Through an examination of Epic v. Apple, this article defines and traces the project of metaverse engineering: a long-term, large-scale reorganization of the games industry at technical, organizational, and governmental scales. Metaverse engineering as a games industry project seeks to redefine regulatory and market landscapes to redefine what counts as a platform, as data ownership, and as games themselves. Epic Games′ goal of the platformization of gaming production software like Fortnite and the Unreal Engine will require more than just using game engines to develop financialized 3D worlds. It will require the production of enticing legal and monetization models to encourage content creation, and competing for influence in regulatory and governmental regimes. Gaming platformization is not only technical, it is ontopolitical: the material realities of platforms shape and are shaped by rhetorical, social, cultural, and institutional forces. Epic's court successes have already moved us into a post-metaverse world.
AllenM. (2013). What was Web 2.0? Versions as the dominant mode of internet history. New Media & Society, 15(2), 260–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812451567
2.
BallMatthew (2022). The metaverse: and how it will revolutionize everything. Liveright Publishing.
3.
BaltoD. A. (1999). Antitrust enforcement in the Clinton administration. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, 9(1), 61.
4.
BijkerW. E. (1997). Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change. MIT Press.
5.
BoellstorffT. (2015). Coming of age in Second Life: An anthropologist explores the virtually human. Princeton University Press.
CallonM. (1980). The state and technical innovation: A case study of the electrical vehicle in France. Research Policy, 9(4), 358–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(80)90032-3
8.
ChiaA. (2022). The metaverse, but not the way you think: Game engines and automation beyond game development. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 39(3), 191–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2022.2080850
9.
ChiaA.KeoghB.LeorkeD.NicollB. (2020). Platformisation in game development. Internet Policy Review, 9(4), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.14763/2020.4.1515
10.
ClineE. (2011). Ready player one. Crown Publishing Group.
11.
DegensheinAnyaLeslieCamilo Arturo (2025). Using court documents as data: opportunities and challenges for sociolegal scholarship. Law & Society Review, 59(3), 619–647. https://doi.org/10.1017/lsr.2025.30
12.
DiazG. C. (2019). Software rights: How patent law transformed software development in America. Yale University Press.
13.
EglistonB.CarterM. (2022). ‘The interface of the future’: Mixed reality, intimate data and imagined temporalities. Big Data & Society, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211063689
14.
EglistonB.CarterM. (2024). ‘The metaverse and how we’ll build it’: The political economy of Meta’s reality labs. New Media & Society, 26(8), 4299–4316. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221119785
FraserS. (2020). Doing ontopolitically-oriented research: Synthesising concepts from the ontological turn for alcohol and other drug research and other social sciences. International Journal of Drug Policy, 82, Article 102610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.102610
20.
GogginJ. (2011). Playbour, farming and leisure. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization, 11(4), 357–368.
HelmondA.NieborgD. B.van der VlistF. N. (2019). Facebook’s evolution: Development of a platform-as-infrastructure. Internet Histories, 3(2), 123–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2019.1593667
23.
HildebrandtM. (2015). Smart technologies and the end(s) of law: Novel entanglements of law and technology. Edward Elgar Publishing.
24.
HughesT. (1979). The electrification of America: The system builders. Technology and Culture, 20(1), 124–161. https://doi.org/10.2307/3103115
25.
JasanoffS. (1997). Science at the bar: Law, science, and technology in America. Harvard University Press.
26.
JungherrA.SchlarbD. B. (2022). The extended reach of game engine companies: How companies like Epic Games and Unity Technologies provide platforms for extended reality applications and the metaverse. Social Media+ Society, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221107641
27.
LatourB. (2004). Why has critique run out of steam? From matters of fact to matters of concern. Critical Inquiry, 30(2), 225–248. https://doi.org/10.1086/421123
28.
LawJ. (1987). Technology and heterogeneous engineering: The case of Portuguese expansion. The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, 1, 105–128.
MaillandJ. (2024). The game that never ends: How lawyers shape the videogame industry. MIT Press.
31.
MalabyT. (2009). Making virtual worlds: Linden Lab and Second Life. Cornell University Press.
32.
MalazitaJ. (2024). Enacting platforms: Feminist technoscience and the Unreal Engine. The MIT Press.
33.
MalazitaJ. (2025). Rendered topological: Virtual geometry as vectoralism in the Unreal Engine. JCMS: Journal of Cinema and Media Studies, 65(1), 176–182. https://doi.org/10.1353/cj.2025.a974059
MesseriL. (forthcoming). Visions of computing futures: Meta, Apple, and the technological fictions of digitally real worlds. Games & Culture.
36.
NieborgD. B.PoellT. (2018). The platformization of cultural production: Theorizing the contingent cultural commodity. New Media & Society, 20(11), 4275–4292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818769694
ZauchaT.AgurC. (2023). Playbor, gamble-play, and the financialization of digital games. New Media & Society, 27(3), 1279–1298. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231190907
