Sega has announced a collaboration with game developer Double Jump.Tokyo that will see the company begin to sell NFTs (non-fungible tokens) based on its intellectual property this summer.
According to a new statement (Japanese), the two companies will launch NFT content relating to Sega's classic and current IPs, as well as upcoming projects. The content will include a variety of digital assets like art and music from its games, and Sega says it will use the new initiative to explore various services which will allow NFT owners to "effectively utilize and further enjoy their NFT content" (thanks, Siliconera).
If you're not up to speed on what NFTs are all about, here's the description currently offered up on Wikipedia:
"A non-fungible token is a unit of data stored on a digital ledger, called a blockchain, that certifies a digital asset to be unique and therefore not interchangeable. NFTs can be used to represent items such as photos, videos, audio, and other types of digital files."
Essentially, an NFT is a one-of-a-kind version of a digital asset. So for example, a digital art piece (which you would usually be able to share endlessly) can be "tokenised" as a way of making it unique. The token acts as a kind of certificate that cannot be copied, meaning that you could feasibly sell your NFT asset at a later date, complete with this authenticity.
In Sega's case, this new venture means that the company could sell a digital piece of Sonic art to a buyer, complete with this digital form of authenticity; the buyer will never receive anything physical, but owns something thought to be 'unique' in digital form.
As bonkers and supposedly harmless as it all sounds, the very idea of NFTs has been hit with widespread criticism thanks to the fact that buying and selling them causes great damage to the environment. Sega isn't the first game company to jump on the NFT trend, but some reports claim that Sonic fans are "furious" over the plans.
[source sega.co.jp, via siliconera.com]
I need a more practical example of how NFTs work in order to understand the value of the system. So far I have just seen memes and JPEGs going for sale.
I have zero tolerance for companies which are involved in NFTs, they are so bad for the environment and the companies involved deserve to go bankrupt.
NFTs have potential application for licensing verification, but it's being misused for selling imaginary rights to memes and images for the sake of collections.
The scary thing is that the misuse of the concept would be less environmentally damaging than the prospect of widescale digital license verification...
@MysteryCupofJoe From my perspective, it's just another way to separate stupid people from their money while wasting a lot of electricity to process a blockchain that serves no purpose other than to give someone bragging rights.
I don’t even like downloading digital games all that much because I don’t feel like I have the “ownership” of it. So I don’t think I need to tell you what I think of NFT’s.
Hey @NintendoLife- can I buy an NFT of this post for $200,000?
All this crypto currency stuff makes zero sense. How is this bad for the environment for a digital transaction?
I mean, if digital transactions suck up energy, then shouldn't the entire web go down to save the environment?
I'm not ragging on being eco-friendly, I just genuinely don't understand how this is can be worse than the internet's entire existence. Heck, even the availability of this website alone requires 24/7 energy consumption to stay online for us to enjoy.
Wait till EA finds out about this. They'll be 1 step closer to their dream of selling Air.
What’s the fun in a token if you can’t fung it?
Back in the the good old days I used to give all my tokens a good funging, and no one could tell me otherwise. Now there are three non-fungable doodads, which you can’t so much as touch. Ridiculous.
No fung, no fun, I say. Count me out.
I have no idea what most of this article means.
@GamingFan4Lyf because the common folk became aware about the idea of cryptomining, and it really spooked a certain group of people. It's no coincidence that the war on cryptomining started just shortly after people started outinvesting the elites in the stockmarket. Which given how valuable cryptocurrency can be, would definitely not end well for them if the common folk started investing in cryptomining too.
@Muddy_4_Ever I can sell you a NFT of this article for 200.00$ if that makes you happy. And it's 100% not stolen content... yeah... i would never sell stolen content for money...
Seems like a bit of a douche move to artificially restrict access to and then inflate the price of some digital asset that many people could be allowed to access and purchase at a much lower price otherwise. It's like the rare game market in recent times, where people are selling a copy of some random game at prices in the hundreds of thousands, but even more stupid because there's really no good reason from a consumer's perspective to deliberately make it so only one rich individual can get a digital copy of some Sonic the Hedgehog concept art or whatever when in reality a million people could just as easily own that same art otherwise. And Sega can still retain the actual physical original art regardless in this case, so it feels like a total win-win for Sega and a bit of scam for everyone else other than the rich twit who can afford to pay absurd amounts for whatever digital item. And, yes, I'm sure most of these assets will sell initially at probably half-decent prices, but once that ball starts rolling it will just be one person selling it to another at an ever increasing cost. Based on how the rare game collectors market has developed in recent years after the money men/women got involved and artificially inflated and pushed the costs through the roof and into utterly absurd territory, I'm not a fan of this NFT idea at all.
It's the umpteenth time I read an article about and an enclosed explanation of an NFT, and my dumb brain is still none the wiser on what the hell it even is.😅
@GamingFan4Lyf Well, it's on top of all of that. Like if you see an empty crisp packet in the street and then dump some more rubbish on top of it.
Nobody is claiming that other things are fine from an eco-perspective, but this is an unnecessary extra.
@GamingFan4Lyf I’m not an expert, but my understanding is that to keep NFTs secure requires constant running of hardware running the verification software, which apparently consumes a colossal amount of energy.
But like you say, so does pretty much the whole internet. And all the mobile devices people use to fill the internet with complaints about how un-eco-friendly NFTs are.
But the difference is that the internet has become an integral part of society and the way the majority of the world transacts business - for the better. NFTs are for rich t#^*s to gloat about how they spent £50m on a picture of Sonic’s left shoe, providing no practical benefit to any part of society.
Shame, as it's something I would have thought the Official Sonic Twitter account would actually parody. I know I've said this before, but If SEGA want money, they should consider delving deeper into their rich IP history and reviving classics like Skies of Arcadia, Jet Set Radio, Golden Axe etc
It's like taking a poster, with millions of identical copies, and writing 'VERY SPECIAL' on the back of it.. While keeping the hand drawn concept art or piece for yourself..
A fool and his money surely are easily parted..
This is so dumb.
I don't get crypto stuff, primarily because it isn't backed up by any physical tangible item in the real world, therefor value is assigned to it based on "just because".
This is lame. So lame.
It behaves as if you can't screenshot something, make an audio recording or video file from what your monitor is seeing.
It’s both incredibly dumb and also hideously terrible for the environment. Shame on SEGA.
@nhSnork It’s like if you buy a hat from me, but the hat doesn’t physically exist, but I’ll tell everyone that it was definitely you who bought it from me, and I’ll melt a glacier as proof. Then if you want to sell it to someone else, you can point to the melted glacier and say “this is proof I bought it from that other dude, but if you buy it from me I’ll let you point at the melted glacier, and you can use the (now non-existent) glacier as proof that you own the (always non-existent) hat”.
It’s similar to the more tangible concept of materialism, but taken to such a degree that it has transcended the need for actual physical materials.
Let’s call it hyper-post-materialism, because attaching cool prefixes to already cool-sounding words makes them sound even cooler.
@nhSnork As far as I can tell, it's a way to sell something like a digital scan/copy of a production picture of Sonic or whatever to an individual buyer as though it were the only one in existence for an amount that is far beyond what it's actually worth, even though this item could otherwise be digitally scanned and reproduced as many times as they like at no real extra cost and sold relatively cheaply, which will ultimately create a system where the digital version of that thing keeps selling on to the next person at an ever increasing amount so at some point only rich people will ever be able to buy that digital thing. And Sega still gets to keep the actual real original version, maybe to sell for even more money at some time in the future, so it's free money for Sega at the hands of fools who think a digital copy of something has some inherent rarity and ever-increasing value.
It's like the physical game collectors market as it is now, but with digital things, which aren't naturally limited in how many of them there are, instead of actual tangible goods that have some genuine material value and are rare because they either weren't or can't reasonably be reproduced basically infinitely.
They're pretty much gonna make money off wealthy-rich fools, and make the market artificially rare and limited for everyone else that doesn't have lots of spare money.
Basically, they're gonna sell some digital Sonic pictures and the like in a way that you will never likely be able to purchase them (assuming you aren't wealthy), for no good reason other than pure greed--but you can it seem literally just take a screen grab or photo using your smartphone or whatever of said images (and the like) and own them anyway if you really want to.
Here's a nice explanation
@Muddy_4_Ever I can sell you one!
@gaga64 It's about the generation of the NFT as well. It uses a huge amount of energy (like bitcoin mining), it's not comparable to regular internet use. Even streaming which is energy intensive is nowhere near as bad.
Also NFTs don't prove anything. Anyone can generate one of anything.
@sleepinglion The bubble will burst, and a lot of people will lose money. Some deserving, some less so.
NFTs are the latest ***** fad. If the future ought to be "green" it must be without crypto and NFT. Besides that, that whole system is just one global blackout away from failing. Like many other systems.
"A single cryptoart NFT ("non-fungible token" - which cryptoart folks have declared to represent the ownership of a digital artwork) involves potentially dozens of transactions. Akten analysed 18,000 of these tokens, finding that the average NFT has a footprint of around 211 kg of CO2 equivalent. That's the same as an EU resident's electric power consumption for more than a month, driving for 1000km, or a return flight from London to Rome. And that's just for keeping track of who owns it - it doesn't include the energy consumption used in the creation of the work, its storage, or the website it's hosted on."
@Da_Debbil "I don't see any real value in this."
Neither do I. But value is based on what others perceive it to be. If there enough people willing to say something is worth a certain amount then it simply is, whether this be art, trading cards, NFT's or those numbers in your bank account.
I'm sure there's enough people who want in to make this valuable.
@TryToBeHopeful Why in the living Christ does it take all that just to limit the sale of a digital item to a single individual and then store the details of the single individual who owns a bit of digital art for future reference and potential resale?
@Maxz @impurekind @Manah thanks. Sounds like we're bringing Bragging Rights Reward trope to an entire new level.😄
@RupeeClock Please explain. I am not sure I get what you are saying about NFTs being less impactful than digital rights. Aren't NFTs "digital rights" to a single "owner".
That's way too late, the fad will be over.
As far as I understand it blockchain tech uses about 10-50 times more energy than internet browsing because of the constant high level calculations.
But right now we're using the equivalent of 70 coal power plants just powering the internet, people need to work on making it more efficient.
@impurekind You are not restricted access though. It's literally just bragging rights.
Everyone can still download the media, it's just that one person has the verifiable "original" version.
Which is still digital and otherwise 100% the exact same file. You don't even get editable Photoshop files or anything... it's absolutely ridiculous.
I am definitely too old to get the point of this...
The entire human race is doomed if we continue to be so stupidly and pointlessly wasteful.
@TryToBeHopeful how does a single NFT create that big of a carbon footprint? Wouldn't the average person who stores JPEGs on their HDDs have laid down billions of kgs of carbon by now. I don't get how a single digital image/ GIF is causing such an uproar on an enviromental level when most of the world has already put that to shame with the pics of our kids, dogs, cats, etc.. So can you explain how those numbers stack up against what the average person has in "storage".
NFTs by their design cannot be falsified, as blockchain technology is basically having dozens of independent ledgers keep a record of the same transaction. If one record is falsified, it won't match up with all the others.
As I understand it, NFTs are a scheme that make it enticing for less tech-savvy people to spend a lot of real world currency on a digital license to claim ownership of something digital, whilst that licensing is itself empowered by cryptocurrency.
In short, it's a way to get real financial backing behind the cryptocurrency, therefore growing their value and further encouraging people to take up the crypto-mining operations.
Said operations can involve operating sites that run hundreds or thousands of dedicated mining rigs that use up enormous amounts of electricity.
It's something I'm fundamentally against because these resources could be put into something constructive like [email protected]'s efforts to treat and cure diseases through simulations of proteins folding and mis-folding.
Also, this NFT thing really took off with sports memorabilia collectors. So not the sharpest tools in the shed already. I can't believe Sega and Hasbro think this is a good move. It makes them look ***** stupid.
Companies don't understand that just because everybody else is doing it doesn't mean you have to as well. F**k NFTs.
@Daniel36 Yeah, it's really just an illusion of restricted access/ownership, because it's digital so anyone can basically copy and own it too if they want. But people will still pay for "sole ownership" of it, and Sega and Hasbro will make easy money off of it, and presumably the blockchain creators will get even richer off of it, and so on. It's just beyond ridiculous.
@Darknyht my good sir, this a the most precise NFT’s definition Ever !
Allow me to retweet it when I’m yelling at clouds...
@impurekind Because crypto bros. It also doesn't limit anything accurately (because I could generate an NFT of the mona lisa and sell it to you) or bestow copyright or deal with anything that's not already covered by paper certificates of authenticity, and regular property law. Also if the website linked to your NFT goes down, you are SOL.
@Bearzilla823 It doesn't have anything to do with the storage of a jpeg, it has to do with the computational generation of the NFT. Basically computers solving hard maths problems. It's why nobody can buy graphics cards. And those graphics cards use lots of energy when they're being turned into hard math problem solvers.
@impurekind There is a tenuous argument for having a way to allocate ownership of the original of a piece of purely digital art. But this is a dumb way to do it.
@TryToBeHopeful All of this stuff is just bonkers. How in God's name did we get here? I miss the days when we could just pay for something [physical] and own it outright and do with it what we pleased. It's kinda why my physical SNES Classic Edition with its pre-installed library of games, which I own outright for as long as I live and can do with as I please, has been the most pure and satisfying gaming product I've purchased in a looong time. Outside of buying old/used/worn consoles and games that come from a time long past, it's about as close as we can get to the way it was buying some gaming console and a handful of games for it back in the likes of '80s-'90s, that simple and honest, and that just makes me happy. Now that I've hacked it and added a bunch more games, patched it to allow me to get back to the main menu via simple button combination, and bought a couple of controller extension cables, I honestly love my SNES Classic Edition. Other than VR, which I absolutely love too, it's basically the only gaming system I play on these days (and that includes home consoles, handhelds, smartphones/tables, PC and browser).
Exactly the sort of short sighted cash grab I'd expect from modern Sega.
@impurekind It's attempting to solve a 21st century problem, but not well. And obviously the idea of purchasing bragging rights on a piece of digital art is different to buying MP3s, but not much.
As for everyone questioning what exactly it is... Yep, seems like basically digital authenticity certificates.
But since they're built on a blockchain (rather than something more sensible), managing those certificates is maintained by all the miners constantly spending tons of energy trying to mine blocks (by looking for low enough answers to those math equations).
All the work/energy put into keeping the chain going is the reason the buyer knows the certificate/bitcoin/etc is authentic/valuable/etc. Can't feasibly tamper with it, as to do so would mean you'd need to re-spend the same amount of energy spent until now.
@bluesun I don't think the miners are keeping the chain going. I think they are mining bitcoins in the first instance, or generating NFTs. I imagine (what do I know?) that transferring ownership of cryptographic keys is probably pretty low impact.
I hope Sega burns to the ground and goes under because of this
Can we go back to when Fidget Spinners and Tide Pods were the hot new things?
I wouldn't raise the pitchfork against sega about this. Just because some claims ownership of a digital asset doesn't necessarily mean that inaccessible to everyone else. But yeah, in it's current use nft's serve little purpose, but it'll have its merits for contracts, the music industry and other things in the future.
It's an utter mess. Capitalism has run out of things to sell so needs to sell imaginary things (or more accurately, used electricity).
❗I'll just copy-and-paste or screenshot from Google and save some money 😊
@Xiovanni I can't think of a single business that doesn't make money and doesn't destroy our planet even a bit...
@MysteryCupofJoe From what little I understand, it's the digital equivalent of owning an original piece of artwork, even though prints of said artwork are freely available everywhere. You have proof you own the original.
Mining blocks is exactly what adds to the 'block' chain.
Even just transferring something to someone else (be it bitcoins or NFTs or whatever), means paying miners a fee to make it worthwhile to post it inside their blocks.
Generating NFTs seems to take up more room than an ordinary transfer, meaning miners want higher fees ('gas'), but there'd still be fees on transferring.
@Bearzilla823 @GamingFan4Lyf It's all about how much usage. Eacg NFT used as much energy as (on average) as a single person uses in a month (in the EU). As for the how? It's not the person doing the transaction, but the work of putting the transaction into the ledger is done by the miners. As you probably have heard, they fill up entire warehouses with computers mining, trying to get new coins.
@MysteryCupofJoe Then you understand the system.
It seems like NFT is infiltrating all mediums these days, and I won't be one of the people who purchase one. Purchasing a digital autograph of a person you admire or something else along those lines? I just don't see the sense in it. Especially for the outrageous prices people are charging.
i surprisingly sold my first one last week. make a piece of digital art, sell it to someone using blockchain, they now own the rights to it. that's literally all it is. yes, it will be and has already been taken advantage of in lots of ways, but that's literally no different than anything else in any other industry/market.
NFT, for how I understand it at the moment, sounds like the most uselessly capitalist thing that exists.
Selling nothing for a profit while destroying the planet? Basically a neoliberal's wet dream.
@Maxz "...and I’ll melt a glacier as proof."
Duuuude that had me rolling lol
Lol. Sounds like a money laundering scheme... I mean seriously? This is lunacy... Weird weird weird.
Can someone provide an example of a NFT in my life?
@ryancraddock When is Nintendo Life going to reveal the amount of carbon emissions that the ReedPop family of websites and servers generate? When are you going to dive into the amount of pollution caused by Nintendo consoles and electronics in general? When are you going to talk about the issues of e-waste disposal? Until you look at how your own employer, lifestyle, and hobbies impact the environment, please keep your pseudoscience masquerading as "facts" to yourself. We're here for the gaming news and not your conjecture.
Modern day equivalent of selling Lord/lady titles in Scotland, or a star.
It's a scam, and any company doing this is just scummy as hell and should be cancelled harder than Dr Seuss.
I'm maybe old, but...
What is a NFT?!
Well for once I can honestly say thank you to the community for explaining something to an old cogger like me without being snide and nasty. I can say that I see why we are upset about the goings on behind the NFTs. And now that i have a little more of an education on these things I can develop a better opinion about them. Thank you the guys or gals that helped.
I must be too old because this sounds all too sketchy to me. I could see paying for art that you can throw up over the mantle. I can get doing it if it were something you could use.
Nice to see SEGA going back to their yakuza roots!
Segata Sanshiro didn’t sacrifice himself for this...
Why is modern Sega such a big piece of crap?
@blockfight yeah me too ! X
How do I contact Sega to discuss my exciting one-time discount on Martian real estate that I'd like to offer them?
It’s been explained and still does not make any sense to me.
Maybe a explanation why they are bad for the environment?
I don't get any of this nor do I want to.
....Wait, they ain't dead?
I don't really care for NFTs myself, but the amount of people who just keep repeating "but it's destroying our planet!" is just ridiculous.
Once a Pioneer of Arcade Gaming, who would have thought, this is what Sega has become
@AlexSora89 Who are all those people who do the reactions in his Videos?
Is it a modelling agency?
This straight up some Black Mirror type stuff...
I think it's all rather weird.
I already don't understand Cryptocurrency. NOW I have to start not understanding Crypto-goods&services?
@MysteryCupofJoe it’s like buying something but instead of physical it’s digital but unlike digital items today there is only one for each purchased. You cannot copy it or burn it and make another per-say but of course anything on the internet can be duplicated.
It’s basically a way to push digital items and claim their one of a kind like the game you buy at the store but it’s nothing but a scam really.
@gspro15198 NFTs are not inherently bad for the environment. Look up elrond network for eg, its proof of staking rather than proof of work plus thats proof of space on its way now too.
Boo!!! These are the worst thing since loot lootboxes. Shame on SEGA for encouraging this terrible method of wasting money.
Go on saga! if some jokers willing to spend money on NFTs then take advantage?, as long as the people buying are not ill or mentally challenged then take them for all their worth. Casinos don't exactly care when they take your money!
@TryToBeHopeful Well, you buy mp3s to support the artist, and for some the ability to play said mp3 (ot lossless file) as DJ and not get into trouble. But I get your point.
I would like to say something as a lot of you are planning. I don't know about other things but at least for memes, owning the NFT does not give you exclusive access, all it does is basically give you bragging rights. You basically just have an autographed version of the meme.
Urgh..... The future.
No. That sounds dumb.
@MysteryCupofJoe Same as the fever of the pokemon cards, why people pay thousands for a piece of cartoon? everything in this life have value because people put it to them.
Can someone explain to me how exactly is this bad to the environment?
Tap here to load 97 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...