Meta’s metaverse ambitions are evolving rapidly, with younger users and mainstream consumers reshaping the Quest platform over the course of 2024, according to Samantha Ryan, VP of Metaverse Content, which could see free-to-play content flourish as a result.

In a recent developer blog post, Ryan highlighted key shifts in user behavior over the course of last year, with an evolution driven by the growth of users entirely new to Quest.

“Compared to the prior year, device sales increased in 2024 and people spent more time on average in Quest 3S devices than any other headset at launch,” Ryan says. “People also spent more money across Quest devices. Total payment volume on the platform rose 12% in 2024, driven by significant growth of in-app purchases.”

Free-to-play games almost entirely depend upon those in-app purchases, with Another Axiom’s breakout VR game Gorilla Tag (2022) topping $100 million in gross revenue last summer, which was generated primarily through in game cosmetics.

“We’re building a social-first platform, and these younger users are more likely to spend time with friends in multiplayer experiences and social hangout apps,” Ryan continues. “They’re contributing to the rise of free-to-play titles — a pattern historically common on other platforms. We’re also seeing growth of younger users in Horizon Worlds.”

Meta CTO Andrew Bosworth highlighted the company’s focus on its cross-compatible social platform, stating in a recently leaked memo the mobile phone version of Horizon Worlds “absolutely has to break out for our long term plans to have a chance.”

“We expect free-to-play (F2P) to become a broadly viable strategy for developers, who up until now have relied almost exclusively on premium apps. But we don’t think F2P will replace premium apps — both models are likely to coexist,” Ryan says.

Still, Quest’s cohort of VR enthusiasts, who expect high-quality premium content, “remains a foundation of this growing ecosystem,” with existing Quest owners driving “a wave of device sales as they upgraded from earlier models, accounting for 27% of Quest 3 and 20% of Quest 3S users for the year.”

SEE ALSO
VR Veteran Fast Travel Games Announces Layoffs, Citing Lower Than Expected Sales in 2024

According to Ryan though, the majority of new devices in 2024 weren’t enthusiast upgraders, but rather entirely new to Quest; “the well-known attributes of VR enthusiasts no longer represent the full Quest userbase,” Ryan says.

As for traditional media and entertainment consumption, Ryan reveals 2D apps and browsers haven’t historically seen high engagement on Quest devices, despite increasing over recent years.

“Use of 2D apps has also increased since Quest 3 launch. Our ongoing operating system improvements, such as multitasking, theater mode, and immersive audio, are intended to support this growing customer cohort.” In 2024, Ryan says Quest saw a 10% increase in overall time spent per-user per-month in media apps, as well as a 21% rise in people using the headset’s default Internet browser.

Meta’s recent trend suggests Quest is coming to a pivotal moment, as the company aims to serve early adopters’ premium content expectations while free-to-play, social-driven content makes an ever larger impact on revenue expectations. That said, it’s uncertain just how much Meta will rely on in-app spending to sustain its developer ecosystem, which could incentivize a shallow, engagement-maximizing design ethos. What is certain though: Meta’s challenge now is harnessing that growth without alienating either ends of the spectrum.

Newsletter graphic

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. More information.

Well before the first modern XR products hit the market, Scott recognized the potential of the technology and set out to understand and document its growth. He has been professionally reporting on the space for nearly a decade as Editor at Road to VR, authoring more than 4,000 articles on the topic. Scott brings that seasoned insight to his reporting from major industry events across the globe.
  • Arno van Wingerde

    I guess I am too old for this kind of thing to follow what is going on… the minimum age for Quest accounts is 10 years and by that time most people would have outgrown everything I have seen of Horizon Worlds … except that the same could be said for Gorilla Tag, which is an undeniable succes. I would love a more realistic graphics environment – remember what the "R" in VR stands for, anybody? – and sincerely hope there will also be "something" for "grown-ups", with a more realistic environment.

    • Nevets

      Couldn't agree more re graphics. Quest is capable of so much more than the dull and basic Horizon Worlds.

    • timelessicons

      Agreed. New headsets coming in at higher resolution soon and most likely Oled screens again, which should increase pic quality but we definitely need more games on PC VR like HL Alyx in terms of graphic power. That is still one of the best looking games in vr, if not the best. While I get what Meta is aiming for in terms of their own ecosystem, I hate that all those games aren't cross buy as I'd much rather play better versions of those games (Looking at you Batman, Asgard's Wrath 2) for those that want to play them on pc instead. With all the new headsets and companies in the game now, perhaps this will push devs to start producing more AAA games for the medium but if we don't get a similar push in high quality software like we just did in the last quarter of 2024, I'm not sure how many more chances VR will get to cement itself as a constant gaming platform.

      • 石雨濛

        There was no push in Mobile quality and graphics in 2024 – u talking about the garbage mobile games: Metro, Batman, Alien, and Behemoth. These games are all mobile garbage.

    • guest

      If you really want to following what is going on, read the article about Meta's Hyperscale Infrastructure in this months Communications of the ACM. They state that their future direction is an increase of IoT apps and cloud gaming for instance that shift graphics rendering from user devices to GPU servers in edge datacenters necessitationg less than 25ms network latency. In other words, what they want the impossible, and are going to wreck XR doing it.

  • Octogod

    “Compared to the prior year, device sales increased in 2024 and people spent more time on average in Quest 3S devices than any other headset at launch,” Ryan says. “People also spent more money across Quest devices. Total payment volume on the platform rose 12% in 2024, driven by significant growth of in-app purchases.”

    Let's play with math.

    In late 2023 there were roughly 400 games and apps on the Meta Store. In late 2024 there were roughly 10,000.

    If total payment volume rose 12%, but the number of apps is 25x higher, you can start to see how broken the Meta Store is.

    To put this another way, if we just guess that the total Meta Store spend is $100m across the year, the average revenue per game in 2023 is $250,000 and in 2024 is.$10,000. This is supported by many studios saying their seeing a drop of 50-80% in sales.

    Add in curation dying at this same time and you have a perfect storm of conditions to push these developers out of the ecosystem.

  • Sven Viking

    This shift in behaviour also coincided with Meta’s shift to advertising free-to-play Horizon Worlds content above paid apps in a way that often makes them look to new users like full games. Many infringe upon trademarks of major IPs or are made to look like popular paid VR apps.

    How much of this is a cause or an effect is up for speculation. Even ignoring Horizon Worlds content additionally appearing prominently in search results, though, general discoverability has also been poor since Meta opened the store to everyone without improving search or filter options.

    • VRDeveloper

      Meta has the worst video game marketing I’ve ever seen in my entire life as a game developer. They primarily target middle-aged women and children.

      The majority of the player base consists of young to middle-aged men—that's where the money for AAA games is. Meta itself built this player base, and now it’s useless to complain. Women and children prefer casual genres and tend to spend money on cosmetics and in-game items rather than expensive and immersive/violent AAA games. Meta created this audience with marketing that doesn't attract any type of men(traditional AAA consumer).

      Now it’s no surprise they’re focusing more on Horizon, which obviously has more appeal to women and children. Adult men tend to seek more immersive experiences centered on violence and combat. Even though there are games in the catalog that cater to this demand, Meta never highlights them because its marketing isn’t aimed at that audience.

      Here’s why: If this isn’t about some progressive agenda within the marketing team (which I think it probably is), then they’re likely targeting a female audience, thinking ahead to a future where AR glasses replace smartphones. Women are the biggest spenders on mobile devices and casual mobile games in general. I don’t know if Meta is thinking that far ahead or if their marketing is purely ideological, but in the end, I don’t think they care about the traditional gamer audience(man).

      • Christian Schildwaechter

        The 80s called, they want their prejudices about gamers back. In exchange they offer some recent statistics on who plays games that paint a very different picture, esp. since the whole gaming market exploded from a tiny niche to literally billions of people.

        • VRDeveloper

          I regret that you accuse me of being prejudiced. Unfortunately, many lies are told through statistics. As I mentioned, women tend to prefer casual game genres, and oftentimes, mobile users are counted alongside console and PC users precisely to manipulate results in favor of an ideology.

          Men and women have different tastes in games, and there is nothing wrong with that. Go beyond ideological barriers and try to see reality—it’s not about prejudice. There are things that attract women more and things that attract men more, and there are even evolutionary reasons for this.

          We men evolved by hunting and warring, so we are predominantly drawn to violent or combat-themed games. Women, on the other hand, evolved by managing resources and taking care of people, which is why statistics show they enjoy casual genres—the very genres that align with this evolutionary perspective.

          Unfortunately, in modern-day America, stating reality is seen as prejudice. I am not demeaning or insulting women; I am merely stating a biological fact. You cannot appeal to both audiences at the same time unless your game is something childish, like Nintendo’s titles—but that’s another story.

          If you want to sell AAA games, you should focus on the male audience. The industry is on the verge of collapse precisely because it refuses to accept this reality and insists on prioritizing the female audience. If they acknowledged this, they would know how to make games for both demographics. But you can’t please everyone. I hope I’ve clarified my reasoning.

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            TL;DR: making wild claims ≠ evidence base argument

            The offer still stands, actual statistics in exchange for your prejudices that you now simply repeated, only adding several claims (without supporting sources) about ideology and biology in what I'd call a standard defense to justify why it's okay for you to still not look at actual data, and instead just stick to your oversimplified picture. ("look at the actual data" -> "but statistics could in theory be false"-> "I'll stick to whatever I want, and if data contradicts it, just declare the data invalid by default instead of checking my claims.")

            Women and children prefer casual genres and tend to spend money on cosmetics and in-game items rather than expensive and immersive/violent AAA games. […] Adult men tend to seek more immersive experiences centered on violence and combat.

            The first game that got legally banned because its monetization amounted to gambling with real money was EA's FIFA 19 in Belgium. And while according to EA their overall player base is ~56% male, 44% female, their sports franchises are clearly male dominated. Now you can argue that soccer is a violent game, but you cannot argue that women drive in-game purchases and mostly for cosmetic items.

            EA made over USD 20bn with FIFA, with way more than half of that from in-game purchases. They now switched to EA Sport SC due to licensing reasons, but never budged regarding the gambling claims in many countries, instead they simply paid millions in fines and stopped selling FIFA points in Belgium, as this was a money printing press very like Fortnite. Fortnite now generates around USD 6bn in revenue each year by selling mostly cosmetic skins to a user base that is 72% male, with 78% of all users stating in one survey that they purchased items in the game with real money. Not sure how much the knife trade in CS2 as one of the kingpins in underage (but still legal) gambling brings in, but while this is still a lot of males buying those, at least they are murderous weapons that you said are what real men are all about. It seems to make less than 20% of what Fortnite makes with virtual clothing though.

            Of course humans are different and have different preferences, and you will find way more male players in Fifa and Fortnite than female ones. The more toxic a game's community is, the higher the percentage of male players (usually, not always). But you take this (smaller/bigger) statistic in-balance and then put people into distinct boxes, with aggressive men forced by nature to chose violence and only acquiring items that serve a purpose, and women avoiding competitive or combative games an spending money on decoration.

            Which is utter nonsense. There is a huge overlap, tons of male gamers leave positive reviews on cozy games like "A Short Hike" and there are literally thousands of public counter examples like streamers Luality, who got famous for beating all the FromSoftware's Souls titles on a dance pad and is one of the most prolific BG3 players even recognized by Larian, or Bubbell who basically streams a "situational comedy/she chose violence" mashup.

            The world just isn't black and white, even if this is much more convenient to think, as it allows to just propagate some pseudo-truisms as facts instead of having to look at and bother with the actual numbers. Things also change, so you have to recheck your bias from time to time, for example the average gamer age is now 34 years, and it has been rising for decades.

            You could avoid many issues simply by adding "most", "the majority", "a lot" etc. qualifiers to your sentences phrased as if they were facts, but that of course would not allow you to then treat them as facts, or build an argument that arrives at oversimplified ideas because you yourself first oversimplified the situation: "Meta's must be driven by an ideologic agenda, because they obviously only target women and children, the ones that ruined game monetization by buying too much useless stuff, while the traditional users that retained the 'for Orcs, war solves everything' traits of their cavemen ancestors, get left behind because they don't fall for stupid traps sucking money for useless stuff."

            I'm fully aware that my polemic answer won't convince you to see things more differentiated, but maybe the inherent lack of balanced view in any polemic answer will clue you in (annoy you enough) that any oversimplified, black and white argument is in dire need of a check against reality, and has to paint a more realistic, inevitably more grayish picture to become acceptable.

          • VRDeveloper

            You're obviously consuming out of ideology, you can't see reality, if there's anyone who doesn't see reality here it's you, it's because of people like you that these companies spend so much money on failures like Dragon Age Veiguard, Concord, Forspoken, the new Hallo that they gave to a bunch of feminists to run

            While games that focus on the male audience like Kingdom Come 2 make 1 million sales on the first day, it's hard for someone so alienated by ideology to understand that I'm not telling you that women don't play video games, or that their income isn't important.

            I'm just trying to explain to you that the two audiences have different concepts of what's fun and what's not, and it's hard for a man as beta as you to understand that ever since the industry approached a female perspective, all the games that men liked were destroyed, studios were closed and thousands were fired.

            If the people who run these companies weren't alienated like you, they'd understand that each audience has a different taste and that there's no point in trying to please everyone at the same time, that's all I'm trying to explain. But your primitive middle-American brain with no opinions of its own won't let you understand.

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            Do you even realize that the more I cconfront you with facts, the more your retreat to denial, insults and blaming everything on ideology?

          • VRDeveloper

            I'm not saying you're 100% wrong; there is truth in the data you provided. What you refuse to understand is that women have different preferences than men, and what works for women doesn't necessarily work for men. This is what the industry needs to grasp.

            50% of the gaming audience is composed of women. However, they are mostly concentrated in more casual genres and mobile games, with rare exceptions, as you mentioned.

            Your issue is interpreting this statement as hatred. I'm merely stating a fact: when a feminine perspective is brought into games, they tend to become more peaceful, intellectual, and feminized, which distances the general male audience.

            And the male audience is usually the one engaging with AAA genres, which are typically FPS, Action RPGs, Souls-like games, etc.

            That's all I'm saying. At no point did I offend any woman—I'm simply pointing out a market reality. When Meta focuses so much on marketing towards a female audience, it builds a user base with a preference for casual and feminized games.

            Since VR is better suited for violent, shooting, and war games, it would be more marketable to attract male gamers by running ads closer in style to *Ready Player One*. That way, we would build a user base willing to play the AAA games released on the platform. It's that simple.

  • Christian Schildwaechter

    TL;DR: This sucks, but was at least partly forced upon Meta, as this trend is driven by the behavior of new Quest users, with the composition of this group being a logical consequence of Meta's low hardware price polity.

    In Meta's defense, they don't really have a lot of choice here. VR was always a big bet, they had to grow a large user base early on that gave them a chance to compete with Apple and Google once those started to transition billions of users to XR. So the primary goal has always been to grow fast, and they pursued this path by offering VR hardware at an incredible low price.

    A side effect was Quest becoming a popular Christmas present, which shifted the user base massively towards younger gamers. We saw similar effects with Android going for the budget market with users less willing to pay for apps. So today almost all Android apps are either free, ads driven or using micro-transactions, with paid full versions of many games only available on iOS, where more expensive devices led to a more affluent user base.

    And remember that Gorilla Tag's success wasn't something Meta planned. It sort of happened accidentally when someone released a funny, but in no way technically impressive free app on Meta's App Lab that back then could have never have made it the official Quest store. For unknown reasons that app then went viral on TikTok with currently 1.7mn posts tagged as #gorillatag plus many more similar ones that AFAIR generated more than a billion views.

    This was literally the main group of Quest users voting on what they want from VR first with their eye balls, and then with their wallets, when they drove Gorilla Tag to be the first VR app to generate USD 100mn with in-game purchases only, and by now the most profitable VR game ever. Meta made big waves in 2021 with its attempt to push the metaverse and changing its name, and social VR spaces were already the goal when they bought Oculus in 2014, so this trend just fit the long term goals they had anyway.

    All this will alienate many of the existing VR enthusiasts users, and throw a lot of VR developers under the bus. But Quest sales didn't suddenly jump up significantly, so if the mentioned ratio of upgraders among newly sold HMDs in 2024 (27% for Quest 3 and 20% for Quest 3S) are correct, then a large portion of those that owned a Quest 1/2 never made it to current generation anyway. [In theory all the enthusiasts could have already upgraded immediately after Quest 3 released in 2023-10, shifting the balance, but Quest 3 sales in Q4'23 say otherwise.]

    If the majority of Quest users gets sort of replaced during an upgrade cycle, there is no (strategic/financial) motive for Meta to not primarily go after the newbies that want free casual multiplayer stuff to have a quick laugh with friends, and barely care about all the work that went into the platform before.

    All this doesn't make things better, but just like developers usually have to go to the platform(s) where the most users can be found, Meta has to go to where most of its users are heading. Many "older" users despising all this will have to follow Meta as still the only ones offering budget VR HMDs, and consequently many developers will then be forced to at least look at creating F2P content paid for by micro-transactions inside of Horizon Worlds. Certainly not what I was hoping for.

    • vrnotmr

      do you think google have partnered with htc to put out a cheapo headset to enact the freemium app strategy? I think the high-end samsung device will probably end up like the quest pro…

      • Christian Schildwaechter

        TL;DR: Google's HMDs will be just as expensive as Samsung's HMDs for many years, and that is a wise decision to slowly establish AndroidXR, starting with the professional high end and only working down towards consumer devices once the hardware cost have fallen significantly.

        No, I think Google took over HTC's VIVE engineering team because like with phones and smartwatches, they intend to release a higher end HMD that serves as a showcase for what AndroidXR can do. That was the purpose of first the Google Nexus and then the Google Pixel line, with Nexus devices designed by others like Samsung, LG or HTC. For Pixel Google first cooperated with HTC, and then in 2017 outright buying half of HTC's smartphone R&D department plus lots of IP. Very similar to what they now did with the VIVE R&D department.

        While Google always provided the OS and added lots of new features with each release, phone manufacturers were often slow to incorporate them and instead ignored many for cost reasons. So Google created their own phone line that was usually feature packed in hardware, with an open boot loader allowing to change the OS. These phones usually weren't particularly cheap, but rather attractive to a more technical crowd, esp. developers, and later even to the mass market as Google started to guarantee five years of OS updates after launch, compared to maybe two and often zero years of updates from other phone manufacturers.

        Pixel phones are basically Google showing how to do Android right, without antagonizing their partners. Sales have been increasing, but apparently Google sold a total of about 38mn Pixel phones from 2016-2023, which is less than Samsung sells in a single quarter, with Google now holding about 3% of the smartphone market share. This isn't enough to seriously impact the market, and I'd expect them to do similar in XR, leaving the very large budget part of the market to others. But we are many years away from that.

        The Pixel strategy is to establish Android more as a high end option instead of going for the low cost segment where software revenue is driven by freemium/ads/micro-transactions. So starting with partners like Samsung and Sony that go after AVP with rather high prices seems logical. There is no rush for Google to compete with Meta in the low price market, even though this will happen once hardware prices have fallen significantly and many AndroidXR HMD manufacturers compete with each other via price like they now do on Android phones. I doubt though that we'll see Android XR HMDs at the price level of Quest 3S during this decade.

        High price HMDs aren't automatically doomed. Quest Pro's failure has a lot to do with a lacking/miserable product strategy. Meta had established Quest only as a gaming VR HMD, and then just tried to jump into the professional market based on a virtual conferencing use case that massively overpromised and underdelivered. Others like HTC and Varjo have been selling HMDs for much higher prices for years to the professional market, based on service and reliability, while Meta killed several Quest/Go business programs, leaving their cooperate users in a ditch without a warning.

        There certainly is a market for high end productivity HMDs. Sony's SRH-S1 that Siemens will now bundle with their NX CAD software for a whopping USD 4750, started as an in-house XR tool for Sony designers. So if Samsung/Google follow the model of HTC/Varjo and work with their professional customers on actual use cases instead of like Meta trying to just come up with one that would allow them to sell their HMDs in larger numbers (and then immediately drop it once that doesn't work), I'd expect them to be able to establish AndroidXR. Starting from the professional high end that's fine with high prices as long as there is real benefit, and only gradually working towards the prosumer, high end consumer and finally budget HMD market. And similar to AVP first mostly focused on productivity and media consumption to long term transition billions of Android phone users, with gaming just one use case that will become more interesting only after prices have fallen a lot.

    • Herbert Werters

      Nobody has to do anything.

  • Republican Vampire

    Vr is dead

    • Ravey

      They've been saying that for ten years. I think it has plenty of potential if handled properly. If Meta (and others) just cater to the fickle 'new users' it would be a mistake as they'll move on to other new shiny things. As a comparison, in the 2D gaming world, huge sign-ups for Live services like Fortnite lead every gaming CEO to declare single player RPGs were no longer viable. However, games like RDR2, The Last of Us, made lots of money and Kingdom Come 2 has made all its costs back in first day of release. Older players still want games with depth and story. I am currently playing Batman and the VR element adds so much to the IP.

  • kakek

    Everything in that trailer looks so bright, toktok-ish, and low quality.

  • Nevets

    You'd think, particularly given how well VR can work for FPS games and RPGs, that mainstream gamers would be clamouring to be plonked right inside their favourite games. I understand that the form factors of TV and sofa will always have their place, but even so…

  • Christian Schildwaechter

    Eat At least know your own dog food.

    • VrBiTcH

      Bitches eat the fruity table scraps. Do Yes Evil seems to be their motto now. Maybe one of the founders will make a comeback!

  • gothicvillas

    Been in VR since HTC Vive days.. went thru galore of headsets. After all this time I have left with Quest 3 and Psvr2 (index somewhere lying around too) but somehow stopped using vr much.

    I'm tired of devs treating vr like special niche. All games (I mean ALL OF THEM) should be playable either VR or flat. Give it to consuer to decide what he/she intends to use. I may switch back and forth depends how I feel that day. Until VR headset is treated like just another possible video output, things will not change.
    Edit: Before someone tells me that VR requires more dev work.. im inspired by the vr mods, so there is a pathway

  • ZarathustraDK

    Exploiting kids' inability to pay for a full game by luring them in with ad-laden f2p-games and microtransactions… class act Meta.

    Forgive me for not crying a river when these retards can't afford a down-payment on a house once they come of age. No microtransactions in the housing-market, guess they'll have to do the monthly subscription instead, aka rent, aka HaaS (Housing as a Service).

  • So more squeakers and more cheap and free crap. Great.