Jump to content
IGNORED

NFTs and the Blockchain - What the hell is all this?


squirtle
 Share

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, footle said:

(also, how many digital pc stores have shut down and not just been taken over: I suspect the answer, for anything you might have bought something from, is none, and the prospect of it happening isn’t something that you as a consumer spend any time worrying over)

Direct2Drive was the big one before Steam and all their downloads are long gone even if the brand remains. Games for Windows Live is also long dead and I had purchases in that too. 

 

It’s also not just about that, it’s the flexibility to move to different platforms based on their features rather than being locked-in.


We’ve seen a repeated pattern where these centralised tech monoliths become increasingly user-hostile, greedy or simply lazy. This would help prevent that.

 

Generally, I’m sceptical of blockchain bro bullshit, but distributed trust-free proof of ownership akin to software licenses is basically a case study for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Halo said:

Direct2Drive was the big one before Steam and all their downloads are long gone even if the brand remains. Games for Windows Live is also long dead and I had purchases in that too. 

 

It’s also not just about that, it’s the flexibility to move to different platforms based on their features rather than being locked-in.


We’ve seen a repeated pattern where these centralised tech monoliths become increasingly user-hostile, greedy or simply lazy. This would help prevent that.

 

Generally, I’m sceptical of blockchain bro bullshit, but distributed trust-free proof of ownership akin to software licenses is basically a case study for it.


You could buy things through game for windows live (hint: no, and the blockchain isn’t solving service deprecation)?

 

also, someone appears to have bought direct2drive and it’s been rebranded a couple of times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, footle said:


You could buy things through game for windows live (hint: no, and the blockchain isn’t solving service deprecation)?

 

also, someone appears to have bought direct2drive and it’s been rebranded a couple of times.

Yes, you could buy games through Games for Windows Live for many years until they discontinued the service.

 

And, yes, the Direct2Drive brand still remains, but has little to do with the original storefront, having been sold at least twice. The games purchased way back when are no-longer available.

 

I think you're being disingenuous.

 

I do think there's a genuine problem that digital licenses are tied to individual platforms. A mechanism for digital licenses to be shared across platforms would be genuinely useful for a variety of reasons for end-users, including help mitigate the discontinuation of individual services and enable people to move between digital download services in a way they cannot currently do. A blockchain would be a potential mechanism for delivering it. If you disagree with that, that's fine.

 

Edit: I also believe digital licenses being tied to individual platforms helps entrench large "trusted" digital sellers by creating a high barrier to entry, reducing innovation and keeping retailer margins artificially high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Halo said:

I do think there's a genuine problem that digital licenses are tied to individual platforms. A mechanism for digital licenses to be shared across platforms would be genuinely useful for a variety of reasons for end-users, including help mitigate the discontinuation of individual services and enable people to move between digital download services in a way they cannot currently do. A blockchain would be a potential mechanism for delivering it. If you disagree with that, that's fine.

 

But it still requires the Platform holders to cooperate with it.  It's not something that can be done without them, & without sufficient incentive they won't.

 

Going back to the example of ITunes, the music industry was losing out to Piracy & so they jumped on the Lifeline that Steve Jobs offered them.  Things have changed again now with the advent of services like Spotify where there is one service you subscribe to that has all the content.  Will there ever be a service like that for games?  One place where you download/stream all of your purchased/subscribed content from Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo etc forever?  Not unless they agree to it, & unless it's a better proposition for them than the current fragmented market, why would they?

 

Edit:  Thinking about it some more, for the same reason that they got on board with ITunes/Spotify.  The Customers were unwilling to put with re-purchasing they same content over & over.  I think Nintendo have finally reached that point with Super Mario Bros.  It's in it's own little Handheld now, but that's it.  People won't buy that game by itself anymore.  How long until it's the same for other games?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Pretty much every NFT for games plan has been met with people flinging shit, and rightly so IMO. Ubisofts foray is a disaster, the STALKER devs walked back their plans (with a very passive aggressive message). I'm sure we'll see more instances but I don't see them getting a foot hold. But then I don't understand them or the appeal of them, so it could be a generational thing where the next gen of gamers get entirely on board with it in ten years or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose it’s like anything, until there’s a compelling reason (ie a good or popular game (notice the differentiation)) to use it, then we’ll just slag it off as a gimmick, a con etc.

 

I’m starting as CTO tomorrow at a company that’s resurrecting a ‘90s football game as a cross-platform multiplayer football game, where you can trade players on the blockchain. Even now I’m not sure why’d you’d want to do that, but I can see it working within that sort of scenario, especially as player trading is something that’s done in “real” football.


I think Square bloke is right though, it’s going to happen, but the whole wallet/transaction process needs to be a to slicker. It’s much easier than it was 5 years ago, but it’s still a fair way to go before your Mum could use it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Oaf said:

I suppose it’s like anything, until there’s a compelling reason (ie a good or popular game (notice the differentiation)) to use it, then we’ll just slag it off as a gimmick, a con etc.

 

I’m starting as CTO tomorrow at a company that’s resurrecting a ‘90s football game as a cross-platform multiplayer football game, where you can trade players on the blockchain. Even now I’m not sure why’d you’d want to do that, but I can see it working within that sort of scenario, especially as player trading is something that’s done in “real” football.


I think Square bloke is right though, it’s going to happen, but the whole wallet/transaction process needs to be a to slicker. It’s much easier than it was 5 years ago, but it’s still a fair way to go before your Mum could use it.

 

Why on the blockchain? Surely people would expect your company to have oversight of the game, making a centralised option cheaper, better for the environment, and more secure?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Uncle Mike said:

If you're the CTO, you probably want to have worked it out before your first day, I'd have thought.


Nah, I just have to make sure the 1s and 0s are in the right order ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

During one of the interminable NFT arguments on my Twitter timeline the other day someone came up with the reason that big companies will embrace it is because they "won't have any choice."

 

I take that to mean that NFT Shooter & NFT RPG that the little studios make will eat so much of Call of Duty's & Final Fantasy's lunch that Activision/Blizzard & Square Enix will see the writing on the wall and will let you take your Buster Sword into Call of Duty, Darn it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the NFT you are buying and selling not the art. It might as well just be numbered. NTF #395,245 for sale, get it while it's hot! The image is the pretty (or not) picture stamped on the back of your imagined coin, or the funky hologram on your moon land deed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/01/2022 at 17:25, Oaf said:

 Even now I’m not sure why’d you’d want to do that, but I can see it working within that sort of scenario, especially as player trading is something that’s done in “real” football.


 

 

Would that not require there to be only one version of that player in the whole game though? Would the game not run out of in game players of would it auto generate more? And if it did generate more then would that lead the developers to have the ability to directly influence the cost / value of the nft's (players) already owned by people playing the game? So many questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.