Steve Lukas issues this call to action after working both as a developer and in developer relations over more than a decade in immersive computing.
It’s become clear now more than ever: The future of XR is up to us. Who is “us”? Well… whoever’s still here. Whoever is still playing the game of “making XR happen” at any level. The January layoff was a big blow dealt just months ago, and last week’s talks at GDC coupled with the announced shutdown of Horizon Worlds for VR cemented it.
If you’re still in XR, you’re either waiting to get laid off or you’re still here fighting for something. But fighting for what, and how do we make this industry succeed?
2016 - 2025: Follow the Leaders
12 years ago I thought VR was interesting and the more I learned, the more I wanted to participate. All I wanted to do was participate. I had no intention of managing, leading, or even innovating. I just wanted to play and be a part of it.
A lot of us trusted in platform leadership to guide the path, to lead the way, to show us how to take VR mainstream and thrive. That’s why seeing follow-up commentary around “GDC’s State of VR has taught us the path forward” crushed me.
How XR Leadership Guidance Actually Works
I’ve been on the inside of XR platforms and I’ve been on the outside. I know how corporate budgets work, how off-sites work and how initiatives are time-bound in annual allocations.
Walk with me. In 2025, Meta said Horizon Worlds was the path to unlock VR, and committed $50 million to it. That was the 2025 thesis, in year 10 of the Oculus from Rift’s launch, and yesterday they said “That thesis was wrong” by shutting it down as far as VR is concerned. So this is 2026, year 11, and the State of VR isn’t a report on what’s unlocked VR, it’s just “annual thesis number 11”, yet to be proven but declared prominently as a well-researched, proven fact.
The guidance of how adults will adopt was not “the answer”, it’s the next thesis provided to management that they have a year to try to prove until 2027’s GDC. I mean, it would be amazing to say that someone in charge has the answers that we need. It’s a leadership stance that we need. But what I learned in my years working at and with platforms, is what you don’t see, and that is that everyone in charge is looking to someone else for the answers. That’s why so many of these “answers” sound like they’re taken from another XR platform’s still unproven thesis.
It’s the nature of the industry, and especially a by-product of people in charge having clocked fewer headset hours than the people on the ground, but by having more authority and title seniority, it creates blindspots. It’s of course common sense that the higher the title and the power, the more pressure there is for immediate returns as their guide, focused more on financials and less so on the actual research hours into understanding this medium *for themselves*. As a result, the vast majority of XR platform leadership is building what they think “other people will want”.
The XR platform leader that I would put the most trust and faith in to move this industry would be the one using the product on a regular basis for their own true benefit. I would want to see that person being excited for others to be able to one day do what they’re already able to do. The closest I’ve seen of that in the last 5 years is Mark Zuckerberg at Meta Connect running with his Oakleys after the keynote. That air of “I love this, I’m using it, and I’m using it in a way that’s authentic and not just a stage demo, and I can’t wait for you to love this too.”
I’ve spent enough time with XR Dev Rel leaders that have said “We don’t know what will work, the developers will, so we’ll look to them for the killer app.” But when those platforms then met with developers, the devs would ask in turn “What do you want us to be building?” rightfully inquiring the creators of said devices. Additional companies in the supply chain would also ask what content should be built, and it would go round and round until an unknown quantity (in the form of an announced but not yet shipped headset) got pointed to and selected as XR’s “savior”, most notably in 2023 with the anticipation and subsequent announcement of the Apple Vision Pro.
For months the industry buzz was “Apple will solve it for us” until the Vision Pro’s market share became a reality. Very reminiscent of the Silicon Valley episode of being “pre-revenue”. As soon as that buzz wore off, it was time to say “Android XR will do it.” Until that unknown quantity became known, the talking heads would say why Google had all the answers, but now the market share has the talking heads saying “It’s going to be Steam Frame”. Why? Because it’s an unknown quantity with aspirations, until it isn’t.
All of this to say: don’t look elsewhere for the answers to XR. Look within. If you have a strong thesis, it may be just as good, if not better, than the big budget corporation in charge, because we are all just people trying to figure it out.
Why Words Alone Will Not Win the Day
I know enough to know that if you’re reading this, you’re likely not in charge of an XR platform. Those people are too busy and likely looking for another XR outsider with limited headset experience to come save the day, even higher probability if they have a strong consulting background or sales track record. But if for some reason you are in charge of an XR platform, you’re also likely not to take any action from this, and that’s well-justified, because your metrics are majority financial and this here is just a statement that isn’t.
So this message is for the VR community, the ones making content. Today with where we are, it’s super important to know that if you want to be a part of it, you have two choices: service the VR market, or expand it. “Service it” means to make the same kind of content that’s already out there. Another zombie shooter. A rhythm game with a twist. An escape room with generative AI. And be prepared for it to sell to a fraction of the existing market. Remember, even another Batman or another Deadpool would be an extension of an already discarded thesis.
Great Responsibility
The other option: is to not just service, but to expand the market. And to do it using the tools that the platforms have given us, which to be honest, do represent great power. If we want the space to grow, it’s no longer enough for us to merely participate. The novelty momentum in VR is gone, and just following the next platform’s new thesis is once again not a guaranteed path to success. Even 100 games hitting $1m is also sadly *not* a rallying cry when billions have been put into this market.
So if you’re building in VR just to service the market, stop here. Have fun, hope it works out for you.
But if you take up the responsibility to expand it:
Don’t build for other people. Build for you, and for people like you.
Build something that you truly enjoy. If you don’t enjoy it, stop or pivot.
Build something that other people enjoy. If they don’t enjoy it, fix it, stop, or pivot.
Form a thesis of why your project matters. Find the pillars that you’re building to, and be very declarative about your motivations.
Build something accessible. If people can’t understand it or can’t use it, keep iterating and find solutions. Tip: some people prefer controllers, and some prefer hands. Serve them both.
Build something that you believe will change the market in ways that haven’t been done before. If you don’t want that responsibility, then you’re servicing the existing market and can stop here.
Build the most important thing that you believe this industry needs, and demonstrate your thesis with enough of a financial return that’s so significant that the platforms can’t ignore you.
It’s long past time to leave XR’s future success solely to the people in charge of the platforms. They’ve done their part and given us amazing tools. Now WE the builders have to grow it if we want it to succeed and reawaken investment from the companies that can take it further.
AI is Not Enough
“And that’s why we’re investing in AI”...
Artificial Intelligence algorithms are accelerants and are limited to amplifying what they’re trained on. They can do what we teach it to do, faster and more thoroughly, but AI cannot solve the XR problem on its own because it hasn’t yet been solved by humans, and AI cannot put on the headsets with a physical human perspective. It needs human innovation coming from the people that get it, understand it, use it, love it, and know how to build it, to rally and make the things that the big platforms have all missed, whatever it may be.
Remember Why We’re Here
I want to trace this rallying cry back to 2014, when Facebook bought Oculus. For those of us that believe in VR, I want to trace it back to the moment you first believed in its future.
For many of us, you believed because you saw the potential. You saw what it was like to have an infinite computing space, not limited to 1080p and now 4k monitor pixels, not limited to one rectangle, but moreso not limited to 2d inputs. Full freedom of sight and interaction provided limitless potential in what we could do, in how we could experience the world, how we could transform and who we could do that with. And so Facebook spent the billions, and we pivoted our entire careers.
Today some would have us believe that the “ultimate potential of VR” is now somehow realized with AI-powered smartglasses. While those sales figures are impressive, does that vision line up with what we imagined when we first believed in VR? Were all of us wrong, or is that immersive vision simply not yet realized?
Whoever’s left out there, it’s time to get serious and take the ball. The platforms have done their part, it’s time to step up and do ours. No more relying on another executive’s annual thesis, let’s build our own with everything that we uniquely understand, team up where we can, and let’s be loud about it. Together, let’s make mainstream immersive a reality.
 | A guest post by
|