Jump to content
IGNORED

Ubisoft announces rebadged cosmetic tradeable DLC for dummies...sorry NFTS!


Uzi
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, bear said:

Is the first time advertising for cosmetic DLC has felt the need to include a disclaimer about it being "energy efficient"? 

 

Maybe it's simplistic on my part but if they can't even go as far as "environmentally friendly" then I'm inclined to class this whole scheme as a bad thing. 


Gaming can’t claim to be environmentally friendly, so why would these products?

 

There is an important distinction to be made between Proof of Work and Proof of Stake in these areas from the perspective of energy usage - POS is environmentally trivial compared with POW, so it’s understandable they would want to highlight that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Anne Summers said:

I don't think it's that bad an idea that we should be able to sell own and sell digital assets that we buy in-game. Or anywhere else. I've spend hundreds of quid on Kindle books, it would be great if I could sell them on when I've finished reading them. Even if I had to give Amazon a cut (which is perfectly doable with NFTs as I understand it). 

 

 

You can already do it. It is up to the owner of the content whether you can in specific cases. You do not need blockchains to sell and trade digital content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Anne Summers said:

But it's all centralised, right, and under the control of MS? So they can "clock" your cars , or do other things that affect their value ?

(Honest question, I don't know because I've never played Forza).

 

Indeed. And then we get angry posts whenever big publishers disable game servers or close digital stores. Either way, people are going to be angry at things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Graham S said:

I love that in a digital world of infinite possibilities, your imagination goes straight to having a swanky virtual house where you can show off your high status purchases and raise loans against them. 


Isn’t this the point of any collectible though? You either display and ‘appreciate’ them in some fashion, or stow them away in the hope their collectible value increases as an asset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People love "things". Life is becoming increasingly digital and virtual. Therefore people will want to buy digital things they can own/show off in their digital virtual lives. Those are three inescapable facts. It doesn't really matter if you like them , or don't (and there are plenty of reasons to do both). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Anne Summers said:

People love "things". Life is becoming increasingly digital and virtual. Therefore people will want to buy digital things they can own/show off in their digital virtual lives. Those are three inescapable facts. It doesn't really matter if you like them , or don't (and there are plenty of reasons to do both). 

Sure. And you don't need blockchains for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Anne Summers said:

But it's all centralised, right, and under the control of MS? So they can "clock" your cars , or do other things that affect their value ?

(Honest question, I don't know because I've never played Forza).

 

They still can, the NFT doesn't include the actual metadata, just "proof" this car is "your" car.

 

So it's just adding another person to the list, who you have less reason to trust than the person who could and should have the records and doesn't need to set fire to a penguin to achieve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anne Summers said:

People love "things". Life is becoming increasingly digital and virtual. Therefore people will want to buy digital things they can own/show off in their digital virtual lives. Those are three inescapable facts. It doesn't really matter if you like them , or don't (and there are plenty of reasons to do both). 

 

As mentioned on page 2 of this, Ubisofts T&Cs forbid showing off the digital things:-
 

You do not have the right to, directly or indirectly:
[…]
use the Visual Representation of your Digit in videos or any other forms of media,

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Anne Summers said:

I don't think it's that bad an idea that we should be able to sell own and sell digital assets that we buy in-game. Or anywhere else. I've spend hundreds of quid on Kindle books, it would be great if I could sell them on when I've finished reading them. Even if I had to give Amazon a cut (which is perfectly doable with NFTs as I understand it). 

 

 

 

And perfectly doable without NFTs

 

So we're again back to "Why NFTs"?

 

  

2 hours ago, alex3d said:

 

Indeed. And then we get angry posts whenever big publishers disable game servers or close digital stores. Either way, people are going to be angry at things.

 

If MS close the server, NFT or not you still can't do anything with that car, because even if "ownership" transfers the car is still residing in your save and always will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Wow, think of how much we could fuck up this perfectly functional system by establishing some competing 3rd parties to decide who owns all this stuff, so long as they never tell anyone about it because we'll make that against the terms" ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dudley said:

So it's just adding another person to the list, who you have less reason to trust than the person who could and should have the records and doesn't need to set fire to a penguin to achieve it.


If they are still doing this, it’s on the Tezos proof of stake network, so no penguins are being burned.

 

Well, no more than you currently burn anyway in any number of equally pointless activities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ZOK said:

This

Sorry, yes, I was leading the witness.

 

If you support the re-sale of DLC, how do you make money? I assume the platform holder can just take a % transaction fee as usual, but how does the publisher make money, if at all? Either way, I can see why you might want to outsource some of the overhead to blockchain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TehStu said:

Sorry, yes, I was leading the witness.

 

If you support the re-sale of DLC, how do you make money? I assume the platform holder can just take a % transaction fee as usual, but how does the publisher make money, if at all? Either way, I can see why you might want to outsource some of the overhead to blockchain.

Steam already does this. They take a percentage of every sale 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, skittles said:

:lol:

 

Crypto dickbutts. An NFT that can be yours for only 3.6eth currently. https://opensea.io/collection/cryptodickbutts :lol:


Man alive…this one is a snip at nearly 3 million dollars!

 

https://opensea.io/assets/0x495f947276749ce646f68ac8c248420045cb7b5e/49272215164227341957529616276745060366364320606730995167344709379033724354561/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can implement royalties on secondary sales with NFTs. So that's where Ubisoft potentially cash in.

 

As much as I dislike the idea of all of this, cosmetics in a videogame is at least an application of NFTs that I think makes some kind of sense.

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.