. Cline’s detailed descriptions
of these physical and digital worlds prompted reflections on both the potential and risks
of creating persistent virtual universes, sparking debate about the ethical, economic, and
political implications of a future in which virtual reality plays a central role in daily life
(Bibri, 2022). The film adaptation, which was directed by Steven Spielberg, increased
the appeal of the metaverse concept by bringing OASIS’ vision on the screens and to a
global audience, and encouraging thought on new technologies. Ready Player One is thus
more than just a work of entertainment; it is a seminal text that has helped shape social
and technological expectations about the future of virtual worlds, providing illustrative
suggestions into how they may evolve and impact social and cultural structures.
Turning to the practical level, the launch of Second Life by Philip Rosedale and Linden
Lab in 2003 was a milestone in the emergent concretization of the metaverse (Boellstorff,
2008). Second Life is a computer game, and is notable for being one of the first persistent
virtual environments accessible to a wide audience, where users could create personal-
1| Literature Review 11
ized avatars and interact with each other in a 3D digital world. What made Second
Life particularly innovative was not only the ability to explore a virtual world, but also
the introduction of a complex virtual economy. Users have the ability to buy, sell and
trade virtual goods, such as land, clothing, digital items and services, using a digital
currency called Linden Dollar. This currency, which can be converted into real money,
created a comprehensive economic marketplace within Second Life where content cre-
ators, businesses, and users could actually earn money from their activities. Second Life
anticipated many of the economic practices that characterize metaverse platforms today,
such as the creation of digital goods, virtual transactions, and the idea of an economy
parallel to physical reality. In addition, the freedom users had to design and build their
own virtual space introduced a concept of digital ownership that would become central
to many future platforms. Although Second Life’s commercial success was more limited
than other later virtual worlds, its influence was enormous in shaping the understanding
of the metaverse as a place not only for play and social interaction, but also for economic
creation and cultural experimentation. As noted by Boellstorff, Second Life anticipated
crucial themes related to the interaction between the physical and digital worlds, virtual
identities, and emerging economic dynamics, making it a precursor to the modern concept
of the metaverse (Boellstorff, 2008).
In the years since, gaming platforms such as World of Warcraft, Minecraft and Roblox have
demonstrated the commercial and social potential of virtual worlds, attracting millions
of users through a combination of gaming, creativity and community. David Baszucki,
founder of Roblox, said his goal was to create a platform where "anyone can imagine,
build and share experiences together,” an approach that reflects the importance of active
user participation in the creation of virtual content (Baszucki, 2020).
Since 2020, the metaverse has gained further relevance due to the interest of large technol-
ogy companies. Mark Zuckerberg, during the announcement of Facebook’s name change
to Meta, stated that the metaverse represents “the next chapter of the Internet,” emphasiz-
ing the importance of creating immersive and interconnected digital spaces (Meta, 2021).
At the same time, figures such as Epic Games’ Tim Sweeney and Nvidia’s Jensen Huang
have emphasized the critical role of graphics rendering and artificial intelligence tech-
nologies in enabling realistic and scalable virtual environments (Huang, 2022). Finally,
the contribution of artists should not be underestimated. Mike Winkelmann (Beeple),
with the record sale of his NFT work, has demonstrated the economic potential of virtual
spaces in the art market, while Krista Kim and her “Mars House” project have suggested a
future in which virtual property could become an essential component of digital life (Kim,
2021). These developments, combined with growing academic interest, as evidenced by
12 1| Literature Review
studies, reflect the shift of the metaverse from a speculative idea to a rapidly evolving
technological reality (Dwivedi et al., 2022). The history of the metaverse is not only a
chronicle of technical and cultural advances, but also an example of how futuristic visions
of the past can shape the society and economy of the present.
1.1.2. Definition of the Metaverse
As mentioned earlier, due to its complex and ever-evolving nature, the concept of the
metaverse does not yet possess a universally accepted definition. Scholars, technology
companies, and industry professionals approach the metaverse from different perspec-
tives, each emphasizing distinct characteristics. This divergence in viewpoints makes it
challenging to establish a single, all-encompassing definition. Nevertheless, for clarity and
coherence, it is essential to examine a spectrum of influential definitions before adopting
one that best serves the purpose of this thesis.
Influential Definitions of the Metaverse
The definitions analyzed in this section have been selected to represent a broad range of
perspectives: from business and industry leaders to academic researchers. The goal is
to highlight how different stakeholders conceptualize the metaverse and to identify the
key elements that will inform the final working definition for this thesis. The discussion
begins with definitions that emerge from technology companies and industry figures, which
emphasize the structural and economic potential of the metaverse, before transitioning
to more academic and critical perspectives that address its broader social and cultural
implications.
Industry and Investor Perspectives:
•Matthew Ball: Matthew Ball is an influential investor, entrepreneur, and venture
capitalist, and he is widely regarded as one of the leading theorists on the meta-
verse. His extensive work on digital economies, emerging technologies, and platform
ecosystems has positioned him as a key voice in shaping contemporary discussions
about the metaverse. His 2022 book, The Metaverse: And How It Will Revolutionize
Everything, serves as one of the most comprehensive explorations of the concept, an-
alyzing its technological foundations, economic implications, and potential societal
impact. In his aforementioned book, he defines the metaverse as:
"The Metaverse is a massively scaled and interoperable network of real-time rendered
3D virtual worlds which can be experienced synchronously and persistently by an
1| Literature Review 13
effectively unlimited number of users with an individual sense of presence, and with
continuity of data, such as identity, history, entitlements, objects, communications,
and payments." (Ball, 2022)
Ball’s definition emphasizes technological scalability, data continuity, and user ex-
perience. His perspective aligns with a vision of the metaverse as an expansive,
networked digital space where interoperability and persistence are fundamental.
The emphasis on economic elements such as entitlements and payments highlights
the commercial aspects that make the metaverse an evolving business model rather
than just a social or entertainment medium. However, this definition primarily fo-
cuses on technical and infrastructural components, overlooking broader cultural and
social dimensions.
•Tim Sweeney (Epic Games): Tim Sweeney, the founder and CEO of Epic Games,
is a key figure in the gaming industry and one of the most vocal proponents of
the metaverse. Through his leadership at Epic Games, he has played a central
role in shaping digital economies and user-generated content platforms, particularly
through the creation of the popular game Fortnite and the Unreal Engine, a software
framework widely used for the design and development of video games. Sweeney has
frequently emphasized the importance of interoperability, open ecosystems, and user
empowerment in the development of the metaverse, advocating for a vision that re-
sists corporate monopolization and prioritizes creator-driven experiences. He offers
a definition that further bridges the technical and social aspects of the metaverse:
"The metaverse is a real-time, interactive, and 3D social space where users can come
together for any purpose. It is not just a game or platform but an expansive digital
ecosystem driven by user participation and creativity." (Sweeney, 2023)
Sweeney’s definition shifts the focus from large-scale infrastructure to user agency
and creativity. Unlike Ball’s emphasis on data continuity and networked infras-
tructure, Sweeney envisions the metaverse as a participatory digital economy where
users actively shape experiences. This notion of user-generated content and dynamic
social interaction is crucial in understanding how platforms like Roblox thrive on
community-driven engagement.
•Cathy Hackl: Cathy Hackl instead is a futurist and leading metaverse strategist and
she is widely regarded as one of the foremost experts in metaverse-related business
strategies and immersive technology adoption. Often referred to as the “godmother
of the metaverse,” Hackl has advised major companies on how to navigate and lever-
age virtual worlds for branding, marketing, and consumer engagement. Her work
14 1| Literature Review
focuses on the intersection of digital identity, virtual commerce, and the evolution of
social interactions in digital environments. She presents a definition that prioritizes
accessibility and user interaction:
"The metaverse is the convergence of physical and digital spaces where people can
create, socialize, and engage in a variety of activities across immersive platforms."
(Hackl, 2022)
Hackl’s perspective underscores the metaverse’s potential to reshape human inter-
actions, industries, and institutions. Unlike Ball and Sweeney, she does not em-
phasize interoperability or data structures but instead highlights the metaverse as
an evolving socio-digital environment. This approach is particularly relevant when
considering the metaverse’s role in areas such as education, remote work, and com-
merce.
The academic perspectives on the metaverse provide alternative viewpoints to the tech-
nologically and commercially driven definitions presented above. While such definitions
emphasize the metaverse as a scalable digital infrastructure or a participatory social space,
academic analyses often focus on its structural, economic, and societal implications. These
various perspectives help to contextualize the metaverse beyond its technological features,
addressing issues of power, control, and data governance.
Technological and Structural Definition
•Lee et al. : Lik-Hang Lee is a researcher specializing in human-computer inter-
action, extended reality (XR), and the architecture of virtual environments. His
work focuses on the technological foundations of the metaverse, analyzing how it
integrates web-based and XR platforms to create persistent and interactive spaces.
Lee, along with his co-authors, approaches the metaverse from a technological and
structural perspective, emphasizing its evolution as an extension of existing internet
and immersive computing technologies. His research provides a detailed framework
for understanding the architectural and infrastructural dimensions of the metaverse,
but it does not deeply engage with the social or economic dimensions that define
user participation and monetization in metaverse ecosystems. Lee et al. describe
the metaverse as:
"At the core of the metaverse stands the vision of an immersive Internet as a gi-
gantic, unified, persistent, and shared realm."
Later they add:
“In this paper, we consider the metaverse as a virtual environment blending physical
1| Literature Review 15
and digital, facilitated by the convergence between the Internet and Web technologies,
and Extended Reality (XR).”
And finally:
"The metaverse should own perpetual, shared, concurrent, and 3D virtual spaces
that are concatenated into a perceived virtual universe." (Lee et al., 2021)
This definition highlights the technological and structural dimensions of the meta-
verse, focusing on the blending of physical and digital environments facilitated by
internet and web technologies. While this perspective provides a comprehensive view
of the metaverse’s underlying mechanics, it largely omits the social and economic
dynamics that drive metaverse experiences.
Social and Structural Perspectives
•Danda B. Rawat: Danda B. Rawat is a professor at Howard University and a re-
searcher specializing in cybersecurity, machine learning, and next-generation net-
working systems. He provides a definition of the metaverse that is particularly rele-
vant as it bridges technological infrastructure with social and economic dimensions,
emphasizing its role as both a digital innovation and an evolving socio-technical
ecosystem.He defines the metaverse as:
"The Metaverse is driving the next wave of innovation for new opportunities by re-
placing the digital world (Internet) with the virtual world through a single, shared,
immersive, persistent 3D virtual space. Beyond its technological foundation, the
metaverse is also a socio-economic construct, fostering new forms of digital collab-
oration, economic participation, and virtual social interaction." (Rawat and alami,
2023)
Rawat’s definition emphasizes the transformation of the internet into a persistent,
interactive virtual space, capturing the technological, structural, and social dimen-
sions of the metaverse. Unlike purely technical definitions, Rawat’s perspective ac-
knowledges the immersive and economic potential of metaverse environments while
recognizing their dependence on evolving digital infrastructures.
The definitions examined so far illustrate the diversity of perspectives on the metaverse.
Industry and investor perspectives, such as those of Ball and Sweeney, emphasize its
technological infrastructure, economic potential, and user-driven creativity. Academic
perspectives, such as those of Lee et al., provide structural definitions that highlight the
convergence of digital and physical spaces. Meanwhile, Rawat’s definition incorporates
social elements, positioning the metaverse as an evolution of the digital world.
16 1| Literature Review
It is also important to acknowledge more critical perspectives, such as those put forth
by Hesselbein et al., who highlight the corporate influence on metaverse narratives and
the risks of datafication and platformization. Instead of viewing the metaverse primarily
as a new technological paradigm, they analyze it as an assemblage of data-driven in-
frastructures that expand corporate control over digital interactions.These critiques offer
valuable insights into the economic and governance challenges shaping its development.
Recognizing these concerns ensures that discussions around metaverse business models
remain aware of the potential risks tied to corporate infrastructuralization and digital
identity monetization (Chris Hesselbein and Canali, 2024).
Each of these perspectives contributes essential elements to understanding the metaverse,
yet none fully captures the balance of technological, social, and economic factors neces-
sary for a comprehensive definition. Therefore, this thesis adopts the definition proposed
by Markus Weinberger, as it synthesizes these diverse aspects into a unified framework.
Weinberger defines the metaverse as:
"An interconnection of ubiquitous virtual worlds that partially overlap and enrich the
physical world. These virtual worlds allow users, represented by avatars, to connect and
interact with each other, experience and consume user-generated content in an immer-
sive, scalable, synchronous and persistent environment. An economic system provides
incentives to contribute to the metaverse." (Weinberger, 2022)
This definition is particularly suitable for this thesis because it integrates all the key el-
ements: social interaction, immersion, persistence, scalability, and economic incentives.
Unlike purely technical or industry-driven definitions, Weinberger’s formulation acknowl-
edges the broader cultural and economic significance of the metaverse.
However, one aspect of this definition requires adjustment: namely the interconnection
between virtual worlds. As of today, no platform fully enables seamless movement between
virtual worlds in a way that mirrors Weinberger’s vision. For example, major metaverse
platforms such as Roblox, Decentraland, and Horizon Worlds operate as independent
ecosystems, each with its own economy, user base, and digital assets, without enabling
seamless movement between them. While blockchain-based projects like The Sandbox
and Decentraland promote interoperability through NFT-based ownership, these assets
are often limited to visual representation rather than functional cross-platform use. Even
high-profile initiatives like Meta’s metaverse vision have struggled to establish true in-
teroperability between platforms, highlighting the current fragmentation in the industry.
These examples illustrate how the vision of a fully interconnected metaverse remains
largely theoretical, dependent on future technological and economic developments. While
interoperability is often cited as a future goal, it remains an aspirational rather than an
1| Literature Review 17
existing feature. For this reason, this thesis will adopt Weinberger’s definition while re-
maining critical of the extent to which such interconnectivity is currently not yet realized.
Furthermore, while Extended Reality (XR), which encompasses Virtual Reality (VR)
and Augmented Reality (AR), is frequently associated with the metaverse, it has been
consciously excluded from the definition adopted in this thesis. The metaverse is generally
defined as an interconnected virtual ecosystem that exists independently of any single
access technology. While VR and AR enhance immersion and interactivity within the
metaverse, they are not intrinsic to its definition. This is evident in platforms such as
Roblox and Decentraland, which function as metaverse environments yet do not require
VR or AR for access. Users engage with these virtual worlds using conventional devices
such as PCs, consoles, and smartphones, demonstrating that the metaverse can exist and
thrive without reliance on immersive technologies. Furthermore, XR technologies extend
beyond the metaverse, finding applications in healthcare, industrial design, and remote
collaboration, often without any connection to a persistent virtual world. Including XR
in the definition would risk conflating the metaverse with the tools used to interact with
it, rather than focusing on its fundamental attributes: interconnectivity, user-generated
content, persistence, scalability, and economic incentives.
1.1.3. Metaversal Technologies
Extended Reality
Various studies have posited three fundamental pillars of the metaverse as the core ele-
ments that shape a cohesive and immersive digital ecosystem: Extended Reality (XR),
virtual worlds, and interoperability (Yang et al., 2024b), (Ning et al., 2023). These foun-
dational components enable transformative interactions in digital environments by lever-
aging emerging technologies. The concept of XR, encompassing Virtual Reality (VR),
Augmented Reality (AR), and Mixed Reality (MR), plays a central role in creating im-
mersive experiences (Choi, 2023). Interoperability is crucial for ensuring seamless in-
teraction between different virtual spaces, facilitating persistent and interconnected user
experiences (Xu et al., 2024). Finally, virtual worlds serve as the structural framework
within which digital economies, social interactions, and user-generated content flourish
(Torres et al., 2023). Among the studies on this topic, the comprehensive report Os-
servatorio Realtà Aumentata e Metaverso from the Politecnico di Milano highlights how
these pillars, supported by emerging technologies such as the Internet of Things (IoT),
Artificial Intelligence (AI), and blockchain, are instrumental in shaping the next phase
of digital interactions (Osservatori Digital Innovation, 2024b). To fully grasp the meta-
18 1| Literature Review
verse’s technological foundation, it is essential to delve into the technological framework
that underpins the metaverse’s existence, to explore these core components and their role
in enabling virtual experiences.
At the core of this framework lies Extended Reality (XR): this technology serves as one
of the possible gateways to the immersive experiences offered by the Metaverse, enabling
users to traverse and interact with its digital environments. Even if XR will not be the
core focus of this thesis, it will be well mentioned throughout the work, as the connection
between all the components of the metaverse is what makes the metaverse so interestingly
complicated. Therefore, it is important to go through the definitions, meaning and usage
of such technologies, as the comprehension of these subjects is important to understanding
how prominent actors conceptualize and define the metaverse. The next paragraphs will
explore the concept of Extended Reality, examining its various forms, the underlying
technologies that make it possible, and its pivotal role in shaping the Metaverse in its
current and future form. This exploration will also highlight the synergies between XR
and the characteristics of the Metaverse, providing a comprehensive understanding of how
these two domains intersect and co-evolve.
Figure 1.1: Rauschnabel’s explanation on XR
Extended Reality (XR) is an umbrella term that encompasses a spectrum of immer-
sive technologies, including Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality (AR), and Mixed
Reality (MR). These technologies enable users to interact with and experience digital
environments that blend physical and virtual realities. Philipp A. Rauschnabel, a leading
scholar in digital marketing and immersive technologies, proposes a broader conceptual-
ization, suggesting that XR should be understood as “xReality,” where the "x" represents
1| Literature Review 19
a placeholder for diverse reality formats, such as Assisted Reality, Mixed Reality, and
even Diminished Reality. This flexibility reflects the dynamic and evolving nature of XR
technologies and their applications, particularly within the metaverse ecosystem. When
talking about Extended Reality, it’s important to be able to differentiate between the
three different technologies (Rauschnabel et al., 2022).
The first version is the one most generally known among the broader population. Virtual
Reality (VR) refers to fully immersive digital environments where users interact exclu-
sively in and with computer-generated surroundings. Using devices such as head-mounted
displays (HMDs) and motion-tracking systems, users experience a sense of presence in vir-
tual worlds. Within the metaverse, VR facilitates a range of applications, from gaming and
social interactions to collaborative workspaces and simulated training environments. Pop-
ular VR-based platforms include Meta’s Horizon Worlds, which enables users to socialize,
attend virtual events, and engage in shared experiences, and VRChat, a community-driven
platform where users can create custom avatars and explore interactive 3D environments.
In the gaming industry, titles such as Half-Life: Alyx and Beat Saber showcase how VR
enhances player immersion by integrating hand-tracking and spatial movement mechan-
ics. Beyond entertainment, VR also plays a crucial role in professional and educational
applications, such as Microsoft’s Mesh for Teams, which facilitates remote collaboration
through immersive 3D meeting spaces, and medical simulations used in training surgeons
to practice procedures in risk-free virtual settings. Matthew Ball emphasizes that VR
is foundational to the metaverse as it provides “fully immersive environments that allow
users to step into and interact with digital spaces, creating new possibilities for human
connection.” VR’s capability to replicate and extend real-world interactions positions it
as a key driver in the metaverse’s development (Ball, 2022).
Next, there is Augmented Reality (AR), which overlays digital content onto the phys-
ical world, creating a hybrid environment where virtual and physical elements coexist
simultaneously. Technologies like smart glasses or smartphone applications allow users
to access AR experiences seamlessly. One of the most well-known examples is Pokémon
GO, which revolutionized mobile gaming by allowing players to see and interact with
Pokémon in real-world locations through their smartphone cameras. Similarly, Snapchat
and Instagram AR filters demonstrate how AR enhances social interactions by modifying
appearances or integrating digital objects into real-world imagery. University professor,
researcher and digital artist Vladimir Geroimenko highlights that AR’s value in the meta-
verse lies in its ability to enrich real-world environments, providing users with contextually
relevant information and interactive digital content (Geroimenko, 2014). This is evident
in AR navigation tools, such as Google Lens and Apple’s ARKit, which overlay real-time
20 1| Literature Review
directions and information onto physical spaces, enhancing wayfinding experiences in ur-
ban environments. Retail and commerce have also embraced AR, with brands like IKEA
offering IKEA Place, an AR application that allows users to preview how furniture would
look in their homes before making a purchase. AR is particularly significant in scenarios
where users seek to bridge their physical and virtual realities without fully immersing
themselves in a digital domain. Unlike Virtual Reality, which requires dedicated hard-
ware, AR integrates seamlessly into daily life through smartphones and wearables like
Microsoft HoloLens or Meta’s Ray-Ban Stories. This characteristic makes AR indispens-
able for applications such as navigation, education, and real-world commerce within the
metaverse.
The last one, Mixed Reality (MR), blends elements of VR and AR, enabling users to inter-
act with both physical and virtual objects in real-time. This interaction is facilitated by
advanced devices like Microsoft HoloLens or Magic Leap, which integrate spatial mapping
and gesture recognition technologies. The concept of MR was formally introduced by Paul
Milgram and Fumio Kishino, two researchers specializing in human-computer interaction
and augmented reality. In their seminal 1994 paper, they proposed the Reality-Virtuality
Continuum, a framework that defines MR as environments "where real and virtual objects
are presented together within a single display system, interacting in real time" (Milgram
and Kishino, 1994). Their work remains foundational in understanding how digital and
physical spaces merge to create immersive, interactive experiences. In the metaverse,
MR expands possibilities for collaboration, simulation, and hybrid interactions, making
it ideal for industries such as healthcare, engineering, and creative design. For example,
NASA has utilized MR for astronaut training, simulating space environments while al-
lowing users to remain grounded in a physical setting. Additionally, remote collaboration
tools like Mesh for Microsoft Teams leverage MR to create shared holographic workspaces,
where users can interact with 3D data and each other as if they were physically present.
XR technologies serve as one of the foundational infrastructure for the metaverse, pro-
viding the tools necessary for creating immersive, interactive, and interconnected envi-
ronments. These technologies enable users to inhabit virtual spaces, interact with other
users, and engage with content in ways that transcend traditional digital experiences.
For example, VR facilitates full immersion in virtual worlds, AR enriches physical spaces
with digital overlays, and MR integrates both domains for seamless interaction in vari-
ous professional and leisure contexts. Furthermore, XR can contribute to the scalability,
persistence, and real-time synchronization of the metaverse by enabling fluid transitions
between physical and digital realities. As Ball notes: “XR technologies bridge the gap
between our physical existence and the limitless potential of the metaverse, allowing for
1| Literature Review 21
an unprecedented degree of personalization and interactivity.” (Ball, 2022). XR technolo-
gies revolutionize the user experience in the metaverse by offering immersive interaction,
augmented context, and hybrid integration. Virtual Reality (VR) provides total immer-
sion, allowing users to fully inhabit digital spaces and interact with the environment in a
natural way. Augmented Reality (AR) enriches the physical world by overlaying virtual
elements, allowing users to interact seamlessly with the real world and digital overlays.
Mixed Reality (MR) combines the strengths of VR and AR, allowing users to manipulate
both virtual and physical elements within a cohesive environment. In addition, XR ensures
that the metaverse remains accessible on various devices, expanding user engagement and
increasing its applicability in various domains.
To summarize, Extended Reality is not just an auxiliary component but a core enabler of
the metaverse. By integrating VR, AR, and MR, XR technologies provide the immersive
framework necessary for creating and sustaining the metaverse’s digital environments. As
dr. Rauschnabel suggests, XR’s adaptability as “xReality” underscores its transformative
potential in shaping the way users experience and interact with the metaverse. Whether
enhancing physical realities or constructing entirely new virtual realms, XR can redefine
the boundaries of human interaction and digital innovation (Rauschnabel et al., 2022).
After explaining the meaning behind all these virtual-related technologies, it’s important
to note that a crucial technological and conceptual foundation of the metaverse is the pro-
cess of datafication, which involves the transformation of human behaviors, interactions,
and environments into quantifiable data. Metaversal technologies open a new frontier
for extending ongoing practices of datafication that seek to capture and claim ownership
over ever-larger sets of varied data for the purposes of value extraction and capitalist
exploitation (Hesselbein et al., 2024). Technologies like extended reality (XR) exemplify
this process. While these tools are primarily celebrated for their ability to create im-
mersive and interactive experiences, they simultaneously act as powerful mechanisms for
data collection. By capturing sensory inputs, spatial data, and user interactions, these
technologies enable platforms to amass vast amounts of information about their users.
This data is then leveraged to refine user experiences, optimize platform algorithms, and,
most notably, extract value through targeted advertising, personalized content delivery,
and other monetization strategies. The dual role of XR, AR, and VR—as both facil-
itators of immersion and instruments of datafication—illustrates their centrality to the
technological infrastructure of the metaverse.
22 1| Literature Review
Virtual Worlds
Below, the concepts of virtual worlds and, more specifically, metaverse platforms will be
illustrated: they will be the heart of the thesis. We will start with the history, that is,
when the first virtual worlds began to develop, up to a brief explanation of the fundamen-
tal technologies for understanding how, currently, various metaverse platform operate-
User Generated Content (UGC), blockchain and Non Fungible Tokens (NFTs). Virtual
worlds form the foundation of the metaverse, serving as environments where users can
interact, create, and explore simulated realities. Matthew Ball highlights that virtual
worlds encompass any computer-generated environment: from immersive 3D spaces to
the simplest text-based simulations. These worlds can exist independently or be overlaid
onto the physical world through augmented reality, offering a versatility that goes beyond
mere video game entertainment. Historically, virtual worlds were primarily designed for
video games or cinematic purposes, such as The Legend of Zelda or Disney Pixar films.
However, their use has expanded significantly. Today, they are used for a wide range of
purposes, including education, socialization, commerce, and urban planning. For exam-
ple, a digital twin of Hong Kong International Airport was created to simulate passenger
flow and operational scenarios, supporting the decision-making process in the real-world
context. Similarly, entire cities are recreated as virtual worlds and connected to real-
time data streams, allowing urban planners to optimize traffic management, emergency
response, and construction projects (Girginova, 2025).
These worlds are a crucial element of the metaverse thanks to their intrinsic characteristics
of persistence, immersion, and transactional capabilities. According to a report from the
Osservatorio Realtà Aumentata in the School of Management, Politecnico di Milano, to be
part of the metaverse, virtual worlds must possess eight fundamental characteristics: per-
sistence, accessibility, immersion, modularity, interoperability, transactional capabilities,
asset ownership, and representation through avatars. Of the 141 virtual worlds identified
by the Politecnico’s Observatory, only 44 percent are "Metaverse Ready," meaning they
possess the required characteristics such as persistence, economic activity, and interoper-
ability between platforms. Significant examples include platforms such as Decentraland
and The Sandbox. Other virtual worlds, such as Horizon Worlds, are classified as "Open
Worlds," which, despite not having full interoperability, remain modular and immersive
(Osservatori Digital Innovation, 2024a). A key feature of virtual worlds is their adapt-
ability both in design and purpose. They can replicate real environments as digital twins,
for example, to simulate a city’s infrastructure, or represent completely fictional settings
where the impossible becomes the norm. The purposes of these worlds vary greatly, rang-
ing from playful objectives—such as winning or solving puzzles—to non-playful uses like
1| Literature Review 23
social interaction, meditation, or professional training. Ball emphasizes that much of the
recent growth in the popularity of virtual worlds is focused on platforms that empha-
size non-ludic purposes, such as Animal Crossing: New Horizons. Although labeled as a
game, this is more accurately described as a virtual environment for creativity and social
exchange.
At the center of the metaverse ecosystem are various kinds of metaverse platforms, which
act as hubs by integrating virtual worlds with additional features to enable interaction,
creation, and economic activities. Such platforms, such as Roblox, Fortnite, or Decentra-
land, offer users tools to experience immersive environments, often represented by avatars
that act as digital identities. Metaverse platforms facilitate the creation of user-generated
content (UGC), allowing participants to design and share virtual assets, spaces, and activ-
ities. This democratization of content creation is central to the appeal of the metaverse,
promoting a participatory culture where users shape their own digital environments.
Blockchain technology enables decentralized ownership and secure transactions, and by
doing so it plays a significant role in many, but certainly not all, metaverse platforms.
Digital assets, such as non-fungible tokens (NFTs), are often used within these ecosys-
tems, enabling virtual economies where real value can be exchanged for digital goods and
services. For example, platforms like Decentraland and The Sandbox integrate blockchain-
based economies, while others, such as Fortnite, operate in a centralized manner. The ac-
cessibility of virtual worlds and metaverse platforms has contributed to their proliferation:
innovative technological advancements have significantly reduced the costs, complexity,
and time required to create these environments, leading to an increase in both the number
and diversity of virtual worlds. Platforms like Roblox embody this trend, allowing ama-
teur creators to design and share their own virtual experiences. For example, Adopt Me!,
a user-created game within Roblox, illustrates this trend, reaching billions of sessions and
attracting millions of simultaneous users. Persistence is another distinguishing feature of
many virtual worlds and metaverse platforms. Some maintain a completely continuous
state where user actions have lasting effects, while others, such as Fortnite, periodically
reset completely or partially between sessions. This variability supports a wide range of
use cases, from entertainment to solving real-world problems. Moreover, the governance
and operational models of metaverse platforms vary. Most are centrally controlled by
their developers, who define policies and manage economies. However, some blockchain-
based platforms aim for decentralized governance, granting users greater control over their
digital environments.
As already mentioned in the previous section, despite the rapid evolution of virtual worlds
and metaverse platforms, the concept of a fully interconnected metaverse is still under de-
24 1| Literature Review
velopment. As Valeria Portale, Director of the Observatory at the Politecnico di Milano,
emphasizes, "The Metaverse is not a single virtual world, as it is often mistakenly de-
scribed, but an universe that includes various persistent, interoperable, and interconnected
virtual worlds." (Osservatori Digital Innovation, 2024b). Although hundreds of millions
of users are already navigating and interacting within these virtual spaces, achieving full
interoperability between platforms represents a future challenge. This highlights the on-
going efforts by companies to create engaging virtual experiences and offer meaningful
value propositions. Integrating virtual worlds with features such as user-generated con-
tent, cross-platform accessibility, and persistent economies, metaverse platforms transform
the metaverse into a dynamic and multifaceted ecosystem. These platforms are not just
technological milestones, but also cultural and economic pillars that define how people
interact and create in digital spaces. As Ball says, virtual worlds and metaverse platforms
are essential for understanding the metaverse, supporting its evolution and defining its
potential across various sectors (Ball, 2022).
1.1.4. Key Characteristics
On the basis of the literature discussed above, the following section will list the key aspects
that define the essential parameters of the Metaverse according to the analyzed literature,
offering in-depth explanations for each of them. The goal is to provide a clear and accessi-
ble understanding of these components, which range from persistence and immersiveness
to real-time synchronization and user-generated content. These characteristics not only
outline the boundaries of the Metaverse but also represent the fundamental requirements
for its creation and operation.
1. Ubiquity: Ubiquity is a central feature of the Metaverse, allowing users to be present
in multiple places simultaneously through a parallel interaction with both the phys-
ical and virtual domains. This idea implies the existence of a digital layer that
overlaps with the physical world, creating a hybrid reality. To achieve this ubiq-
uity, two fundamental elements are necessary. The first is Ubiquitous Availability
and Access: This component concerns user interface technologies, computational
power, and connectivity necessary to ensure continuous and ubiquitous access to
the Metaverse. The second is Ubiquitous Personae and Presence: It represents the
idea of persistent avatars, which serve as an extension of the user’s identity within
the Metaverse, ensuring continuity and consistency in interactions.
2. Persistency: Persistence is a distinctive feature of the Metaverse, which applies not
only to avatars but also to elements such as virtual goods, content, and curren-
1| Literature Review 25
cies. This means that actions and events in the Metaverse are permanent, without
interruptions or resets. Matthew Ball emphasizes that "some virtual worlds are
completely persistent, which means that everything that happens within them is per-
manent." (Ball, 2022). Similarly, Dionisio highlights that "the virtual environment
continues to operate even when a specific user is not connected." (Dionisio et al.,
2013). This persistence creates a reality without pauses or resets, as explained by
Coogan (Coogan, 2023).
3. Immersiveness: Immersiveness measures the degree to which the user perceives
being cognitively transported to an alternative and synthetic world. Academic
and researcher specialized in e-learning, immersive virtual environments, and the
metaverse Stylianos Mystakidis distinguishes between socio-psychological immer-
sion, similar to the emotional involvement experienced during the reading of an
engaging book or the watching of a movie, and multimodal immersion, generated
by technical means that stimulate sensory channels through optical, acoustic, tac-
tile signals, and more. As Mystakidis emphasizes users immerse themselves in the
Metaverse to connect and interact with other users and in-world content, making
immersion a crucial aspect of the experience (Mystakidis, 2022).
4. Scalability: Scalability represents the Metaverse’s ability to handle a large number
of users and objects without compromising the immersive experience. This includes
managing sufficient computational resources to support complex social interactions,
ensuring that millions of users can connect and interact simultaneously. Given the
matrix not only of technological innovation but also and above all social innova-
tion of the metaverse, it is essential that metaverse platforms have a technological
capacity capable of supporting the access and interaction of a high -potentially al-
most infinite- number of users and objects. Liang Yang, a researcher specializing in
digital ecosystems and emerging virtual technologies, along with his co-authors, em-
phasizes that the ability of a virtual world to maintain an uninterrupted experience
is fundamental to the Metaverse (Yang et al., 2024a).
5. Real-time synchronization: Real-time synchronization is essential to allow users
to interact in a virtual environment without perceiving significant delays. Virtual
worlds are described as "environments that allow users to interact with other users
and in-world content in (almost) real-time." (Shen et al., 2021). This ensures a
fluidity in the experience, essential for maintaining the sense of presence.
6. User-Generated Content: User-generated content (UGC) is an essential requirement
for the Metaverse. This feature allows the community to create and modify content,
26 1| Literature Review
enriching the experience for themselves and others. Coogan observes that platforms
like Roblox and Minecraft have succeeded thanks to the contributions of their users,
who create unique and engaging experiences (Coogan, 2023). Ning emphasizes that
the Metaverse should allow each user to "produce content and modify the world."
(Ning et al., 2023). User-generated content, or UGC, is also a foundational element
of the metaverse economy: the relationships and economic exchanges between the
considered actors will be analyzed in more depth later in the thesis. User-generated
content will be the foundation of this research on business models in the metaverse:
this concept is as interesting as it is complex, and it is precisely its innovativeness
that makes it so fascinating and important.
7. Monetary Incentives: An integrated and functioning economic system is essential to
incentivize user participation in the Metaverse. Wang describes it as "a computer-
generated world with a consistent value system and an independent economic system
connected to the physical world." Coogan adds that the Metaverse requires "a fully
functioning economy," emphasizing the importance of offering monetary incentives
to stimulate user contributions (Coogan, 2023).
The analysis of the fundamental characteristics of the Metaverse has allowed for the delin-
eation of the distinctive traits that define the nature of this virtual ecosystem. Ubiquity,
persistence, immersiveness, scalability, real-time synchronization, user-generated content,
and economic incentives are not just technical attributes, but also elements that reflect
the social, cultural, and economic interconnections that make the Metaverse a unique and
revolutionary phenomenon. Through these characteristics, the Metaverse is configured
as a hybrid space that combines the physical and virtual worlds, offering unprecedented
opportunities for new forms of interaction, creation, and innovation. However, these
same qualities pose significant challenges, ranging from technological implementation to
economic sustainability and the ethical governance of such novel environments.
1.2. Business Model
This second part of the literature review aims to introduce the concept of the business
model and illustrate its evolution over the years in terms of theoretical development. We
start from the theorization of the model to understanding why it is such an important
concept for companies. The evolutions of business models will be analyzed in relation
to technological innovation, the advent of the internet, and the rise if digital platforms.
Finally, the literature regarding business models in the metaverse will be discussed.
1| Literature Review 27
1.2.1. The Concept of Business Model
The concept of a business model has become a central element in both academic and prac-
tical discussions regarding business strategy, value creation, and technological innovation.
In general terms, a business model refers to how an organization creates, delivers, and
captures value (Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010). In their book Business Model Genera-
tion, Osterwalder and Pigneur state that "a business model describes the logic by which an
organization creates, delivers, and captures value," emphasizing its fundamental role in
shaping the strategic direction of a company. This definition highlights the concept that
business models are not merely financial tools, but complete structures that guide organi-
zational activities across various sectors. In fact, understanding business models is crucial
as they reflect the fundamental strategy and operations of a company. Michael E. Porter,
a renowned economist and professor at Harvard Business School, is widely recognized
for his influential work on competitive strategy and business models. His frameworks,
such as the Five Forces Analysis and Value Chain model, have become foundational in
strategic management studies. As Porter suggests in his book Competitive Advantage,
"the business model of a company is a direct reflection of its competitive position within
an industry." (Porter, 1985). Porter states that a company’s competitive advantage is
intrinsically linked to its ability to design a business model that allows it to surpass the
competition through unique value propositions, cost leadership, or differentiation. There-
fore, the business model is not just an operational tool, but a strategic framework that
can determine a company’s success in the market.
In the current rapidly evolving digital landscape, business models have become even more
important. University professors Chesbrough and Appleyard, in their study on open in-
novation, explain that companies increasingly need to "open their innovation processes
to external sources of knowledge" to maintain their competitive advantage (Chesbrough
and Appleyard, 2007). In this context, business models serve as a pillar for understanding
how companies leverage internal and external innovations to create new value. Economist
David J. Teece expands on this concept, emphasizing that companies with dynamic capa-
bilities must continuously evolve their business models to adapt to technological changes
and evolving market conditions (Teece, 2010). For example, companies in the digital
economy, including those in the metaverse, often rely on platform-based business models
that enable scalable interactions between users, the creation of digital content, and the
decentralized capture of value. The study of business models allows researchers and prac-
titioners to understand how companies generate revenue, sustain growth, and adapt to
changes in market conditions. Joan Magretta, a senior associate at the Harvard Business
School and a former editor at Harvard Business Review, has significantly contributed
28 1| Literature Review
to the study of strategy and management. Her work focuses on how businesses create
and sustain competitive advantage, making her insights on business models particularly
influential. According to Magretta, "a business model is a story that explains how a
company works." This narrative approach emphasizes that business models help both
companies and stakeholders understand the underlying assumptions about value creation
and distribution (Magretta, 2002). By analyzing business models, scholars can uncover
the mechanisms through which companies monetize their products and services and how
these mechanisms align with broader industry trends.
In the context of innovation and entrepreneurship, understanding business models is fun-
damental for both established large companies and startups. Christensen highlights that
companies often struggle with disruptive innovations because their existing business mod-
els fail to adapt to these innovations. Disruptive innovations, according to Christensen,
create new markets and value networks that eventually disrupt existing market-leading
firms (Christensen et al., 2018). Therefore, understanding business models becomes essen-
tial not only to maintain a competitive advantage but also to navigate through industry
disruptions. Furthermore, companies must develop adaptive business models to cope with
technological evolution. As Baden-Fuller states, "innovative activities and business mod-
els co-evolve, influencing each other over time" (Baden-Fuller and Haefliger, 2013). The
interdependence between technological advancements and business models means that or-
ganizations must remain agile in their approach to innovation, continuously revising how
they create and capture value in a constantly and rapidly changing environment.
Understanding business models is fundamental for both academic research and practical
business strategy. As companies face new market dynamics, technological challenges, and
competitive forces, their ability to adapt their business models can determine their success
or failure. The work of scholars such as Osterwalder, Porter, Chesbrough, and Christensen
has underlined the importance of business models in shaping strategic decisions and fueling
innovation. By delving into the mechanisms through which organizations generate value,
scholars can not only inform business practice but also provide insights into the broader
trends shaping industries, particularly in emerging fields such as the metaverse and digital
platforms.
The rise of the internet and the digital age has profoundly transformed how businesses
operate, creating both challenges and opportunities for adapting to a new technological
and societal landscape. As noted by Remané et al., "The increasingly digital business
landscape has created manifold novel opportunities as well as threats to traditional busi-
ness models. In consequence, a broad variety of digital business models emerged."(Remané
et al., 2022). The emergence of digital technologies has disrupted established practices,
1| Literature Review 29
pushing businesses to rethink how they engage with customers, manage resources, and
generate revenue. In response to these shifts, businesses began transitioning from conven-
tional models rooted in physical infrastructure, product-based transactions, and direct
sales to innovative, technology-driven approaches. Remané et al. also highlights that
traditional "brick-and-mortar" systems, reliant on inventory-based operations and local-
ized customer bases, were supplanted by e-commerce platforms, enabling global reach
and streamlined logistics (Remané et al., 2022). For instance, companies like Amazon
leveraged the internet to scale operations beyond geographical constraints while reducing
overhead costs associated with physical storefronts (Harracá, 2017).
Other notable transformations include the rise of subscription models, where businesses
generate recurring revenue by offering continued access to services or products. Companies
such as Netflix and Spotify epitomize this shift, delivering digital content through flexible,
user-centric pricing (Kvick and Sornette, 2019). Additionally, the freemium model gained
traction, particularly in software and gaming industries, by offering free basic services
while monetizing premium features (not to mention the datafication of user behavior for
advertising purposes). Vineet Kumar, a professor at Yale School of Management and an
expert in digital business strategies, has extensively studied the mechanics of freemium
models and their impact on customer acquisition and monetization. As he explains, ’The
idea is to acquire customers by offering a product or service free of charge and then to
convert some of them to paying customers.’(Kumar, 2014).
Freemium has become a popular business model for digital and internet startups to ac-
quire customers quickly and monetize with limited marketing resources. In this model,
basic functionalities and features of the product are offered free of cost, and advanced fea-
tures are monetized. Freemium models have emerged as a cornerstone of digital business,
allowing firms to capture large user bases while converting a subset into paying customers.
These digital business models emphasize scalability, reduced dependency on physical as-
sets, and a stronger focus on user experience and engagement. However, perhaps the most
revolutionary shift has come from the advent of platform business models.
1.2.2. Platforms: A Paradigm Shift
Platform business models have redefined the way businesses create, distribute, and capture
value, marking a departure from traditional linear models. Unlike traditional businesses
that produce goods or services and sell them directly to consumers, platforms serve as
intermediaries, facilitating interactions between multiple user groups—such as buyers,
sellers, and advertisers. According to the IESE Business School, (2024) "Platform-based
30 1| Literature Review
business models create and facilitate exchanges between two or more interdependent par-
ties, typically producers and consumers" (Insight, 2024).
A critical aspect of platform models is their ability to harness network effects, which ex-
plain that the value of a product or service grows as more people use it. The concept
of network effects was first formally theorized by Metcalfe’s Law, named after Bob Met-
calfe, the co-inventor of Ethernet, the set of wired networking technologies and protocols.
Platforms such as Facebook, Airbnb, and Uber exemplify this phenomenon, achieving
exponential scalability without directly owning the underlying assets, such as digital con-
tent, accommodations, or vehicles (Mussi, 2017). Moreover, platform businesses excel
in leveraging data as a strategic asset. Platforms collect and analyze user data to en-
hance services, personalize experiences, and drive innovation. Markovich et al., observe
that platforms collect personal consumer information and use it to improve the quality
of their service as well as for commercialization purposes, such as selling it to third-party
vendors or to advertisers (Markovich and Yehezkel, 2024). Through advanced analytics
and algorithms, they derive insights into user behavior, enabling personalization, tar-
geted advertising, and operational efficiencies. According to Shahid et al., "Big Data is
playing an important role in innovations, creating competitive advantage, enhancing pro-
ductivity, and assisting in data-driven decisions." (Shahid and Sheikh, 2021). Platforms
also disrupt traditional value chains by fostering decentralized value creation. Instead of
relying on in-house resources, platforms empower third-party contributors—whether con-
tent creators, app developers, or gig workers—to co-create value within the ecosystem.
This democratization of production reduces costs, diversifies offerings, and enhances user
engagement.
The evolution of digital business models, from e-commerce and subscriptions to platforms,
underscores a broader shift towards agility, scalability, and user-centricity. As highlighted
by Fehrer et al., digital business models are not merely adaptations to technological
change but are reshaping the foundational principles of competition and value creation in
the 21st century (Fehrer et al., 2018). These models serve as the foundation for emerging
paradigms, including those seen in the metaverse, where platform-centric approaches to
value creation, user participation, and data utilization are further amplified by immersive
technologies. This progression demonstrates how digital business models continue to
influence and inspire innovation across industries.
The emergence of Web 2.0 was fundamental in enabling the rise and evolution of platform
business models. Web 2.0, a term popularized by Tim O’Reilly in the mid-2000s, marked
a shift from static, information-based websites (characteristic of Web 1.0) to interactive,
user-centric platforms (O’Reilly, 2005). It introduced features like dynamic content, par-
1| Literature Review 31
ticipatory culture, and social networking, which transformed the internet into a space
where users could actively contribute, share, and collaborate. Web 2.0’s emphasis on
user-generated content and participatory platforms paved the way for businesses to lever-
age the collective intelligence of their user base. This transition allowed platforms such as
Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter to emerge and grow, as they could scale by facilitating
user interactions and contributions rather than solely relying on proprietary content. As
noted by O’Reilly, the more people who participate, the better the platform becomes,
highlighting how Web 2.0’s principles align closely with the concept of network effects
(O’Reilly, 2005). Additionally, Web 2.0 fostered the development of tools and frameworks
that made it easier for developers and users to create and share content. For example,
the widespread adoption of application programming interfaces (APIs) and open-source
software enabled third-party developers to build apps and services that extended the
functionality of platforms. This interoperability further enhanced the scalability and flex-
ibility of Web 2.0 platforms, solidifying their dominance in the digital economy. The
shift to Web 2.0 also introduced significant changes in how businesses operate and engage
with consumers. It transformed users from passive consumers of information into active
participants and content creators. This participatory culture blurred the lines between
producers and consumers, creating a prosumer dynamic where users both consumed and
produced content for platforms (Buzzetto-Hollywood, 2015). Another critical transfor-
mation was the emphasis on data collection and monetization. Web 2.0 platforms began
collecting vast amounts of user data, which became a valuable asset for targeted advertis-
ing and the creation of personalized experiences. This development laid the groundwork
for the platform economy, where data-driven insights became central to business success.
As Shahid et al. noted, “Big Data is the backbone of Web 2.0 platforms, enabling them to
innovate and remain competitive by leveraging user insights” (Shahid and Sheikh, 2021).
1.2.3. Business Models in the Metaverse
Regarding business models in the metaverse, the existing literature is quite limited: given
the novelty, complexity, and uncertainty of the subject, there are not many thorough
studies that present an in-depth analysis of business models in the metaverse. Neverthe-
less, from what has been possible to extract from the few existing papers, the literature
describes the metaverse as a transformative digital ecosystem, capable of reshaping tra-
ditional business models and introducing innovative mechanisms for the creation, distri-
bution, and capture of value. As the metaverse transitions from concept to commercial
reality, scholars and professionals are examining its potential to redefine how companies
operate, engage customers, and generate revenue (Bray, 2022).
32 1| Literature Review
Business models in the metaverse leverage advancements in technologies such as virtual
reality, augmented reality, blockchain, and artificial intelligence. According to Cui and
Du, the "value logic" is the core of the metaverse’s chained business model, compris-
ing four fundamental components: value proposition, value creation, value distribution,
and value acquisition (Cui and Du, 2022). Latino et al. add that metaverse business
models must graple with three types of innovation: incremental, radical, and exaptation
-which is the repurposing of existing technologies, systems, or business models for new,
unintended uses (Latino et al., 2024). This structured approach emphasizes the unique
characteristics of the metaverse, where user-driven creation, immersive experiences, and
decentralized ownership are thought to converge in order to form entirely new economic
ecosystems. The value proposition of the metaverse focuses on the ability to transcend
spatial and temporal boundaries, offering highly immersive and interactive experiences.
As Ball observes, the metaverse is "an expansive network of persistent, real-time rendered
3D worlds and simulations that support the continuity of identity, objects, data, and
payments" (Ball, 2022).
Co-creation is at the heart of this value proposition, with platforms like Roblox and De-
centraland allowing users to actively shape their environments, fostering a strong sense
of belonging and community. This participatory culture not only enhances user engage-
ment but also supports the economic sustainability of these platforms. The creation of
value in the metaverse is fueled by innovative partnerships, virtual environments, and
cutting-edge technologies. Cui and Du emphasize that "technological upgrades have led
to a more realistic virtual experience," as advancements in extended reality and artificial
intelligence enable companies to offer richer and more immersive interactions (Cui and
Du, 2022). Latino et al. also highlight how digital twins are now essential for sectors such
as urban planning and traffic management (Latino et al., 2024). Partnerships with infras-
tructure providers, content creators, and application developers amplify the potential of
these ecosystems, creating a solid foundation for sustained innovation. The distribution
of value in the metaverse is equally transformative.
Unlike traditional models, the metaverse prioritizes decentralized and immersive channels,
blending virtual and physical interactions. According to Cui and Du, "interest becomes
the communicative link between people," allowing brands to build strong relationships
with customers through shared experiences and targeted engagement (Cui and Du, 2022).
The concept of Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAO), for instance, exemplifies
this change, by offering users opportunities for collaboration and co-governance. DAOs
operate on blockchain-based smart contracts, enabling users—rather than centralized en-
tities—to collectively vote on key decisions, such as platform policies, funding allocations,
1| Literature Review 33
and economic structures. For instance, in Decentraland, landowners and token holders
can shape changes to the platform through a DAO, deciding on rules, fees, and community
guidelines. This model fosters shared ownership and decision-making, contrasting with
centralized platforms, where governance remains entirely in the hands of the platform
operators (Decentraland, 2025).
Virtual stores and immersive marketing campaigns further enhance the user experience,
blurring the boundaries between digital and physical spaces. The generation of revenue
in the metaverse is driven by innovative approaches to value acquisition. Cui and Du
highlight three main revenue streams: "co-creation of virtual platforms," such as the
user-generated content (UGC) economy of Roblox; virtual economies, including NFTs and
cryptocurrencies; and the sale of virtual assets and experiences (Cui and Du, 2022). Latino
et al. emphasize the importance of digital marketplaces as a tool for monetizing virtual
goods through cross-platform transactions (Latino et al., 2024). These mechanisms reflect
a broader trend towards decentralization, allowing users to monetize their contributions
while platforms benefit from increased engagement and traffic. Bray emphasizes the
importance of these innovations, stating that "the potential market for the metaverse is
enormous, with estimates suggesting it could reach 13 trillion dollars by 2030" (Bray,
2022).
Despite the immense promises, the metaverse faces significant challenges. Cui and Du
warn that risks related to privacy, intellectual property, and ethical issues must be ad-
dressed proactively. "The risks faced by the metaverse mainly stem from privacy, intel-
lectual property, ethics, and psychological risks," they write, emphasizing the need for
solid governance frameworks to ensure user safety and trust (Cui and Du, 2022). Latino
et al. add that the lack of interoperability between platforms represents a crucial barrier
to creating a truly connected ecosystem (Latino et al., 2024).
In conclusion, the metaverse appears to represent a paradigmatic shift in digital business,
combining advanced technologies with innovative user engagement strategies. By integrat-
ing co-creation, decentralized governance, and immersive distribution mechanisms, it can
redefine value creation across various sectors. As Ball observes, the metaverse is "better
understood as a near-successor state of mobile internet" (Ball, 2022). This underscores
the need for companies to navigate its challenges by capitalizing on its transformative
potential to achieve sustainable growth and profitability.
34 1| Literature Review
1.3. The Creator Economy
This part of the literature review aims to explore the concepts of digital entrepreneur-
ship and, in particular, to explain what the Creator Economy is. We will start with a
definition, then explain the emergence of the concept due to technological innovation and
the dominance of digital platforms in our current societies, and finally illustrate the most
significant aspects of the phenomenon of digital content creation. Finally, we will analyze
how the concept is expressed in the metaverse.
1.3.1. Creators
A fundamental concept for understanding innovative digital business models is the "Cre-
ator Economy", which is the ecosystem that revolves around individuals called "creators".
But what exactly is a creator? Instagram head Adam Mosseri in a TED Talk defined cre-
ators as “those whose personality is their brand, and who use platforms to turn their
passion into a living.”, a distinction that underscores the personal and entrepreneurial
nature of their work (Mosseri, 2024). Sophia Kunthara, a reporter who covers this topic,
wrote in Crunchbase that Creators are “the industry of people who create online content
and make money off of it, independent of a third-party brand.” (Kunthara, 2022). Their
monetization strategies may include memberships, subscriptions, digital tips, ad revenues,
sponsorship deals, direct funding from platforms, and even direct contributions from fans,
reflecting a multifaceted approach to income generation (Florida, 2022). So, taking all the
inputs and putting them into a comprehensive definition, it can be said that creators are
individuals who leverage digital technologies to produce and share unique content across
a variety of formats and platforms. This content can range from videos and music to art,
blogs, and tutorials, often aimed at engaging specific communities or broad audiences.
Unlike traditional artists or entertainers, creators utilize digital tools and platforms to
not only distribute their work but also monetize it directly.
The Creator Economy refers to the ecosystem that enables these individuals to thrive
professionally. This ecosystem encompasses various digital platforms (such as YouTube,
TikTok, and Patreon), tools (like video editing software and audience analytics), and the
broader economic infrastructures that supports content creation and distribution. Florida
notes that: "the Creator Economy is not merely a byproduct of the internet but a mani-
festation of the increasing importance of creativity as an economic driver" (Florida, 2022).
The democratization of content creation—where anyone with access to a smartphone and
an internet connection can participate—has expanded this economy significantly, trans-
forming creative expression into a viable career path for millions (Florida, 2022).
1| Literature Review 35
1.3.2. Platforms as the Backbone of Creator Economy
The growth of the Creator Economy is deeply intertwined with the rise of digital platforms,
which have revolutionized the production and dissemination of content (Poell et al., 2021).
As digital platforms proliferated, they provided creators with unprecedented opportunities
to showcase their work globally, bypassing traditional gatekeepers such as publishers,
record labels, and TV networks. This transformation is highlighted by Florida, who
describes the Creator Economy as a “digital manifestation of the rise of creativity as a
key element in our economy” (Florida, 2022).
Social media platforms such as Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok have played a pivotal
role in this shift. These platforms offer tools and features designed to simplify content
creation, such as built-in video editing, analytics dashboards, and monetization programs.
Moreover, platforms encourage active user participation by enabling creators to directly
engage with their audiences through comments, live streams, and personalized interac-
tions. Such innovations have not only lowered the barriers to entry for content creation
but also diversified the types of content and voices that gain visibility (Edeling and Wies,
2024). The economic viability of the Creator Economy is further enhanced by its inte-
gration with digital commerce. Platforms have introduced features like in-app purchases,
virtual tipping, and merchandise stores, allowing creators to monetize their audiences
directly. This seamless blending of creativity, community building, and commerce under-
scores the unique appeal of the Creator Economy, which continues to grow in influence
and reach (Edeling and Wies, 2024).
The vast majority of exchanges in the creator economy take place on digital platforms:
what is really the role of these environments? Platforms are not just venues where cre-
ators and audiences meet; they are the foundational infrastructure upon which the Creator
Economy is built. Bleier et al. describe platforms as “the underlying ecosystem that con-
nects key actors, supports content creation, and facilitates monetization”. This statement
highlights the dual role of platforms as both facilitators and active participants in shaping
the Creator Economy (Bleier et al., 2024).
Connecting Key Actors: Platforms bring together creators, audiences, and advertisers
in dynamic ecosystems. Creators produce content to engage audiences, while advertisers
leverage this engagement to promote their products and services. Platforms act as inter-
mediaries, providing the tools and algorithms that enable these interactions. For instance,
YouTube’s recommendation engine helps creators reach broader audiences by suggesting
their content based on user preferences. This connectivity fosters a symbiotic relationship
among all actors, where the success of one depends on the active participation of others.
36 1| Literature Review
Monetization Facilitation: Platforms also play a critical role in enabling monetization.
They offer revenue-sharing models, such as YouTube’s ad program, and direct-to-fan
tools like Patreon’s subscription system. These features allow creators to diversify their
income streams, reducing reliance on a single source of revenue. Furthermore, platforms
facilitate brand collaborations, where creators act as influencers to promote products to
their audiences. This advertising model has shifted the role of users from being customers
to becoming the product, with brands paying platforms to access their data and attention.
Platforms increasingly leverage advertising as a primary revenue source, especially in the
metaverse: Roblox, for example, is experimenting with immersive advertising formats,
such as 3D portals to branded experiences, in order to increase user engagement and
revenue generation (Kim, 2022).
Algorithmic Dependencies: One of the most significant aspects of platforms is their
reliance on algorithms to determine content visibility and engagement: “Content creators
compete for user attention: their reach crucially depends on algorithmic choices made
by developers on online platforms. To maximize exposure, many creators adapt strategi-
cally, as evidenced by examples like the sprawling search engine optimization industry”
(Hron et al., 2023). While algorithms can amplify creators’ reach, they also introduce
risks (Florida, 2022). Changes to algorithms can drastically affect a creator’s income and
audience growth, creating a precarious dependency. Bleier et al. note that “platform al-
gorithms often prioritize content that maximizes engagement, potentially forcing creators
to adapt their style and focus to align with algorithmic trends” (Bleier et al., 2024). This
dependency highlights the power dynamics within the Creator Economy, where platforms
wield considerable influence over creators’ success.
Actors in the Creator Economy: The Creator Economy involves a complex interplay
among three main actors: creators, audiences and advertisers/brands. Creators are, as
stated in some paragraphs above, individuals producing original content, often initially
driven by passion, curiosity and creativity rather than purely financial motives. The Au-
diences are users who consume and engage with the content, contributing to its visibility
and value through views, likes, shares, subscriptions and comments. Lastly, Advertis-
ers/Brands are companies that leverage platforms to target audiences through collabora-
tions with creators, effectively using the platform as a medium to reach consumers. This
shift in dynamics, where platforms mediate relationships between creators, audiences, and
brands, underscores their centrality in the Creator Economy. Looking from this perspec-
tive, platforms are no longer passive intermediaries but active participants that shape
how value is created, distributed, and captured.
One of the defining features of the Creator Economy is the reconceptualization of creativity
1| Literature Review 37
as a marketable asset (Poell et al., 2021). Florida emphasizes that “creativity is not just
an artistic endeavor; it is an economic force driving innovation and income generation”
(Florida, 2022). This perspective has elevated creative expression from a hobby or passion
to a viable career path, supported by tools and platforms that monetize individual talents.
The idea that creativity can be commodified and turned into a sustainable source of
income has reshaped societal perceptions of artistic work, making it a cornerstone of the
digital economy.
The entrepreneurial nature of content creation has sparked debates about whether cre-
ators should be classified as entrepreneurs. Edeling et al., introduce the concept of “cre-
atrepreneurship,” which defines creators as individuals who “capitalize on opportunities
by delivering digital content to generate sustainable revenue” (Edeling and Wies, 2024).
This model combines elements of personal branding, business strategy, and creative in-
novation, positioning creators as hybrid figures who straddle the line between artistry
and entrepreneurship. While not all creators may view themselves as entrepreneurs, their
reliance on business strategies to monetize their creativity aligns them with broader defi-
nitions of entrepreneurship.
Despite its potential, the Creator Economy faces significant challenges, particularly in in-
come distribution. While a few creators achieve substantial financial success, the majority
struggle to earn a living wage. Florida observes that: “two-thirds of creators earn less than
25,000 dollars annually, and a quarter earn less than 1,000” (Florida, 2022). This stark
disparity has prompted discussions about creating a “middle class” of creators who can
sustain themselves economically without relying on viral success or brand sponsorships.
Addressing these inequalities is critical for ensuring the long-term sustainability of the
Creator Economy. and preventing it from becoming an industry where only a handful of
individuals or large corporations reap the benefits.
Beyond economic disparities, the rise of user-generated content (UGC) has also intro-
duced challenges related to illegal content, misinformation, and disinformation—issues
that have become increasingly difficult to regulate in decentralized digital ecosystems.
Unlike traditional media, where content is produced by regulated institutions, UGC plat-
forms democratize content creation, allowing anyone to publish material with minimal
oversight. While this openness fosters creativity, it also makes platforms susceptible to
false narratives, extremist content, and copyright infringements. Misinformation and dis-
information have become particularly prevalent and profitable in the Creator Economy.
Zeng and Schäfer highlight that "social media and content-sharing platforms have signif-
icantly contributed to the viral spread of misleading information, amplifying its effects
on public perception and decision-making" (Zeng et al., 2022). YouTube, TikTok, and
38 1| Literature Review
Facebook have all been exploited by creators spreading false or misleading content for
financial gain. For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the viral "Plandemic" doc-
umentary promoted conspiracy theories about vaccines and was monetized through ad
revenue and affiliate marketing before being removed (Lee et al., 2023). Similarly, fake
financial advice and crypto pump-and-dump schemes have been widely disseminated by
creators seeking to profit from hype-driven engagement. A notable example is the Squid
Game Coin scam, where influencers promoted a fraudulent cryptocurrency, resulting in
investors losing millions while early promoters made substantial profits (News, 2021).
Illegal content, including hate speech, copyright violations, and child exploitation mate-
rial, also presents regulatory difficulties. Platforms hosting user-generated content must
balance creator freedom with the need for robust moderation policies to prevent the pro-
liferation of harmful material. Gillespie argues that “platforms operate in a paradox of
wanting to present themselves as neutral hosts while also enforcing content policies that
shape discourse and cultural norms” (Gillespie, 2018). This contradiction places responsi-
bility on both platform owners and creators to navigate an increasingly complex regulatory
environment. In an attempt to curb deepfake disinformation and extremist propaganda,
platforms like YouTube and Facebook have implemented AI-driven moderation systems,
though these remain imperfect, often failing to detect nuanced or rapidly evolving forms
of manipulated content.
As the Creator Economy continues to expand into the metaverse, these issues may become
even more pronounced. Virtual spaces introduce new challenges related to identity theft,
AI-generated deepfake content, and the lack of transparency in virtual transactions. While
some platforms invest in better content moderation and verification mechanisms, the rapid
evolution of UGC in digital and immersive environments raises critical questions about
ethics, platform governance, and the long-term sustainability of creator-driven economies.
1.3.3. The Creator Economy in the Metaverse
The emergence of the metaverse is poised to redefine the Creator Economy further, of-
fering new opportunities and challenges. What these opportunities and challenges might
be is still very much an emerging question as metaverse platforms are created and grow.
The metaverse, a collective virtual shared space created by the convergence of virtually
enhanced physical reality and persistent virtual worlds, provides creators with an im-
mersive environment to expand their work. Florida suggests that “the metaverse allows
creators to construct entire digital worlds, monetize virtual assets, and engage audiences
in unprecedented ways” (Florida, 2022). For instance, creators in the metaverse can sell
1| Literature Review 39
virtual goods, offer exclusive experiences, or host events within these immersive spaces.
As Wang et al emphasize, "The creator economy in the metaverse enables users to create
and reap financial rewards from their content" (Wang et al., 2023).
This economic model is central to platforms such as Zepeto, Roblox, and Decentraland,
which empower users to design virtual goods, environments, and experiences, often mon-
etized directly through platform-specific currencies.This shift not only amplifies creative
possibilities but also deepens the economic integration of digital and virtual economies
(Chen et al., 2023). One key aspect of it is the process of datafication: as Hesselbein et
al., state: "We define ‘metaverse data’ therefore not as an entirely new phenomenon that
radically breaks with the era of big data, but instead as an expansion of the process of
datafication into important new domains of human activity." In a metaversal environment,
this process extends beyond conventional data collection to capture users’ interactions,
behaviors, and virtual assets, further embedding economic activity within digital ecosys-
tems. However, the negative implications of datafication become more pronounced in
metaverse environments. As Hesselbein et al. (2024) warn, "The creation of metaversal
spaces – or put better, the ‘metaversalisation’ of human spaces and actions – threatens to
potentially intensify the current drive towards the datafication and commodification by
large tech platforms as well as expand trends towards quantification and metrification in
other industries as well as research." This suggests that while datafication enhances mon-
etization opportunities for creators, it also raises concerns about increased surveillance,
commercialization of digital interactions, and the growing influence of major technology
companies in shaping user experiences (Chris Hesselbein and Canali, 2024).
The economic dynamics of the metaverse Creator Economy can also involve blockchain
technology and cryptocurrencies, which enable secure ownership and trading of digital
assets. Non-fungible tokens (NFTs) play a central role, allowing creators to sell unique
digital works directly to audiences, bypassing traditional intermediaries. These tokens
represent ownership of digital items such as artwork, virtual real estate, or in-game as-
sets, creating new revenue opportunities for creators. Platforms such as Decentraland and
The Sandbox further illustrate the metaverse’s potential. In these platforms, creators are
facilitated in the design of virtual environments and experiences while monetizing their
creations through the sale of virtual goods and services. Florida emphasizes that “the
metaverse integrates creativity and commerce in ways that are fundamentally transfor-
mative, enabling creators to engage audiences in deeply immersive ways while driving
economic growth” (Florida, 2022). Platforms such as Zepeto exemplify how the meta-
verse integrates tools that streamline content creation and monetization. Features like
"Build It" and "Studio" allow users to create personalized 3D avatars and engage in vir-
40 1| Literature Review
tual world-building. Lee et al. note that "Zepeto integrates social interactions, gaming,
content creation, and virtual workspaces," highlighting the platform’s holistic approach
to empowering creators (Lee et al., 2024). The economic scale of the metaverse creator
economy is considerable. For instance, Zepeto hosts over 2.83 million active creators and
has generated transactions worth over 25 million dollars (Kim et al., 2025). Creators are
central to user experience as they can directly create and sell virtual items, thus bridging
the gap between the virtual and physical worlds (Zhang et al., 2024). This highlights the
significant revenue potential of virtual goods and services within immersive environments.
The metaverse also encourages new forms of collaboration among creators, developers,
and audiences. As mentioned above, community-driven projects such as decentralized au-
tonomous organizations (DAOs) provide creators with governance tools to make collective
decisions about platform development and revenue sharing. These structures shift power
from centralized entities or corporations to the participants themselves, fostering a more
equitable ecosystem.
Adding to these dynamics, the metaverse is enabling groundbreaking applications of the
creator economy across several industries. In the music and entertainment sector, for
example, it offers artists a direct connection to their audiences, bypassing traditional in-
termediaries such as labels and distributors. This disintermediation not only increases
the share of profits for creators but also encourages emerging talent to display their work
(García-Marzá and Calvo, 2024). Dedicated platforms designed for music and entertain-
ment have become critical hubs, fostering creativity and democratizing access for artists.
The disruption of the traditional music industry model highlights the potential of the
metaverse to serve as a growth engine for creative sectors. (Singla et al., 2024)
In gaming, the creator economy is flourishing due to the immersive and interactive nature
of metaverse platforms. Multiplayer capabilities and the integration of in-game rewards,
cryptocurrencies, and NFTs provide new avenues for creators to design engaging experi-
ences and monetize their efforts. Shalender notes that the collaborative and connected
nature of the metaverse elevates gaming to a level that was previously unattainable on
traditional platforms (Singla et al., 2024). These advancements are also driving policy-
level discussions, with governments exploring ways to generate tax revenue from in-game
economies. These economic and technological shifts position gaming as a significant con-
tributor to the metaverse’s broader creator economy. (Davenport and Kalakota, 2019)
Virtual real estate has also emerged as a prominent aspect of the metaverse creator econ-
omy. Platforms such as Decentraland and The Sandbox offer opportunities to buy, sell,
lease, and rent digital land parcels, providing entirely new streams of revenue. The ac-
1| Literature Review 41
quisition of digital land is driven by multiple factors, including speculative investment,
identity expression, and community engagement, reflecting the diverse motivations of re-
tail investors in the metaverse (Ante et al., 2023). High-profile brands like Nike and
Coca-Cola have leveraged these spaces for innovative marketing campaigns, such as cre-
ating interactive environments like Nikeland or launching digital collectibles inspired by
metaverse concepts. These initiatives underline the versatility of virtual land as a tool for
brand engagement and economic activity.
The retail sector also finds significant promise within the metaverse. Retailers are har-
nessing AR and VR technologies to provide immersive shopping experiences, enabling
customers to try, customize, and purchase items in virtual settings. This interactive ap-
proach enhances user satisfaction while creating strong emotional connections between
brands and their audiences (Kolo, 2022). Furthermore, the growing popularity of digi-
tal avatars and their accessories opens additional revenue streams for retailers, allowing
them to tap into virtual marketplaces. This omnichannel strategy not only mirrors phys-
ical retail experiences but also expands opportunities for growth and profitability (Gupta
et al., 2024). By integrating these diverse applications, the creator economy in the meta-
verse showcases its transformative potential. Its ability to redefine value creation and
distribution across industries reinforces the metaverse’s role as a catalyst for economic
innovation.
However, challenges remain. The reliance on blockchain and NFTs introduces sustainabil-
ity concerns due to the energy-intensive nature of these technologies. Additionally, the
metaverse faces accessibility barriers, as creating and participating in virtual worlds often
requires significant technological resources and expertise. Addressing these challenges will
be critical for ensuring that the Creator Economy in the metaverse remains inclusive and
sustainable (Jung et al., 2025). Furthermore, the lack of tangible solutions within the
digital realm poses another significant hurdle. Kulshrestha et al. (2022) highlight how
the intangible nature of many offerings in the metaverse can alienate potential users and
diminish engagement. Enhancing the sensory and physical cues in digital spaces through
technologies like AI, advanced graphics, and low-code development tools can mitigate this
challenge and make virtual experiences more relatable and impactful (Singla et al., 2024).
Another persistent issue is the unrealistic expectations held by many organizations ven-
turing into the metaverse. The success of major brands such as Nike and Coca-Cola often
inspires others to emulate their strategies, but without adequate planning or a long-term
vision, these attempts often fall short. Unrealistic demands for quick returns from stake-
holders exacerbate these difficulties, further stressing the need for patience and sustainable
approaches in metaverse ventures (Kumar et al., 2025).
42 1| Literature Review
Finally, the lack of clear implementation strategies remains a pressing concern. While
many companies focus on establishing a presence in the metaverse, the real challenge lies
in creating meaningful and lasting engagement with users. Shaheen argues that organiza-
tions must shift from questioning why they need to be in the metaverse to understanding
how they can contribute to and benefit from these digital ecosystems (Al-Shaheen et al.,
2023). This strategic clarity, combined with a focus on aligning demographics with tar-
geted activities, will be vital in ensuring a meaningful and successful presence in the
creator economy of the metaverse.
The Creator Economy continues to evolve, with the metaverse offering a new frontier for
creativity and entrepreneurship. By integrating advanced technologies such as blockchain
and virtual reality, the metaverse extends the principles of the Creator Economy into
immersive digital spaces. This progression not only expands opportunities for creators
but also highlights the need for equitable and sustainable practices in these emerging
ecosystems. The Creator Economy in the metaverse exemplifies the fusion of creativity,
technology, and economic innovation, setting the stage for a future where digital and
virtual economies converge seamlessly.
1.4. Conclusion and Gaps
This literature review has provided a comprehensive exploration of the conceptual, tech-
nological, and economic foundations of the metaverse, alongside a detailed examination
of business models and the creator economy. By addressing the convergence of these
domains, it has reseached how emerging technologies and digital platforms are reshaping
traditional paradigms of value creation, distribution, and monetization.
The first section of this review examined the metaverse, tracing its evolution from theoreti-
cal constructs to tangible digital environments supported by technologies such as extended
reality (XR), blockchain, and artificial intelligence (AI). It highlighted the key character-
istics that define the metaverse, including immersion, persistence, interoperability, and
decentralization, while emphasizing its transformative potential for digital interaction and
commerce. Despite this progress, gaps remain in understanding how these technologies
can be fully integrated to deliver scalable, accessible, and sustainable solutions.
The second section focused on business models, charting their development from tra-
ditional structures to digital and platform-based models. It underscored how digital
platforms have introduced new mechanisms for generating revenue, such as subscription
services, freemium offerings, and data-driven personalization. These innovations have rev-
olutionized industries by fostering network effects, enabling user-generated content, and
1| Literature Review 43
leveraging data as a strategic asset. However, the unique business models emerging within
the metaverse—with their reliance on virtual goods, decentralized governance, and im-
mersive experiences—remain underexplored in the existing literature. Understanding how
these models adapt to the metaverse’s distinct characteristics is essential for advancing
both theoretical and practical knowledge in this area.
The third section explored the creator economy, particularly its integration with the
metaverse. It demonstrated how digital platforms empower creators to monetize their
work through tools, marketplaces, and direct audience engagement. Platforms such as
Roblox, Decentraland, and Zepeto exemplify this dynamic, offering creators opportuni-
ties to generate revenue through virtual goods, events, and immersive experiences. The
review also addressed challenges such as economic inequality among creators, algorith-
mic dependencies, and sustainability concerns, emphasizing the need for equitable and
inclusive strategies to ensure the long-term viability of this economy.
While the review has outlined significant advancements and opportunities, several critical
gaps remain. The intersection of the metaverse, business models, and the creator econ-
omy lacks holistic frameworks that account for the unique economic dynamics that are
emerging in these virtual spaces. There are numerous studies that thoroughly examine the
technological detail of the metaverse, from extended reality, with descriptions of headsets
and haptic suits to blockchains, with precise explanations of cryptocurrencies, NFTs, and
virtual lands. There is also a wealth of literature on business model theory, such as how
to adapt frameworks to the unique characteristics of digital businesses and how to incor-
porate and leverage the creator economy phenomenon into the theory. However, there is
a lack of research that can connect the three concepts: metaverse, business model, and
creator economy. It is undeniable that there are business opportunities in the metaverse;
however, are they extensions of existing paradigms, copies of what is applicable in the
traditional digital world translated into the metaverse, or instead new structures whose
existence is specifically linked to the metaverse environment?
This is exactly what this thesis seeks to explore and understand. The metaverse promises
unprecedented change and innovation, both from the perspective of users and in terms
of monetization opportunities. But how might this be the case? And if that’s the case,
how does the metaverse provide this? At the heart of this question is a desire to bet-
ter understand the role of the creator economy in the formation of business models in
the metaverse: everything in the metaverse is extended, emphasized, and augmented,
including creative opportunities. This is precisely the research question addressed in this
thesis.
44 1| Literature Review
In light of these gaps, this thesis aims to address the following research questions:
•How do metaverse platforms drive the evolution of digital business models?
•What role does the creator economy play in this process?
•How do revenue models in the metaverse differ from traditional Web 2.0 monetiza-
tion strategies?
By examining this question, the research will contribute to the understanding of how
the metaverse fosters economic innovation and inclusivity, offering a nuanced perspective
on its potential to redefine digital economies and creative industries. This inquiry not
only bridges the gaps identified in the literature but also provides actionable insights for
stakeholders navigating the rapidly evolving landscape of the metaverse.
45
2| Methodology
This chapter outlines the methodology employed to explore and analyze the evolving busi-
ness models of metaverse platforms, focusing on how these platforms create and capture
value as well as the role of the creator economy in this process. A combination of qual-
itative research methods, namely platform analysis, participatory observation, and case
study examination, was employed to achieve a nuanced understanding of these dynam-
ics at both the cross-platform as well as on-platform levels. This methodology aimed to
ensure a balance between theoretical insights and empirical observations, laying a robust
foundation for the subsequent analysis.
2.1. Research Approach
The study employed an exploratory and qualitative approach, reflecting the nascent and
rapidly evolving nature of the metaverse and its various platforms, technologies, and
practices. In the first stage, secondary data sources such as academic articles, industry
reports, and consultancy analyses were used to gain an initial understanding of metaverse
technologies and economic models. This phase involved a critical evaluation of sources,
focusing on relevance, credibility, and methodological rigor, with a particular emphasis on
the intersection of metaverse platforms and their revenue models. Gaps in the literature
were identified at this stage, informing both the literature review and guiding the selection
of platforms and case studies for further empirical investigation.
In the second stage - focusing on the level of metaverse platforms - a combination of sec-
ondary data analysis and firsthand platform exploration were employed to examine the
technical structures, user experiences, and monetization models of metaverse platforms.
This second step applied methods that are common in qualitative studies of digital plat-
forms in the fields of digital sociology and anthropology (Boellstorff et al., 2012);(Calian-
dro, 2017);(Kozinets, 2023);(Pink et al., 2015). Insights were gathered through academic
literature, industry reports, platform documentation, and, most importantly, direct en-
gagement with and participation in platforms such as Roblox, Decentraland, The Sand-
box, and Horizon Worlds. This approach not only facilitated an in-depth exploration of
46 2| Methodology
current user practices and business structures on metaverse platforms, but also allowed
for a comparative classification, identifying the key characteristics that differentiate these
distinct ecosystems and informing the case study selection.
In the third and final stage a case study approach was adopted to provide a detailed anal-
ysis of monetization strategies within a single metaverse ecosystem. Based on findings
from the previous phase, Roblox was selected for its structured, highly developed creator
economy. Three case studies were chosen to represent different revenue models—a user-
generated experience, a branded experience, and a virtual fashion brand. Once again,
an ethnographic approach was applied - involving long-term and in depth exploration of
the cases through participant observation. This analysis also integrated platform doc-
umentation, developer policies, gameplay observations, and industry reports to offer a
comprehensive understanding of business models in practice.
2.1.1. Literature Review
The initial phase involved extensive reading of academic papers and industry reports re-
trieved from databases such as Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. Keywords
including "metaverse," "business models," "creator economy," "metaverse platforms," and
"virtual worlds" guided the literature research. The review was complemented by insights
from diagrams and classification maps found on academic and industry websites, which
categorized metaverse platforms based on characteristics such as centralization, techno-
logical scope, and purpose.
The literature review was instrumental in providing a foundational understanding of the
metaverse’s technological and economic frameworks. By synthesizing insights from diverse
sources, this phase highlighted emerging trends, such as the interplay between decentral-
ized technologies like blockchain and user-generated content economies. Additionally,
the literature review allowed for the identification of existing gaps, such as the lack of
comprehensive studies addressing the role of creators in platform monetization strategies.
2.1.2. Platform Classification and Analysis
After gathering initial insights from the academic literature and industry sources, a struc-
tured process was undertaken to classify metaverse platforms. This involved identifying
recurring characteristics of platforms as described in this literature by analyzing their con-
tents as well as the diagrams, classification maps. These academic and industry sources
were supplemented with analysis of live streams and gameplay videos created by ‘expe-
riential experts’ (Bishop and Kant, 2023) of metaverse environments on platforms such
2| Methodology 47
as YouTube. Common characteristics such as "centralized vs. decentralized," "social
vs. gaming vs. crypto-focused," and "free-to-play vs. tokenomics-based" were noted
by employing a process of iterative coding of recurrent patterns and themes (Przybylski,
2020).
Using this information, a comprehensive list of characteristics was developed to system-
atically classify metaverse platforms. This list formed the basis for creating an Excel
table, which categorized approximately 30 metaverse platforms based on these attributes.
The table provided a clear visualization of platform similarities and differences, revealing
clusters of platforms that shared key characteristics. This analytical step was crucial in
narrowing down which platforms to explore in depth for further cross-platform as well as
on-platform analysis through case studies.
2.1.3. Platform Selection and Participant Observation
Based on the insights derived from the classification analysis, four platforms—Roblox, De-
centraland, Horizon Worlds and The Sandbox—were selected for further in-depth analysis.
The selection was guided by the need to include platforms with distinct characteristics
(both similar and different enough to cover the most important aspects of various meta-
verse platforms), popular activity, and relevance to the research question:
•Roblox: Chosen for being the most widely recognized and accessible metaverse
platform. It is available on the Apple App Store, free to play, and hosts millions
of daily active users. Roblox’s extensive library of games, ease of access, and the
relatively rich body of academic and industry literature about its ecosystem made
it an essential focus for the study as one of, if not the largest, metaverse platform.
•Decentraland: Selected for its decentralized and blockchain-based infrastructure,
which contrasts with Roblox’s centralized model. It is particularly noted for its
emphasis on virtual retail and land ownership. Despite requiring the setup of a
crypto wallet (which involved creating one specifically for this study), Decentra-
land’s unique position as a socially oriented platform made it a valuable subject for
analysis.
•The Sandbox: Included due to its significant endorsements by celebrities and brands,
as well as its tokenomics-driven ecosystem. While slightly more challenging to nav-
igate, The Sandbox’s focus on user-generated content and its appeal to high-profile
creators and corporations provided critical insight into the intersection of branding
and the metaverse economy.
48 2| Methodology
•Horizon Worlds, the metaverse platform set up and run by Meta, was also included
in the analysis; however, due to the limitations of accessing the platform without a
VR headset, the depth of exploration was more restricted compared to other plat-
forms. While efforts were made to assess its ecosystem through online research and
available resources, the platform’s non-VR experience offered limited interaction,
making it difficult to fully evaluate its user engagement and monetization mechan-
ics. Additionally, Meta’s official website merges information about both Horizon
Worlds and the Meta Quest hardware, making it challenging to clearly separate the
platform’s functionalities from its VR device ecosystem, further complicating the
analysis. Despite this issues, its inclusion was deemed useful for a meaningful com-
parison in terms of its technical features and business models with other metaverse
platforms.
The client software for each selected platform was downloaded, and an account was cre-
ated to ensure direct access. A significant amount of time -over 100 hours in total- was
spent directly on all these platforms to gather firsthand insights into their functionality,
user behavior, and monetization mechanisms. During the initial exploration, it became
apparent how these platforms differed not only in terms of technology but also in their
economic models and user experiences. For example, Roblox’s accessibility and extensive
library of user-generated content stood in stark contrast to Decentraland’s blockchain-
based ownership model and The Sandbox’s emphasis on tokenized assets and celebrity
partnerships.
Direct interaction with and participant observation of these platforms allowed for the
collection of data on their functionality, user behavior, and monetization mechanisms.
Efforts were made to experience a variety of content, including popular games, branded
experiences, and creator-designed assets, to gain a comprehensive view. In line with com-
mon methods in ethnographic studies, both offline and online (Boellstorff et al., 2012);
(Pink et al., 2015), extensive field notes were taken throughout the process that included
observations of the platform architecture, social and cultural features, as well as user
and business practices. On a number of occasions, data was gathered from other users
concurrently present on the platform who provided useful information on the practical
operation and experience of the specific platform. Field notes were subsequently typed
up and further analysed through iterative coding using a grounded theory approach in
order to identify key concepts, themes, and categories. A final, second round of coding
was conducted to draw connections between emerging themes and the higher level con-
cepts and analytic categories, namely metaverse business models and the creator economy
(Charmaz, 2006). Each platform was thus explored to understand its user demographics,
2| Methodology 49
the dynamics of creator-platform interactions, and the specific features that distinguish
it within the metaverse ecosystem.
2.1.4. Analysis of secondary video sources
In addition to firsthand exploration and ethnographic analysis, gameplay videos on YouTube
provided valuable supplementary data, offering insights into user behavior, platform func-
tionality, and monetization strategies that were not immediately apparent through per-
sonal interaction. Over 50 hours of video content were analyzed, covering platform-
produced presentations, user-generated gameplay, and expert analyses from media outlets
and technology commentators. As with the documentary analyses described above, such
videos were critically analyzed by taking note of emergent themes and concepts, which
were subsequently coded and brought into relationship with analytical categories focusing
on metaverse business models.
Official platform videos from TheSandbox, Meta Quest, and Roblox, as well as brand-led
metaverse projects like Gucci Town and Vans World 2.0, were examined to understand
how companies position their presence in the metaverse, structure monetization through
seasonal updates or collaborations, and communicate their vision to potential users. Ad-
ditionally, a wide range of walkthroughs, gameplay, and tutorial videos from streamers
and content creators were reviewed to assess how users engage with these platforms in
practice, particularly in terms of earning mechanisms, creator monetization strategies, and
in-game economic activities. Youtube channels such as PlaySandbox, The Social Guide,
and Lanaslifeee, among others, provided valuable perspectives on Roblox’s in-game econ-
omy, Decentraland’s virtual land system, and The Sandbox’s NFT-based monetization
models. For example, the analysis included observing how advanced players generate
income on Roblox through content creation, participation in branded events, and game
development, as well as how users in Decentraland navigate land ownership, NFT trading,
and token-based economies. Such videos not only provide an important source of infor-
mation and instruction to new users of metaverse platforms by guiding their first steps
and potentially shaping their further experience on these platforms, but they also serve
as an important means - for academic analysts (Bishop, 2023) - to understand how these
platforms as well as users practices are shaped by such external sources of information.
Beyond the platforms examined in this research, videos about other notable metaverse
platforms, such as VRChat, Somnium Space, Neos VR, and Spatial, were also explored
to gain a deeper understanding of the broader metaverse landscape. Channels such as
Somnium Space VR and The Virtual Reality Show offered insights into social VR interac-
50 2| Methodology
tions, digital ownership models, and immersive world-building, helping contextualize the
distinct characteristics of the platforms covered in this thesis.
Although these platforms are not the focus of this research, acquiring a general knowl-
edge of major metaverse ecosystems, and the similarities and differences between them
on a technical as well as business level - provided a more comprehensive perspective on
the field. To integrate broader perspectives, the study also briefly examined analyses
from BBC News, The Wall Street Journal, and The Economist, which provided critical
viewpoints on the sustainability of metaverse business models, scalability issues, and eco-
nomic viability. These varied video sources were analyzed through key themes, focusing on
user engagement and monetization strategies, platform accessibility, economic structures,
and comparative user experiences across different metaverse platforms. By combining
platform-driven messaging, real user interactions, and independent expert commentary,
this approach ensured a holistic understanding of metaverse engagement and monetiza-
tion, reinforcing findings from firsthand platform exploration.
2.1.5. Official Documentation
To validate observations and deepen understanding, official documents from the selected
platforms were also reviewed and analysed. Examples include Decentraland’s whitepaper,
Roblox’s developer documentation, and The Sandbox’s user guides. These resources pro-
vided critical insights into how platforms conceptualize and communicate the relationships
between platform owners, developers, creators, and users, as well as the revenue-sharing
models and contractual arrangements that underpin these ecosystems. The documents
were collected through official repositories, developer portals, and publicly available plat-
form guidelines. Again, these documents were then systematically coded using a qual-
itative content analysis approach, identifying recurring themes related to monetization
strategies, governance structures, and platform-user dynamics. Key categories such as
revenue distribution, business model plan, and user engagement were extracted and com-
pared across platforms to highlight patterns and divergences in business models. This
structured approach ensured that the findings were not only descriptive but also analyt-
ically grounded in the broader framework of digital platform economies. The analysis
of official documentation was particularly useful in uncovering the structural underpin-
nings of platform business models. For example, Roblox’s Developer Exchange (DevEx)
program revealed the intricate dynamics of revenue-sharing mechanisms, highlighting the
percentage of revenue retained by the platform versus what is paid to developers and cre-
ators. Similarly, Decentraland’s documentation shed light on the governance structures
facilitated by decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs), offering a distinct contrast
2| Methodology 51
to Roblox’s centralized approach.
2.1.6. Case Studies
Given the limited academic literature on metaverse-specific business models, a case study
approach was adopted to analyze specific examples of monetization and value creation.
As for the platform analysis, again a qualitative analysis was applied following a mixed-
methods approach (Poth, 2023), specifically tailored to online and virtual spaces and
practices (Kozinets, 2023);(Pink et al., 2015). While multiple platforms were explored
during the initial stages of the research, all case studies were ultimately selected from
Roblox, one of the largest, most popular, and most active metaverse platforms. This
decision was driven by several factors, which will be explained in detail in the following
chapters. First, Roblox offered a comprehensive environment for examining business
model opportunities by enabling the selection of three distinct experiences within the same
ecosystem. This approach facilitated an in-depth comparison of business models while
minimizing external variables such as platform-specific user behaviors or technological
limitations that could complicate cross-platform analyses. Given the limited academic
literature on metaverse-specific business models, a case study approach was adopted to
analyze specific examples of monetization and value creation. Three cases were chosen to
ensure a representative overview of the diversity in scope and objectives:
•Dress to Impress on Roblox: A user-generated game that gained viral popularity on
social media platforms such as TikTok, illustrating the role of user creativity and
social media in driving engagement and revenue.
•Blueberry Fashion on Roblox: A virtual fashion brand specializing in digital clothing
for avatars, showcasing the economic potential of virtual goods and the emergence
of digital fashion as a business model. This particular case is also interesting as
Blueberry produces digital clothing for various metaverse platforms, such as Second
Life and Zepeto.
•Barbie Dreamhouse on Roblox: A branded experience developed in collaboration
with Mattel, highlighting the role of partnerships in creating immersive brand-driven
content.
By focusing on a single platform, the research ensured consistency in evaluation, enabling
a clearer understanding of differences in revenue streams, creator contributions, and user
engagement strategies. Attempting to compare a Roblox experience, such as Dress to
Impress, with a Decentraland land parcel owned by a brand would have introduced am-
biguities and inconsistencies due to the vastly different contexts, user demographics, and
52 2| Methodology
monetization opportunities. Roblox’s unified ecosystem provided the necessary cohesion
for a thorough and comparative analysis of diverse use cases. Additionally, Roblox’s user-
friendly interface and vibrant ecosystem allowed for extensive interaction with the selected
case studies, ensuring that data collection was both feasible and comprehensive. This ac-
cessibility contrasted with platforms like Decentraland and The Sandbox, where technical
barriers and narrower user engagement posed challenges for similar comparative analy-
ses. Ultimately, Roblox’s extensive user base, varied experiences, and well-documented
developer ecosystem made it the ideal platform for the selected case studies.
2.1.7. Data Analysis
The data collected through platform analysis, gameplay observation, and document re-
view were synthesized to identify patterns and trends. A thematic analysis approach
(Przybylski, 2020) was employed to categorize findings under key themes, including plat-
form functionality, user behavior, monetization strategies, and the role of creators. Special
attention was paid to the interplay between platform owners, developers, creators, and
users, as well as the ways in which these interactions shape economic outcomes. Thematic
analysis involved identifying recurring motifs, such as the significance of user-generated
content in driving platform engagement or the reliance on tokenomics for decentralized
ecosystems. Cross-case comparisons further enriched the analysis, revealing commonali-
ties and divergences in how platforms operationalize their business models.
Scope and Limitations
While the methodology outlined above arguably provides a comprehensive view of meta-
verse business models, it is not without limitations. The reliance on a limited number of
platforms and case studies means that findings may not be universally applicable across
all metaverse environments. Additionally, the use of secondary data, such as gameplay
videos, introduces potential biases related to the creator’s perspective and expertise. How-
ever, given the breadth and popularity of these gameplay videos as well as their role in
shaping user practices on metaverse platforms, taken together these can nonetheless be
seen as representative of broader practices on these platforms.
Another limitation concerns the rapidly evolving nature of the metaverse itself. Technolo-
gies, platforms, and economic models are subject to constant change, which may render
some findings less applicable over time. Furthermore, the focus on four specific platforms
excludes insights from other potentially relevant environments, such as VRChat, Zepeto or
Axie Infinite. Despite these constraints, the triangulation of data across multiple methods
2| Methodology 53
and sources enhances the reliability and validity of the findings.
Conclusion
This methodology combines exploratory research, literature analysis, participant observa-
tion, and case study analysis to provide a detailed understanding of metaverse platforms
and their economic models. By integrating literature review, platform analysis, and case
studies, it establishes a solid foundation for addressing the research question: "How do
metaverse platforms drive the evolution of digital business models?" and following sub-
questions "What role does the creator economy play in this process? How do revenue
models in the metaverse differ from traditional Web 2.0 monetization strategies?" The
chosen methods ensure that the study captures both the theoretical underpinnings and
practical realities of the metaverse economy, offering valuable insights into its transfor-
mative potential.
55
3| Metaverse Platforms
The metaverse, as a digital ecosystem, comprises diverse platforms that shape how users
engage, interact, and create value within virtual spaces. Each platform brings its unique
technological frameworks, monetization strategies, and user experiences, contributing to
the broader metaverse economy. This chapter aims to provide an in-depth exploration
of four key platforms—Roblox, Decentraland, The Sandbox, and Horizon Worlds—to
illustrate the varying approaches these platforms adopt in fostering user engagement,
enabling creator economies, and monetizing their ecosystems.
The need for this in-depth analysis arises from the complexity and diversity of the meta-
verse ecosystem, which varies significantly across platforms. Each metaverse platform op-
erates with distinct technological infrastructures, governance models, and monetization
strategies. By examining these differences, this analysis uncovers how these platforms
innovate, engage users, and drive economic activity. Without this granular exploration,
the nuances that make each platform unique—and how they contribute to the broader
metaverse economy—might be overlooked. Furthermore, as with the rise of Web 2.0, the
creator economy plays a pivotal role in shaping the dynamics of metaverse platforms.
Platforms such as Roblox, Decentraland, The Sandbox, and Horizon Worlds vary signifi-
cantly in how they enable and support creators and monetize their activities. Analyzing
these dynamics helps to clarify the evolving role of user-generated content, creator mone-
tization, and platform-specific tools within the metaverse economy. This exploration also
highlights opportunities and challenges for creators across centralized and decentralized
ecosystems.
In addition to understanding individual platform dynamics, this chapter seeks to map
the key characteristics that define metaverse platforms. The metaverse -despite its name
suggesting a level of integration and coherence- is still very much a fragmented space, but
underlying patterns exist that connect platforms with shared characteristics. Identifying
these patterns—such as decentralized versus centralized models or VR-enabled versus
non-VR ecosystems—helps to systematize our understanding of what defines a metaverse
platform in the present. These classifications are also crucial for recognizing emerging
56 3| Metaverse Platforms
trends and indicating possible future developments.
Moreover, this chapter addresses existing literature gaps by offering a detailed compara-
tive analysis of individual platforms. While academic research often discusses metaverse
concepts broadly, detailed studies on individual platforms and their economic frameworks
remain scarce. By filling these gaps, the analysis presented here provides insights into the
interplay between platform design and economic outcomes, contributing to both academic
and practical understandings of the metaverse. Another critical objective is to inform fu-
ture business models. By analyzing platforms in detail, the study provides a framework
for understanding how metaverse environments foster innovation in business models, such
as tokenomics, virtual retail, and branded experiences. This understanding is essential for
businesses and researchers seeking to understand, navigate and leverage the metaverse.
Finally, this chapter lays the groundwork for the subsequent analysis of case studies.
The platform-specific contexts explored here provide foundational knowledge that links
directly to the next chapter’s case studies. Understanding these contexts allows for a
deeper exploration of how individual initiatives —such as Barbie Dreamhouse, Dress to
Impress, and Blueberry Fashion—function within these ecosystems.
The platforms chosen for analysis represent a range of different technological infrastruc-
tures, governance models, and user experiences. Roblox, a centralized platform with mil-
lions of daily active users, exemplifies an accessible, gaming-focused ecosystem enriched
by user-generated content and brand partnerships. Decentraland and The Sandbox, by
contrast, are decentralized platforms built on blockchain technology, emphasizing virtual
land ownership, token-based economies, and NFT-driven marketplaces. Finally, Horizon
Worlds, developed by Meta, offers a VR-centric experience, showcasing the potential and
challenges of integrating immersive technologies into the metaverse. By examining these
platforms, the chapter highlights the diversity of the metaverse landscape and the key
factors shaping its evolution.
This chapter is structured to provide a detailed examination of each platform through
dedicated subsections. For each platform, critical aspects such as access and user in-
terface, avatar customization, required technologies, gameplay mechanics, monetization
strategies, user-generated content, and platform economies will be discussed. As described
in the previous chapter, these analyses are based on direct interactions with the platforms,
supplemented with extensive observations of gameplay and official documentation. The
objective is to offer a holistic understanding of how these platforms function and how they
enable value creation and revenue generation.
Following the individual platform analyses, the chapter will synthesize insights to identify
3| Metaverse Platforms 57
the fundamental characteristics that define metaverse platforms. These characteristics
include distinctions such as centralized versus decentralized governance, open versus closed
ecosystems, and VR-enabled versus non-VR platforms. A classification table will then
present a broader mapping of 30 major metaverse platforms based on these characteristics,
revealing patterns and clusters that reflect underlying similarities and differences (see
Appendix 1).
This comprehensive approach not only illuminates the unique attributes of each platform
but also provides the foundation for understanding how these characteristics influence the
economic opportunities and challenges within the metaverse, which are themes that will
follow later on in this thesis. By identifying these defining traits, the chapter sets the
stage for subsequent discussions on the broader implications for business models and the
creator economy.
3.1. The Platform’s Analysis
To conduct a thorough investigation into the business models of metaverse platforms, a
systematic and multi-step research process was adopted. This approach -as described in
the methodology section-combined online research, direct engagement with platforms, and
observation of third-party gameplay to overcome gaps in available literature and gain a
comprehensive understanding of the platforms’ dynamics. Below is a detailed explanation
of the research process and the rationale behind the selection of the platforms studied.
Initial Online Research
The first step involved gathering preliminary information about various metaverse plat-
forms from reliable online sources. The objective at this stage was to understand the
basic features of these platforms, including their functionalities, methods of access, user
demographics, available activities, user bases, and origins. Platforms such as Roblox,
Decentraland, The Sandbox, and Fortnite had relatively abundant information available,
thanks to their popularity and media presence. However, for most other platforms, find-
ing reliable and detailed information proved to be challenging, particularly for emerging
or niche platforms.
Despite these efforts, the information collected online only addressed superficial aspects of
the platforms, such as their creation dates, currencies, access methods, and whether they
were centralized or decentralized. Many critical questions about platform functionality,
monetization strategies, and user engagement remained unanswered. Recognizing these
gaps, I concluded that literature research alone was insufficient and decided to directly
58 3| Metaverse Platforms
engage with the platforms through participant observation to gain deeper insights.
Direct Engagement with Platforms
The second step involved downloading the access software and exploring the platforms
firsthand. Roblox was the first platform to be explored, as it is currently the largest
and most active metaverse platform. Being available on the Apple App Store and free
to play, Roblox offered a straightforward onboarding experience. Next, The Sandbox
was downloaded, which required a slightly more involved process for installation and ac-
count creation. Decentraland posed additional challenges due to technical issues with its
browser-based version, which often lagged and failed to load properly. After several frus-
trating attempts, the platform software was successfully downloaded, which also required
setting up a crypto wallet—a step necessary for both Decentraland and The Sandbox
as part of their blockchain integration. Lastly, Horizon Worlds was explored. Since I
do not own a VR headset, I used the limited online version of the platform. While the
experience was relatively easy to access, its functionality was highly restricted without
VR equipment, and the platform itself appeared underdeveloped and underpopulated in
comparison to the others. For this reason, I decided against further in depth exploration
using VR hardware.
Across all platforms, I created accounts and spent significant time navigating their en-
vironments, interacting with features, and engaging in activities..This hands-on explo-
ration was invaluable for understanding platform-specific dynamics, though certain barri-
ers—such as technical difficulties and limited gaming expertise—restricted the ability to
address all questions comprehensively.
Supplementary Research via Gameplay Observation
To address the limitations encountered during direct engagement, the third step involved
observing gameplay videos and streams created by skilled gamers and expert commen-
tators. These videos provided raw, detailed, and relatively unbiased insights into the
platforms. Content creators often demonstrate advanced platform mechanics, including
monetization strategies, in-game economies, and user behaviors that would otherwise be
inaccessible to a novice player like myself. Over 50 hours of streams were analyzed, featur-
ing diverse creators, platforms, and games. For example, gameplay videos of The Sandbox
demonstrated how users could earn and utilize SAND—the platform’s cryptocurrency—to
participate in its economy. These insights would not have been possible without the sup-
port of streaming videos, as I did not have the abilities to play the experience at such a
3| Metaverse Platforms 59
high level to be able to earn any platform-money. Similarly, streams of Roblox showcased
the monetization mechanisms within specific experiences, such as user-generated games
and branded content. Observing these videos significantly deepened my understanding
of the platforms’ inner workings and helped clarify mechanisms that had initially seemed
opaque during my personal exploration.
Returning to Platforms for Validation
Insights gathered from gameplay observation were subsequently tested through additional
participation in the platforms activities. This iterative process of observation, engagement
and analysis allowed for the validation of information and the resolution of lingering un-
certainties. For example, I revisited Roblox to examine its monetization mechanics more
closely, exploring both branded experiences and popular user-generated games. Similarly,
I navigated Decentraland with a better understanding of its NFT-driven economy, fo-
cusing on virtual land ownership and marketplace transactions. This fourth step proved
essential for achieving a comprehensive understanding of the platforms.
Justification for Platform Selection
The platforms selected for this study—Roblox, Decentraland, The Sandbox, and Horizon
Worlds—were chosen for their distinct characteristics, representativeness, and relevance
to the research objectives.
Roblox was selected as the most prominent and accessible platform, boasting millions
of daily active users and a vast library of user-generated content. Its centralized model,
ease of access, and relatively abundant secondary literature made it an ideal starting
point. Decentraland, on the other hand, was chosen for its decentralized governance and
blockchain-based infrastructure, providing a valuable contrast to Roblox. Its emphasis
on virtual retail and land ownership offered insights into token-based economies, which
are a prominent feature of a significant segment of metaverse platforms in general. The
Sandbox was included due to its significant endorsement by celebrities and brands, as
well as its focus on tokenomics and user-generated assets. Lastly, Horizon Worlds was
explored to understand the potential and challenges of VR-centric platforms, particularly
for a leading metaverse company, namely Meta, despite its current limitations in terms
of development and user engagement.
An important consideration in platform selection was the desire to present a diversified
overview of metaverse platforms. Roblox served as a representative of closed, centralized,
and free-to-play ecosystems, while Decentraland and The Sandbox provided examples of
60 3| Metaverse Platforms
decentralized, open, and blockchain-based platforms. This diversity allowed for a more
comprehensive exploration of the varying economic models, technological frameworks,
and user engagement strategies within the metaverse. Attempting to analyze platforms
that shared too few similarities, such as Roblox and Decentraland, would have introduced
challenges in making meaningful comparisons. The inclusion of Horizon Worlds added a
VR-centric perspective, despite its current developmental limitations.
Limitations and Scope
Despite the comprehensive nature of this research process, certain limitations remain.
The analysis is confined to four platforms, and even within these, due to their complexity
and evolving nature, not all experiences and features could be explored. Furthermore,
the reliance on gameplay streams introduces potential biases based on the perspectives
and expertise of the content creators. Nevertheless, by combining direct engagement,
supplementary observation, and iterative exploration, this methodology provides a robust
foundation for developing an initial understanding of the business models and creator
economies within the metaverse.
3.2. Roblox
Roblox serves as the first platform explored in this study, given its prominence as one of the
most widely recognized and utilized metaverse platforms. Launched in 2006, Roblox has
grown into a global phenomenon, boasting millions of daily active users and an extensive
catalog of user-generated games and experiences. Its centralized structure, free-to-play
model, and accessibility across devices make it one of the most inclusive and user-friendly
platforms in the metaverse landscape (Au, 2023).
Analyzing Roblox proved to be the most straightforward among the selected platforms
due to the wealth of information readily available. As a well-established platform, Roblox
has been the subject of numerous academic studies, industry reports, and media cover-
age, providing valuable insights into its operations, business model, and creator ecosys-
tem. Additionally, the platform’s robust documentation and accessible user base offered
clear pathways for both direct exploration and supplementary research through gameplay
observation. These factors collectively positioned Roblox as an ideal starting point for
understanding metaverse platforms and their economic frameworks.
3| Metaverse Platforms 61
3.2.1. Background and Vision
Roblox is a 3D online platform where users can create, share, and engage with various
games and experiences within a user-driven virtual world. Originally launched in 2006 by
co-founders David Baszucki and Erik Cassel as a platform to allow users to develop and
play games, Roblox has since expanded into a vast metaverse. It provides a collaborative
and creative environment where users can build unique worlds, create custom games, and
monetize their creations through in-game purchases. Featuring its own virtual currency,
Robux, Roblox operates as an expansive digital ecosystem with millions - approximately
40 millions, according to Matthew Ball (Ball, 2022) and James Au (Au, 2023)- of user-
generated games and experiences. The platform boasts around 80 million daily active
users, reflecting its role as one of the largest user-generated content platforms globally
(Statista, 2024), (Singh, 2025). Headquartered in San Mateo, California, Roblox Corpo-
ration’s vision is centered on empowering creators and fostering social interaction within
a safe, family-friendly environment. As they state on their website:
“Our North Star: New opportunities for human connection, communication, togetherness,
and learning are emerging as digital technologies become more capable of mirroring and
augmenting the physical world. Roblox is dedicated to developing an immersive shared-
experiences platform that enhances and deepens positive human connection. Our vision
is to reimagine the way people come together, Our mission is to connect a billion people
every day with optimism and civility” (Roblox, d)
3.2.2. History
Roblox’s development began in 2004 when co-founders David Baszucki and Erik Cassel
created an early version called DynaBlocks, later rebranded as Roblox in 2005 (Roblox, a).
Officially launched on September 1, 2006, Roblox prioritized user safety from the outset,
implementing COPPA-compliant safe chat in 2007 to restrict younger users’ interactions
to pre-selected messages. The platform introduced its first premium subscription, Builders
Club, that year, eventually rebranded as Roblox Premium in 2019. A crucial development
was the 2013 launch of the Developer Exchange (DevEx) program, allowing creators to
convert their virtual currency earnings, Robux, into real-world income, thus establishing
a monetizable ecosystem that incentivized user-generated content (Roblox, c).
From 2014 to 2017, Roblox expanded its technological offerings and platform compatibil-
ity. In 2014, an Android version became available, and in 2015, Roblox was introduced
on Xbox One with a curated selection of games. The introduction of Smooth Terrain that
same year enabled significant graphical improvements, elevating the platform’s visual fi-
62 3| Metaverse Platforms
delity beyond its initial block-based aesthetics. Smooth Terrain is a feature in Roblox
Studio that provides more realistic, detailed, and visually appealing landscapes compared
to the platform’s original blocky terrain. It allows creators to work with soft, round ed,
and sculptable surfaces, giving a more natural look to landscapes with hills, valleys, water
bodies, and other environmental details. In 2016, Roblox VR was released on Oculus Rift,
a VR headset produced by Facebook (now Meta), enabling users to explore the platform
in virtual reality, and a Windows 10-compatible standalone launcher provided greater
stability and accessibility for PC users.
In 2018 the platform retired its guest access feature, making account creation mandatory
for all users. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Roblox launched “Party Place” in
2020, providing users with a virtual venue for social engagement (Newsround, 2020). In
2022, Roblox introduced an age rating system, signaling a shift toward inclusivity of older
demographics. This system allowed games with mature themes to be available to users
aged 13 and older, with additional age-restricted content approved in 2023 for players
aged 17 and up, thus broadening the platform’s appeal among young adults. Roblox
also expanded onto Meta Quest devices with a public beta version, quickly amassing
over one million downloads, and announced support for PlayStation. During this period,
Roblox acquired Speechly, a voice moderation company, to bolster user safety through
AI-enhanced community standards (Mandrill, 2023).
In 2024, Roblox further streamlined content creation with the addition of generative AI
tools within Roblox Studio. These tools included an automatic avatar customization fea-
ture and a text-based texture generator, enhancing the creative process for developers and
supporting a higher level of game development on the platform. This period of innovation
underscores Roblox’s evolution from a basic game-building platform into an elaborate,
user-driven digital ecosystem, marked by continuous technological advancement, strate-
gic expansion, and a commitment to user safety and engagement across global markets
(Vuteva, 2023).
3.2.3. Platform Structure and User Accessibility
Roblox is a centralized platform where all content, servers, and user data are managed
by Roblox Corporation. It operates as a closed system with exclusive ownership of the
platform, meaning that while users create content, Roblox retains control over its infras-
tructure and digital environment. Built around user-generated content (UGC), Roblox
enables users to design and share their own experiences, from games to interactive worlds,
using Roblox Studio, its development toolkit, which allows users to build highly customiz-
3| Metaverse Platforms 63
able worlds with unique mechanics, visuals, and gameplay styles. The platform is free-
to-play, with monetization primarily through virtual purchases made with its in-game
currency, Robux. Roblox games are accessible across various devices (PC, mobile phones,
consoles) without the need for a VR headset, enhancing accessibility and ease of use for
a wide audience.
The Roblox platform operates as a network of individual games and experiences created by
users. The homepage of Roblox looks like an online games hub, similar to popular games
websites like CrazyGames.com, and users can easily scroll through the different games and
select the one they want to open and play. Each game functions independently, hosted
on servers managed by Roblox, allowing seamless player transitions between experiences.
Navigation within the platform is facilitated through an interactive home interface where
users can browse featured games, recommended content, and trending experiences. Roblox
games are varied and range across genres, catering to diverse interests, from adventure
and role-playing to simulations and educational games. The degree of continuity between
different games is up the single developer: some games maintain the block-esque graphic
style, typical of Roblox, let the user use their Roblox general avatar, buy specific acces-
sories for it and let them use them also outside the game, whereas other games might
have a completely different graphic and have the user pick game-specific avatars.
Figure 3.1: Roblox’s homepage
To access Roblox, users need to visit the official Roblox website or download the app on
mobile or desktop, which is very easy, as Roblox is available on the App Store for Apple
devices and on Google Play for other devices. After creating an account, users get their
64 3| Metaverse Platforms
avatar. They can customize their avatars, choosing from various clothing, accessories,
and items available for purchase with Robux or as free options. Once their avatars are
set, users are directed to the main Roblox interface, where they can browse a vast array
of user-generated games and experiences. New users can explore “Welcome to Roblox”
tutorials and interactive guides to familiarize themselves with the platform’s features,
including controls, building tools, and social functions.
Figure 3.2: Roblox’s avatar menu
3.2.4. Core Experiences and Activities
Roblox refers to each game on its platform as an "experience." This shift in terminology
was made around 2021 as part of Roblox’s broader focus on creating immersive social and
interactive environments beyond traditional gaming. The term "experience" is meant to
encompass the variety of virtual worlds and activities available on the platform, reflecting
that these spaces can offer more than just gameplay—they can also be social spaces,
events, or creative environments that users explore and interact with in different ways
(Roblox, 2023). Once in Roblox, users have a wealth of experiences to explore, from
multiplayer games and social hangouts to themed events and educational experiences.
Popular games such as Adopt Me!, Brookhaven, and Bloxburg offer immersive worlds
where users can adopt pets, engage in roleplay, or build virtual homes. Roblox also
regularly hosts events and collaborations with brands and influencers, creating limited-
time experiences.
Additionally, Roblox provides users with Roblox Studio. Roblox Studio is the develop-
ment environment within Roblox, offering users a comprehensive suite of tools for creating,
3| Metaverse Platforms 65
testing, and publishing games and experiences. Its intuitive interface caters to users with
varying skill levels, from beginners to experienced developers, and supports programming
through the Lua scripting language. Roblox Studio’s features include real-time collabo-
ration, a marketplace for assets and scripts, and recently added generative AI tools for
automating avatar customization and texture generation. Roblox Studio not only enables
individual creators but also drives the platform’s creator-led economy by allowing users
to earn Robux through in-game sales, contributing to Roblox’s growth as a global hub for
user-generated content (RobloxStudio, 2025). Creators can use these tools to create their
own experiences or also for modeling accessories for avatars such as clothing, objects and
body parts like heads and hair (ZyberVR, 2025).
3.2.5. Monetization and Virtual Economy
Robux is Roblox’s virtual currency, and it drives its in-platform economy. While not being
a cryptocurrency, it is used for purchasing items, accessories, game passes, and access to
premium content within the platform. Robux can be purchased with real-world money,
earned through game development, or received as a part of Roblox Premium membership.
Roblox Premium also allows users to earn a monthly Robux stipend and access exclusive
experiences, games and discounts, and the possibility to trade. Roblox Premium has 3
different monthly subscription options, on three different price ranges: 5.99, 11.99 or 23.99
dollars, which give respectively 450, 1000 and 2200 Robuxes per month.
Developers who create popular games can generate revenue from in-game purchases, ad-
vertisements, microtransactions and partnerships, fostering a thriving virtual economy
within Roblox. Players can earn Robux by creating and selling accessories for avatars on
the marketplace: transactions are subject to fees, which differ based on several aspects
of the transaction in question. Additionally, developers can exchange Robux for real cur-
rency through the Developer Exchange (DevEx) program, which is a program that allows
Roblox creators to exchange their Earned Robux for real money. This program incen-
tivizes content creation and enhances the virtual economy but, as stated by Roblox in
their DevEx official documentation: "While any creator can use Roblox Studio to learn to
code, create experiences or items to enjoy with their friends, and even earn some Robux,
only successful creators will be able to meet the high requirements (described below) to earn
money through DevEx. Reaching this level of success typically requires a lot of time, effort,
skill, and strategy. Even then, there is no guarantee of earning money". (Roblox, c). The
procedure to apply and to be selected for this program is quite long and complicated, and
the requirements asked by the platform are very stringent.
66 3| Metaverse Platforms
Although users do not have a guaranteed opportunity to earn money on Roblox, many
still invest significant time in creating content, ranging from full experiences to avatar
accessories. To regulate these exchanges, Roblox has established clear guidelines and a
structured fee system for creators who design and sell virtual items—such as clothing, ob-
jects, hairstyles, and even body parts—on the platform’s marketplace. The documentation
outlines various fees, commissions, and revenue-sharing models, ensuring transparency in
the monetization process.
First, creators must pay an upload fee for each item they submit, with the amount varying
depending on the type of asset—for instance, the fee for uploading a t-shirt differs from
that of a hat. Once submitted, the item undergoes a moderation commission, and upon
approval, it becomes available for sale. Revenue distribution then depends on where
the item is sold. If purchased directly from the Roblox marketplace, earnings are divided
between Roblox and the creator. However, if the sale occurs within an in-game experience,
a portion of the revenue is also allocated to the experience’s creator or owner. Additionally,
commission rates vary based on the nature of the item. For 3D assets, the percentage
retained by Roblox is higher, resulting in a lower payout for the creator compared to
classic clothing—although the latter has now been removed from the developer toolkit.
Furthermore, Premium users have access to a reselling feature, applicable only to limited-
edition items. In such cases, Roblox enforces strict commission regulations, ensuring
that the original creator receives a percentage of the resale price -which, as of now, is
10percent of the original creator commission. This system allows for the resell of limited-
edition assets, whereas standard accessories remain available indefinitely. Lastly, while
creators have the freedom to set prices for their items, they must adhere to a predefined
range, which currently spans from 0 to 99,999,999 Robux (Roblox, b).
Figure 3.3: Distribution of Roblox’s commissions
Having analyzed the revenue model associated with the sale of virtual assets on Roblox,
including the costs incurred, the commission structures, and the potential earnings for cre-
3| Metaverse Platforms 67
ators, it is now possible to approximate the economic prospects for individuals engaged in
asset creation. The structured procedures governing content submission, approval, pric-
ing, and resale have provided a clear understanding of the steps creators must follow to
monetize their work. However, the revenue mechanisms for experience creators present
additional complexities that require further investigation. Unlike asset creators, whose
earnings depend primarily on item sales and marketplace transactions, experience devel-
opers operate within a more intricate economic framework involving engagement-based
monetization, in-game transactions, and potential brand collaborations. Due to these
complexities, a deeper analysis is necessary to fully comprehend the financial dynamics
and revenue streams available to these creators. This will be explored in the next chap-
ter, where specific case studies will be examined to provide concrete insights into how
experience creators generate income within the Roblox ecosystem.
3.2.6. User Demographic and Community Guidelines
Roblox has a diverse user base, with a significant portion of its audience made up of
younger users aged 9–15 (Au, 2023). This demographic drives much of Roblox’s com-
munity culture, though the platform has broadened its appeal to older age groups by
introducing age-specific content ratings, allowing more mature themes for users aged 13
and up. Unlike many platforms that focus solely on gaming, Roblox attracts casual
players interested in social interaction, creative expression, and non-gaming experiences,
allowing users to participate in varied activities like role-playing and virtual events. This
flexibility supports a wide user base, from dedicated gamers to those simply looking for
casual, social experiences (Roblox, 2024).
Figure 3.4: Distribution of Roblox’s audience by age. (Statista, 2024)
68 3| Metaverse Platforms
Roblox’s centralized governance model, managed by Roblox Corporation, maintains strict
control over platform policies, content guidelines, and infrastructure, with no decentralized
community governance. To ensure safety for its younger audience, Roblox enforces strict
moderation policies, including automatic and human review of content, chat filters, and
age-appropriate restrictions. Community guidelines prohibit inappropriate content, and
users under 13 are provided with additional privacy protections. The platform’s "safe
chat" system and parental controls help limit younger users’ interactions, maintaining a
safer environment for minors while encouraging creative exploration and social interaction
in a controlled space.
3.3. The Sandbox
3.3.1. Background and Vision
The Sandbox is a 3D blockchain-based metaverse platform where users can create, explore,
and monetize virtual worlds. It was originally launched as a 2D mobile game in 2012 by
Pixowl, a game development studio known for its focus on user-generated content (UGC)
and sandbox-style gaming experiences. In 2018, Pixowl was acquired by Animoca Brands,
a leading company in blockchain gaming and digital property rights, which played a key
role in transforming The Sandbox into a decentralized metaverse. Reimagined as a 3D
platform and officially launched in 2021, The Sandbox is now powered by the Ethereum
and Polygon blockchains. Within this ecosystem, users can build unique virtual worlds,
develop interactive games, and trade digital assets with real-world value through the
platform’s native cryptocurrency, SAND.
The currency enables in-game purchases and transactions, supporting a user-driven econ-
omy within this expansive digital ecosystem. The Sandbox’s open environment attracts
a diverse user base, including players, creators, and brands, drawn to its decentralized
structure and creative possibilities. With over 27,000 landowners in its alpha phase,
50,000-100,000 monthly active users and 5.7 millions account created, Animoca Brands
envisions The Sandbox as a community-governed digital space with a user-focused econ-
omy (Takahashi, 2024), (Crichton-Stuart, 2024). Headquartered in Hong Kong, Animoca
emphasizes community participation, aiming to encourage users to shape the platform’s
future through a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO), allowing citizens to vote
on key decisions that influence The Sandbox ecosystem.
Animoca Brands’ vision for The Sandbox, as outlined in its 2020 whitepaper, focuses on
building a “digital nation” where players, creators, and owners collaboratively shape the
3| Metaverse Platforms 69
platform. The DAO represents a significant step toward this vision, fostering a democratic
community where governance is in the hands of its users. As described in The Sandbox’s
mission statement: “Shaping the Sandbox: We’ve imagined a world where our vibrant
community of players, creators, owners, and brands shape the future of the platform with
us. The DAO signifies the actualization of this goal.” (The Sandbox DAO, 2024b)
3.3.2. History
The Sandbox was founded as Pixowl in May 2011 by game designer Adrien Duermaël
and entrepreneurs Arthur Madrid and Sébastien Borget.The year before, with his wife
Laurel Duermaël, a comic book illustrator, Duermaël had created Doodle Grub, a simple
game that utilizes accelerometers in smartphones to allow the user to direct a snake-like
character in the gameplay by tilting the phone. Pixowl was founded to develop new games
and manage updates for Doodle Grub. In 2012, the company released The Sandbox, a
world building mobile video game in which the user can create a "universe" that fits
on a single screen using "elements" such as trees, fire, water and mud to achieve the
increasingly complex objectives presented as levels in the gameplay (Davison, 2012). In
November 2014, the company released The Sandbox EDU, a new version of the game
with several changes to make the game appropriate to children and educational. In June
2016, the company released The Sandbox Evolution, another sequel to the 2012 game.
The new gameplay featured more than 160 elements that can be used to create a universe,
including "the ability to create electrical machines that utilize levers, batteries, sensors
and more". In August 2018, Animoca Brands acquired Pixowl for 4.875 million in cash
and stock (Takahashi, 2018).
Now a subsidiary of Animoca Brands, Pixowl changed its incorporation name to TSB
Gaming LTD and began doing business simply under the name The Sandbox as it was
preparing to release a sequel to The Sandbox in a 3D game format with blockchain in-
tegration (The Sandbox, 2020). In 2020 Virtual real estate on the platform began to be
sold as property in plots representing no smaller than 9,216 square metres (2.28 acres)
with air space up to 128 metres (420 ft). In February 2021, a pair of sales of plots of
land in The Sandbox were reported to have been valued at a total of 2.8 million (Putzier,
2021). As of November 2021, there were more than 12,000 digital land owners on The
Sandbox,including significant parcels of land were owned by musical artists Snoop Dogg,
and Deadmau5, investors Cameron Winklevoss, Tyler Winklevoss,and Adrian Cheng,as
well as companies like video game developer Atari and cryptocurrency exchange Binance.
In November 2021, the company also completed a Series B funding round in which it
raised 93 million dollars (Kolodny, 2012). Its investors included SoftBank Group, LG
70 3| Metaverse Platforms
Technology Ventures, Samsung Next, and Liberty City Ventures. In December 2021, The
Sandbox was the site of the biggest virtual land sale reported to date with a 4.3 million
dollars deal between Atari SA and Republic Realm, a virtual real estate developer (Hu,
2021). The platform launched for alpha stage testing in November 29 to December 20,
2021, attracting more than 200,000 users. In 2022, the company announced a partnership
with celebrities such as Paris Hilton’s, and Gucci opened the "Gucci Vault Land" on the
platform (Adweek Staff, 2022), (Schulz, 2022). That year, a report indicated that The
Sandbox had around 500 daily active users interacting with the platform’s blockchain.
Animoca Brand’s founder, Sat Yiu said that this number was not representative of en-
gagement, as the Sandbox claimed to have around 200,000 monthly active users at that
time (Miller, 2022).
3.3.3. Platform Structure and User Accessibility
The Sandbox is built on a decentralized infrastructure that applies blockchain technology
to enable open ownership of virtual assets, such as land and in-game items, through non-
fungible tokens (NFTs). This allows players to have true ownership of their creations,
offering user-generated content (UGC) tools for building games, environments, and assets.
While Ethereum is the primary network for its main assets, such as the SAND token and
LAND parcels, The Sandbox has also integrated Polygon, a layer-2 solution on Ethereum.
Polygon allows for lower-cost and faster transactions, which enhances user experience for
in-game actions, asset trading, and interactions on the platform, while still linking to
the Ethereum blockchain for security and decentralized asset ownership. This hybrid
approach combines Ethereum’s robustness with Polygon’s efficiency. It operates both on
a free-to-play model and tokenomics model, by using its native cryptocurrency, SAND,
to power the economy, reward creators, and facilitate transactions (The Sandbox, 2024d).
The platform is accessible without the need for a VR headset, but it does support VR for
those who want a more immersive experience. Players can use a VR headset to explore
and interact with the virtual world in a more physical way, while still being fully playable
on traditional PCs.
The Sandbox platform operates as a vast, finite three-dimensional space divided into
uniformly-sized plots known as “LAND.” The Sandbox territory consists of 166,464 LAND
plots, each measuring 3072x3072x4096 voxels (three-dimensional pixels), equivalent to
96x96x128 meters. Of these, 74 percent is intended for users, 16 percent is given to
partners and creators, and 10 percent is held by the company. Each LAND plot func-
tions as a building block of this metaverse platform, with users or partner organizations
having the flexibility to purchase one or multiple plots, depending on the desired scale
3| Metaverse Platforms 71
of their virtual experiences. Ownership of LAND unlocks the potential for construction
and design, enabling developers to create richly detailed environments tailored to various
interactive experiences. These range from gaming quests and social spaces to virtual con-
certs, providing a robust framework for diverse, immersive engagements (The Sandbox
Map, 2024).
Navigating The Sandbox is facilitated through an interactive map that reveals the entire
platform’s layout, showing all LAND plots and their current status. The map indicates
which plots are occupied with active experiences, which are available for purchase, and
which are privately owned yet currently undeveloped. Users can easily identify and ex-
plore experiences on the map, while also locating plots available for new developments.
Additionally, The Sandbox organizes its LAND into themed districts, where groups of
adjacent plots share similar motifs or overarching concepts. For example, the fashion
district hosts GucciTown and Adidas virtual realm, while the "adrenaline district" fea-
tures high-intensity experiences, including The Walking Dead encounter and an Attack
on Titan-inspired gameplay. This district-based structure fosters a cohesive and navi-
gable landscape, making The Sandbox not only a platform for individual creativity but
also a community-driven environment where related content is accessible and thematically
aligned. (The Sandbox Map, 2024).
Figure 3.5: Interactive Map of TheSandbox
To enter The Sandbox the first step is to visit the official The Sandbox website and select
“Sign Up” to create an account. This process requires linking a compatible cryptocur-
rency wallet, such as MetaMask or WalletConnect, which serves as a digital ID for secure
logins, access to in-game purchases, and storage of digital assets and NFTs (non-fungible
72 3| Metaverse Platforms
tokens). For those without a cryptocurrency wallet, The Sandbox facilitates setup di-
rectly through its platform, creating one for free. Following wallet setup the user will
proceed to avatar customization. The Sandbox provides an avatar creation tool to define
appearance attributes, including clothing, accessories, and physical features. Basic op-
tions for customization are available at no cost, while premium elements may be acquired
through the in-game currency, SAND. This personalized avatar serves as your virtual
identity within The Sandbox’s digital environment. Then, users will have to go through
a short interactive guide, where various characters explain basic commands, moves and
provide instructions on how to move in the environment, interact with others, obtain
NFTs, access the personal inventory and fight in games that involve such types of play.
Upon completion of the onboarding guide, users are transported to a central hub featuring
various portals that lead to distinct “try-on” experiences designed to familiarize newcom-
ers with the platform. These introductory experiences include quests such as those based
on The Little Prince and The Smurfs: Potion Land. Within the hub, users encounter
non-playable characters (NPCs) representing key partners of The Sandbox, including no-
table figures such as Snoop Dogg and iconic characters from games produced by Ubisoft.
Additionally, users have the opportunity to collect complimentary NFTs, which include
items such as a combat helmet and armor.
3.3.4. Core Experiences and Activities
Once in the platform, the user can explore various “seasons” within The Sandbox. These
seasons are time-limited events or content updates, often requiring specific passes to ac-
cess. When entering during an active season, the user can take part in seasonal content,
such as quests, social events, and games created by other users or partners. The sand-
box is currently in its fourth season, which started on October 9th of 2024 and lasts
approximately 10 weeks. If no season is currently open, access may still be grated for
basic features or to prepare for the next season. New users are encouraged to familiarize
themselves with The Sandbox ecosystem through these initial interactions.Then you are
ready to explore and hunt for gaming experiences created by partners or the company
itself.
The most active users can also decide to:
•Buy land (LAND): Each LAND purchased is certified by an NFT (ERC-721 stan-
dard). The owner can build structures and experiences, rent or sell the parcel.
•Create objects (ASSET): Using the internal software VoxEdit, you can create ob-
jects, buildings, and clothing to use or sell on the company’s marketplace. Each
3| Metaverse Platforms 73
asset is automatically registered on the blockchain and becomes an NFT (ERC-
1155 standard).
•Develop gaming experiences (GAME): With the internal Game Maker tool, users can
create games and other experiences to host on their land or sell on the marketplace.
The GAMES are also minted on the blockchain and take the form of NFTs (ERC-
1155).
The Sandbox uses ERC-721 for LAND, as it ensures each parcel is a unique, non-fungible
asset, while ERC-1155 is used for ASSETS and GAMES, allowing for both unique and
semi-fungible items. Unlike ERC-721, ERC-1155 enables batch transfers, reducing trans-
action costs and making it more efficient for in-game items that may have multiple copies.
VoxEdit is the voxel software provided by The Sandbox, designed to facilitate the cre-
ation of 3D voxel-based assets for use within the platform. This software allows users
to model, animate, and customize various elements, such as characters, structures, and
interactive objects. (The Sandbox, 2024b). With an accessible interface, VoxEdit enables
both new and experienced users to engage in asset creation. It offers a range of tools
for manipulating individual voxels, applying textures, and adding colors to enhance the
visual representation of assets. Moreover, the animation features permit users to intro-
duce dynamic movements to their creations, which can be critical for developing engaging
interactive experiences.
Figure 3.6: Gucci Vault experience on TheSandbox
Source: PlaySandbox on Youtube.
In The Sandbox, experiences are designed to be permanent fixtures on the LAND plots
where they are created. Once developers build an experience—such as a game, virtual
concert, or interactive environment—it remains accessible to users as long as the LAND is
74 3| Metaverse Platforms
owned and the experience is maintained by its creator. To move between the experiences,
users can click on the map or walk freely between adjacent LAND plots and explore
different worlds, if the transitions are designed to be open by the LAND owners. This
means that if two LAND are next to each other, users can navigate seamlessly between
the two as long as there are no barriers set by the creators. Otherwise, users can transition
between experiences by utilizing the portals located within the central hub. These portals
act as gateways, allowing individuals to move from one experience to another with ease.
Additionally, in-game navigation tools, such as maps and directional prompts, assist users
in discovering and exploring various activities, enhancing the overall fluidity of the user
experience within the platform. Through this approach, The Sandbox aims to cultivate a
versatile and user-driven digital ecosystem within the metaverse. However, if an experi-
ence is set to be exclusive or gated in some way—such as requiring a special ticket, access
key, or fulfilling certain conditions—then users may encounter limitations. In general,
though, the framework of The Sandbox encourages exploration and interaction between
experiences on adjacent LAND, fostering a rich and interconnected metaverse (The Sand-
box, 2024c).
The Sandbox has formed partnerships with a diverse array of high-profile brands, celebri-
ties, and entertainment entities, helping to position the platform as a relatively vibrant
and engaging virtual world with wide appeal. Collaborations with popular figures like
Snoop Dogg and Paris Hilton bring a celebrity presence to The Sandbox, allowing such
public figures to create custom virtual experiences that reflect their unique personalities
and brand identities.
Figure 3.7: Map of The Sandbox partners
For example, Snoop Dogg’s involvement includes an exclusive "Snoopverse" where users
can experience virtual events and purchase themed NFTs, adding a unique entertainment
layer to the platform. Similarly, partnerships with iconic brands like Atari, The Smurfs,
and Care Bears provide nostalgic and widely recognized content, allowing fans to interact
3| Metaverse Platforms 75
with familiar IPs in an interactive, gamified environment. “IPs” refers to well-known
brands, franchises, or characters that are legally owned by companies and can be licensed
or integrated into different forms of media. In the context of The Sandbox, IPs like The
Smurfs, Care Bears, and Atari are popular franchises that have been incorporated into
the platform, allowing users to interact with recognizable content in a virtual, gamified
environment. These partnerships not only attract fans of these brands but also diversify
the experiences available within The Sandbox, blending gaming, social engagement, and
virtual events. By working with partners across various industries, from entertainment
and gaming to fashion and lifestyle, The Sandbox appears to seek to enhance its appeal as
a dynamic metaverse that combines user-generated content with branded virtual worlds,
thereby enriching the platform and attempting to draw in a wider user base.
3.3.5. Monetization and Virtual Economy
The Sandbox operates as a decentralized, blockchain-based metaverse platform that pro-
vides users with extensive monetization opportunities through asset creation, land own-
ership, and participation in its token-based economy. Unlike centralized platforms where
digital assets and revenue streams are tightly controlled by a governing entity, The Sand-
box provides users with true ownership over virtual goods and currency, facilitating a
dynamic creator-driven economy. One of the primary ways users can monetize activi-
ties in The Sandbox is through the creation and sale of NFT-based digital assets. Using
the platform’s proprietary tool, VoxEdit, creators can design 3D objects such as avatars,
wearables, buildings, and game assets. Once completed, these assets can be minted as
non-fungible tokens (NFTs), establishing verified ownership and allowing them to be in-
tegrated into LAND parcels or sold on The Sandbox Marketplace. This process supports
the circulation of user-generated content and plays a key role in shaping the platform’s
virtual economy (BabyPips.com, 2021). In addition to selling individual assets, The Sand-
box allows users to buy, sell, and monetize virtual land parcels (LAND NFTs). Owners
can generate revenue by renting out their LAND to other users or businesses, hosting vir-
tual events, or developing interactive experiences that attract visitors. Since The Sandbox
functions as a limited real-estate economy, where LAND supply is fixed, property values
fluctuate based on demand, making virtual real estate an investment opportunity similar
to physical-world property markets.
The entire economy within The Sandbox is powered by its native cryptocurrency, SAND,
an ERC-20 token with a total supply cap of 3 billion units. All transactions—whether
for LAND purchases, asset trading, or in-game interactions—are conducted using SAND,
making it the core of The Sandbox’s financial ecosystem. The token’s value fluctuates
76 3| Metaverse Platforms
based on market demand and platform success, meaning economic activity within The
Sandbox directly impacts its real-world valuation. Users can acquire SAND in multiple
ways: by purchasing it with fiat currency on crypto exchanges, by earning it through plat-
form incentives such as contests and referral programs, or by engaging in The Sandbox’s
play-to-earn (P2E) model, where completing quests within virtual experiences rewards
players with tokens (The Sandbox, 2024a).
To maintain the ecosystem and encourage participation, The Sandbox applies a 5percent
transaction fee on all SAND transactions within the platform. Half of this fee is allo-
cated to the staking pool, rewarding users who stake their SAND tokens, while the other
half is directed to The Sandbox Foundation, which funds game developers and designers
through grants, ensuring continued innovation and growth of the platform. Additionally,
the platform has allocated 17.18percent of the total token supply to its initial seed sale,
with another portion held in company reserves, reinforcing the long-term sustainability
of the ecosystem. Compared to centralized platforms, monetization opportunities in The
Sandbox are broader and more flexible, allowing users to fully control their assets, gen-
erate revenue through various mechanisms, and participate in an open, blockchain-driven
economy. However, this complexity also presents higher entry barriers, as understanding
cryptocurrency markets, NFT trading, and blockchain mechanics is essential for effectively
leveraging these opportunities. While decentralized platforms like The Sandbox offer
greater economic freedom and investment potential, they require more technical expertise
and financial risk management compared to centralized alternatives such as Roblox. The
following analysis will focus on how these monetization mechanics translate into real-
world applications by examining case studies of specific economic activities within The
Sandbox and how different stakeholders—creators, developers, and investors—navigate
this evolving metaverse economy (The Sandbox, 2020).
3.3.6. User Demographic and Community Guidelines
The Sandbox targets a broad user base, attracting both gamers and creators, with a
particular focus on adults and those interested in the emerging intersection of gaming,
blockchains, and virtual economies. Unlike platforms such as Roblox, which primarily
caters to a younger audience, The Sandbox appeals to users who are more familiar with
he complexities (and potential financial risks) of cryptocurrency and decentralized technol-
ogy, positioning itself as a platform for both gaming and investment within virtual spaces.
Community involvement in The Sandbox is largely driven by its decentralized governance
model, structured through the use of a DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization).
Membership in the DAO is primarily determined by ownership and participation within
3| Metaverse Platforms 77
the platform, with users who own significant assets like LAND (virtual real estate) or
NFTs being granted voting rights. The more assets or virtual property a user holds, the
greater their influence in governance decisions, but it actually takes only 5 SAND (or
a plot of LAND) to participate in governance decisions through the DAO. This model
ensures that those with a vested interest in the platform’s success have a voice in shaping
its future, highlighting its relatively more democratic model of participation compared
to more centralized platforms. For example, users can vote on The Sandbox Improve-
ment Proposals (SIPs) as The Sandbox publishes a new batch of proposals to improve
the experience every other Wednesday (The Sandbox DAO, 2024b), (The Sandbox DAO,
2024a).
In terms of safety and moderation, The Sandbox implements various measures to protect
users, especially those involved in its virtual economy. While the platform does not have
as strict age restrictions as other platforms, for example Roblox, it provides tools for
content moderation, ensures compliance with legal standards, and encourages creators to
follow community guidelines to foster a safe environment. Additionally, the platform relies
on user-driven moderation and reporting systems, allowing the community to actively
participate in ensuring that harmful content or behavior is addressed (The Sandbox DAO,
2024a).
3.4. Decentraland
3.4.1. Background and Vision
Decentraland is a 3D, blockchain-based virtual world designed for social interaction, con-
tent creation, and decentralized ownership. Conceptualized in 2015 as an experiment
in blockchain-based land ownership, Decentraland was officially launched to the general
public in 2020 as a fully decentralized metaverse on the Ethereum blockchain. The plat-
form allows users to buy, develop, and trade virtual land parcels and digital assets, with
ownership secured through Ethereum smart contracts. Decentraland’s economy is pow-
ered by MANA, its native cryptocurrency, which facilitates transactions and interactions
within this virtual world. This currency supports a decentralized marketplace, where
users can buy and sell LAND parcels, wearables, and other virtual assets, creating an
economy that aligns with Decentraland’s vision for community-driven digital ownership.
As of September 2023, Decentraland reports approximately 8,000 daily active users (DAU)
and 56,697 monthly active users (MAU), indicating a steady user engagement with the
platform (Decentraland Foundation, 2022), (Au, 2023). As highlighted in Decentraland’s
2024 whitepaper, the platform “aims to rewrite the social contract of entertainment and
78 3| Metaverse Platforms
technology” by creating a virtual world where governance and digital ownership rest with
the users rather than with a centralized authority. Similar to The Sandbox, governance
within Decentraland is managed by a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO),
which enables MANA and LAND owners to propose and vote on key decisions, ensuring
that the platform’s evolution is shaped by its community. Decentraland’s vision, as laid
out in its whitepaper, focuses on creating a digital space governed by users who can truly
own and control their digital lives. This democratic ethos is reflected in Decentraland’s
mission to provide a decentralized alternative to conventional virtual platforms, aiming
to establish a metaverse where user empowerment and digital autonomy take precedence
over content creation and gamification. As stated in the platform’s guiding principles:
“Decentraland challenges the dominance of centralized systems, placing ownership of one’s
digital life exactly where it belongs—in the hands of the user” (Ordano et al., 2024)
3.4.2. History
The development of Decentraland began in 2015 when Manuel Araoz and Esteban Or-
dano tested a prototype using the Bitcoin blockchain to register digital land. This early
version, developed in JavaScript, created an ephemeral blockchain that tracked owner-
ship of virtual land parcels, allowing users to mine, transfer, and alter the color of the
pixels representing their land (O’Halloran, 2018). In 2016, the project advanced with a
new prototype utilizing a real blockchain, forking a Bitcoin node to replace BTC value
transfers with X and Y coordinates for land locations. This phase introduced the first 3D
client built in Unity, a prominent game engine, enabling users to walk through a virtual
world and interact with dynamically loaded content.
By 2017, Decentraland took a major step forward with the release of its whitepaper and
the development of a Unity-based client that would support peer-to-peer communications
and multiplayer experiences. The platform’s first 3D world, Genesis City, was established
as a grid of 90,601 LAND parcels, with ownership recorded on the Ethereum blockchain.
This also marked the creation of MANA, an ERC-20 token, which served as the plat-
form’s currency and powered its economy, alongside the establishment of the ERC-721
token standard for non-fungible tokens (NFTs) (Winkie, 2020). On February 20, 2020,
Decentraland officially launched as the world’s first fully decentralized blockchain-based
virtual world. The platform’s code was made public, transitioning from a centralized
server system to a decentralized network, ensuring its infrastructural resilience in a more
distributed manner. The launch also saw the establishment of the Decentraland DAO
for community governance and the Decentraland Foundation to support the platform’s
3| Metaverse Platforms 79
development. Between 2020 and 2023, Decentraland expanded its features, including the
introduction of Wearables, virtual events, and a marketplace (Rosen, 2021). The plat-
form continued to evolve with the release of new features, including private virtual spaces
(Worlds) in 2022, enhanced creator tools, and AI integrations in 2023. By 2024, Decen-
traland began preparing for a new phase, focusing on a more immersive and stable client
to support future growth. This new era was marked by the beta release of a Unity-based
desktop client and the launch of a Creator Hub, signaling a significant milestone for the
platform in terms of the creation of virtual goods and services. (WWD Staff, 2022).
3.4.3. Platform Structure and User Accessibility
Decentraland is built on a decentralized foundation, utilizing blockchain technology to
provide true ownership of digital assets through non-fungible tokens (NFTs). The plat-
form operates on the Ethereum blockchain, allowing users to own virtual land (LAND)
and assets like Wearables, Emotes, and more. Decentraland emphasizes a user-driven
ecosystem where players can buy, sell, and trade their digital properties within its tok-
enized economy. The native cryptocurrency, MANA, facilitates transactions and serves
as the platform’s currency for purchases, governance, and other platform interactions.
Although Decentraland is accessible through standard web browsers, the platform has
introduced a Unity-based desktop client for enhanced stability and immersion. While
Decentraland does not require a VR headset, it does support virtual reality for those who
wish to enjoy a more immersive experience, offering the flexibility for users to interact
with the platform using both traditional PCs or VR headsets.
Like in The Sandbox, virtual land ownership is central to Decentraland. The platform’s
virtual world is made up of 166,464 LAND parcels, each representing a piece of virtual
real estate. These parcels are registered on the Ethereum blockchain as unique, tradable
assets, giving users full control over their land ownership. LAND can be used to create
or host diverse experiences, from gaming and entertainment to social spaces and art gal-
leries, thus enabling a robust range of creative applications. The platform’s decentralized
nature ensures that users control their digital assets, contributing to a community-driven
economy. Decentraland’s interactive map helps users explore and locate available LAND,
marking plots as either occupied, for sale, or undeveloped. Each LAND parcel is repre-
sented by cartesian coordinates, allowing users to create unique experiences across differ-
ent locations. When users click on a specific point on the map, a pop-up shows, sharing
whether the land is on sale, owned, if there is a public experience going on and other
similar information. Decentraland’s main urban hub, Genesis City, fosters community
groups where creators with similar interests can cluster, forming themed districts that
80 3| Metaverse Platforms
attract specific audiences and so creating a cohesive and navigable environment for users
to explore. The finite design of Genesis City maintains scarcity, encouraging a secondary
market for LAND trading and leasing. In addition to the central metropolis, Decentraland
offers private Worlds where users can develop more intimate, personalized experiences.
Together, Genesis City and these Worlds create a traversable and evolving ecosystem that
supports social connection, exploration, and creative expression (Genesis City).
Figure 3.8: Map of Genesis City
Figure 3.9: Zoom-in of 3.9: Each point on the map corresponds to cartesian coordinates
3| Metaverse Platforms 81
To join Decentraland, users first need to visit the official website and sign up by linking
an Ethereum-compatible wallet, such as MetaMask. If a wallet is not already available,
users can create one directly through the platform at no cost. Once the wallet is set up,
users can proceed to personalize their avatars by selecting from a range of customization
options, including wearables, emotes, and other digital accessories. As for all the other
platforms, basic customization features are available for free, while premium items can
be purchased using MANA tokens. After avatar setup, users undergo an introductory
tutorial that teaches them how to navigate Decentraland, interact with objects and other
users, and engage with the platform’s various features. Following the tutorial, users are
introduced to the virtual world, where they can explore different areas, attend events,
and interact with others in the community-driven environment: their avatar will appear
in one of the main city’s squares called Genesis Plazas and, from there, they can either
walk through the virtual world or enter a portal that will transport them wherever they
wish to go on the map. (Ordano et al., 2017).
3.4.4. Core Experiences and Activities
Decentraland offers two main types of environments: Genesis City and Worlds. Genesis
City serves as the central hub of Decentraland, comprising 90,601 LAND parcels that form
a shared, persistent space for exploration and social interaction. It is the most populous
and interactive area within Decentraland, where users can engage with the community,
explore diverse spaces such as shopping districts, art galleries, and entertainment hubs,
or attend live events (Genesis City). It is a dynamic area, home to themed districts such
as Art and Fashion, where users can engage with the community, attend live events, and
explore various experiences. In contrast, Worlds are private, user-controlled environments
separate from Genesis City, offering more personalized and customizable experiences.
Users can create bespoke virtual spaces, host private events, or develop specialized games.
While users can not walk directly between Genesis City and Worlds, they can access them
via specific links or portals. The main difference between the two lies in their purpose:
Genesis City is a communal, public space for social interaction, while Worlds provide
greater creative freedom in a private setting, allowing users to build unique experiences.
Together, these environments form a complementary ecosystem within Decentraland’s
metaverse.
Decentraland offers powerful tools for users to create their own content. Using its Decen-
traland SDK (Software Development Kit), users can design interactive 3D scenes, games,
and assets for the platform. The SDK allows for the creation of dynamic environments
with custom interactivity, enabling users to script experiences, develop virtual games,
82 3| Metaverse Platforms
or even integrate their creations with blockchain-based transactions. Additionally, De-
centraland’s Builder Tool is a simpler drag-and-drop interface, allowing users without
coding experience to construct spaces such as art galleries, virtual stores, or interactive
environments. These tools empower creators to contribute to the platform, driving a
rich ecosystem of user-generated content (UGC). In addition to building entire Worlds,
creators in Decentraland can use the platform’s toolkit to design a wide range of digital
assets that enhance the virtual experience. These include avatars’ accessories, such as
hats, glasses, and jewelry, as well as clothing items that allow for personalized fashion.
Creators can also design interactive objects, like furniture or vehicles, that can be placed
within Worlds or sold on the marketplace. Furthermore, Decentraland offers the ability
to create emotes, which are animations or gestures -performed by the avatar- that users
can use to express themselves during social interactions. These creative tools enable users
to contribute to the platform’s vibrant ecosystem, adding diversity and individuality to
the virtual environment.
Decentraland is known for hosting unique virtual events that attract users and creators
from around the world. Some of the most prominent events include Metaverse Fash-
ion Week, Art Week, and Decentraland Music Festival, where users can attend virtual
concerts, fashion shows, and art exhibitions. Additionally, Decentraland has hosted high-
profile branded collaborations, such as experiences with luxury brands like Gucci and
MGM, bringing a level of prestige and innovation to this particular metaverse world.
These events are often community-driven, with users participating as creators, perform-
ers, or attendees. The platform also regularly features pop-up events, exhibitions, and
seasonal celebrations, making Decentraland a constantly evolving space that blends vir-
tual exploration, social interaction, and digital commerce (WWD Staff, 2022).
3.4.5. Monetization and Virtual Economy
MANA is the native cryptocurrency of Decentraland, functioning as the platform’s pri-
mary means of exchange for digital assets and services within the virtual world. As
an ERC-20 token on the Ethereum blockchain, MANA is used to buy LAND parcels,
wearables, accessories, and other in-game assets, enabling users to participate in and
cotribute to Decentraland’s economy. Additionally, MANA plays a key role in Decentra-
land’s governance, as holders can vote on decisions regarding platform updates, policies,
and community proposals through the Decentraland DAO (Decentralized Autonomous
Organization). The monetizing possibilities offered by Decentraland are very similar to
those of The Sandbox, as the two platforms share many fundamental characteristics -
decentralization, open ecosystems, tokenomics etc. Also the role of MANA is comparable
3| Metaverse Platforms 83
to that of SAND.
A unique aspect of MANA’s economy is its deflationary mechanism: a portion of the
MANA used for transactions is "burned," or permanently removed from circulation, re-
ducing the total supply over time. This burning process helps to maintain scarcity and
potentially increases the token’s value. The economy of Decentraland is primarily driven
by user-driven content creation, trading of digital assets, and the renting or sale of LAND,
creating a dynamic market where creators, users, and investors interact, all facilitated by
MANA as the medium of exchange (Ordano et al., 2024).
3.4.6. User Demographic and Community Guidelines
Decentraland primarily attracts a tech-savvy, crypto-oriented audience, drawing individ-
uals interested in blockchain, decentralized finance, and digital ownership. Users are typ-
ically adults, often spanning young professionals, artists, developers, and entrepreneurs
with a strong inclination toward digital innovation. Unlike platforms like Roblox, which
appeal to a younger demographic, Decentraland’s users are largely motivated by its em-
phasis on decentralization and the potential for real economic participation through NFTs,
MANA tokens, and LAND ownership. This user base values autonomy and community
involvement, viewing Decentraland as a pioneering platform in the metaverse and Web3
space. Decentraland’s governance is notably decentralized, embodying a community-
driven model through a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO). This DAO gives
users who own MANA tokens, LAND parcels, NAME token holders or other in-world as-
sets a voice in the platform’s direction. Through voting, users propose changes, prioritize
features, and allocate funds from the DAO treasury. The DAO operates using smart con-
tracts, ensuring transparent and automated decision-making processes. A smart contract
is a self-executing contract with the terms of the agreement directly written into code.
These contracts run on blockchain networks like Ethereum, and once conditions are met,
they automatically enforce the agreed-upon actions without the need for intermediaries.
In Decentraland, smart contracts are used for managing transactions, governance propos-
als, and other automated functions within the platform, ensuring transparency, security,
and efficiency. The Decentraland Foundation, though responsible for supporting devel-
opment and upholding platform standards, collaborates closely with the DAO, allowing
the community’s will to influence key decisions and maintain the platform’s decentralized
ethos (Decentraland, 2025).
While Decentraland is geared toward an adult user base and does not implement stringent
safety protocols often seen in platforms with younger users, it does have measures to
84 3| Metaverse Platforms
maintain a safe environment. The community-enforced content standards include IP
compliance checks and a moderation process for user-generated Wearables and Emotes
to prevent spam and maintain quality. Although not as extensive as platforms serving
younger audiences, Decentraland’s moderation policies focus on preserving user trust and
protecting creator rights within its digital marketplace and virtual environment (Ordano
et al., 2024).
3.5. Horizon Worlds
3.5.1. Background and Vision
Horizon Worlds is a 3D virtual reality platform created by Meta (formerly Facebook)
where users can explore, socialize, and create within immersive, user-generated environ-
ments. Initially launched in 2021, Horizon Worlds seeks to pioneer Meta’s specific vision
of a connected metaverse. Like the previous three platforms, the platform allows users to
build interactive worlds, games, and social spaces while fostering creativity, collaboration,
and virtual social interaction. Horizon Worlds employs in-platform tools for building and
coding, enabling users to craft unique environments without prior experience in program-
ming. With a vision centered on social connection, due to its background as a social
media company, Meta emphasizes that Horizon Worlds will serve as a safe and inclusive
space where people can engage in lifelike activities—from virtual work meetings to social
gatherings—despite physical distances. Users will be able to share virtual experiences,
bridging physical distances in a digital world. This aligns with Meta’s broader goal to
"help bring the metaverse to life," providing a framework for digital social experiences and
fostering global connectivity. Meta’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg believes this platform is a
crucial part of Meta’s long-term strategy, transforming digital interactions and ultimately
making the metaverse "the next chapter of the internet” (Meta, 2021). Importantly, this
vision does not just involve the creation of virtual worlds, such as Horizon Worlds, but
also the development of VR and AR hardware, such as Meta’s Quest headsets as well as
the ongoing collaboration with Essilor Luxottica in the development of smart glasses.
3.5.2. History
Horizon Worlds was developed by Meta as a social VR platform with the ambition of
building a metaverse-driven experience. The platform was initially launched as an invite-
only beta in 2020 and opened to users in the U.S. and Canada in December 2021. The
primary vision was to allow users to explore, socialize, and create within an intercon-
3| Metaverse Platforms 85
nected 3D space that also emphasized ease of creation for virtual experiences, using tools
built directly into the platform. Horizon Worlds is intricately tied to Meta’s corporate
rebranding and strategic pivot towards the metaverse. Originally launched as "Facebook
Horizon," the platform’s name and mission evolved in line with Facebook’s transforma-
tion into Meta in October 2021. This shift reflected a broader vision beyond social media,
aiming to position the company as a leader in building immersive digital spaces where
people could socialize, work, and play within a shared, virtual environment (Heath, 2022).
To introduce this vision, Mark Zuckerberg released a one-hour video presentation in late
2021, outlining Meta’s ambitious plans for the metaverse. The video, shared widely
on YouTube and various social media platforms, offered a glimpse into the world Meta
aspired to build—showcasing virtual meetings, social gatherings, interactive 3D spaces,
and digital commerce. In this (in)famous presentation, Zuckerberg described how the
metaverse could eventually enable seamless digital-physical interaction, making virtual
worlds feel as "real" as everyday life. This video positioned Horizon Worlds as a core
part of Meta’s plans, embodying the company’s commitment to pioneering a metaverse
that combines entertainment, social connectivity, and digital creation tools. Throughout
2022, Horizon Worlds expanded to additional countries including the U.K., France, Spain,
and more, growing its global reach as part of Meta’s metaverse strategy. The platform
evolved with the introduction of games and mechanics, like the 3v3 laser tag game and
new creation tools, to foster a sense of community and participation among users. Meta
also launched a 10 million Creator Fund to incentivize and support creators in building
content, encouraging a robust user-generated environment (UGC) comparable to those in
platforms like Roblox and VRChat.
Meta’s founder, Mark Zuckerberg, has been a vocal advocate of Horizon Worlds, viewing
it as central to Meta’s goal of establishing a comprehensive, immersive metaverse. Zucker-
berg has outlined the platform as a foundational step toward a metaverse that combines
work, social interaction, and entertainment in a unified digital ecosystem, albeit still under
development and facing criticism for technical challenges, harassment, and user retention
issues. The platform remains accessible for free on Meta’s VR headsets, providing tools
and resources to facilitate user creation and interaction. It continues to be a focus of
Meta’s long-term vision for a future where social VR environments become as integral to
digital life as traditional social media platforms have been (Meta, 2021).
86 3| Metaverse Platforms
3.5.3. Platform Structure and User Accessibility
Horizon Worlds operates as a closed ecosystem, designed to provide immersive social and
creative experiences. Unlike decentralized platforms like Decentraland or The Sandbox,
Horizon Worlds does not integrate blockchain technology, focusing instead on a propri-
etary system that allows users to create, explore, and interact in virtual spaces. It is
primarily user-generated, encouraging participants to design worlds and activities within
its framework, but with content subject to moderation and guidelines from Meta. The
platform follows a free-to-play model without cryptocurrency-based tokenomics, mone-
tizing instead through features like in-app purchases and advertising initiatives. Horizon
Worlds does not have a predefined size but instead it is a dynamically growing environ-
ment where the number of "worlds" expands as users and Meta create new experiences.
Each world in Horizon Worlds functions as a standalone virtual space, hosted on Meta’s
centralized servers. This architecture allows the platform to scale indefinitely, as it is not
constrained by a blockchain-based finite land system. Horizon Worlds’ reliance on user-
generated content (UGC) enables continuous expansion, with its overall size theoretically
limited only by Meta’s server infrastructure and active user engagement. This approach
emphasizes flexibility and scalability, reflecting the platform’s focus on creating immersive
social and interactive experiences without spatial limitations.
Figure 3.10: Homepage of Horizon Worlds
Access to the platform via VR requires a compatible VR headset: until now, Horizon
Worlds is exclusively compatible with Meta’s own VR headsets, including the Meta Quest
2, Quest 3, and Quest Pro, reflecting the company’s strategy of integrating hardware and
software within its metaverse ecosystem. This exclusivity ensures an optimized experience
3| Metaverse Platforms 87
tailored to Meta’s devices but limits accessibility for users with other VR hardware. By
focusing on its proprietary technology, Meta can deliver seamless updates and features
designed specifically for Horizon Worlds, reinforcing its vision of a unified metaverse plat-
form. Initially exclusive to VR, Meta has started expanding accessibility by introducing a
beta web and mobile version, broadening the platform’s reach to non-VR users. However,
the VR experience remains the most comprehensive and immersive way to interact with
Horizon Worlds.
Creating an account requires a Meta account, which consolidates login credentials for
all Meta services, including Horizon Worlds. Until 2022, users were required to link
their Meta account to their social media accounts (facebook, instagram..) however, in
August 2022, Meta introduced a significant update, allowing users to create standalone
Meta accounts and Horizon profiles, eliminating the need for Facebook integration. These
Meta accounts are independent of Meta’s social media platforms, though users can choose
to link them for additional functionality, such as connecting with Facebook friends in
VR. This shift aims to provide more flexibility and privacy for users accessing Horizon
Worlds and other Meta platforms. Once they create a Meta account, users will proceed
to create an avatar using a custom creation tool that offers a variety of personalizable
features, including facial attributes, hairstyles, and clothing. Interestingly, all clothing
and accessory options in this step are free. (Meta, a).
Figure 3.11: Meta Avatar menu
88 3| Metaverse Platforms
3.5.4. Core Experiences and Activities
In Horizon Worlds, users can explore a wide variety of user-created environments, in-
cluding social hubs, games, and thematic worlds, designed to encourage interaction and
collaboration. These spaces are populated with interactive elements, ranging from puz-
zles and multiplayer challenges to casual social hangouts. Avatars serve as the primary
mode of interaction, allowing users to communicate in real-time and engage with shared
activities like games, discussions, or group projects.
The Horizon Worlds interface is structured to provide users with an accessible overview
of the platform’s available experiences. Upon accessing the platform, users are presented
with a categorized dashboard featuring sections like Worlds, Events, and People reflecting
its core focus on exploration, real-time social interaction, and personalized networking.
The Worlds section offers access to various virtual environments created by users or Meta,
such as puzzle games, social hubs, or immersive adventure spaces. These worlds cater to
different user interests, from casual hangouts to skill-based challenges. The Events sec-
tion highlights scheduled experiences, ranging from entertainment to educational content.
Users can explore interactive screenings, such as "Space Explorers: Apollo to Artemis,"
or attend branded collaborations like virtual concerts and cinematic events. Each event
lists details like the number of interested participants and time remaining, emphasizing
community-driven participation.The special events and branded collaborations provide
unique opportunities for users to engage with exclusive content. These include virtual
concerts, interactive promotional campaigns, and experiences tied to well-known brands
or artists. Such events emphasize Meta’s commitment to integrating entertainment, so-
cial connection, and creativity within Horizon Worlds, ensuring it remains a dynamic and
evolving metaverse experience. Finally, the People section facilitates social connectivity,
helping users discover friends, communities, or new connections within the platform. This
structured layout allows users to navigate seamlessly between creating, interacting, and
expanding their social circles, making it both creative and community-focused.
Content creation is a key component of the platform, supported by Horizon Worlds’
integrated World Builder. This tool enables users to construct virtual spaces using a
combination of drag-and-drop mechanics and simple scripting, making it accessible to
individuals with no prior programming experience. Creators can design environments,
build interactive games, or develop thematic spaces for events and gatherings. Although
monetization opportunities are currently limited to pilot programs, the platform encour-
ages creative experimentation, fostering a community-driven ecosystem where creators
and users actively shape the experience (Meta, b).
3| Metaverse Platforms 89
3.5.5. Monetization and Virtual Economy
Currently, Horizon Worlds does not use a traditional virtual currency. Instead, it sup-
ports creator monetization through Meta’s funding programs, including the Creator Fund,
which provides financial incentives based on the engagement levels of user-built worlds.
Meta is currently testing in-world purchase systems to allow creators to sell virtual items,
and creators who meet eligibility requirements can generate revenue based on their cre-
ations’ popularity.
Creators who meet specific eligibility requirements—such as meeting a certain level of
engagement or producing high-quality, popular content—can potentially generate rev-
enue from their creations. This includes the ability to sell virtual goods like clothing,
accessories, or other items that enhance users’ avatars or environments. Meta’s testing
of these systems is part of an effort to create more robust opportunities for creators to
earn money from their work while also encouraging a thriving ecosystem of user-generated
content within Horizon Worlds. Unlike traditional models that rely on advertisements or
external transactions, Horizon Worlds’ monetization efforts focus on enabling creators to
earn income directly through the success and engagement of their virtual content. As
Meta continues to refine its in-world purchase systems, the platform’s monetization strat-
egy is expected to evolve, offering new revenue streams for creators and developers. This
approach underscores Horizon Worlds’ commitment to fostering a sustainable creative
economy, where creators are rewarded for the value they bring to the platform. But try-
ing to move past the promises of Zuckerberg and analyzing what is actually happening
in the platform, it appears that Horizon World still does not have a clear direction to
pursue, and at the moment does not have a payment system either.
3.5.6. User Demographic and Community Guidelines
Horizon Worlds primarily targets an audience of adults interested in virtual socializing,
gaming, and collaborative creation. Initially accessible only to users aged 18 and older, it
was expanded in 2023 to include teenagers (13+), broadening its demographic reach. The
inclusion of younger users necessitated stricter safety and moderation policies, ensuring a
safer and more inclusive environment for all participants. Meta’s goal has been to appeal
to a diverse user base, from casual VR enthusiasts to more experienced creators seek-
ing immersive and interactive social experiences. In terms of community involvement and
governance, Horizon Worlds does not employ decentralized governance models like Decen-
traland’s DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization). Instead, it remains centrally
managed by Meta. However, user feedback plays an integral role in shaping updates and
90 3| Metaverse Platforms
improvements to the platform. Community input is typically gathered through forums,
in-app reporting features, and Meta’s direct engagement with active creators, aiming to
foster a collaborative development process.
Safety and moderation policies are crucial to maintaining a secure environment in Hori-
zon Worlds, particularly with the platform’s expansion to include teenage users. Meta
has implemented a range of safety features, such as age-appropriate settings, parental
controls, and active content moderation, all aimed at ensuring a positive user experience.
The platform also provides users with the ability to report inappropriate behavior or en-
vironments, which is followed by strict enforcement of safety protocols. This approach
reflects Horizon Worlds’ commitment to balancing creative freedom with the need for a
well-regulated, safe space for its diverse user base. One of the key safety features intro-
duced in Horizon Worlds is the “Personal Boundary” tool, designed to prevent avatars
from invading personal space (Chalk, 2022). By enforcing a four-foot buffer zone around
each avatar, this feature addresses concerns related to harassment and discomfort from
unwanted proximity in virtual environments, underscoring Horizon Worlds’ emphasis on
user comfort and privacy. The personal space feature was developed in response to inci-
dents of harassment (Basu, 2021) in early virtual reality spaces, aiming to foster a more
respectful and comfortable environment for users. Similar features are also present in
other virtual reality platforms, such as VRChat, AltspaceVR, and Rec Room, though
Horizon Worlds’ implementation stands out for being enabled by default. These mea-
sures collectively reflect a broader effort across virtual reality platforms to prioritize user
safety and well-being in increasingly socially interactive virtual spaces (Hamilton, 2022).
3.6. Discussion and Analysis
The detailed analysis of Roblox, The Sandbox, Decentraland, and Horizon Worlds has
revealed several of the fundamental differences in terms of how metaverse platforms oper-
ate. While each platform presents unique features, business models, and user experiences,
certain key characteristics consistently emerge as defining elements that distinguish them
from one another. These characteristics not only impact how users interact with the
platform but also shape economic opportunities, monetization models, and the level of
control users have over digital assets.
To systematically compare and categorize metaverse platforms, it is necessary to identify
a structured framework that highlights the most influential dimensions of their design,
economy, and governance. Through firsthand experience and extensive research, it became
evident that certain fundamental characteristics define how metaverse platforms operate
3| Metaverse Platforms 91
and distinguish themselves from one another. These characteristics shape user experience,
determine monetization models, and influence the broader economic and social structures
of each platform.
The following classification emerges from the direct exploration of Roblox, The Sand-
box, Decentraland, and Horizon Worlds, as well as an analysis of their business models,
content creation frameworks, and economic mechanisms. These characteristics were not
arbitrarily selected but rather identified as key differentiators based on observations made
while engaging with each platform and studying their documentation and community dy-
namics. The classification outlines these key characteristics, grouping platforms based on
how they approach centralization vs. decentralization, content creation, economic mod-
els, ownership structures, customization, and target audience. This framework provides
a structured basis for understanding how metaverse platforms function and how their
business models compare.
1. Centralization vs. Decentralization
One of the most defining aspects of a metaverse platform is whether it operates
as a centralized or decentralized ecosystem. This distinction affects who controls
the platform, how assets are managed, and how revenue is distributed. Centralized
platforms, such as Roblox and Horizon Worlds, are governed by a single entity that
dictates rules, policies, and revenue structures. This results in a more controlled,
stable environment where creators must adhere to platform-specific guidelines, but it
also limits ownership rights over digital assets. In contrast, decentralized platforms
such as Decentraland and The Sandbox employ blockchain technology to distribute
both ownership and governance among users. This model allows players to truly
own virtual land and items, fostering a more open, investment-driven economy. The
firsthand experience of navigating both types of platforms revealed that decentral-
ization significantly impacts how monetization opportunities unfold, making it one
of the most crucial classification criteria.
2. Content Creation: User-Generated vs. Developer-Created
The degree to which a platform relies on user-generated content (UGC) versus pro-
fessionally developed content shapes its creative ecosystem and business model. In
platforms such as Roblox and The Sandbox, users drive the platform’s economy
by creating and monetizing their own experiences, from games to virtual items.
This enables a dynamic, evolving landscape where users actively contribute to the
ecosystem’s expansion. Conversely, platforms such as Horizon Worlds and, to some
extent, Decentraland, have a more restricted content-creation process, where much
92 3| Metaverse Platforms
of the available content is either curated by the platform itself or follows stricter
development standards. Engaging with these platforms firsthand demonstrated how
UGC-based economies tend to be more diverse, fast-growing, and adaptable, while
developer-controlled platforms often provide higher production value but greatly
limit entrepreneurial opportunities for users.
3. Primary Function: Socialization vs. Gaming vs. Commerce
Metaverse platforms are designed around different core user experiences, which in-
fluence how users interact and engage economically. Through direct exploration, it
became clear that platforms like Horizon Worlds emphasize social interaction, fos-
tering spaces where users gather, communicate, and build communities. Meanwhile,
Roblox is predominantly gaming-focused, with an extensive catalog of user-created
games that drive engagement. The Sandbox and Decentraland, while incorporat-
ing gaming elements, lean more toward commerce-driven experiences, where the
sale and exchange of digital assets—including NFTs and virtual land—are central
to the platform’s functionality. This distinction matters because business models
must align with platform purposes—a gaming-focused economy thrives on in-game
transactions, while commerce-driven economies rely on asset ownership and trading.
4. Revenue Models: Free-to-Play, Subscription, or Token-Based
A key aspect of metaverse platform sustainability is how revenue is generated, both
for the platform itself and for its creators. Some platforms, like Roblox, operate on
a free-to-play model with microtransactions, where users can access content for free
but purchase virtual items, premium memberships, and in-game perks. Others, such
as The Sandbox and Decentraland, operate on token-based economies, where mon-
etization occurs through the sale of blockchain-based assets like NFTs and virtual
land. Meanwhile, platforms like Horizon Worlds are exploring subscription-based or
advertising-supported models to generate revenue. Understanding these differences
is crucial, as they dictate the financial incentives for creators and businesses oper-
ating within each platform. Engaging with these ecosystems firsthand revealed how
certain models foster accessibility and mass adoption (e.g., free-to-play), while oth-
ers rely on exclusivity and financial investment-or peculation- driven participation
(e.g., token-based systems).
5. Degree of Ownership: Closed vs. Open Ecosystems
Closely tied to centralization, the distinction between closed and open ecosystems
affects how much control users have over their assets. Platforms such as Roblox and
3| Metaverse Platforms 93
Horizon Worlds operate as closed systems, where users can create and trade digital
items but remain fully dependent on the platform’s infrastructure. In contrast,
Decentraland and The Sandbox function as open ecosystems, where assets exist as
NFTs that can be traded outside the platform. This characteristic is crucial because
it determines whether users can retain value independently of the platform or if their
digital wealth is intrinsically tied to the company’s policies. Moreover, it remains to
be seen to what extent the ability of users to transfer or trade assets across platforms
can be beneficial to such platforms or not.
6. Immersive Technology: 2D, 3D, or VR-Based
The level of immersion offered by a metaverse platform shapes its accessibility, en-
gagement, and technological requirements. Roblox and The Sandbox are 3D virtual
environments that can be accessed through desktops or mobile devices, making them
widely available to mainstream audiences. Horizon Worlds, on the other hand, is
primarily designed for VR experiences, offering deeper immersion but limiting acces-
sibility to users with the necessary hardware. The firsthand experience of navigating
these platforms highlighted how VR-based worlds can create stronger presence and
realism, which is desirable to some categories of users, but 3D non-VR platforms
appear to reach a much broader audience and drive higher engagement.
7. Economic System: Virtual Currency vs. Real Money Economy
Monetization models in the metaverse often depend on whether a platform operates
with a virtual economy (in-game currency) or a real money economy (blockchain-
based assets). Roblox and Horizon Worlds use platform-specific currencies (Robux,
Meta’s Horizon tokens) that exist solely within their respective ecosystems. In
contrast, Decentraland and The Sandbox utilize cryptocurrencies (MANA, SAND)
that have real-world value and can be exchanged on external cryptocurrency mar-
ketplaces. The decision to implement a closed vs. open economy influences creator
compensation, investment potential, and overall platform scalability. Moreover, it
also appears that blockchain-based platforms shape the interactions of some cate-
gories of users, which seek to engage financial speculation rather than, for example,
on-platform content creation.
8. Customization: Pre-Built vs. Fully Customizable
Lastly, the degree of customization impacts how much creative freedom users have
within a platform. Roblox and The Sandbox provide extensive customization tools,
enabling users to design entire games and assets from scratch. Horizon Worlds, on
94 3| Metaverse Platforms
the other hand, offers a more pre-built environment with limited creative flexibility.
The more customization a platform allows, the greater the potential for a diverse
range of business models to emerge, from independent game development to branded
experiences.
Through direct engagement with these platforms, it became clear that no single charac-
teristic defines a metaverse platform on its own—instead, it is the combination of these
factors that shapes its business potential, user engagement, and overall experience. The
classification framework developed from these observations provides a structured way to
analyze how different platforms function and what economic models they enable. The
next section will apply this classification to a broader selection of metaverse platforms,
comparing their core attributes to identify trends and emerging business opportunities.
3.7. Comparative Analysis of the Platforms
The technical structures and access requirements of Roblox, The Sandbox, Decentraland,
and Horizon Worlds highlight both the diversity and convergence of metaverse platforms,
reflecting distinct strategic choices that may influence user engagement, monetization, and
long-term viability. While all four platforms emphasize user-generated content (UGC)
as a core feature, their differing approaches to ownership, accessibility, and moderation
reveal underlying philosophies that cater to different user demographics, technological
aspirations, and business models.
Figure 3.12: Classification table of the major Metaverse Platforms
A key point of divergence is the distinction between centralized and decentralized ecosys-
tems. Roblox and Horizon Worlds operate within closed, centralized systems, whereas
The Sandbox and Decentraland embrace blockchain-based decentralization. This division
may reflect broader industry trends: centralized platforms like Roblox and Horizon Worlds
prioritize ease of use, scalability, and simplified content moderation. These platforms aim
for a wide user base, targeting both casual and younger audiences who may value acces-
sibility over ownership. Roblox’s decision to maintain control over its infrastructure and
content aligns with its role as a mass-market platform, where consistency, ease of use,
3| Metaverse Platforms 95
and a unified ecosystem are paramount. This centralized model facilitates a more con-
trolled user experience, reducing potential issues with governance and moderation, but it
may limit the autonomy and economic potential of users in comparison to decentralized
platforms.
In contrast, The Sandbox and Decentraland’s blockchain-based structures reflect a differ-
ent vision for the metaverse, one that places a premium on ownership and digital assets.
Both platforms use NFTs and cryptocurrencies to enable users to buy, sell, and trade
virtual land and assets, which could suggest an emphasis on building a more "economi-
cally empowered" user base. The decentralized nature of these platforms may appeal to
users seeking a sense of true ownership over their virtual creations and assets, potentially
attracting creators and developers interested in capitalizing on the value of virtual prop-
erty. The integration of Ethereum and Polygon in The Sandbox, in particular, indicates
an attempt to balance the allure of blockchain technology with the practical needs of a
smooth user experience, reducing transaction costs and enhancing scalability. This hybrid
approach suggests that the creators of The Sandbox are positioning the platform as an
ecosystem where both artistic creativity and financial speculation can coexist, possibly
anticipating a more mature market for digital assets as blockchain technology becomes
more mainstream.
Another interesting aspect is how access requirements might shape the user base. Roblox’s
cross-platform accessibility via PC, mobile, and consoles ensures that its experiences are
available to a wide range of users, including those without access to specialized hardware
like VR headsets. This accessibility may be one of the reasons for Roblox’s dominance
among younger audiences—it is easy to access and does not require an upfront investment
in hardware. On the other hand, The Sandbox and Decentraland’s reliance on browser-
based access and optional VR support might signal an appeal to a more tech-savvy demo-
graphic, potentially attracting users who value the depth and immersion offered by VR or
blockchain technologies, even though this may limit immediate mass adoption. Horizon
Worlds, by tying itself closely to Meta’s VR ecosystem, appears to be positioning itself as
a premium offering in the virtual space, but this exclusivity could hinder rapid widespread
adoption among casual users who are not yet invested in VR hardware.
The differences in moderation approaches are also telling. Roblox and Horizon Worlds,
with their centralized systems, can more tightly control content and interactions, ensur-
ing a more consistent and regulated experience for users. This model likely appeals to
users and parents who prioritize safety and oversight, particularly in environments that
cater to younger audiences (Au, 2023). The blockchain-based nature of The Sandbox and
Decentraland, however, allows for greater creative freedom, as users can operate more
96 3| Metaverse Platforms
independently, but it also introduces complexities around content moderation and gov-
ernance. The responsibility for ensuring safe, respectful environments often falls more
heavily on the community itself, which could create challenges as the platforms scale and
attract diverse user groups. Horizon Worlds has introduced the concept of "personal
space" in virtual interactions—an intriguing innovation that signals Meta’s heightened
sensitivity to user comfort and safety in immersive environments. This feature may not
just be a reaction to early VR harassment but also a strategic move to foster long-term
engagement by appealing to a broader demographic, including families and more cautious
users. By focusing on seamless VR integration and ensuring comfort in social interactions,
Horizon Worlds reflects Meta’s broader strategy of tying its metaverse to its VR hardware
ecosystem, reinforcing the relationship between content and device. This exclusivity to
Meta’s hardware could be interpreted as an attempt to solidify its position in the com-
petitive VR market, ensuring that Horizon Worlds becomes a key differentiator for its
headsets, which are marketed as premium products.
The differences in the economic models of Roblox, The Sandbox, Decentraland and Hori-
zon Worlds reflect not only the strategic choices of the platforms, but also their inter-
nal architecture and target audience. Roblox’s decision to adopt a centralised currency,
Robux, facilitates more direct access for a young and broad audience that may be unfa-
miliar with complex financial instruments. This system complements a highly centralized
model in which the platform retains significant control over transactions and distribution
of earnings, mirroring the closed structure of a hub of disconnected games accessible via
a dashboard. In contrast, The Sandbox and Decentraland adopt decentralised curren-
cies (SAND and MANA), which are closely linked to blockchain-based ecosystems. This
choice suits more experienced users interested in digital ownership and greater economic
autonomy, but also implies a level of complexity that could limit accessibility to a more
generalist audience. Their architecture reflects this philosophy: finite and interconnected
virtual spaces where the scarcity of digital resources creates an economy based on per-
ceived value and speculation. Finally, Horizon Worlds, with its still embryonic economic
system, seems to focus on social experience and accessibility rather than on building an
established economy. The lack of a strong currency or digital ownership mechanisms re-
flects Meta’s desire to attract generalist users and consolidate an active community before
further developing its economic ecosystem. In sum, economic choices not only influence
accessibility and attractiveness for different types of users, but are also deeply linked
to the architecture and strategic goals of each platform. The differences between these
economic systems reflect the platforms’ strategies: Roblox aims at maximizing profits
through a large and young audience, while The Sandbox and Decentraland emphasize
3| Metaverse Platforms 97
digital ownership and technological innovation. Horizon Worlds, on the other hand, em-
phasizes socialization and accessibility, postponing monetisation to a later stage of its
development, or relying the majority of their revenues on the headsets (or VR technolo-
gies overall).
The comparative analysis of metaverse platforms reveals not only a set of distinct op-
erational characteristics but also underscores the multifaceted dynamics that drive their
economic models. At this point of the discussion, I want to pay particular attention to
the influence of user-generated content (UGC) on the overall ecosystem, the contrast-
ing approaches between centralized and decentralized models, and the implications for
monetization and creator engagement.
A key observation emerging from the analysis is how Roblox embodies the essence of the
Web 2.0 business model—an ecosystem where users are not merely consumers of content
but active creators whose contributions form the platform’s very foundation. Much like
early Web 2.0 platforms such as YouTube and Instagram, where users initially shared con-
tent simply for the joy of creation, Roblox leverages a similar dynamic. Users on Roblox
generate games, virtual items, and experiences out of passion and creativity, not solely as
a means to earn income. In many cases, the motivation for creating content is intrinsic:
a desire to experiment, innovate, and enjoy the creative process, rather than a drive for
fame or financial reward. Although a subset of developers does eventually pursue game
development as a full-time career, the majority of creators engage with the platform for
the fun of it, echoing the early, uncommercialized ethos of Web 2.0 content production.
Roblox, as a platform, merges the concept of traditional in-app or mobile games with the
burgeoning creator economy, resulting in an environment where user-generated content is
the primary engine of growth. The platform’s robust tools, such as Roblox Studio, are
continuously updated to simplify the creative process and empower users to design their
own experiences. This model creates a self-sustaining ecosystem where even though mon-
etary rewards exist—through revenue-sharing mechanisms and the Developer Exchange
program—they emerge as a positive byproduct rather than the sole incentive for content
creation. Yet, unlike the relatively unregulated nature of early digital platforms, Roblox’s
controlled framework offers creators a predictable and transparent path to revenue gen-
eration—an attribute that has significantly contributed to its widespread adoption and
success.
Another aspect to consider is that decentralized metaverse environments—exemplified
by The Sandbox and Decentraland— target a much more specific segment of internet
users. These platforms are built upon blockchain technology and require a certain level
of technical acumen and familiarity with concepts like decentralization, cryptocurrencies,
98 3| Metaverse Platforms
and NFTs. As a result, their user base is typically composed of individuals who are either
deeply invested in the idea of a decentralized internet or are actively seeking to capitalize
on crypto and NFT opportunities. This means that creators on decentralized platforms
are generally more motivated by economic incentives from the outset, with a pronounced
focus on monetization, investment, and profit generation.
The economic model in decentralized platforms is inherently more complex. For instance,
while Roblox encourages content creation as a form of self-expression—with many users
creating for fun, and monetization emerging as a secondary benefit—the decentralized
platforms often emphasize the potential for substantial financial returns. Numerous on-
line resources promote the notion of becoming rich by investing in NFTs, buying virtual
land, or staking tokens, rather than simply creating content for enjoyment. This emphasis
on economic opportunity means that the creators who thrive on decentralized platforms
are usually those who are oriented toward profit, often treating content creation as a
professional endeavor rather than a hobby. In these environments, the separation be-
tween the experience owner and the developer becomes more distinct, with the former
typically being companies or brands seeking to leverage the economic potential of the
platform, and the latter being the developers or creators who are compensated directly
for their work. Moreover, the entry barriers on decentralized platforms further contribute
to this phenomenon. The process of acquiring a virtual asset or land often involves signif-
icant financial investment—as seen with the requirement to purchase virtual land using
cryptocurrency—thereby limiting participation to those with both the resources and the
technical knowledge to navigate these systems. For example, acquiring a new land parcel
on these platforms typically requires an investment of at least 0.08 ETH ( 2.536,25 dollars
conversion dollar-ETH on february 02/2025) (CoinMarketCap). This contrasts sharply
with a platform such as Roblox, where the financial barriers to entry are much lower and
the focus remains on a broad, inclusive user base that often creates content out of passion
rather than profit. Consequently, while decentralized platforms offer a wider array of
monetization opportunities due to their open, blockchain-based ecosystems, they tend to
attract a niche group of economically driven creators.
This differentiation is critical for understanding the evolving landscape of metaverse busi-
ness models. On one hand, centralized platforms such as Roblox foster a creative culture
where monetization is an added incentive to a primarily passion-driven process. On the
other, decentralized platforms are more likely to see creators engaging with the ecosystem
purely for financial gain, as these environments are advertised and structured around the
promise of economic opportunity. The comparison underscores that while both types of
platforms are built on user-generated content, the underlying motivations and economic
3| Metaverse Platforms 99
dynamics differ significantly. This insight not only illuminates the current and diverse
state of the metaverse economy but also sets the stage for further discussion on how these
models might converge or diverge in the future and thus shape the further development
of the metaverse.
This aforementioned dichotomy raises critical questions about long-term sustainability
and user adoption: Do the benefits of a decentralized economy outweigh its barriers, or
does the simplicity of a centralized model ultimately lead to greater mass-market ap-
peal? Furthermore, this discussion invites a reflection on the broader implications for
the metaverse as an evolving digital economy. The success of Roblox demonstrates that
even within a centralized system, where revenue and asset control are tightly regulated,
there exists ample scope for creative expression and monetization. In contrast, the exper-
imental nature of decentralized platforms suggests a future where economic opportunities
may be more diversified, albeit at the risk of increased volatility and technical challenges.
The contrast between these models is not simply a matter of technical implementation; it
reflects deeper philosophical questions about control, ownership, and the democratization
of digital economies.
These insights have informed the decision to focus the subsequent case studies exclusively
on Roblox. By concentrating on a single platform that exemplifies a mature and complex
UGC-driven economy, it becomes possible to conduct a thorough, 360-degree analysis
of monetization mechanisms, creator revenue models, and the interplay between user
engagement and platform policies. The rich, integrated environment of Roblox provides
a coherent framework for examining how digital content creation translates into tangible
economic outcomes—a subject that will be further explored in the next case study chapter.
101
4| Case Studies on Roblox
Understanding how business models operate within the metaverse requires more than just
theoretical analysis at the level of platforms: it also demands an in-depth examination of
real-world cases where monetization strategies are actively and successfully being imple-
mented. The metaverse is a rapidly evolving ecosystem, where economic models, platform
policies, and user interactions are still taking shape. Given this complexity, a case study
approach provides a powerful research tool, allowing for a detailed investigation of how
revenue models function within specific metaverse environments. As Robert K. Yin in his
book "Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods" (2018) argues, case
studies are valuable when researchers seek to explore "how" and "why" questions about
contemporary, real-world phenomena, especially when the boundaries between the subject
of study and its broader context are not clearly defined (Yin, 2018). In the metaverse,
where monetization models, user behaviors, and technological infrastructures interact dy-
namically, a case study approach allows for a detailed, context-specific analysis of how
revenue generation mechanisms operate in practice. Unlike purely quantitative methods,
which prioritize generalizability, case studies enable an in-depth exploration of platform-
specific dynamics, uncovering the underlying mechanisms that drive success or failure in
metaverse business models (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007).
Additionally, case studies are particularly effective for analyzing emerging and rapidly
evolving industries, where theoretical frameworks are still developing. In such contexts,
Flyvbjerg highlights that “The case study produces the type of context-dependent knowl-
edge that research on learning shows to be necessary to allow people to develop from
rule-based beginners to virtuoso experts” (Flyvbjerg, 2006). This is especially relevant
for the metaverse economy, where monetization strategies differ significantly across plat-
forms, and new business models continue to emerge. By selecting three distinct case stud-
ies within Roblox, this research can capture diverse revenue models, from user-generated
content sales to branded experiences and virtual fashion businesses, offering a nuanced un-
derstanding of how creators, brands, and the platform itself interact within a structured
metaverse ecosystem. The findings derived from this case study analysis will not only
contribute to academic discourse on platform-based business models but also provide
102 4| Case Studies on Roblox
practical insights for businesses, policymakers, and platform developers navigating the
economic landscape of virtual worlds. The study of business models within the metaverse
necessitates a focused examination of specific platforms to understand their monetization
structures in depth. Metaverse platforms can be broadly categorized into centralized and
decentralized ecosystems, each offering distinct economic frameworks and monetization
opportunities for creators and businesses.
Among metaverse platforms, Roblox stands out as the most commercially successful and
widely adopted. With over 200 million monthly active users and an established digital
economy generating billions in revenue annually, Roblox serves as a benchmark for under-
standing how metaverse-based business models function at scale. Unlike many decentral-
ized metaverse platforms, which remain niche and largely speculative in nature, Roblox
has successfully built a self-sustaining creator economy that integrates both user-generated
content (UGC) and brand-sponsored experiences into a structured and accessible system.
This widespread adoption and financial viability make Roblox an ideal case for examining
how monetization works in practice rather than in theoretical, underdeveloped ecosys-
tems. Centralized platforms, such as Roblox, operate within a closed ecosystem where
all transactions, content creation, and revenue-sharing mechanisms are controlled by the
platform itself. While this structure imposes restrictions—such as higher commission fees,
limited cash-out options, and revenue being subject to the platform’s policies—it also of-
fers a highly accessible, structured, and stable environment where creators can monetize
through a well-defined set of mechanisms, such as selling digital assets, game development,
advertising, and in-game transactions.
In contrast, decentralized platforms such as The Sandbox and Decentraland function on
blockchain-based economies, where assets exist as non-fungible tokens (NFTs), and mon-
etization possibilities extend beyond platform boundaries. Users have full ownership over
their digital goods and can engage in peer-to-peer transactions, virtual land trading, stak-
ing mechanisms, and cross-platform commerce. While these decentralized environments
offer a wider array of revenue streams, their complexity, reliance on cryptocurrency, and
high entry barriers make them less immediately accessible compared to centralized plat-
forms like Roblox. Theoretically, the monetization possibilities in decentralized metaverse
platforms are more diverse and flexible, as they enable economic models that go beyond
the restrictions imposed by a single governing entity. However, the depth and complex-
ity of monetization mechanisms within centralized platforms, particularly Roblox, are
already substantial and highly intricate. Given that even within this structured envi-
ronment, a broad range of business models exists—from user-generated content sales to
brand-sponsored experiences—this study prioritizes a detailed, in-depth analysis of a sin-
4| Case Studies on Roblox 103
gle ecosystem rather than a broad but less comprehensive comparison across multiple
platforms.
For this reason, the case studies selected for this research focus exclusively on Roblox,
allowing for a 360-degree examination of its monetization ecosystem. By analyzing three
distinct types of economic activity within Roblox—a fully user-generated experience, a
branded experience, and a digital-native fashion brand operating in the metaverse—this
study aims to capture the breadth of revenue-generating opportunities available within a
centralized platform. The selection of three distinct types of case studies—user-generated
content (UGC) experiences, branded metaverse activations, and digital-native fashion
brands—ensures a comprehensive analysis of monetization models within Roblox. These
categories were chosen because they represent three fundamental approaches to economic
activity in the metaverse, covering the key revenue-generation mechanisms found across
most virtual experiences. By analyzing these diverse case studies, this research provides
a structured understanding of how different actors—individual creators, corporations,
and digital-native brands—leverage the platform’s economic infrastructure in ways that
frequently go beyond the existing models found on Web 2.0 platforms.
•User-Generated Content (UGC) Experience– Dress to Impress: UGC-based experi-
ences illustrate how independent developers and creators monetize their work in a
platform economy. They often rely on player engagement, virtual item sales, and
competition-driven revenue models, providing insight into grassroots-level moneti-
zation strategies within a centralized platform. These experiences are critical in
demonstrating how individuals, rather than only corporations, can generate sus-
tainable revenue in the metaverse.
•Digital-Native Brand– Blueberry Fashion: Digital-native fashion brands operate
exclusively within the metaverse, making them a distinct category of company that
differs from traditional brands entering digital spaces. By focusing on a direct-
to-avatar (D2A) fashion company, this research explores how commerce evolves
when physical inventory, supply chains, and retail spaces are removed from the
equation. This case demonstrates how businesses that originate in the metaverse
function without reliance on external industries, making them a blueprint for future
metaverse-native enterprises.
•Branded Experience– Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon: Branded metaverse activations
exemplify how major real-world brands seek integrate themselves into virtual spaces,
leveraging immersive environments to engage audiences in ways traditional digital
advertising cannot. These experiences offer a perspective on sponsorship models,
104 4| Case Studies on Roblox
in-game brand storytelling, and how corporations navigate metaverse platforms to
extend their intellectual property. Including a branded experience ensures that this
study also examines the role of established companies in shaping virtual economies.
By selecting these three case studies, this research ensures that the major pillars of
metaverse commerce—individual creators, established brands, and digital-native enter-
prises—are all accounted for. While there are countless variations of metaverse business
models, these three categories collectively provide a scalable framework for understand-
ing monetization strategies across the vast majority of virtual experiences. Their analysis
not only captures the breadth of revenue-generating opportunities within Roblox but also
offers insights into how different actors shape and sustain economic activity in metaverse
ecosystems more broadly. The following case studies will provide an in-depth look at
how monetization occurs within the Roblox ecosystem, shedding light on the economic
relationships between creators, brands, and the platform itself.
4.1. Dress To Impress: A Viral User-Generated Ex-
perience
One of the key reasons for selecting Dress to Impress as the UGC case study is its im-
mense popularity and player engagement metrics. The game consistently has no fewer
than 90,000 concurrent players at any given time, with an average of 180,000 active users,
making it one of the most well-known and popular games on Roblox. The high player
count is a strong indicator of its successful business model, demonstrating how indepen-
dent creators can generate sustainable revenue through in-game purchases, customization,
and socially-driven engagement loops. Additionally, personal in-depth expamination of
the game allowed me to gather first-hand insights into its monetization mechanics and
player interactions. While there are many UGC experiences on Roblox, Dress to Impress
stands out due to its well-integrated economic model, widespread virality, and ability to
consistently attract high engagement.
Among the many user-generated content (UGC) experiences on Roblox, Dress to Im-
press was selected as a case study because it exemplifies a highly successful player-driven
economy, where monetization is deeply integrated into social interaction and competition.
Unlike many UGC experiences that focus on open-ended creativity or casual gameplay,
Dress to Impress introduces structured mechanics that incentivize spending through sta-
tus, exclusivity, and self-expression. The game’s reliance on avatar customization, limited-
edition digital fashion, and progression-based incentives makes it an ideal example of how
4| Case Studies on Roblox 105
independent creators can establish sustainable business models within a centralized plat-
form. Furthermore, its virality on social media platforms such as TikTok reinforces its role
as a trend-driven economy, showcasing how user-generated games can leverage external
visibility to drive monetization.
4.1.1. Context
Dress to Impress is a user-generated experience (UGE) on Roblox, developed by the Dress
to Impress Team, with key creators including Gigi, Owen, DiarBenOfficial, and Choopie.
While limited public information is available about the developers, the main creator, Gigi,
appears to have been around 16 years old at the time of the game’s release in October
2023, highlighting how Roblox enables everyone, even such young developers, to build and
scale successful metaverse experiences (Dress To Impress Group, b), (Weedston, 2024).
Despite being a relatively new addition to the Roblox ecosystem, Dress to Impress has
quickly become one of the platform’s most popular games. While no official data is
available on its average player count, an estimate of around 100,000 concurrent players
by mid-2024 is based on my own observations, having checked the game’s player count
on over 50 different occasions (Dress To Impress Group, a). The game’s viral success is
closely tied to its highly engaging, social, and competitive gameplay mechanics, as well as
its ability to integrate seasonal updates, limited-edition content, and real-world cultural
moments—all of which contribute to a dynamic in-game economy and sustained player
interest.
4.1.2. Gameplay and Monetization Model
The core mechanic of Dress to Impress revolves around competitive fashion styling. Play-
ers enter online lobbies, where they receive a randomly assigned theme (e.g., "Winter
Wonderland" or "Futuristic Fashion") and have four minutes to assemble an outfit from
a selection of up to 18 articles of clothing (Koepp, 2025). The game also allows users to
modify colors, adjust makeup, select skin tones, and customize nail colors, further increas-
ing the personalization factor. Once the styling phase is complete, players walk a virtual
runway, where they are judged by other participants, who rate outfits on a one-to-five-
star scale. Players accumulate personal rankings, with the highest tier being "Fashion
Goddess.". In addition to competitive rounds, the game includes a free-play mode, where
users can experiment with outfit combinations without time constraints.
106 4| Case Studies on Roblox
Figure 4.1: Dress To Impress experience on Roblox
The monetization strategy of Dress to Impress capitalizes on several key revenue drivers
commonly seen in user-generated experiences on Roblox:
•Limited-Edition Virtual Goods: The game releases seasonal updates (e.g., Hal-
loween, Christmas, Valentine’s Day) introducing new clothing, accessories, and
hairstyles, many of which are limited-time only, incentivizing purchases through
a scarcity model.
•Premium Customization Options: While players can access a wide range of free
items, additional premium cosmetics and customization options are available for
purchase using Robux, the Roblox currency.
•Quest-Based Monetization: Recent updates have introduced story-driven quests,
which further encourage engagement and monetization through progression-based
rewards.
4.1.3. Virality, Social Media Influence, and Cultural Impact
Beyond its in-game mechanics, Dress to Impress has benefited from unprecedented virality
on social media, particularly on TikTok and Instagram, where millions of users have posted
gameplay clips, styling tips, and ranking strategies. The game has been featured in videos
from popular streamers, YouTubers, and TikTok influencers, amplifying its reach beyond
the Roblox ecosystem. One of the defining moments in the game’s rise to prominence
was its collaboration with popstar Charli XCX for the release of her album BRAT. This
strategic partnership aligned the game with a global pop culture phenomenon, driving
further interest from players who might not have otherwise engaged with Roblox content.
4| Case Studies on Roblox 107
The ability to tap into real-world cultural moments and trends has reinforced the game’s
relevance and longevity, demonstrating how metaverse experiences can act as interactive
extensions of major cultural and media events (Raynor, 2024).
4.1.4. Business Model Analysis: How Dress to Impress Gener-
ates Revenue
Dress to Impress follows a hybrid monetization model, combining direct Robux transac-
tions, an in-game currency system, and exclusive premium features to encourage both
free-to-play engagement and paid upgrades. To better understand the dynamics, it has
to be said that the only way for a user who is not also a creator to obtain Robux is to
directly buy them: the only currency obtainable by playing is in-game currency. Users
can get Robux via monthly subscription to Roblox or by simply buying a pack of them
on the Roblox website and there’s no way to get Robux for free: “There is no such thing
as free Robux or membership offers, tricks, or codes. If a person, video, website, or game
tries to tell you there is one, this is a scam and a violation of our Terms of Use” (Roblox
Corporation). This said, the game’s revenue model can be broken down into the following
key mechanisms:
VIP Access: Exclusive Content as a Status Symbol
One of the game’s core revenue drivers is VIP entrance, a pay-to-access model where play-
ers purchase the access to an exclusive area filled with high-end clothing and accessories
that are otherwise off-limits to non-paying users. This monetization strategy follows a
premium access model, frequently seen in mobile gaming, live-service games, and virtual
fashion economies.
•Monetization Strategy: Players must purchase VIP access using Robux, creating an
upfront paywall for exclusive content.
•Scarcity and Social Status: VIP-only items, particularly recognizable staple pieces,
function as status symbols within the game, reinforcing their desirability and en-
couraging non-VIP players to upgrade.
•Psychological Incentive: Since these highly visible VIP items appear in every com-
petition, they generate aspirational demand, motivating players to spend Robux to
enhance their social standing.
108 4| Case Studies on Roblox
Figure 4.2: In order to get VIP users have to buy a special "pass" using Robux
This exclusivity-based monetization mirrors models seen in luxury brand marketing, where
certain items gain cultural value simply due to their scarcity and symbolic recognition.
In the metaverse, however, digital scarcity is not constrained by production costs but is
artificially created to mimic real-world luxury economies.
Customized Makeup: Enhancing Competitive Advantage
Another premium feature is customized makeup, which allows users to design their own
makeup looks instead of selecting from pre-made options. This freemium model is a widely
used business strategy in digital platforms, where users receive basic access for free but
can pay for premium customization features.
•Monetization Strategy: This feature is paywalled behind a Robux transaction,
meaning only paying users can unlock full creative control over their makeup styling.
•Strategic Advantage in Competitions: Since the game requires players to match
their outfits to specific themes, having customized makeup provides a competitive
edge, making it a highly desirable upgrade for serious players.
•Encouraging Repeat Purchases: Players who frequently compete in styling chal-
lenges are likely to invest in customized makeup to maintain high ratings and rank-
ings, thus reinforcing engagement-based spending.
This aligns with pay-to-customize models seen in other avatar-based economies (such as
Bitmoji’s premium features or Fortnite’s paid skins), where expressive personalization is
valued by players and directly monetized.
4| Case Studies on Roblox 109
Limited-Time Virtual Goods: Seasonal and Special Item Sales
In addition to VIP-exclusive content, the game regularly releases special edition clothing
and makeup items, often tied to seasonal events or pop culture moments (e.g., Halloween,
Christmas, Valentine’s Day updates). This model follows the event-driven virtual goods
economy, where limited-time, high-demand content encourages impulse purchases.
•Scarcity-Driven Demand: Many of these items are limited edition, meaning once
they are gone, they do not return. This “fear of missing out” (FOMO) dynamic
encourages impulse purchases.
•Cultural Relevance and Trend-Based Spending: The game aligns in-game fashion
releases with real-world fashion and pop culture trends, ensuring continued engage-
ment and relevance.
•Recurring Revenue Model: Regular content drops encourage repeated spending over
time, sustaining ongoing revenue generation rather than relying on one-time pur-
chases.
This strategy reflects seasonal digital commerce trends, similar to battle pass models in
Fortnite or seasonal item rotations in The Sims 4, where time-limited exclusivity drives
higher purchase rates and repeat engagement.
In-Game Currency: Soft Monetization and Indirect Spending
Beyond direct Robux transactions, Dress to Impress features an internal in-game currency,
earned by playing that can be used to purchase additional clothing, patterns, and poses
for the runway, which is a hallmark of freemium mobile games and metaverse platform
economies.
•Dual Currency System: Players can either play for in-game money or purchase it
instantly with Robux, introducing an optional pay-to-progress mechanic.
•Pose Packs as Cosmetic Monetization: Runway poses can be purchased with in-
game currency, but players looking to expand their performance options quickly can
bypass the earning process by spending Robux.
•Microtransaction Strategy: By making the in-game economy convertible via Robux,
the game creates a frictionless entry point for spending, where players justify pur-
chases as a time-saving convenience rather than a direct paywall.
This system mirrors freemium models seen in mobile games (such as Genshin Impact or
FIFA Ultimate Team), where players can either earn resources through gameplay or pur-
110 4| Case Studies on Roblox
chase them for immediate access. This business model is particularly effective because it
allows both free and paying users to participate, while subtly pushing spending incentives
through time-saving convenience.
Brand Partnerships and Integrated Cultural Collaborations
One of the most innovative business models used in Dress to Impress is brand and celebrity
partnerships, as demonstrated by its collaboration with Charli XCX for the release of her
BRAT album. This partnership exemplifies a new form of experience-based monetiza-
tion, where brands and artists enter virtual ecosystems not just for advertising but to
become part of the user experience itself. Unlike traditional advertising-driven platforms,
where revenue comes from display ads, sponsorships, or product placements, this model
integrates brand activations into the core game experience. Since no official financial
details of this collaboration have been disclosed, the following revenue structures are hy-
pothesized based on common industry practices in metaverse brand partnerships, virtual
collaborations, and similar case studies:
•Revenue Sharing Agreement: If Brat-themed items or in-game features were mon-
etized (e.g., themed clothing, limited-time content), revenue may have been split
between DTI’s developers and Charli XCX/her record label.
•Fixed Sponsorship Fee: Charli XCX (or her label) may have paid DTI a lump sum
to integrate Brat branding in the game, in exchange for exposure to the Roblox
audience.
•Engagement-Based Promotion: DTI could have gained direct financial benefits from
increased player engagement, as Roblox’s Premium Payouts reward developers based
on how long Premium users stay in a game.
Figure 4.3: Dress To Impress partership with CharliXCX’s BRAT.
4| Case Studies on Roblox 111
This partnership highlights a key difference between Web 2.0 marketing and metaverse-
native business models. Unlike Web 2.0 brand deals, where influencers promote products
outside the platforms they use, metaverse partnerships embed the brand inside the digital
world itself, transforming entertainment into an interactive and more enduring economic
system. The apparent success of this collaboration suggests that metaverse platforms
like Roblox provide entirely new spaces for brand engagement. While traditional music
marketing relies on streaming numbers, live events, and social media engagement, the Brat
collaboration demonstrates how music and digital platforms can merge to create deeper
fan interaction and potentially new revenue channels. This model could be replicated by
other brands, expanding metaverse-based brand activations beyond gaming into fashion,
music, entertainment, and beyond. As Roblox and other virtual platforms grow, brand
partnerships and integrated content experiences are likely to become one of the dominant
monetization strategies in the metaverse economy.
So, to summarize, the sustained engagement and monetization success of Dress to Impress
can be attributed to several key factors that drive player participation and spending. The
game remains dynamic and ever-evolving through continuous updates, regularly introduc-
ing new clothing, makeup, and accessories to keep the experience fresh and engaging. A
significant driver of monetization is the concept of FOMO, a term used by genZ meaning
Fear of Missing Out, as many of these items are seasonal and time-limited, creating a sense
of urgency that compels players to spend Robux before exclusive outfits and cosmetics
disappear (Alfina and Mardhiyah, 2023). Additionally, the game’s social and competitive
mechanics play a crucial role in retention—its rating and ranking system encourages play-
ers to consistently refine their styling skills, reinforcing a cycle of repeated engagement. At
its core, Dress to Impress monetizes user-generated creativity and skill, allowing players
to express themselves through fashion while positioning self-expression as a fundamental
economic driver within the experience.
4.1.5. Implications for Metaverse Business Models
The success of Dress to Impress highlights several key insights about user-generated busi-
ness models in the metaverse:
•Community-Driven Monetization: Unlike traditional games where revenue is dic-
tated by developers, UGC-based experiences on Roblox allow monetization to emerge
from community engagement and social trends.
•The Role of External Cultural Influences: The Charli XCX collaboration showcases
how metaverse experiences can integrate with mainstream pop culture, opening new
112 4| Case Studies on Roblox
avenues for brands, artists, and creators to engage with digital audiences.
•The Power of Virality and Social Media Amplification: The game’s TikTok-driven
popularity demonstrates how UGC platforms rely on player-generated marketing to
scale organically.
Ultimately, Dress to Impress exemplifies how a user-generated experience can become a
fully-fledged metaverse business, leveraging community engagement, real-world cultural
moments, and limited-edition digital assets to drive both player retention and monetiza-
tion
4.1.6. Discussion of the Dress to Impress Case
The monetization strategy of Dress to Impress reflects a carefully structured approach
to revenue generation, balancing direct Robux transactions, engagement-driven spending,
and social status-based monetization. The decision to monetize primarily through VIP
access, customized features, limited-edition items, and in-game currency purchases aligns
with established trends in platform-based and digital goods economies, where exclusivity,
personalization, and social influence drive consumer spending. As Bleier et al. highlight,
this aligns with insights from the platform economy, where the success of digital business
models depends on their ability to leverage user engagement and spending habits (Bleier
et al., 2024). The VIP model, for example, leverages exclusivity and social visibility,
making premium clothing and accessories a status symbol within the game’s ecosystem.
This mirrors strategies used in luxury fashion and gaming economies, where scarcity and
recognizable premium content increase desirability (Periyasami and Periyasamy, 2022).
Similarly, customized makeup functions as a competitive advantage, allowing players to
fine-tune their avatars to better match competition themes, thereby introducing a func-
tional reason to purchase premium content beyond aesthetic appeal.
The game’s limited-time releases and seasonal updates further enhance player engagement
and monetization by integrating FOMO (fear of missing out) mechanics, a widely used
strategy in live-service games and digital marketplaces. By creating short-lived but highly
desirable digital goods, Dress to Impress ensures that players feel a sense of urgency to
spend Robux, reinforcing recurring revenue cycles rather than relying on one-time pur-
chases. According to Edeling, The ability to tie limited-edition digital assets to moments
of cultural significance amplifies engagement and fosters a deeper connection between the
creator and the audience (Edeling and Wies, 2024). Additionally, the inclusion of an in-
game currency system introduces a dual monetization pathway—players can either earn
currency through gameplay or bypass playing by directly converting Robux into in-game
4| Case Studies on Roblox 113
money, a strategy seen in freemium mobile games and engagement-driven economies. This
model incentivizes both paying and non-paying users while subtly pushing players toward
microtransactions by making premium items feel more attainable through small, repeated
purchases rather than large upfront costs.
Beyond its internal game economy, Dress to Impress also benefits from Roblox’s Pre-
mium Payouts program, as do all experiences on Roblox, which distributes revenue based
on how much time Premium subscribers spend in the game. Unlike platforms such as
YouTube, where creators earn based on ad revenue and total views, Roblox developers do
not receive payouts simply for attracting high player counts. Instead, Roblox monetizes
primarily through user spending, with Premium Payouts acting as an additional reward
for games that successfully retain paying subscribers. This structure incentivizes high-
quality, engagement-driven experiences, discouraging the creation of low-effort, clickbait
games that rely solely on visitor count. By ensuring that only Premium players contribute
to these passive earnings, Roblox reinforces the importance of subscriber retention, as Pre-
mium users provide a stable, recurring revenue source through monthly membership fees.
This system also aligns developer incentives with Roblox’s business strategy—successful
games help increase the value of a Premium subscription, encouraging more users to enroll,
which in turn drives higher engagement across the platform (Elavra, 2024).
The effectiveness of Dress to Impress’s monetization model can be attributed to its deep
integration of engagement loops, social validation mechanics, and limited-edition digital
commerce. Unlike traditional digital storefronts, where users browse and purchase static
content, Dress to Impress transforms monetization into an interactive, competitive, and
social experience. Players not only purchase items for self-expression but also to gain an
advantage in competitions, climb ranking systems, and maintain a digital identity within
a dynamic, evolving game world. These strategies ensure that monetization feels like an
organic part of the experience, rather than an external sales mechanism, making spending
within the game feel more justified, rewarding, and socially meaningful. The case of Dress
to Impress highlights how metaverse business models increasingly rely on psychological
triggers, scarcity-driven demand, and gamified spending mechanics, demonstrating how
UGC-based economies can achieve sustainable success through community-driven mone-
tization strategies.
114 4| Case Studies on Roblox
Figure 4.4: The gamified version of famous fashion items (e.g., Hermès Birkin bag) can
be purchased with Robux.
Differences with Classic Web 2.0 Platforms’ Business Model and
the Role of the Metaverse in Shaping New Models
The monetization strategies employed in Dress to Impress reflect a hybrid metaverse
business model, designed to optimize engagement, retention, and social-driven spending.
Unlike traditional Web 2.0 platforms, where revenue is primarily generated through adver-
tising, brand partnerships, and influencer-driven sponsorships, Dress to Impress follows
a direct-to-user monetization approach, where spending is fully integrated into game-
play. This distinction represents a fundamental shift in how digital platforms extract and
sustain economic value.
In traditional Web 2.0 models, platforms such as YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok rely on
advertising-based revenue, where businesses pay to reach audiences, and content creators
earn money based on ad impressions, sponsorships, or affiliate marketing. Monetization
is indirect, as users do not typically pay for platform access or engagement features. By
contrast, Dress to Impress operates within a transaction-based economy, where users pay
directly for premium content, such as VIP access, customizable makeup, and exclusive
seasonal items. This removes reliance on external advertisers and places the financial
model within the closed-loop economy of the platform, where all revenue is derived from
user participation.
Another key difference is how value is created and monetized. In Web 2.0 platforms, users
4| Case Studies on Roblox 115
generate value primarily through content creation and engagement metrics (likes, views,
shares), and platforms monetize their attention through advertising and data collection.
In Dress to Impress, value is derived from user-generated self-expression, where players
engage in a gamified economy of digital fashion, making direct purchases to enhance
their status, rankings, and customization options. Unlike Web 2.0 influencers, who build
personal brands to attract sponsorships, players in Dress to Impress monetize their digital
identity directly through in-game purchases, bypassing the need for brand partnerships
(Florida, 2022).
Additionally, the freemium model in Web 2.0 platforms differs in execution. Platforms
such as Spotify, Twitch, and YouTube Premium use a subscription-based freemium model,
where users can remove ads and unlock additional content for a monthly fee. In contrast,
Dress to Impress does not follow a subscription-based model but instead integrates mi-
crotransactions and virtual economies, where players can make one-time purchases or
convert Robux into in-game currency to accelerate progress. This pay-to-customize and
pay-to-progress model is more closely aligned with mobile gaming economies (e.g., Gen-
shin Impact, Fortnite) than with Web 2.0 content platforms.
Furthermore, Dress to Impress leverages Roblox’s Premium Payouts, which reward devel-
opers based on time spent by Premium subscribers—a mechanism partially reminiscent
of Web 2.0 watch-time monetization models (e.g., YouTube’s ad revenue split). However,
this payout is restricted to Premium users, meaning developers do not earn passive in-
come from total player count alone, as for example YouTubers do from general viewership.
This ensures that only games that retain paying subscribers are rewarded, reinforcing a
platform economy that prioritizes engagement-driven monetization rather than passive
attention capture.
Can These Business Models Exist in Web 2.0 Platforms?
Although some elements of Dress to Impress’s monetization strategies resemble Web 2.0
revenue models, the full scope of its business model is uniquely shaped by the structure of
the metaverse itself—and particularly by the Roblox platform economy. The integration
of virtual economies, gamified spending, and digital self-expression monetization is not
easily transferable to traditional Web 2.0 platforms, because those platforms were built
around content consumption rather than interactive, participatory economies.
One of the main reasons Web 2.0 platforms cannot fully adopt metaverse business models
is that their core function is passive content consumption, not immersive engagement.
Platforms such as YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok do not support persistent virtual
116 4| Case Studies on Roblox
worlds, nor do they provide users with ownership over digital goods or avatars. The
success of Dress to Impress is rooted in its ability to turn self-expression into an interactive,
gamified competition, where virtual assets have functional value beyond aesthetics—an
element missing in traditional Web 2.0 platforms.
Furthermore, Web 2.0 platforms rely on indirect monetization (ads, sponsorships, and
brand deals), while metaverse platforms operate through direct digital commerce. If
YouTube or Instagram were to attempt a similar model, they would need to fundamen-
tally restructure their ecosystems to include persistent virtual economies. Some Web 2.0
platforms have tried integrating elements of metaverse monetization—for example, Insta-
gram has experimented with NFT sales, and YouTube has introduced "super chats" and
channel memberships. However, these do not replicate the full-scale in-world economies
found in metaverse platforms like Roblox.
Additionally, Web 2.0 platforms lack the concept of in-world scarcity, which is crucial to
the business model of Dress to Impress. The FOMO-driven limited-time items and VIP
exclusivity mechanics work because the metaverse allows for artificial scarcity in digital
spaces (Alfina and Mardhiyah, 2023). In contrast, Web 2.0 platforms do not have finite
resources or limited availability mechanics—users can always access older videos, posts,
and filters without urgency. This fundamental structural difference means that metaverse
business models cannot be fully replicated in Web 2.0 without changing the entire nature
of the platform.
4.2. Blueberry Fashion: A Digital-Native Fashion
Brand
Despite having a relatively modest player base with an average of 60 concurrent users,
Blueberry Fashion was chosen because of its recognition as a leading digital-native fashion
brand in the metaverse (Jones, 2022). Unlike smaller digital fashion brands on Roblox,
Blueberry is also established on multiple platforms, including Second Life and Zepeto,
reinforcing its status as a well-known and influential name in virtual fashion. This cross-
platform presence highlights its ability to scale beyond Roblox and remain relevant in the
broader digital fashion landscape. While some other fashion brands also operate in the
metaverse, Blueberry’s direct-to-avatar (D2A) model, frequent collaborations with real-
world designers, and reputation as a pioneer in metaverse fashion make it a particularly
insightful case study for understanding the evolution of digital commerce.
In selecting a digital-native fashion brand, Blueberry Fashion stood out due to its direct-
4| Case Studies on Roblox 117
to-avatar (D2A) business model, which has redefined digital fashion commerce within
Roblox. Unlike traditional fashion brands that enter the metaverse through limited col-
lections or virtual runway shows, Blueberry operates exclusively within digital spaces,
proving that a brand can thrive without any physical product counterpart. This case
study was chosen because it highlights how a fashion label can function entirely in a
virtual economy, leveraging avatar-based self-expression, scarcity mechanics, and influ-
encer collaborations to drive sales. Compared to other digital fashion brands on Roblox,
Blueberry’s consistent expansion, partnerships with real-world designers, and community-
driven marketing strategies make it a leading example of how fashion brands can scale
and sustain profitability in a metaverse economy (WearBlueberry).
4.2.1. Context
Blueberry Fashion is a digital-native fashion brand that has established a strong presence
within the metaverse, particularly on Roblox. Unlike Dress to Impress, which originated as
a user-generated experience (UGE) developed by independent creators, Blueberry Fashion
is a professional digital fashion label that designs and sells virtual clothing exclusively for
avatars. The brand was founded by Mishi McDuff, a digital fashion entrepreneur who
initially gained recognition for creating virtual couture for Second Life. Blueberry later
expanded into Roblox in 2023, positioning itself as a pioneer in direct-to-avatar (D2A)
fashion, where digital goods are sold directly to users without a physical counterpart
(McDuff). By mid-2024, Blueberry had grown into one of the most recognized fashion
brands on Roblox, partnering with major metaverse influencers and real-world fashion
brands to market and distribute its designs (House of Blueberry).
Unlike traditional fashion brands that have entered the metaverse through one-off collab-
orations, Blueberry operates exclusively within digital environments, making it a prime
case study for analyzing sustainable virtual fashion business models. The brand’s success
demonstrates how digital fashion has moved beyond novelty into a full-fledged economy,
where users willingly invest in their avatar’s appearance as an extension of their identity
(Barrett, 2021).
4.2.2. Gameplay and Monetization Model
Blueberry Fashion does not operate as a standalone game but instead functions as a
digital fashion retailer within the Roblox marketplace. The Blueberry Fashion experience
consists simply of a two-floor mall, with different “rooms” that resemble shops and has all
the available clothing and accessories displayed on the walls. Players purchase and wear
118 4| Case Studies on Roblox
Blueberry outfits across multiple experiences, making it an example of how metaverse-
native fashion brands monetize without requiring a dedicated game environment.
Figure 4.5: Blueberry Fashion experience on Roblox
Blueberry Fashion offers a range of clothing, accessories, and avatar customization op-
tions, all of which exist exclusively as digital assets within Roblox’s avatar ecosystem.
Unlike traditional e-commerce, where customers purchase physical products, Blueberry’s
consumers acquire wearable digital items that their avatars can use across multiple ex-
periences on the platform. This model allows for a seamless integration of fashion into
the metaverse, enabling users to express their digital identity through customized styles.
To facilitate this, Blueberry operates its own virtual storefront within Roblox, where
users can browse, purchase, and instantly equip their selected items, making the shopping
experience entirely platform-native and immersive (WearBlueberry).
Blueberry Fashion employs a direct-to-avatar (D2A) business model, where all revenue
comes from digital fashion sales rather than advertising or external sponsorships. Its
primary monetization strategies include: Limited-Edition Digital Fashion Drops: Just
like real-world luxury brands, Blueberry releases exclusive fashion collections, encouraging
urgency and repeat purchases.
•Premium Customization: Players can mix and match different Blueberry clothing
items, promoting personalization as a form of economic engagement.
•Brand and Influencer Collaborations: The company partners with real-world fashion
labels and metaverse influencers to create exclusive, co-branded collections, expand-
ing its reach.
4| Case Studies on Roblox 119
4.2.3. Virality, Social Media Influence, and Cultural Impact
Blueberry Fashion has positioned itself as one of the most trend-forward digital fashion
brands, benefiting from virality across multiple digital platforms:
•Metaverse Influence and Digital Identity: As avatars become more sophisticated,
users invest in digital fashion for self-expression. Blueberry taps into this cultural
shift, recognizing that digital fashion is not just an accessory but an identity state-
ment in virtual spaces. Also, Blueberry’s designs are created with realistic fabric
textures, intricate details, and high levels of customization, setting a new standard
for digital fashion.
•Social Media and Platform-Native Promotion: Blueberry collaborates with Roblox
influencers, streamers, and in-game creators to promote new collections. Unlike
Dress to Impress, which gained virality through TikTok trends and gameplay clips,
Blueberry relies on fashion-focused marketing, positioning itself as a premium brand
for digital wearables.
•Bridging Digital and Physical Fashion: While Blueberry primarily operates within
the metaverse, its rise reflects larger industry trends in phygital fashion (physical
+ digital). The brand’s success suggests that fashion brands may no longer need
physical products to generate demand, as users are willing to invest in purely digital
wardrobes (Zwieglinska, 2022).
4.2.4. Business Model Analysis: How Blueberry Fashion Gen-
erates Revenue
Unlike Dress to Impress, where monetization is tied to in-game engagement, Blueberry
Fashion follows a fashion retail business model, where revenue is generated from direct
digital product sales. The main revenue streams are:
•Item Sales (Primary Revenue Source): Users purchase individual fashion pieces
using Robux, with no free-to-play equivalent.
•Exclusive Drops and Limited-Edition Collections: Like real-world luxury fashion
brands, Blueberry limits supply to drive demand.
•Collaborations with Roblox Creators and Developers: Expands reach by integrating
fashion into existing popular experiences.
120 4| Case Studies on Roblox
The Direct-to-Avatar (D2A) Model: A New Retail Paradigm
Unlike traditional direct-to-consumer (DTC) fashion, which sells physical products online,
Blueberry operates as a D2A brand, where all purchases are purely digital. This model
is scalable, high-margin, and built for the metaverse economy, requiring no inventory,
logistics, or material production. The D2A model represents a shift in consumer behavior,
as younger generations appear to be equally willing to invest in digital fashion as in
physical fashion.
Figure 4.6: Users can "try on" the items before buying them.
Brand Partnerships and Integrated Fashion Collaborations
In addition to standalone sales, Blueberry Fashion has introduced partnership-based col-
lections, and it is currently collaborating with: Leah Ashe (Roblox influencer), Natori
(luxury fashion brand) and Rebel Girl (fashion-forward brand with themes of empower-
ment). These partnerships integrate real-world and influencer-led branding into digital
fashion, but since there is no available data regarding how these collaborations work, the
exact financial arrangements remain unclear. Some of the possibilities could be:
•Revenue Sharing Model: Blueberry splits sales revenue with the partner brands,
giving them a percentage per item sold (or something similar)
•Fixed Licensing Fee: Blueberry pays a licensing fee to use branded designs, or brands
pay Blueberry for platform exposure
•Collaborative Design Process: The designs are created by the brands and mod-
eled by Blueberry, or could be that Blueberry is responsible for both design and
implementation
4| Case Studies on Roblox 121
Figure 4.7: Blueberry’s partnership with fashion-brand Natori.
Regardless of structure, these partnerships enhance Blueberry’s legitimacy as a premium
digital fashion brand, allowing real-world designers and influencers to access a new market
of metaverse consumers.
4.2.5. Implications for Metaverse Business Models
The success of Blueberry Fashion offers key insights into how fashion brands can thrive
in the metaverse:
•Digital-Only Brands Can Be Profitable: Blueberry proves that a fashion brand does
not need physical products to generate real revenue.
•The Power of Limited-Edition Drops: Creating urgency and exclusivity in digital
fashion mirrors real-world luxury fashion strategies.
•Brand Partnerships Are an Emerging Metaverse Model: The success of collaborative
collections suggests that digital fashion brands may increasingly operate as platforms
for metaverse-native brand partnerships.
4.2.6. Discussion of the Blueberry Fashion Case
The case of Blueberry Fashion illustrates how direct-to-avatar (D2A) business models are
reshaping the fashion industry within metaverse platforms. Unlike traditional fashion
brands that rely on physical production and distribution, Blueberry operates exclusively
within digital environments, demonstrating that fashion commerce no longer requires
122 4| Case Studies on Roblox
physical goods to be viable. The success of Blueberry underscores a fundamental shift
in consumer behavior, where virtual self-expression is valued as highly as physical-world
fashion, particularly among younger generations accustomed to digital economies.
A key insight from this case study is that Blueberry’s business model bypasses traditional
advertising-driven revenue streams, opting instead for direct user monetization through
digital asset sales. In doing so, Blueberry creates a fully immersive brand ecosystem where
users engage with fashion as an interactive and evolving aspect of their digital identity.
Unlike Web 2.0 platforms where fashion brands market products externally, Blueberry’s
integration into Roblox allows for fashion engagement as a lived experience, rather than
as a promotional tool (Barrett, 2021).
Figure 4.8: Blueberry’s approach to D2A model: when the avatar gets closer to the item,
the price shows
Additionally, the success of Blueberry highlights how fashion brands can leverage scarcity
and exclusivity in digital commerce. By offering limited-edition fashion drops and influ-
encer collaborations, Blueberry mirrors high-fashion retail strategies while adapting them
for a fully digital economy. The ability to seamlessly incorporate co-branded collections
with influencers and real-world designers further demonstrates how digital fashion brands
can operate as platforms for brand synergy and cross-market engagement. This case also
reinforces the growing importance of platform-native digital identity. Unlike traditional
e-commerce, where fashion consumption is passive, Blueberry Fashion’s model enables
users to actively express themselves in an environment where digital clothing serves not
only aesthetic but also social and interactive purposes. Research by Periyasami et al.
(2022) suggests that avatar-based self-expression is becoming a key factor in how users
engage with digital platforms, making fashion a crucial element of identity formation in
metaverse economies.
4| Case Studies on Roblox 123
Ultimately, the Blueberry Fashion case exemplifies how metaverse-native business models
are disrupting conventional industry structures, creating a new digital-first approach to
fashion commerce. It serves as a proof-of-concept for the long-term viability of avatar-
driven fashion economies, demonstrating that direct digital transactions, immersive brand
ecosystems, and influencer collaborations will likely play a central role in the future of
the industry.
Differences with Classic Web 2.0 Platforms’ Business Model and
the Role of the Metaverse in Shaping New Models
The monetization strategies employed by Blueberry Fashion in Roblox showcase a fun-
damental departure from classic Web 2.0 business models, illustrating how the meta-
verse environment reshapes the relationship between creators, platforms, and consumers.
Unlike traditional Web 2.0 platforms such as Instagram, YouTube, or TikTok, which
primarily monetize through indirect revenue streams like advertising, sponsorships, and
influencer-brand collaborations, Blueberry Fashion operates within a direct-to-consumer
digital commerce model, where virtual goods serve as the primary revenue driver.
In Web 2.0 platforms, monetization revolves around audience attention and engagement,
with creators earning revenue through ad-based revenue sharing (e.g., YouTube Partner
Program), brand sponsorships, and affiliate marketing. The economic model is inher-
ently advertiser-dependent, meaning that revenue generation relies on attracting brands
rather than selling directly to users. Creators generate value by producing content, but
this content itself is generally free to consume, with monetization occurring through in-
termediaries. By contrast, Blueberry Fashion’s business model is fully embedded within
the metaverse platform economy, where monetization is not based on passive viewer-
ship but on active user participation and in-game transactions. Instead of serving as
a content-driven, ad-monetized platform such as Instagram or TikTok, Blueberry Fash-
ion sells virtual fashion items directly to users. These items function as digital assets,
often tied to exclusivity, personalization, and social identity; all elements that Web 2.0
platforms struggle to commercialize due to their fundamentally different nature.
Additionally, Blueberry Fashion engages in direct brand collaborations with fashion de-
signers, influencers, and brands such as Leah Ashe, Natori, and Rebel Girls, integrating
co-branded digital assets into the game world. This goes beyond mere sponsorship or
product placement, as the brand itself becomes part of the user experience, blending
commerce with self-expression. Unlike influencer marketing in Web 2.0, where brand
exposure remains passive (e.g., an influencer wearing a product in a video), Blueberry’s
124 4| Case Studies on Roblox
collaborations offer players the ability to actively engage with branded content, wearing
and customizing virtual items as part of their in-game identity.
This integration of virtual goods, immersive experiences, and direct digital commerce
within a user-generated world represents a fundamental evolution in platform-based busi-
ness models. Metaverse platforms allow businesses to move beyond advertising-based
revenue models toward direct monetization of digital identity, virtual assets, and partici-
patory experiences (Jung et al., 2025).
Can These Business Models Exist in Web 2.0 Platforms?
While some elements of Blueberry Fashion’s monetization strategy share similarities with
Web 2.0 commerce models (e.g., digital fashion, branded collaborations, and direct sales),
the full scope of its business model is uniquely shaped by the structure of the metaverse,
making it difficult to fully replicate in Web 2.0 environments. One of the primary barriers
to Web 2.0 adoption is the lack of persistent, interactive virtual economies. Platforms
like Instagram and YouTube are content-first, designed for passive consumption rather
than immersive engagement. In contrast, metaverse platforms create persistent digital
environments where users actively participate, giving virtual items functional value be-
yond aesthetics. Users do not simply watch content—they inhabit digital worlds, making
self-expression through virtual fashion an interactive and gamified experience rather than
a passive act of content consumption.
Additionally, Web 2.0 platforms lack built-in scarcity mechanics and virtual economies,
making it challenging to implement limited-edition digital assets or direct avatar-based
monetization. While Instagram has experimented with NFT sales, and YouTube has
introduced "super chats" and memberships, these do not fully replicate the integrated
virtual economies of metaverse platforms like Roblox, where users regularly purchase
and trade in-game assets that hold social and functional value. Furthermore, brand
partnerships in Web 2.0 platforms are fundamentally different from those in the metaverse.
On platforms such as Instagram or TikTok, brand deals are transactional and external,
relying on influencers to promote products that exist outside the platform. In Blueberry’s
model, however, brands become part of the digital ecosystem itself, offering items that
users buy, wear, and showcase within the metaverse environment. This distinction is
crucial: whereas Web 2.0 markets products to users, the metaverse makes them directly
part of the ongoing experience.
Also, the interoperability of digital assets is a crucial differentiator. In the metaverse, dig-
ital fashion items are designed to be worn by avatars across different experiences, fostering
4| Case Studies on Roblox 125
a sense of digital identity and ownership. In contrast, Web 2.0 platforms do not offer a
seamless way for users to transfer or utilize digital goods across multiple applications. As
highlighted by Periyasami et al., metaverse-native digital commerce relies on persistent
identity, asset ownership, and interactive brand engagement, which are not replicable
within traditional Web 2.0 frameworks (Periyasami and Periyasamy, 2022). The shift
from ad-based monetization to direct digital commerce within user-generated environ-
ments marks a key transformation in platform economics, underscoring how metaverse-
native models operate independently of Web 2.0’s traditional revenue frameworks (Edeling
and Wies, 2024). The ability to commercialize digital identity, integrate ecommerce into
the user experience, and foster scarcity-driven demand positions metaverse platforms like
Roblox as fundamentally different from—and in many ways, more monetizable than—Web
2.0 platforms.
Ultimately, the success of Blueberry Fashion demonstrates that the metaverse is not
merely an extension of Web 2.0 but a fundamentally different paradigm. While certain
aspects of its business model, such as brand collaborations and digital asset sales, can
be adapted to Web 2.0, the fully immersive, engagement-driven commerce structure is
intrinsically tied to the participatory nature of metaverse environments.
4.3. Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon: A Branded Meta-
verse Experience
Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon was selected over other branded experiences, such as Netflix
Nextworld, due to its stronger business model integration and long-term monetization
strategy. Unlike Netflix Nextworld, which primarily serves as a promotional tool for
franchise engagement, Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon operates as a persistent digital econ-
omy where users continuously invest in premium in-game content. The game leverages
a freemium model, in-game purchases, and brand integration mechanics, aligning closely
with metaverse-native monetization strategies. Additionally, Mattel and Gamefam update
the game with new content, ensuring ongoing revenue generation, whereas Nextworld lacks
a clear long-term monetization structure. Given its scalable business model and sustained
economic activity, Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon provides a more insightful case study into
how brands can develop self-sustaining metaverse ecosystems rather than relying solely
on brand awareness.
Branded metaverse experiences vary in approach, but Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon was
chosen due to its sustained player engagement and strong brand presence. While many
126 4| Case Studies on Roblox
branded activations serve as temporary marketing events, Barbie DreamHouse maintains
a consistent player base, with at least 1,000 concurrent players and an average of 4,000
users (Gamefam x Barbie). This is significantly higher than other branded experiences
considered, such as Netflix Nextworld, which averages around 50 concurrent players, mak-
ing Barbie DreamHouse a more relevant case for analyzing long-term brand integration
into metaverse platforms. Initially, Nikeland was also considered, but since it is currently
inactive due to a lack of seasonal events, it was ruled out. Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon’s
ongoing presence, progression-based monetization, and ability to attract a steady audi-
ence make it a strong example of how brands can create persistent revenue streams in
virtual spaces.
Figure 4.9: Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon is licensed by Mattel.
Metaverse experiences requested by famous brands are becoming increasingly common,
yet many are temporary activations designed as promotional campaigns rather than long-
term economic ecosystems. Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon was chosen because it represents
a persistent branded experience, where Mattel has created an ongoing, interactive envi-
ronment rather than a short-lived marketing stunt. Unlike one-time collaborations like
Gucci Garden or Nikeland, Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon integrates progression-based mon-
etization, user engagement loops, and digital commerce mechanics, demonstrating how
established brands can build enduring revenue streams within the metaverse. Addition-
ally, Barbie’s broad cultural impact, particularly following the eponymous film’s success
in 2023, makes this case especially relevant for analyzing how legacy brands transition
into metaverse spaces and sustain engagement beyond initial promotional hype.
4| Case Studies on Roblox 127
4.3.1. Context
Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon is an officially licensed metaverse experience developed by
Gamefam Studios in partnership with Mattel, launched on Roblox in 2023 (Gamefam).
Designed as a persistent, brand-driven virtual world, the game enables players to build,
customize, and expand their own Barbie DreamHouse while engaging in various activities
inspired by Barbie’s universe. Unlike other branded experiences on Roblox that serve
as limited-time promotional events, Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon represents a long-term
investment in digital brand engagement. For example, experiences like Nikeland, which
only opens during specific seasonal activations, or Gucci Garden, which was a temporary
virtual art installation, contrast sharply with Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon’s continuous
presence. By mid-2024, the game had amassed millions of visits, demonstrating the
enduring appeal of Barbie’s cultural legacy in a virtual format.
Mattel’s decision to enter the metaverse aligns with its broader digital transformation
strategy, seeking to evolve beyond its traditional role as a physical toy manufacturer. In
its official communications, Mattel has emphasized its commitment to expanding Barbie’s
universe across digital platforms, ensuring the brand remains relevant for new generations
of digitally native consumers. On this project, Mike DeLaet, Global Head of Digital
Gaming at Mattel, commented: “With so many fantastic iterations of Barbie over the
years, this felt like the right time to give Barbie – one of the world’s best-selling toys and
a fashion icon for more than six decades – the chance to find her feet on Roblox. As one
of the most instantly-recognizable brands in the world, we’re so excited for Barbie’s Roblox
debut and look forward to her connecting with an all-new community of fans.” (Mattel,
2023)
This shift exemplifies the growing significance of metaverse technologies, where traditional
companies recognize the necessity of engaging audiences within interactive, immersive
digital environments rather than solely through physical products.
4.3.2. Gameplay and Monetization Model
Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon departs from competition-based social games like Dress to
Impress by offering a progression-based simulation experience. Players begin with a ba-
sic DreamHouse and gradually unlock new rooms, decorations, and interactive features
as they advance through the game. This time-based progression system is designed to
encourage long-term engagement, ensuring that players return frequently to expand their
in-game assets. The game’s mechanics mirror the appeal of traditional tycoon and sim-
ulation games, where players customize and personalize their virtual spaces. Beyond
128 4| Case Studies on Roblox
house-building, players engage in roleplaying activities such as driving Barbie-themed
cars, dressing up avatars, and interacting with branded items inspired by Barbie’s legacy.
Unlike purely social hangout spaces, Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon integrates structured
objectives, making it more engaging for younger audiences who enjoy progression-based
gameplay (Gamefam x Barbie).
Figure 4.10: Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon experience on Roblox
Monetization in Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon follows a freemium model, where the base
game is free to play, but players are incentivized to purchase premium content. In-game
spending is largely driven by customization options, including exclusive fashion items,
home accessories, and vehicles, all available for purchase using Robux. Additionally,
the game implements limited-edition seasonal updates, featuring themed decorations and
exclusive outfits tied to real-world seasonal trends. These periodic content drops create a
sense of urgency, encouraging players to make time-sensitive purchases.
Unlike a standard direct-to-avatar (D2A) commerce model where brands sell individual
virtual items, Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon integrates interactive brand storytelling into
its monetization strategy. This ensures that players not only purchase virtual goods but
also engage with Barbie as an evolving, digital-first brand.
4.3.3. Virality, Social Media Influence, and Cultural Impact
A key driver behind the success of Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon is its alignment with Bar-
bie’s broader cultural resurgence, particularly following the release of the highly successful
2023 Barbie movie. Directed by Greta Gerwig and starring Margot Robbie, the film was
a global phenomenon, revitalizing interest in Barbie across multiple demographics. This
renewed cultural momentum translated into heightened engagement across digital plat-
4| Case Studies on Roblox 129
forms, including Roblox, where younger audiences already have a strong affinity for avatar
customization and roleplay-based experiences (Marcom, 2023).
The game has also benefited from organic virality on social media platforms such as Tik-
Tok, YouTube, and Instagram, where users share gameplay clips, showcase their Dream-
House designs, and participate in Barbie-themed trends. The so-called Barbiecore aes-
thetic, which saw a surge in popularity following the film’s release, contributed to increased
visibility for the game, as players sought to express their love for Barbie within digital
spaces.
Moreover, Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon is embedded within Mattel’s broader digital mar-
keting strategy, which includes influencer collaborations and cross-platform brand activa-
tions. By leveraging established content creators, Mattel ensures that Barbie’s presence
extends beyond the confines of traditional advertising, instead fostering community-driven
engagement that resonates with digital-native audiences (Mattel, 2023).
4.3.4. Business Model Analysis: How Barbie DreamHouse Ty-
coon Generates Revenue
Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon employs a hybrid monetization model, incorporating in-game
purchases, seasonal content drops, and cross-platform brand integration.
Freemium Model and Microtransactions
The game operates on a freemium basis, ensuring accessibility while incentivizing players
to spend Robux on premium content. Core purchases influence different aspects of player
engagement:
•Exclusive home decor and room expansions: These contribute to the overall cus-
tomization of a player’s DreamHouse, allowing them to create a unique and person-
alized virtual space.
•Fashion items and accessories for avatars: These purchases reinforce Barbie’s role
in digital fashion culture and serve as indicators of personal expression and social
status within the game’s community.
•Luxury vehicles, themed spaces, and animated objects: These elements enhance
the roleplaying aspects of the game, allowing for a more immersive and interactive
experience, which can also signal a player’s level of investment in the game.
130 4| Case Studies on Roblox
Figure 4.11: Special branded items are available for purchase using Robux
This progression-based economy encourages repeat spending, as players gradually un-
lock new digital goods that enhance both their in-game status and the overall immersive
experience.
Seasonal and Limited-Time Content
The game regularly introduces themed seasonal updates, mirroring real-world Barbie
product launches. These include:
•Limited-time seasonal collections, such as holiday-themed furniture or summer out-
fits.
•Themed events tied to Barbie collaborations, ensuring synergy with Mattel’s broader
marketing campaigns.
•Timed-exclusive furniture and outfit drops, leveraging the psychology of scarcity to
drive engagement and sales.
This approach keeps the game fresh, ensuring sustained player interest and higher mone-
tization potential over time.
Brand Partnerships and Digital Merchandising
Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon extends Mattel’s digital merchandising strategy, positioning
the game as a long-term branded space rather than a temporary promotional tool. Unlike
limited-time campaigns, the game functions as an ongoing virtual extension of the Barbie
brand. While there is no confirmed physical-to-digital (phygital) integration offering
exclusive digital rewards for real-world purchases, the game still serves as a persistent
4| Case Studies on Roblox 131
brand hub where players engage with Barbie as a lifestyle experience rather than just a
toy line. This reinforces Mattel’s transition toward a digital-first branding strategy that
aligns with emerging trends in the metaverse economy.
4.3.5. Implications for Metaverse Business Models
The success of Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon offers valuable insights into how legacy brands
can leverage metaverse platforms for sustained engagement and revenue generation:
•Metaverse as a Persistent Brand Platform: Unlike traditional ad placements, Barbie
DreamHouse Tycoon integrates the brand into a playable, evolving digital space.
•Customization and Progression-Based Monetization:→The game follows the princi-
ples of mobile gaming economies, where players are incentivized to personalize and
expand their experience.
•Hybrid Physical-Digital Commerce: Although not yet fully realized, the potential
for deeper phygital integration highlights how metaverse spaces can complement
physical product sales in the future.
Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon exemplifies how traditional toy companies can transition
into the digital age, transforming their intellectual property into interactive, revenue-
generating virtual ecosystems. As metaverse adoption continues, more brands are likely
to follow Mattel’s lead in creating immersive, persistent digital experiences that redefine
audience engagement beyond traditional product sales.
4.3.6. Discussion of the Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon Case
The case of Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon provides a unique perspective on how metaverse
business models extend beyond conventional digital commerce, enabling users to actively
immerse themselves in branded environments. Unlike previous case studies that focused
on competitive self-expression and fashion-driven economies, this case highlights the power
of persistent, brand-integrated virtual experiences, where players do not just engage with
a brand but play and, to some extent, live within it.
Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon illustrates how the metaverse enables brands to create long-
term, interactive environments that foster emotional and aspirational connections with
their audiences. By designing an experience where users build, decorate, and role-play in
a fully realized Barbie world, Mattel moves beyond transactional marketing into sustained
digital engagement. This immersive integration showcases how metaverse platforms rede-
132 4| Case Studies on Roblox
fine the relationship between brands and consumers, moving from external brand exposure
(as seen in Web 2.0) to internal brand inhabitation, where the product is not just displayed
or purchased but becomes an interactive, evolving space. This phenomenon is not exclu-
sive to Barbie. Other metaverse experiences, such as Sonic Speed Simulator, allow players
to enter and interact with the legendary Sonic universe, experiencing it firsthand rather
than passively consuming its media. Similarly, Super NFL Tycoon transforms users into
real NFL players, while Netflix Nextworld invites them to navigate and live in the envi-
ronments of popular Netflix series like Stranger Things and One Piece. This demonstrates
a broader shift toward brand-based world-building, where users not only associate with a
brand but actively exist within its digital representation. Researches suggest that digital
embodiment within branded ecosystems enhances consumer engagement and loyalty, as
users emotionally invest in the interactive experience rather than merely identifying with
a product or advertisement (Adhini and Prasad, 2024).
This concept extends beyond entertainment-driven brands. While it may seem intuitive
for narrative-rich franchises such as SpongeBob SquarePants—which already features an
established world as the famous cartoon city of Bikini Bottom—to translate seamlessly
into a metaverse setting (SpongeBob Simulator on Roblox), even non-narrative brands
have successfully created immersive experiences. For instance, Vans World does not rely
on an existing fictional world but builds an interactive skateboarding environment that
aligns with the brand’s real-world identity. This aligns with research by Periyasami et al.,
which highlights that brands can leverage their defining characteristics—whether tied to
sports, lifestyle, or fashion—to construct digital spaces that resonate with consumers in
unique ways. The metaverse thus enables all types of brands, regardless of their existing
media footprint, to transition from passive advertising to active experiential commerce
(Periyasami and Periyasamy, 2022).
The case of Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon provides a unique perspective on how meta-
verse business models extend beyond conventional digital commerce, enabling users to
actively immerse themselves in branded environments. Unlike previous case studies that
focused on competitive self-expression and fashion-driven economies, this case highlights
the power of persistent, brand-integrated virtual experiences, where players do not just
engage with a brand but live within it. Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon illustrates how the
metaverse enables brands to create long-term, interactive environments that foster emo-
tional and aspirational connections with their audiences. By designing an experience
where users build, decorate, and role-play in a fully realized Barbie world, Mattel moves
beyond transactional marketing into sustained digital engagement. This immersive in-
tegration showcases how metaverse platforms redefine the relationship between brands
4| Case Studies on Roblox 133
and consumers, moving from external brand exposure (as seen in Web 2.0) to internal
brand inhabitation, where the product is not just displayed or purchased but becomes an
interactive, evolving space.
Differences with Classic Web 2.0 Platforms’ Business Model and
the Role of the Metaverse in Shaping New Models
The business model of Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon expands upon the key differences
between metaverse and Web 2.0 platforms but with a distinct focus on immersive brand
inhabitation rather than competitive social self-expression. Unlike Dress to Impress, which
leverages a user-driven fashion economy to generate value, Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon
transforms the Barbie brand into a persistent digital environment where users do not just
interact with branded items but actively play and effectively live inside Barbie’s world.
In traditional Web 2.0 models, brand engagement is limited to external interactions: users
may see advertisements, watch influencer collaborations, or purchase Barbie-themed dig-
ital items for their avatars. However, Web 2.0 platforms do not allow for continuous in-
habitation of a brand ecosystem. In contrast, the metaverse enables Mattel to place users
inside the Barbie DreamHouse, wearing official Barbie outfits, driving Barbie-branded
cars, and interacting with a digital environment that mirrors the fantasy lifestyle asso-
ciated with Barbie’s brand identity. This goes beyond traditional digital advertising by
making brand engagement a fully immersive, aspirational, and interactive experience.
This distinction is supported by research on experiential branding, which emphasizes how
brand immersion fosters deeper emotional connections compared to passive content con-
sumption (Pine II and Gilmore, 2013). Unlike Web 2.0’s reliance on advertising-driven
brand visibility, the metaverse enables users to experience a brand as a lived reality,
making it an intrinsic part of their virtual identity rather than an external product they
purchase or engage with sporadically (Schmitt, 2010). The business model employed by
Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon fundamentally differs from traditional Web 2.0 platforms due
to the immersive, persistent, and interactive nature of the metaverse. Unlike Web 2.0 plat-
forms, which primarily rely on advertisement-driven revenue or subscription-based mod-
els, metaverse platforms like Roblox integrate direct in-game transactions, user-generated
content monetization, and digital brand ecosystems that extend beyond passive engage-
ment.
One of the key distinctions is the metaverse’s ability to create fully interactive, branded
digital spaces, rather than relying on banner ads, social media engagement, or static e-
commerce storefronts. In Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon, players are not merely exposed to
134 4| Case Studies on Roblox
Barbie branding through ads; they actively inhabit the brand’s world, living in a Dream-
House they might have only seen in movies, wearing official Barbie outfits, and interacting
with branded objects in a dynamic environment. This transforms brand engagement from
a passive consumption model into an experiential, identity-forming process, where players
internalize and express their affinity with Barbie through immersive participation. Un-
like Web 2.0 platforms, which allow for brand activations through influencer marketing,
sponsored content, or integrated online stores, the metaverse fosters continuous brand
immersion, reinforcing a sense of belonging and aspirational play. Research on digital
brand experiences highlights that experiential engagement deepens consumer-brand rela-
tionships far beyond traditional advertising, which remains transactional and externally
imposed rather than lived and co-created by users (Schmitt, 2010). This persistent en-
gagement ensures that users are not just consumers of content but active participants in
a branded universe, which enhances customer retention and brand loyalty in ways that
Web 2.0 platforms cannot replicate (Pine II and Gilmore, 2013).
Additionally, the monetization structure of metaverse platforms is more immersive and
participatory. Web 2.0 e-commerce relies on direct purchases, whereas the metaverse
allows brands to monetize through progressive content unlocks, virtual goods, and seasonal
digital experiences. The ability to sell digital-only fashion, real estate, and interactive
brand assets reinforces how metaverse economies deviate from Web 2.0 structures, where
content consumption and transactions remain largely external to the experience rather
than embedded within it.
Can These Business Models Exist in Web 2.0 Platforms?
While elements of Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon’s monetization strategy—such as branded
digital assets, seasonal content updates, and in-game purchases—share similarities with
Web 2.0 e-commerce models, the full extent of its immersive, persistent engagement-
driven business model is not replicable in traditional Web 2.0 environments. One of the
key limitations of Web 2.0 platforms is their inability to sustain persistent digital spaces
where users live within a brand’s ecosystem. Platforms like Instagram, YouTube, or
TikTok can showcase Barbie content through influencer collaborations, video campaigns,
or digital advertisements, but they cannot offer users the ability to actively inhabit the
Barbie world. Unlike the metaverse, where players can build, personalize, and role-play
within the DreamHouse, Web 2.0 platforms limit brand interaction to passive consumption
rather than interactive participation.
Additionally, Web 2.0 lacks the interconnected, virtual economy infrastructure that sup-
ports in-world transactions, dynamic content updates, and ongoing digital asset owner-
4| Case Studies on Roblox 135
ship. While Web 2.0 platforms have experimented with digital goods (e.g., Instagram’s
NFT sales and YouTube’s channel memberships), these models remain external add-ons
rather than fully integrated components of the platform’s core experience. By contrast,
Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon demonstrates how metaverse business models naturally em-
bed monetization within the gameplay, making brand interactions feel like organic parts
of the user experience rather than separate commercial transactions.
Finally, the metaverse allows for a continuity of digital identity and ownership, which Web
2.0 does not support. In Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon, players retain ownership of their
customized DreamHouse, their Barbie-branded digital fashion, and their acquired in-game
items across multiple sessions. Web 2.0 platforms lack this persistence—purchased digital
goods or engagement moments remain tied to specific, time-limited content rather than
forming part of a user’s evolving virtual presence.
Furthermore, while Web 2.0 can support brand marketing and some aspects of digital com-
merce, it cannot fully replicate the participatory, persistent, and experiential commerce
structure that metaverse platforms like Roblox offer. This further reinforces the idea that
the metaverse is not merely an extension of Web 2.0 but a fundamentally different digital
ecosystem, where brands do not just market to users but coexist with them in an evolving
virtual world. The immersive business model of Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon cannot be
fully replicated in Web 2.0 platforms due to the absence of persistent virtual environ-
ments and interactive brand inhabitation. Unlike platforms such as YouTube, Instagram,
or TikTok—where brand engagement is based on advertisement visibility or influencer
partnerships—the metaverse allows users to permanently engage with a brand as part
of their digital lifestyle. In Web 2.0, even the most successful branded content remains
an external experience. Users may watch Barbie-themed influencer videos, participate in
hashtag campaigns, or buy limited-edition digital accessories, but these interactions are
fragmented and temporary. In contrast, Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon allows players to
continuously live inside the branded universe, ensuring long-term engagement that Web
2.0 platforms cannot achieve through one-off promotions or influencer campaigns.
Additionally, Web 2.0 platforms lack the ability to sustain dynamic, user-driven economies
within branded ecosystems. While some Web 2.0 platforms have experimented with direct-
to-avatar (D2A) digital commerce (e.g., Instagram’s digital collectibles or YouTube’s NFT
sales), they do not support the progression-based, interactive economies found in meta-
verse platforms. Web 2.0 platforms do not provide users with persistent ownership of
in-game assets within a functioning branded world, making it difficult to replicate the
long-term monetization strategies seen in metaverse experiences like Barbie DreamHouse
Tycoon.
136 4| Case Studies on Roblox
Ultimately, while Web 2.0 platforms can incorporate elements of branded engagement
and digital commerce, they do not facilitate the transition from brand interaction to
brand immersion. The metaverse’s ability to transform static branding into an evolving,
interactive experience is what fundamentally sets it apart from Web 2.0. The business
models seen in Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon could not be fully replicated in traditional
Web 2.0 platforms due to fundamental differences in user interaction, engagement models,
and monetization structures. Web 2.0 platforms are designed around passive engagement,
where users interact with static content, videos, and social feeds rather than immersive
digital spaces. For example, while a brand like Barbie can maintain a strong presence on
a Web 2.0 platform through Instagram, TikTok, or YouTube marketing campaigns, these
platforms do not allow for interactive, persistent world-building experiences. Web 2.0
platforms primarily focus on content consumption, whereas metaverse platforms transform
users into active creators and participants in branded environments. The distinction
lies in interactivity versus passivity, where Web 2.0 remains transactional and metaverse
platforms encourage continuous engagement through progression-based monetization.
Moreover, digital goods in the metaverse hold inherent value due to their integration
within a dynamic, evolving game world. In contrast, Web 2.0 platforms lack the infras-
tructure for owned, in-world assets—a user may purchase a digital item for a social media
avatar, but they do not have a persistent digital space in which to display, use, or engage
with this item. The absence of spatial continuity and persistent virtual worlds means
that Web 2.0 platforms cannot sustain economies based on user-generated, immersive
virtual environments in the way that metaverse platforms do. Ultimately, while Web
2.0 platforms can support elements of brand engagement and digital commerce, they do
not possess the fundamental characteristics that make metaverse business models viable.
The shift from passive digital interactions to immersive digital participation represents a
paradigm change that distinguishes the metaverse as a fundamentally different ecosystem
from Web 2.0.
The success of Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon offers valuable insights into how legacy brands
can leverage metaverse platforms for sustained engagement and revenue generation:
•Metaverse as a Persistent Brand Platform: Unlike traditional ad placements, Barbie
DreamHouse Tycoon integrates the brand into a playable, evolving digital space.
•Customization and Progression-Based Monetization:→The game follows the princi-
ples of mobile gaming economies, where players are incentivized to personalize and
expand their experience.
•Hybrid Physical-Digital Commerce: Although not yet fully realized, the potential
4| Case Studies on Roblox 137
for deeper phygital integration highlights how metaverse spaces can complement
physical product sales in the future.
Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon exemplifies how traditional toy companies can transition
into the digital age, transforming their intellectual property into interactive, revenue-
generating virtual ecosystems. As metaverse adoption continues, more brands are likely
to follow Mattel’s lead in creating immersive, persistent digital experiences that redefine
audience engagement beyond traditional product sales.
4.4. Final Discussion: How the Metaverse Provides
New Business Models
The case studies of Dress to Impress, Blueberry Fashion, and Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon
collectively demonstrate that the metaverse is not merely an extension of existing digital
business models but a transformative space that fosters the creation of different revenue
structures. Unlike Web 2.0, which primarily monetized user attention through advertising
and sponsorships, metaverse platforms enable businesses to commercialize digital identity,
virtual goods, and user participation in ways that were previously impractical, infeasible
or nonexistent. This shift is not just an opportunity but, in many cases, a necessity, as
the nature of immersive environments demands alternative monetization strategies that
integrate seamlessly into user experiences.
Each case study exemplifies a distinct way in which the metaverse enables business models
that go beyond traditional digital commerce:
•Dress to Impress leverages user-generated fashion economies, where competition,
social validation, and self-expression drive monetization.
•Blueberry Fashion operates on a direct-to-avatar (D2A) retail model, illustrating
that a fashion brand can thrive without physical inventory by selling digital assets
that hold aesthetic, social, and economic value.
•Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon transforms brand engagement into a persistent, im-
mersive experience, allowing users to inhabit and interact with a brand ecosystem
rather than merely consuming branded content.
This shift is significant because it redefines the relationships between users, creators, and
platform owners. In Web 2.0, businesses relied on advertising, external sponsorships, and
third-party data collection to generate revenue. Content creators often depended on indi-
rect monetization strategies such as brand partnerships, subscription models, or ad-based
138 4| Case Studies on Roblox
payouts. In contrast, the metaverse enables a self-sustaining, transaction-based economy,
where users directly fund creators and developers through in-game purchases, digital as-
set ownership, and exclusive content. This approach reduces dependency on external
advertisers and empowers both users and developers to shape the economic landscape of
metaverse platforms (Florida, 2022).
Furthermore, the metaverse introduces new forms of scarcity, exclusivity, and interactive
commerce that do not have direct analogs in Web 2.0. Limited-edition digital fashion
drops, branded virtual spaces, and gamified spending mechanics redefine how value is
created and exchanged within digital economies. As highlighted by Jung et al., the meta-
verse moves away from a passive engagement model toward an active participation model,
where users are not just consumers of content but co-creators of the economic environ-
ment. Whether through fashion economies, branded immersive worlds, or competitive
social interactions, these case studies illustrate that metaverse-native business models are
not just adaptations of past digital economies but unique innovations that arise from the
immersive and interactive nature of virtual spaces (Jung et al., 2025).
Ultimately, the metaverse is proving to be a fertile ground for business model innovation,
as seen in Dress to Impress, Blueberry Fashion, and Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon. It
fosters self-sustaining digital economies, empowers direct user-to-creator monetization,
and introduces experiential commerce models that fundamentally reshape how value is
created and consumed. As metaverse adoption continues to grow, these early case studies
suggest that the digital economies of the future will be driven less by external advertising
and more by user-driven, interactive, and immersive monetization strategies.
139
5| Conclusions and future
developments
This thesis has examined how metaverse platforms foster distinct business models, diverg-
ing from conventional Web 2.0 monetization strategies. Through the analysis of four ma-
jor platforms—Roblox, The Sandbox, Decentraland, and Horizon Worlds—this research
has identified key structural, economic, and user-driven characteristics that differentiate
metaverse business models from traditional digital economies. By conducting a compar-
ative and in-depth analysis and classification of these platforms, this study has outlined
how their various underpinning visions, economic structures, monetization mechanisms,
and user engagement strategies shape the evolution of metaverse-based revenue models.
One of the key findings from the platform comparison is that metaverse platforms are not
homogeneous; they vary significantly in their governance models, economic structures, and
degrees of centralization, thus illustrating the highly emergent and experimental nature
of the metaverse ecosystem. While some, such as Roblox and Horizon Worlds, operate as
highly structured and platform-controlled economies, where monetization is tightly inte-
grated with user-generated content but remains dependent on platform-imposed revenue-
sharing mechanisms, others, such as Decentraland and The Sandbox, emphasize a more
decentralized approach by incorporating blockchain-based asset ownership. However, de-
spite these fundamental structural differences, all platforms face common challenges, in-
cluding the lack of interoperability, difficulties in sustaining engagement, and the ongoing
struggle to balance creator incentives with platform profitability.
The study also found important distinctions in how each platform approaches moneti-
zation. Roblox and Horizon Worlds primarily rely on user-generated content economies,
where revenue is driven by the direct engagement of users purchasing and creating digital
goods within a closed ecosystem. In contrast, Decentraland and The Sandbox adopt a
different model, focusing on virtual land sales, token economies, and blockchain-based
transactions, which position users as investors and asset owners rather than just content
consumers. These differences demonstrate how platform constraints, governance struc-
140 5| Conclusions and future developments
tures, and user demographics shape the types of business models that emerge within
metaverse ecosystems, showing that there is no single approach to monetization in these
virtual environments. Building upon these findings, the case study analysis focused on
three distinct economic activities within Roblox—a user-generated experience (Dress to
Impress), a digital-native fashion brand (Blueberry Fashion), and a branded metaverse
experience (Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon). Although while these cases were drawn from a
single albeit highly successful platform, the insights gained suggest that similar business
models may be emerging across other metaverse ecosystems, even if their monetization
structures and governance mechanisms differ.
The findings of this thesis demonstrate that metaverse platforms are not merely digi-
tal extensions of Web 2.0 business models but distinct ecosystems that generate revenue
through platform-native monetization strategies. Unlike traditional digital economies,
where monetization is primarily advertising-based and platform-driven, metaverse plat-
forms introduce transactional, immersive economies that center around virtual goods,
digital land ownership, platform-specific currencies, and creator-driven revenue streams.
A particularly significant aspect of this shift is how the creator economy is redefined
within the metaverse, moving away from the influencer-based monetization models of
Web 2.0 to direct participation in economic value creation through digital asset owner-
ship, customization-based economies, and platform-integrated commerce.
Moreover, this study has shown that the structure of each platform determines the types
of business models that can emerge. In platforms with centralized control, such as Roblox
and Horizon Worlds, economic activity is shaped by revenue-sharing policies that favor
platform owners while still allowing for user-driven commerce. In contrast, Decentraland
and The Sandbox introduce decentralized asset ownership through blockchain, enabling
a more autonomous but also speculative form of participation. Despite these structural
variations, all metaverse platforms share the characteristic of integrating monetization
directly into the user experience, rather than relying on external sponsorships or passive
content consumption.
Although this research highlights the transformative potential of metaverse-based busi-
ness models, several challenges and limitations remain. One of the most pressing issues
is the lack of full interoperability among metaverse platforms, which prevents seamless
movement of digital goods, currencies, and identities across different ecosystems. This
fragmentation limits the ability of virtual economies to scale beyond platform-specific
boundaries, reinforcing siloed digital economies rather than fostering a unified metaverse.
Additionally, regulatory uncertainty surrounding digital asset ownership, taxation poli-
cies, and platform governance raises concerns about the long-term sustainability of these
5| Conclusions and future developments 141
emerging economies. As metaverse platforms continue to grow, questions remain regard-
ing how intellectual property rights, taxation frameworks, and consumer protection laws
will evolve to address the complexities of virtual transactions.
Another significant challenge is the inconsistent adoption of metaverse experiences by
mainstream users. While the platforms analyzed in this study demonstrate varied en-
gagement levels, many metaverse applications still struggle to provide compelling use
cases beyond entertainment and speculative investment. For instance, while some plat-
forms explore virtual offices, remote collaboration tools, and educational applications,
these remain largely experimental and do not yet offer a seamless alternative to existing
solutions. Furthermore, since this research primarily focused on four platforms, it is im-
portant to recognize that alternative metaverse ecosystems, such as Fortnite Creative or
Zepeto to cite the most influential ones, may introduce different monetization strategies
that were not covered in this study.
Further research should explore how interoperability between metaverse platforms can
be effectively implemented, particularly in relation to digital asset ownership, economy
integration, and cross-platform accessibility. Given that current metaverse ecosystems
operate as isolated silos, future studies should examine both the technological feasibility
and economic implications of interoperability, assessing whether cross-platform economies
can realistically be established or if platform fragmentation will persist. Another critical
area of study is the role of the creator economy within metaverse platforms. While
this research has identified how metaverse platforms incentivize creator participation,
deeper investigations into revenue streams, digital labor dynamics, and the negotiation
of financial agreements between creators, platforms, and brands would provide further
clarity on how these ecosystems function. Understanding who pays whom, how revenue
is distributed, and what mechanisms govern collaborations and financial transactions is
crucial to assessing whether the metaverse truly empowers creators or if it reinforces new
forms of platform dependency.
However, while these new models present significant opportunities for economic innova-
tion, they also introduce ethical and regulatory concerns. Many of the challenges seen
in Web 2.0—such as user datafication, surveillance, and labor exploitation—risk being
replicated in the metaverse economy. In centralized platforms like Roblox, creators of-
ten face high revenue-sharing fees and opaque financial policies, raising concerns about
platform dependency and digital labor rights. Moreover, the gamification of monetiza-
tion mechanisms may disproportionately impact younger users, as seen in cases where
child developers unknowingly engage in exploitative labor dynamics, working long hours
to generate content under uncertain compensation structures. In decentralized metaverse
142 5| Conclusions and future developments
platforms, speculative digital asset economies and the lack of clear financial regulations in-
troduce risks related to financial instability, security vulnerabilities, and market volatility.
These challenges suggest that while the metaverse offers new opportunities for economic
participation, it also demands greater transparency, regulation, and ethical oversight to
ensure that monetization models remain sustainable and equitable.
Additionally, comparative research between metaverse monetization strategies and Web
3.0 frameworks—including decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs), blockchain-
driven economies, and tokenized assets—could provide new insights into the intersection
of decentralized finance (DeFi) and virtual economies. Since Web 3.0 presents a radically
different vision of digital ownership and governance, studying how its principles align or
conflict with metaverse business models would be essential in predicting the future tra-
jectory of digital economies. Moreover, a deeper examination of how regulatory bodies
respond to the commercialization of virtual economies—particularly in relation to taxa-
tion, intellectual property, and financial oversight—could shed light on the potential risks
and stability of these emerging economic systems.
Ultimately, this thesis has demonstrated that metaverse platforms stimulate the devel-
opment of distinct business models that diverge from traditional Web 2.0 monetization
strategies. The combination of platform-specific economies, creator-driven revenue mod-
els, and immersive digital transactions suggests that the metaverse is not merely an ex-
tension of existing online business models, but rather a fundamental shift in how digital
value is created, exchanged, and sustained within virtual environments. As metaverse
platforms continue to evolve, their ability to address technological, economic, and regula-
tory challenges will determine whether they remain speculative digital spaces or develop
into truly transformative economic ecosystems.
143
Bibliography
N. Adhini and C. Prasad. Perceptions and drivers of the metaverse adoption: A mixed-
methods study. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 48, 06 2024. doi: 10.1111/
ijcs.13069.
Adweek Staff. The sandbox is building a metaverse palace for paris hilton,
February 9 2022. URL https://www.adweek.com/brand-marketing/
the-sandbox-paris-hilton-metaverse-palace/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
M. Al-Shaheen, R. Sundaram, and T. Ramalingam. An integrated workflow for trans-
forming infrastructure projects data into the metaverse. pages 215–224, 02 2023. doi:
10.29117/cic.2023.0032.
S. H. Alfina and D. Mardhiyah. Fomo related consumer behaviour in marketing context: A
systematic literature review. Cogent Business & Management, 10(3):2250033, 2023. doi:
10.1080/23311975.2023.2250033. URL https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.
2250033.
L. Ante, F.-P. Wazinski, and A. Saggu. Digital real estate in the metaverse: An empirical
analysis of retail investor motivations. Technical Report 31, Blockchain Research Lab,
2023. URL https://www.blockchainresearchlab.org. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
W. J. Au. Making a Metaverse That Matters: From Snow Crash & Second Life to A
Virtual World Worth Fighting For. W. W. Norton & Company, New York, 2023. ISBN
978-1-394-15581-1.
BabyPips.com. What is sandbox (sand)?, 2021. URL https://www.babypips.com/
crypto/guides/token/what-is-sandbox-sand. Accessed: 2025-03-06.
C. Baden-Fuller and S. Haefliger. Business models and technological innovation. Long
Range Planning, 46(6):419–426, 2013. ISSN 0024-6301. doi: https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.lrp.2013.08.023. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S0024630113000691. Managing Business Models for Innovation, Strategic Change
and Value Creation.
144 |Bibliography
M. Ball. The Metaverse: And How It Will Revolutionize Everything. Liveright Publishing
Corporation, New York, NY, 2022. ISBN 978-1-63149-219-7.
Barrett. Metaverse fashion brand blueberry entertainment hires uk agency.
PRWeek, October 12 2021. URL https://www.prweek.com/article/1752751/
metaverse-fashion-brand-blueberry-entertainment-hires-uk-agency. Ac-
cessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
T. Basu. The metaverse has a groping problem already. MIT Technology Review,
December 2021. URL https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/12/16/1042516/
the-metaverse-has-a-groping-problem/. Accessed: 2025-03-06.
D. Baszucki. I am david baszucki, co-founder and ceo of roblox. i am here to
..., 2020. URL https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/qhrp7u/i_am_david_
baszucki_cofounder_and_ceo_of_roblox_i/?rdt=35500. Accessed: February 26,
2025.
S. Bibri. The social shaping of the metaverse as an alternative to the imaginaries of
data-driven smart cities: A study in science, technology, and society. Smart Cities, 5,
07 2022. doi: 10.3390/smartcities5030043.
S. Bishop and T. Kant. Algorithmic autobiographies and fictions: A digital method. The
Sociological Review, 71(5):1012–1036, 2023. doi: 10.1177/00380261221146403. URL
https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261221146403.
A. Bleier, B. L. Fossen, and M. Shapira. On the role of social media platforms in the
creator economy. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 41:411–426, 2024.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2024.06.006. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.
2024.06.006.
T. Boellstorff. Coming of Age in Second Life: An Anthropologist Ex-
plores the Virtually Human. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ,
2008. URL https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691148572/
coming-of-age-in-second-life.
T. Boellstorff, B. Nardi, C. Pearce, and T. Taylor. Ethnography and Virtual Worlds: A
Handbook of Method. 09 2012. ISBN 9780691149509. doi: 10.2307/j.cttq9s20.
Bray. Metaverse & Virtual Reality World Investing: The Complete Guide to Successfully
Invest in Virtual Lands, Blockchain Gaming, NFTs and Virtual Reality. Independently
published, 2022.
N. Buzzetto-Hollywood. Communicating and sharing in the semantic web: An examina-
|Bibliography 145
tion of social media risks, consequences, and attitudinal awareness. Interdisciplinary
Journal of e-Skills and Life Long Learning, 11:47–66, 04 2015.
A. Caliandro. Digital methods for ethnography: Analytical concepts for ethnographers
exploring social media environments. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 47:1–28,
05 2017. doi: 10.1177/0891241617702960.
A. Chalk. Meta’s solution to vr creepers: A four-foot zone of personal vir-
tual space. PC Gamer, February 4 2022. URL https://www.pcgamer.com/
metas-solution-to-vr-creepers-a-four-foot-zone-of-personal-virtual-space/.
Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
K. Charmaz. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative
Analysis, volume 1. 01 2006.
J. Chen, X. Wu, and I. Lai. A systematic literature review of virtual technology
in hospitality and tourism (2013–2022). SAGE Open, 13, 08 2023. doi: 10.1177/
21582440231193297.
H. W. Chesbrough and M. M. Appleyard. Open innovation and strategy. California
Management Review, 50(1):57–76, 2007. URL https://www.healthinnovationnwc.
nhs.uk/media/Images/ChesbroughAppleyard2007.pdf. Accessed: 2024-02-27.
T. C. E. C. J. W. C. B. . C. S. Choi, J. Effectiveness of immersive virtual reality in
nursing education: Systematic review. Nurse educator, 2023.
P. B. Chris Hesselbein and S. Canali. Metaverse datafication: technologies, definitions,
and futures. Information, Communication & Society, 0(0):1–15, 2024. doi: 10.1080/
1369118X.2024.2443082. URL https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2024.2443082.
C. M. Christensen, R. McDonald, E. J. Altman, and J. E. Palmer. Disruptive inno-
vation: An intellectual history and directions for future research. Journal of Man-
agement Studies, 55(7):1043–1078, 2018. doi: 10.1111/joms.12349. URL https:
//onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joms.12349. Accessed: 2024-02-27.
CoinMarketCap. Ethereum (eth) price, charts, and market cap. URL https://
coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ethereum/. Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
Coogan. You don’t knoe the metaverse, 2023. URL https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=QvZSdDC9rWo. Retrieved February 26, 2024, from YouTube.
E. Crichton-Stuart. The sandbox hits 5.7 million accounts created, March 25 2024. URL
146 |Bibliography
https://gam3s.gg/news/the-sandbox-hits-5.7-million-accounts-created. Ac-
cessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
H. Cui and B. Du. The theoretical basis and landing strategy of the metaverse business
model. In A. J. Tallón-Ballesteros and P. Santana-Morales, editors, Digitalization and
Management Innovation - Proceedings of DMI 2022, Beijing, China, November 26,
2022, volume 367 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pages 100–
105. IOS Press, 2022. doi: 10.3233/FAIA230010. URL https://doi.org/10.3233/
FAIA230010.
T. Davenport and R. Kalakota. The potential for artificial intelligence in healthcare.
Future Healthcare Journal, 6(2):94–98, 2019. ISSN 2514-6645. doi: https://doi.org/10.
7861/futurehosp.6-2-94. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S2514664524010592.
P. Davison. Become the god of pixels and play in the sandbox, March 22 2012. URL
https://web.archive.org/web/20140701172635/http://www.insidemobileapps.
com/2012/05/21/become-the-god-of-pixels-and-play-in-the-sandbox/. Ac-
cessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
Decentraland. How does the dao work?, 2025. URL https://docs.decentraland.org/
player/general/dao/overview/how-does-the-dao-work/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
Decentraland Foundation. How many dau does decentraland have, Oc-
tober 7 2022. URL https://decentraland.org/blog/announcements/
how-many-dau-does-decentraland-have/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
J. D. N. Dionisio, W. G. B. III, and R. Gilbert. 3d virtual worlds and the metaverse:
Current status and future possibilities. ACM Comput. Surv., 45(3), July 2013. ISSN
0360-0300. doi: 10.1145/2480741.2480751. URL https://doi.org/10.1145/2480741.
2480751.
Dress To Impress Group. Dress to impress, a. URL https://www.roblox.com/games/
15101393044/Dress-To-Impress. Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
Dress To Impress Group. Dress to impress group, b. URL https://www.roblox.com/
communities/17264167/Dress-To-Impress-Group#!/about. Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
Y. K. Dwivedi, L. Hughes, A. M. Baabdullah, S. Ribeiro-Navarrete, M. Giannakis,
M. M. Al-Debei, D. Dennehy, B. Metri, D. Buhalis, C. M. Cheung, K. Conboy,
R. Doyle, R. Dubey, V. Dutot, R. Felix, D. Goyal, A. Gustafsson, C. Hinsch, I. Je-
babli, M. Janssen, Y.-G. Kim, J. Kim, S. Koos, D. Kreps, N. Kshetri, V. Kumar,
|Bibliography 147
K.-B. Ooi, S. Papagiannidis, I. O. Pappas, A. Polyviou, S.-M. Park, N. Pandey, M. M.
Queiroz, R. Raman, P. A. Rauschnabel, A. Shirish, M. Sigala, K. Spanaki, G. Wei-Han
Tan, M. K. Tiwari, G. Viglia, and S. F. Wamba. Metaverse beyond the hype: Multidis-
ciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research,
practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 66:102542,
2022. ISSN 0268-4012. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102542. URL
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268401222000767.
A. Edeling and S. Wies. Embracing entrepreneurship in the creator economy: The rise
of creatrepreneurs. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 41:436–454, 2024.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2024.07.003. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.
2024.07.003.
K. Eisenhardt and M. Graebner. Theory building from cases: Opportunities and chal-
lenges. The Academy of Management Journal, 50:25–32, 02 2007. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.
2007.24160888.
Elavra. Premium payouts discussion 2024 (engagement-based payouts). On-
line forum post, March 6 2024. URL https://devforum.roblox.com/t/
premium-payouts-discussion-2024-engagement-based-payouts/2867475. Ac-
cessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
J. Fehrer, H. Woratschek, and R. Brodie. A systemic logic for platform business models.
Journal of Service Management, 29, 07 2018. doi: 10.1108/JOSM-02-2017-0036.
R. Florida. The rise of the creator economy. Technical report, Creative Class Group,
2022. URL http://www.creativeclass.com/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
B. Flyvbjerg. Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12
(2):219–245, 2006. doi: 10.1177/1077800405284363. URL https://doi.org/10.1177/
1077800405284363.
Gamefam. Gamefam. URL https://gamefam.com/. Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
Gamefam x Barbie. Barbie dreamhouse tycoon. URL https://www.roblox.com/games/
13166293021/Barbie-DreamHouse-Tycoon. Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
M. B. Garcia, F. N. Soriano, and N.-S. Chen. Remodeling a mobile educational meta-
verse using a co-design approach: Challenges, issues, and expected features. In-
ternational Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 17(1):1–17, 2023. doi:
10.1504/IJMLO.2023.10052033. URL https://manuelgarcia.info/publication/
mobile-educational-metaverse.
148 |Bibliography
D. García-Marzá and P. Calvo. The metaverse: Building a digital hyper-economy. In
A. Johnson and B. Lee, editors, Digital Transformation and the Economics of the
Metaverse, pages 123–145. Springer, 2024. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-53015-9_7. URL
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-53015-9_7.
Genesis City. Genesis city map. URL https://genesis.city/#0,0,3z,n0,e0,c0,p0,
s0,r0,g0,a0. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
V. Geroimenko. Augmented Reality Art: From an Emerging Technology to a Novel Cre-
ative Medium. 01 2014. ISBN 978-3-319-06202-0. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-06203-7.
T. Gillespie. Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation, and the Hidden
Decisions That Shape Social Media. 01 2018. ISBN 9780300235029. doi: 10.12987/
9780300235029.
K. Girginova. Global visions for a metaverse. International Journal of Cultural Studies,
28(1):300–306, 2025. doi: 10.1177/13678779231224799. URL https://doi.org/10.
1177/13678779231224799.
R. Gupta, B. Rathore, B. Biswas, M. Jaiswal, and R. K. Singh. Are we ready
for metaverse adoption in the service industry? theoretically exploring the barri-
ers to successful adoption. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 79:103882,
2024. ISSN 0969-6989. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103882. URL
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969698924001784.
C. Hackl. ’godmother of the metaverse’ says web3 is the next level
of social interaction, 2022. URL https://blockworks.co/news/
godmother-of-the-metaverse-says-web3-is-the-next-level-of-social-interaction.
Accessed: February 26, 2025.
I. Hamilton. Meta adds personal boundary to horizon worlds and venues as
default. UploadVR, February 4 2022. URL https://www.uploadvr.com/
meta-horizon-worlds-boundary/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
M. Harracá. Business models and organizational forms: Searching the edge of innovation
in google and amazon. Master’s thesis, Université Paris 13, Paris, France, 2017. URL
https://www.academia.edu/37170242/Business_models_and_organizational_
forms_searching_the_edge_of_innovation_in_Google_and_Amazon. Accessed:
2024-02-27.
A. Heath. Meta’s social vr platform horizon hits 300,000 users. The
|Bibliography 149
Verge, February 17 2022. URL https://www.theverge.com/2022/2/17/22939297/
meta-social-vr-platform-horizon-300000-users. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
C. Hesselbein, P. Bory, and S. Canali. Six provocations for metaverse datafication: An
emergent cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information, Communi-
cation and Society, pages 1–19, 2024.
House of Blueberry. House of blueberry. URL https://www.houseofblueberry.com/.
Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
J. Hron, K. Krauth, M. I. Jordan, N. Kilbertus, and S. Dean. Modeling content creator
incentives on algorithm-curated platforms, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.
13102.
K. Hu. Softbank leads $93 mln investment in nft gaming firm the sand-
box, November 2 2021. URL https://www.reuters.com/technology/
softbank-leads-93-mln-investment-nft-gaming-firm-sandbox-2021-11-02/.
Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
J. Huang. Jensen huang q&a: Why moore’s law is dead, but the metaverse
will still happen. VentureBeat, 2022. URL https://venturebeat.com/games/
jensen-huang-qa-why-moores-law-is-dead-and-smart-design-is-replacing-it/.
Accessed: 2024-03-13.
Z. Hussain, A. Khan, and A. Ali. The impact of user-generated content, social interactions
and virtual economies on metaverse environments. Journal of Sustainable Economics,
1:34–44, 11 2023. doi: 10.32734/jse.v1i2.13798.
I. Insight. Platform business model network effects. IESE Insight, 2024. URL https://
www.iese.edu/insight/articles/platform-business-model-network-effects/.
Accessed: 2025-02-27.
M. S. Islam. Augmented reality and life in the cyberspace in william gibson’s neuromancer.
Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 12:30–34, 09 2021. doi: 10.7575/aiac.alls.
v.12n.4.p.30.
R. Jones. House of blueberry has been outfitting digital avatars for a
decade. Observer, October 22 2022. URL https://observer.com/2022/10/
house-of-blueberry-has-been-outfitting-digital-avatars-for-a-decade/.
Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
Y. Jung, J. Nam, H. Choi, and J. Park. Deciphering the determinants: What guides
creators in choosing their metaverse platforms? Technological Forecasting So-
150 |Bibliography
cial Change, 210:123843, 2025. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123843. URL https:
//doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123843.
E. Kim. The creator economy on the metaverse platform. Journal of Intelligent
Information Systems, 28(4):275–286, 2022. doi: 10.13088/jiis.2022.28.4.275. URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.13088/jiis.2022.28.4.275.
E. Kim, H. Kim, B. Shin, and I. Jang. Comparative analysis of terms of service for
web 3.0 platforms: Focusing on zepeto, roblox, and sandbox. Journal of Virtual Con-
vergence Research, 1(1):226–268, 2025. URL https://metaoneima24.s3.amazonaws.
com/media/journal/10_JVCR_2025_Vol1_No1_article8_20250120_011613.pdf.
K. Kim. Into the metaverse: How it will transform our world, 2021. URL https:
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8IB4RXII5s. YouTube video, Accessed: February 26,
2025.
Koepp. Dress to impress valentine’s update 2025 (part 1) - all details and patch notes.
IGN, February 14 2025.
Kolo. Metaverse platforms report, 2022. URL https://www.thevrara.com/blog2/tag/
Metaverse. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
L. Kolodny. Pixowl raises $1.2m to create ’the simpsons’ of mobile games. The
Wall Street Journal, September 27 2012. URL https://www.wsj.com/articles/
DJFVW00020120927e89rtvrae. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
R. Kozinets. Immersive netnography: A novel method for service experience research in
virtual reality, augmented reality, and metaverse contexts. Journal of Service Manage-
ment, 34:100, 12 2023.
R. Kumar, P. Aneja, R. Jadaun, P. B. N. Kiran, N. Saxena, S. Saxena, P. K. Singh, and
A. K. Painoli. Metaverse marketing: A review and future research agenda. Information
Discovery and Delivery, 2025. doi: 10.1108/IDD-05-2024-0066. URL https://www.
emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/idd-05-2024-0066/full/html.
V. Kumar. Making freemium work. Harvard Business Review, 92(5):27–29, 2014. URL
https://hbr.org/2014/05/making-freemium-work. Accessed: 2024-02-27.
S. Kunthara. Creator economy startups see a wave of vc investment,
2022. URL https://news.crunchbase.com/media-entertainment/
creator-economy-startups-vc-investment/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
G. Kvick and D. Sornette. Subscription based valuation approach: An estimation of net-
|Bibliography 151
flix’s and spotify’s value. 2019. URL https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:
229384399.
M. Latino, M. C. De Lorenzi, A. Corallo, and A. Petruzzelli. The impact of meta-
verse for business model innovation: A review, novel insights and research direc-
tions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 206:123571, 09 2024. doi:
10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123571.
E.-J. Lee, S. Park, W. Lee, and H. S. Kim. Identity experiment in the metaverse: Making
sense of zepeto users’ avatar use. International Journal of Communication, 18:3284–
3291, 2024. URL http://ijoc.org. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
E. W. Lee, H. Bao, Y. Wang, and Y. T. Lim. From pandemic to plandemic: Examining
the amplification and attenuation of covid-19 misinformation on social media. Social
Science Medicine, 328:115979, 2023. ISSN 0277-9536. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.socscimed.2023.115979. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S0277953623003362.
L.-H. Lee, T. Braud, P. Y. Zhou, L. Wang, D. Xu, Z. Lin, A. Kumar, C. Bermejo, and
P. Hui. All one needs to know about metaverse: A complete survey on technological
singularity, virtual ecosystem, and research agenda, 10 2021.
J. Magretta. Why business models matter. Harvard Business Review, 80(5):86–92, 133,
2002. URL https://hbr.org/2002/05/why-business-models-matter. Accessed:
2024-02-27.
M. Mandrill. Horizon worlds guide: Everything to know to start playing, 2023. URL
https://metamandrill.com/horizon-worlds-guide/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
Marcom. How did barbie get 27 million roblox visits in only 13
days?, October 19 2023. URL https://www.maxpowergaming.co/post/
how-did-barbie-get-27-million-roblox-visits-in-only-13-days. Accessed: 28
Feb. 2025.
S. Markovich and Y. Yehezkel. Competing for cookies: Platforms’ business models in data
markets with network effects. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2024. URL https://papers.
ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4770577. Accessed: 2025-02-27.
Mattel. Mattel and gamefam unveil barbie dreamhouse tycoon on
roblox, October 6 2023. URL https://corporate.mattel.com/news/
mattel-and-gamefam-unveil-barbie-dreamhouse-tycoon-on-roblox. Accessed:
28 Feb. 2025.
152 |Bibliography
G. M. McDuff. Gizem ’mishi’ mcduff. LinkedIn profile. URL https://www.linkedin.
com/in/gizem-mishi-mcduff-1a5503195/. Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
L. McInerney. Driving brand loyalty through meta-
verse, 2023. URL https://www.thedigitalspeaker.com/
driving-brand-loyalty-through-metaverse-with-lindsey-mcinerney-step-into-the-metaverse-podcast-ep13/.
Podcast interview, Step Into the Metaverse.
Meta. Meta horizon, a. URL https://horizon.meta.com/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
Meta. World builders, b. URL https://www.meta.com/it-it/experiences/
world-builders/895318275106563/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
Meta. The metaverse and how we’ll build it together — connect 2021, October 28 2021.
URL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uvufun6xer8. [Video]. YouTube.
Meta. Opening horizon worlds to everyone 18+ in the us and canada,
December 9 2021. URL https://about.fb.com/news/2021/12/
horizon-worlds-open-in-us-and-canada/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
P. Milgram and F. Kishino. A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Trans.
Information Systems, vol. E77-D, no. 12:1321–1329, 12 1994.
Miller. Metaverse game backer yat siu says low user count isn’t best
measure, October 23 2022. URL https://finance.yahoo.com/news/
metaverse-game-backer-yat-siu-140000675.html. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
A. Mosseri. A creator-led internet built on blockchain. TED Talks,
2024. URL https://www.ted.com/talks/adam_mosseri_a_creator_led_internet_
built_on_blockchain. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
G. A. Mussi. When consuming becomes collaborative: Airbnb case study. Mas-
ter’s thesis, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Lisbon, Portugal, 2017.
URL https://repositorio.iscte-iul.pt/bitstream/10071/14141/1/0317%20GM%
20CaseStudy%20Airbnb.%20Final%20.pdf. Accessed: 2025-02-27.
S. Mystakidis. Metaverse. Encyclopedia, 2(1):486–497, 2022. ISSN 2673-8392. doi:
10.3390/encyclopedia2010031. URL https://www.mdpi.com/2673-8392/2/1/31.
B. News. The ’creator economy’: How we could all make money in future. BBC News,
2021. URL https://www.bbc.com/news/business-59129466. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
B. Newsround. Roblox: What is it and is it safe for children?, 2020. URL https:
//www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/53496284. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
|Bibliography 153
H. Ning, H. Wang, Y. Lin, W. Wang, S. Dhelim, F. Farha, J. Ding, and M. Danesh-
mand. A survey on the metaverse: The state-of-the-art, technologies, applica-
tions, and challenges. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, PP:1–1, 08 2023. doi:
10.1109/JIOT.2023.3278329.
M. O’Halloran. Making a killing in virtual real estate. The Irish Times,
June 23 2018. URL https://www.irishtimes.com/business/personal-finance/
making-a-killing-in-virtual-real-estate-1.3528861. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
E. Ordano, A. Meilich, Y. Jardi, and M. Araoz. Decentraland: A blockchain-based virtual
world, 2017. URL https://decentraland.org/whitepaper.pdf. Accessed: 27 Feb.
2025.
E. Ordano, A. Meilich, Y. Jardi, and M. Araoz. Decentraland: A blockchain-based vir-
tual world, 2024. URL https://decentraland.org/whitepaper2.pdf?utm_org=dcl&
utm_source=decentraland&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=whitepaper2. Ac-
cessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
T. O’Reilly. What is web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation
of software. O’Reilly Media, 2005. URL https://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/web2/
archive/what-is-web-20.html. Accessed: 2025-02-27.
Osservatori Digital Innovation. Metaverso: tra mondi virtuali e realtà aumentata, 2024a.
URL https://www.osservatori.net/comunicato/extended-reality-metaverse/
metaverso-mondi-realta-virtuale/. Accessed: 2024-02-26.
Osservatori Digital Innovation. Report - osservatori digital innovation, 2024b. URL
https://www.osservatori.net/report/?view=cards. Accessed: 2024-02-26.
Osservatorio Metaverso. Vocabolario metaverso, 2025. URL https://
osservatoriometaverso.it/progetti/vocabolario-metaverso/. Accessed:
2025-03-07.
A. Osterwalder and Y. Pigneur. Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries,
Game Changers, and Challengers. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2010. ISBN 978-
0470876411.
S. Periyasami and A. P. Periyasamy. Metaverse as future promising platform business
model: Case study on fashion value chain. Businesses, 2:527–547, 11 2022. doi: 10.
3390/businesses2040033.
B. Pine II and J. Gilmore. The experience economy: past, present and future, page 269.
09 2013. ISBN 9781781004210. doi: 10.4337/9781781004227.00007.
154 |Bibliography
S. Pink, H. Horst, J. Postill, L. Hjorth, T. Lewis, and J. Tacchi. Digital Ethnography:
Principles and Practice. SAGE Publications, London, UK, 2015. ISBN 9781473902381.
T. Poell, D. Nieborg, and B. Duffy. Platforms and Cultural Production. 10 2021. ISBN
9781509540518.
M. E. Porter. Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance.
Free Press, New York, NY, 1985. ISBN 978-0684841465.
C. N. Poth. The Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods Research Design. SAGE Publications
Ltd, London, 2023. ISBN 9781529767790.
L. Przybylski. Hybrid Ethnography: Online, Offline, and In Between. SAGE Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA, 2020. ISBN 9781544320481.
K. Putzier. Metaverse real estate piles up record sales in sandbox and other virtual realms.
The Wall Street Journal, November 30 2021. URL https://www.wsj.com/articles/
metaverse-real-estate-piles-up-record-sales-in-sandbox-and-other-virtual-realms-11638268380.
Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
P. A. Rauschnabel, R. Felix, C. Hinsch, H. Shahab, and F. Alt. What is xr? towards
a framework for augmented and virtual reality. Computers in Human Behavior, 133:
107289, 2022. ISSN 0747-5632. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107289. URL
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S074756322200111X.
D. B. Rawat and H. E. alami. Metaverse: Requirements, architecture, standards, status,
challenges, and perspectives, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.01125.
K. Raynor. It’s a roblox brat summer: Charli xcx is coming to one of roblox’s biggest
games, dress to impress - here’s what you need to know. VG247, August 16 2024. URL
https://www.vg247.com/roblox-dress-to-impress-brat-update-charli-xcx.
Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
G. Remané, S. SCHNEIDER, and A. HANELT. Digital business model types: Un-
derstanding their mechanisms as recipes to commercialise digital technologies. In-
ternational Journal of Innovation Management, 26(03):2240019, 2022. doi: 10.1142/
S1363919622400199. URL https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919622400199.
Roblox. Dynablocks™, a. URL https://www.roblox.com/games/25593/DynaBlocks.
Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
Roblox. Fees and commissions, b. URL https://create.roblox.com/docs/
marketplace/marketplace-fees-and-commissions. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
|Bibliography 155
Roblox. Developer exchange (devex) overview, how to submit, require-
ments, c. URL https://en.help.roblox.com/hc/en-us/articles/
203314100-Developer-Exchange-DevEx-Overview-How-to-Submit-Requirements.
Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
Roblox. Values and principles, d. URL https://careers.roblox.com/
values-principles. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
Roblox. Horizon worlds guide: Everything to know to start playing,
2023. URL https://create.roblox.com/docs/production/publishing/
publish-experiences-and-places. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
Roblox. Roblox platform policy and guidelines. Technical report, 2024. URL https:
//en.help.roblox.com/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
Roblox Corporation. Free robux or membership genera-
tors. URL https://en.help.roblox.com/hc/en-us/articles/
204262550-Free-Robux-or-Membership-Generators. Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
RobloxStudio. Studio, 2025. URL https://create.roblox.com/. Accessed: 27 Feb.
2025.
P. Rosen. A plot of digital land was just sold in the metaverse for $2.43
million—more than most homes in nyc and san francisco cost, November
24 2021. URL https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/currencies/
metaverse-property-decentraland-sale-price-mana-coin-cryptocurrency-2021-11.
Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
B. Schmitt. Experiential marketing: A new framework for design and communications.
Design Management Journal (Former Series), 10:10 – 16, 06 2010. doi: 10.1111/j.
1948-7169.1999.tb00247.x.
T. Scholz. Own This! How Platform Co-operatives Help Work-
ers Build a Democratic Internet. Verso Books, London, UK,
2023. URL https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2024/01/10/
book-review-own-this-how-platform-co-operatives-help-workers-build-a-democratic-internet-trebor-scholz/.
M. Schulz. Gucci vault opens metaverse world in the sandbox with games and vin-
tage fashion, October 27 2022. URL https://www.voguebusiness.com/technology/
gucci-vault-opens-metaverse-world-in-the-sandbox-with-games-and-vintage-fashion.
Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
U. Shahid and N. Sheikh. Impact of big data on innovation, competitive advantage,
156 |Bibliography
productivity, and decision making: Literature review. Open Journal of Business and
Management, 09:586–617, 01 2021. doi: 10.4236/ojbm.2021.92032.
B. Shen, W. Tan, J. Guo, L. Zhao, and P. Qin. How to promote user purchase in
metaverse? a systematic literature review on consumer behavior research and virtual
commerce application design. Applied Sciences, 11(23), 2021. ISSN 2076-3417. doi:
10.3390/app112311087. URL https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/23/11087.
S. Singh. How many people play roblox 2025 (active user statistics), 2025. URL https:
//www.demandsage.com/how-many-people-play-roblox/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
B. Singla, K. Shalender, and N. Singh. Creator economy in metaverse space: Use
cases, adoption challenges, and integration roadmap. In B. Singla, K. Shal-
ender, and N. Singh, editors, Creator’s Economy in Metaverse Platforms: Em-
powering Stakeholders Through Omnichannel Approach, pages 1–20. IGI Global,
2024. doi: 10.4018/979-8-3693-3358-7.ch001. URL https://www.igi-global.com/
chapter/creator-economy-in-metaverse-space/340308.
Statista. Daily active users (dau) of roblox games worldwide from 4th quarter 2018
to 3rd quarter 2024, 2024. URL https://www.statista.com/statistics/1192573/
daily-active-users-global-roblox/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
T. Sweeney. Tim sweeney explains how the metaverse might actually work.
The Verge, 2023. URL https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/23/23652928/
tim-sweeney-interview-epic-games-fortnite-metaverse. Accessed: 2024-03-13.
D. Takahashi. Animoca brands acquires sandbox game developer pixowl for
$4.875 million, August 26 2018. URL https://venturebeat.com/games/
animoca-brands-acquires-sandbox-game-developer-pixowl-for-4-875-million/.
Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
D. Takahashi. The sandbox reaches 1,000 user-generated experi-
ences, March 22 2024. URL https://venturebeat.com/games/
the-sandbox-reaches-1000-user-generated-experiences/. Accessed: 27 Feb.
2025.
D. J. Teece. Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range
Planning, 43(2):172–194, 2010. ISSN 0024-6301. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.lrp.2009.07.003. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S002463010900051X. Business Models.
|Bibliography 157
The Sandbox. The sandbox whitepaper, 2020. URL https://installers.sandbox.
game/The_Sandbox_Whitepaper_2020.pdf. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
The Sandbox. The sandbox sand, 2024a. URL https://www.sandbox.game/en/about/
sand/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
The Sandbox. Voxedit, 2024b. URL https://www.sandbox.game/en/create/vox-edit/
#/en/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
The Sandbox. The sandbox game, 2024c. URL https://www.sandbox.game/en/
gallery/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
The Sandbox. Vision, 2024d. URL https://www.sandbox.game/en/blog/
the-sandbox-is-deploying-on-polygon/3060/. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
The Sandbox DAO. The sandbox dao, 2024a. URL https://www.sandboxdao.com/.
Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
The Sandbox DAO. Vision, 2024b. URL https://www.sandboxdao.com/vision. Ac-
cessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
The Sandbox Map. Vision, 2024. URL https://www.sandbox.game/en/map/?lat=-12&
lng=26&zoom=1. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
H. Torres, C. V, D. P. G, P. K, S. S, K. A, S. M, D. B. N, C. E, D. C, D. G. F, B. M, H. J,
N. F. I, and V. M. Next generation virtual worlds: Societal, technological, economic and
policy challenges for the eu. Anticipation and foresight KJ-NA-31-567-EN-N (online),
Luxembourg (Luxembourg), 2023.
Z. Vuteva. Beginner’s guide to meta horizon worlds, 2023. URL https://
vrtodaymagazine.com/meta-horizon-world-beginner-guide/. Accessed: 27 Feb.
2025.
Y. Wang, Z. Su, N. Zhang, R. Xing, D. Liu, T. H. Luan, and X. Shen. A
survey on metaverse: Fundamentals, security, and privacy. IEEE Communi-
cations Surveys & Tutorials, 25(1):319–352, 2023. doi: 10.1109/COMST.2022.
3202047. URL https://uwaterloo.ca/scholar/sites/ca.scholar/files/sshen/
files/wang2023metaverse.pdf.
WearBlueberry. Blueberry. URL https://www.roblox.com/communities/15302140/
BLUEBERRY#!/about. Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
L. Weedston. A breakdown of the allegations against dress to impress creator
158 |Bibliography
gigi. The Daily Dot, October 4 2024. URL https://www.dailydot.com/memes/
gigi-dress-to-impress-allegations/. Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
M. Weinberger. What is metaverse?—a definition based on qualitative meta-synthesis.
Future Internet, 14(11), 2022. ISSN 1999-5903. doi: 10.3390/fi14110310. URL https:
//www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/14/11/310.
L. Winkie. Inside decentraland: The surreal second life for crypto true be-
lievers. PC Gamer, March 19 2020. URL https://www.pcgamer.com/
inside-decentraland-the-surreal-second-life-for-crypto-true-believers/.
Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
WWD Staff. Decentraland metaverse fashion week diary: Reporting from the vir-
tual shows, March 28 2022. URL https://wwd.com/fashion-news/shows-reviews/
decentraland-metaverse-fashion-week-diary-reporting-1235140876-1235140876/.
Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
Y. Xu, W. Liu, T. He, and S.-B. Tsai. Buzzword or fuzzword: An event study of the
metaverse in the chinese stock market. Internet Research, 34(1):174–194, 2024. doi:
10.1108/INTR-07-2022-0526. URL https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-07-2022-0526.
L. Yang, S.-T. Ni, Y. Wang, A. Yu, J.-A. Lee, and P. Hui. Interoperability of the meta-
verse: A digital ecosystem perspective review. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.05205v3,
2024a. URL https://arxiv.org/html/2403.05205v3. Accessed: 2024-02-27.
L. Yang, Y. Xu, and P. Hui. Metaverse identity: Core principles and critical challenges,
06 2024b.
R. K. Yin. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. Sage Publications,
6th edition, 2018.
J. Zeng, M. S. Schäfer, and T. M. Oliveira. Conspiracy theories in digital environments:
Moving the research field forward. Convergence, 28(4):929–939, 2022. doi: 10.1177/
13548565221117474. URL https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565221117474.
Q. Zhang, M. Kim, and S. Patel. Metaverse applications in everyday life: Cur-
rent trends and future possibilities. Electronics, 13(19):3917, 2023. doi: 10.3390/
electronics13193917. URL https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/13/19/3917.
X. Zhang, Y. Li, and J. Chen. Impact of virtual influencers on customer engagement of
generation z consumers: A presence perspective. Young Consumers, 25(1):15–29, 2024.
doi: 10.1108/YC-01-2024-1958. URL https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/
doi/10.1108/yc-01-2024-1958/full/pdf.
5| BIBLIOGRAPHY 159
Z. Zwieglinska. Brands are winning on roblox with avatar fashion, gam-
ing. Glossy, November 9 2022. URL https://www.glossy.co/fashion/
avatar-fashion-and-gaming-are-winning-on-roblox/. Accessed: 28 Feb. 2025.
ZyberVR. Studio, 2025. URL https://zybervr.com/en-eu/blogs/news/
horizon-worlds-game-introduction. Accessed: 27 Feb. 2025.
161
A| Appendix
The following glossary contains key terms related to the metaverse that may be unfamiliar
to some readers. Its purpose is to facilitate a clearer understanding of the concepts
discussed throughout this thesis and to ensure a more accessible reading experience.
Glossary
Metaverse Vocabulary:
•Spatial Audio: The term spatial or spatialized audio refers to an immersive listening
experience and a technology that simulates the auditory experience of the physical
world. To achieve this effect, the worn headphones can integrate sensors to track
head movement. In virtual worlds, this type of audio adds realism to the experience
(e.g., if I approach a group of avatars having a discussion, I will only be able to hear
them if I physically get closer).
•Avatar: A graphical representation of the user within digital spaces. In virtual
worlds, it is a three-dimensional, anthropomorphic, or fantasy figure embodying
the user. The creation of the avatar, i.e., defining its physical characteristics and
clothing, is the first step to access and live the experience, whether more or less
immersive. The term "avatar" comes from the Sanskrit word "avat¯ara," which,
in Brahmanism and Hinduism, refers to the descent of a deity to earth through
incarnation in a human body.
•Blockchain: A technology that enables the creation and management of a public
and distributed ledger (replicated across multiple nodes on a peer-to-peer network)
to track transactions between parties. The ledger consists of blocks containing
sequences of data protected by encryption. These blocks are linked together so that
no past transaction can be arbitrarily modified (hence the concept of a “chain of
blocks”). Validation of each transaction is done by consensus from all nodes, but
only the one that solves complex mathematical calculations (mining) can write it to
the ledger and be rewarded for its work. Blockchain technology allows transactions
without the need for intermediaries or central authorities to verify and record data.
This technology is used by some virtual worlds to manage their internal economy,
162 A| Appendix
cryptocurrency, and digital asset transactions.
•Cryptocurrency: Cryptocurrency or virtual currency is a digitally generated and
exchanged currency that represents value. Cryptography is used to verify the own-
ership of a cryptocurrency. It is not issued by a central bank but by private in-
dividuals who code its functionality. It is based on blockchain technology, which
prevents double-spending (using the same money more than once) and guarantees
the immutability of transactions. A cryptocurrency can be held as a means of ex-
change and as a store of value. There are over 15,000 cryptocurrencies, with the
most well-known being Bitcoin (created in 2008) and Ethereum (created in 2015).
•DAO: DAO stands for Decentralized Autonomous Organization, which refers to
profit or non-profit organizations that leverage blockchain technology to be au-
tonomous and decentralized. Autonomy is achieved through the use of Autonomous
Agents, software agents programmed to execute specific rules automatically (smart
contracts) without human intervention. Decentralization refers to the absence of
a hierarchy, replaced by coordination and voting mechanisms for decision-making,
enabled by the blockchain. Decentralization The concept of decentralization refers
to a distributed structure of computers capable of operating autonomously and co-
operatively. It is often discussed in the context of a metaverse not controlled by a
single company (thus, not reliant on its servers).
•Digital Twin: A digital twin is a digital replica of a physical entity, person, or
complex system. This model is fed, synchronously or asynchronously, by informa-
tion from the corresponding physical entity (via sensors). A digital twin can be
used to simulate human interventions to observe their effects. glTF The Graphics
Language Transmission Format (glTF) is a standard binary format for transmitting
three-dimensional geometries and their associated textures, optimized for speed and
compression. It has been well-received by the Unity 3D, Unreal, and Godot com-
munities. Currently, we are on the second version: glTF 2.0.
•Interoperability: Interoperability is the ability of two or more computer systems
to exchange information with each other and use it. In building the metaverse,
interoperability is essential to ensure an adequate user experience. For example,
the ability to buy a digital object in world X and use it in world Y, or to use one’s
identity across all visitable environments.
•NFT: NFT stands for Non-Fungible Token. These are packets of information/code
(tokens) representing a physical or digital object (e.g., a video or image file) along
with certification of its origin and ownership. They are defined as non-fungible be-
A| Appendix 163
cause they are unique and not interchangeable with similar digital objects, though
they can be sold for money. Ownership rights can also be diversified and divided
among multiple subjects. These characteristics are ensured through blockchain tech-
nology.
•MMORPG: MMORPG stands for Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game.
These are online role-playing games set in worlds where users can play and commu-
nicate synchronously with each other. They are often considered proto-metaverses.
World of Warcraft is among the most popular.
•Virtual World: A virtual world is the digital representation of a three-dimensional
space that can be explored through input/output devices (such as joysticks and
screens) or an avatar. These worlds can resemble existing environments or be com-
pletely fantastical.
•Persistence: Persistence is the property that allows the metaverse to operate indef-
initely without the ability to be paused or turned off. Under this condition, the
effects of actions performed by a user remain visible indefinitely and can also be
seen by others. For example, if a user destroys an object within a metaverse world,
it will not reappear upon the next access (as it does in today’s video games).
•Augmented Reality: Augmented reality is a reality dynamically enriched with digital
elements and accessible through smartphones, headsets, or special electronic lenses
(smart glasses). The advantage of augmented reality experiences is that contact
with the surrounding physical world is not lost.
•Mixed Reality: In mixed reality experiences, the user is immersed in an almost exact
reproduction of the surrounding physical space, alongside digital objects with which
they can interact.
•Virtual Reality: Virtual reality is a computer-simulated reality that users can in-
teract with through specific devices (headsets, helmets, controllers, haptic gloves,
suits). The key characteristics of virtual reality experiences are immersion, which
gives the user the impression of truly being inside the simulated place, and inter-
activity, which allows them to interact with other people and control the digital
objects within the environment.
•Smart Contract: A smart contract refers to software/code written to regulate trans-
actions and agreements between buyers and sellers directly and automatically (with-
out the intervention of a third, legally authorized party). Despite the name "con-
tract," they are not legal contracts. Ethereum’s programming language, Solidity, is
164 A| Appendix
one of the most commonly used for writing smart contracts.
•Spatial Computing: Spatial computing is an umbrella term for technologies that
allow humans to be immersed in computerized environments. The term was coined
by Simon Greenwold, who defined spatial computing as "when machines exist in
space and space exists within machines." Sometimes this means bringing space into
the computer, while other times, it means injecting computation into physical ob-
jects. Mainly, it refers to designing systems that go beyond traditional screen-and-
keyboard interfaces (Simon Greenwold, Spatial Computing, MIT graduate thesis,
2003).
•USD: USD, short for Universal Scene Description, is a framework for exchanging
data related to computer graphics. The term also refers to the file format used to
describe three-dimensional computer-generated scenes (including data on modeling,
lighting, shading, animation, special effects, and rendering). It was created by
Pixar and released in 2016 as open-source software. Nvidia, which is pushing for it
to become a standard, has called it "the HTML of the metaverse."
•Voxel: A voxel (volumetric picture element) is a unit of measurement for volume. It
is the three-dimensional counterpart of the pixel (a unit of measurement for area).
Voxels are used in building three-dimensional digital worlds (e.g., Minecraft, The
Sandbox, Voxels). They are also used to create artistic expressions, referred to as
Voxel Art.
•Web3: Web3 refers to a decentralized network, a different functioning of the internet
where the client/server structure (in which data is managed and stored by central
entities) is replaced by blockchain technology, resulting in a decentralized structure
and a set of new protocols. The term Web3 is also associated with particular
applications, called dApps, that run using blockchain technology.
(Osservatorio Metaverso, 2025)
A| Appendix 165
Figure A.1: Extended version of the metaverse platforms table
167
List of Figures
1.1 Rauschnabel’s explanation on XR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.1 Roblox’shomepage ............................... 63
3.2 Roblox’savatarmenu.............................. 64
3.3 Distribution of Roblox’s commissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
3.4 Distribution of Roblox’s audience by age. (Statista, 2024) . . . . . . . . . . 67
3.5 Interactive Map of TheSandbox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
3.6 Gucci Vault experience on TheSandbox
Source: PlaySandbox on Youtube........................... 73
3.7 Map of The Sandbox partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
3.8 MapofGenesisCity .............................. 80
3.9 Zoom-in of 3.9: Each point on the map corresponds to cartesian coordinates 80
3.10 Homepage of Horizon Worlds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
3.11MetaAvatarmenu ............................... 87
3.12 Classification table of the major Metaverse Platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
4.1 Dress To Impress experience on Roblox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
4.2 In order to get VIP users have to buy a special "pass" using Robux . . . . 108
4.3 Dress To Impress partership with CharliXCX’s BRAT. . . . . . . . . . . . 110
4.4 The gamified version of famous fashion items (e.g., Hermès Birkin bag) can
be purchased with Robux. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
4.5 Blueberry Fashion experience on Roblox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
4.6 Users can "try on" the items before buying them. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
4.7 Blueberry’s partnership with fashion-brand Natori. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
4.8 Blueberry’s approach to D2A model: when the avatar gets closer to the
item,thepriceshows..............................122
4.9 Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon is licensed by Mattel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
4.10 Barbie DreamHouse Tycoon experience on Roblox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
4.11 Special branded items are available for purchase using Robux . . . . . . . . 130
A.1 Extended version of the metaverse platforms table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
