NFTs have been a hot topic during 2021, and the New Year's letter from Square Enix president Yosuke Matsuda is only going to add to that noise.
Matsuda's letter – which you can read here – touches upon a wide range of topics, including cloud gaming, AI and "the metaverse", but he devotes a particularly large portion to NFTs and cryptocurrency, and how they can impact gaming.
He notes that people who play games for "fun" are currently opposed to the introduction of NFTs – but he believes they will become a big part of gaming's future:
I realize that some people who “play to have fun” and who currently form the majority of players have voiced their reservations toward these new trends, and understandably so. However, I believe that there will be a certain number of people whose motivation is to “play to contribute,” by which I mean to help make the game more exciting. Traditional gaming has offered no explicit incentive to this latter group of people, who were motivated strictly by such inconsistent personal feelings as goodwill and volunteer spirit. This fact is not unrelated to the limitations of existing UGC (user-generated content). UGC has been brought into being solely because of individuals’ desire for self-expression and not because any explicit incentive existed to reward them for their creative efforts. I see this as one reason that there haven’t been as many major game-changing content that were user generated as one would expect.
However, with advances in token economies, users will be provided with explicit incentives, thereby resulting not only in greater consistency in their motivation, but also creating a tangible upside to their creative efforts. I believe that this will lead to more people devoting themselves to such efforts and to greater possibilities of games growing in exciting ways. From having fun to earning to contributing, a wide variety of motivations will inspire people to engage with games and connect with one another. It is blockchain-based tokens that will enable this. By designing viable token economies into our games, we will enable self-sustaining game growth. It is precisely this sort of ecosystem that lies at the heart of what I refer to as “decentralized gaming,” and I hope that this becomes a major trend in gaming going forward.
Square Enix has previously dabbled in the sale of special NFTs, and is joined by the likes of Sega, Ubisoft and EA in looking at the concept of blockchain gaming and cryptocurrency in a positive light.
"but he believes they will become a big part of gaming's future"
Well that didn't make me feel any better.
I came here for some uplifting news to start the year
Equating NFTs with user generated content now?
That's a pretty hot take from a corporate suit.
Assuming that user generated content will "make games more exciting"?
Sure. If you are going to buy out Roblox and exclusively cater to the 6-12 year olds.
So it's NFT horse armour?
Getting some "You will own nothing, and you will be happy" vibes from this, or to put it more succinctly: "Deal with it!"
But for this crap to work all games must have always-online connection to the servers? Like what the idiots did with Diablo 3 on PC?
This will become popular and only the wealthy not-so-smart people will like it
Welcome to the future where every game is treated like Fortnite
Now I know why I didn't have any fun playing recent square enix games.
I will not play any game with any NFT in it. That’s not what games should be about.
I hope more suits will step up such as Phil Spenser from XBOX did. As if there isn’t enough money in the industry already… https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/xbox-boss-phil-spencer-says-nft-game-plans-feel-more-exploitive-than-about-entertainment/amp/
Somebody please get Gex away from this awful ass company
Start with a sentiment that is ethically sound...then talk absolute horsecrap about why you are going to disregard those ethics for the sake of the bottom line. Make sure to get some buzz words in. Hey, if it's not illegal, they can still sleep like babies.
What a time to be alive to witness your biggest hobby get infested with "get rich quick" pyramid schemes.
It's about them earning more money, common sense.
@Zuljaras while I don't like games that require online servers (unless games that rely heavily on MP)
Blizzard at least does support the online portion for their games for a long while.
@SuperZeldaFun NFTs are not going to fail (sadly, I hate them) because the history is repeating again.
I remember how the whole microtransaction thing slowly creeped into games, and that started the same way, people hated it and people were against it and in first place it seemed to fail.
But these companies are not going to give up, they wait until the majority of gamers gets smell of it after the storm has calmed, and before you know it people will fully accept NFT and spend casually money on it in games, while a small group of people will keep hating it.
Just like with microtransactions.
Expecting it to fail is naive, instead of ignoring it because "it dies anyhow" we should already try to prevent it from coming back.
But I can assure you that most people will not go that fair, they keep saying "NFT will fail hard anyhow" and before you know it, just like microtransactions and lootboxes the other part of gamers will accept it.
That is the real issue.
I think the original intention behind NFTs and the like was good (e.g. to help artists and be a platform for art in the digital world). However, they're terrible for the environment and have become a giant scam:
Steam won't have them and MS have shown no interest, i bet Sony and Nintendo will show no interest as well so i do wonder what these Publishers have planned when the 4 main sources for gaming don't like them.
Of course this is typical SE though in that they follow trends and never create them. They are a complete disaster of a company with the only good thing going in FF14 what sooner or later they will taint. Watch how they put NFT's in games but completely screw it up because while they follow trends they never actually learn from them.
Better, it's NFT levels for Mario Maker.
@SuperZeldaFun Cloud gaming is not failing and MS have proved that with XCloud.
Who’s going to tell him that Square Enix’s most famous game is about a greedy corporation recklessly harming the planet for short term gain?
@Rayquaza2510 Yes but the important thing is that the Online Auction House failed and the Console versions of Diablo 3 are online connection free
Diablo 4 for the moment is always online even for the PS4, Xbox One and the rest. I am curious to see if they could make it work or it will be fine for only about a year.
@Pod really puts the block in blockchain
"We know thr majority of players don't support NFTs, so here's why we're doing NFTs anyway."
good job listening to the fanbase 🥴
I'm completely out of the loop on this. What are NFTs? And why do we hate them?
SMH. This guy need to understand and look it from gamer perspective instead of businessman. GGWP
@Yosher to the best of my knowledge they are jpgs that cost money lol.
@Yosher An NFT is a digital receipt that says you own a thing (when you don't actually own it).
It's like going to a convenience store, and saying "I want to buy this sandwich." And they tell you "We can sell you this receipt that says you own this sandwich. You can't eat the sandwich, but that receipt will tell everyone you own it, which is just as good!"
@RetroOutcast no sweat, just amass the money to buy out the rights and coax Squeenix into selling it. To paraphrase a classic, "start funding, Joker".
Some people defend that NFTs are a good technology, but people are not using well, it can be used in good ways, but people are using it to sell crap that is only worth it for tax evasion and money laundering.
It's like when CDs started being used in games, at first, developers believed the future was turning videogames into movies, with even live-action actors, but then, the PlayStation came and showed how CD technology should be used.
However, blockchain technology spends too much power, and we are in a climate crisis, the technology shouldn't be banned, but postponed.
@CharlieGirl Wow really? That's really bloody stupid if so and yes should never be defended. Thanks for the explanation!
So what he is saying is that most gamers are happy playing games and getting their "hit" from completing a level or constructing something or whatever but some people want to be given a virtual "biscuit (which is a flavour no-one else is allowed to eat but can lick with permission) and a pat on the head" to say well done little Johnny.
"It will be popular in the future because we're going to cram it down your throats"
@Yosher The idea of NFTs is that they use blockchain technology, the same used for cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, it's like a shared database, saved in multiple computers, and it's impossible to fraud or hack because changing one database is easy, but changing all of them is not possible, NFTs are a receipt that is impossible to delete.
But yes, when people buy those PNGs and JPGs for millions, the images aren't even stored on the blockchain, they are still saved on the regular internet like Google Drive.
Some people claim these proof of purchases could be used in good ways, but now, they are being used to make digital files like PNGs and JPGs something "unique", in an attempt of making them one of a kind, even though you can still copy them the regular way by right-clicking.
@Yosher Another thing, it's clear that the only reason why NFTs became so big recently is to continue the scam that is the art market.
No one buys those paintings that are worth millions to hang on the wall, it's all a bunch of tax evasion and money laundering, with galleries, auction houses and museusm inflating the prices.
NFTs are just this applied to digital art.
standard corporation biting on what they think the next big thing is, nothing new
People who play games for fun eh? So literally everyone?
Really though, why are companies even bothering with considering NFTs when the general public doesn't even react positive to them.
I honestly don't get what's so bad about NFT's? You don't have to invest in them just like microtransactions. Just play the game how you would normally it's that simple instead of moaning and saying you will boycott the game.... Even though you will still buy it
@Yosher NFT's in games are going to be items you can use in games that only you have, so for example in fortnite you could own a skin that nobody else but you can use its not just a receipt.
Now imagine how much people would be willing to pay you for your NFT?
Man there's a lot of NFT news in the past month. Like some sort of cult.
I hate the future with NFT.
Let's turn back the clock to 90's era.
@UltimateOtaku91 The excuse of "Don't like it, don't buy it" is the reason why the videogame industry became such a mess.
First it was expansion packs on PC and sequels with little changes on consoles, then it was DLC, then it was Season Passes, then it was microtransactions and loot boxes on free games, then on games that already cost $60, then Battle Passes, nothing was going to change for the people who refuse to buy them, except that it did, and for the worse.
Now the next thing will probably be NFTs.
It's very suspicious that these kind of horrible things always tend to crop up in console gaming near the beginning of a new generation or mid gen refresh. "Horse armor" appeared early in the PS3/360 era, loot boxes appeared early in the PS4/XB1 era, live service and battle passes appeared early in the PS4 Pro/XB1X era, this appearing in the early PS5/Series X|S era.
So it seems the more powerful the console, the more horrible the monetization. Switch is very much a 360/PS3 era console both in terms of power, online infrastructure and monetization.
In hindsight, Nintendo really made the right choice by leaving the "most powerful console" war after the GC.
@victordamazio yet all the things you mentioned are all optional and you don't need them to enjoy the main game. I've played apex legends for over 200 hours and never spent any money, same with genshin impact same with halo infinite. Only things I invest are in dlc and season passes which Nintendo are heavily involved in
Points for honesty at least. My biggest concern with NFT's, is the transition of 'playing games' into a straight up job. Imagine logging into FF XIV or some other MMO and your 'job' pays you in crypto every time you gather, mine or craft. Or if you are a raider you get a bonus for every savage or mythic boss. I get that Content Creators already make their living like this in a way, but once your play is dictated by 'what is the most profitable', that's some sketchy territory.
Yesterday: "Video games will rot my brain? Okay, Boomer..."
Tomorrow: "I can't afford to pay my oxygen bills because I blew it all on Dynasty Warriors NFTs."
@Krysus YouTube became such a mess because making videos became a job, in the early days, there was no way to make money from YouTube.
At first it wasn't bad because it was self-employment, but then, companies took over and YouTube channels became a business.
@Zuljaras It’s the opposite. These kind of models will subsidize games like this so that only the wealthy will be able to easily afford crafted offline experiences and the “rabble” will be in these play-to-earn economies.
Even at best, it bring a lot more opportunities for classism directly into game worlds as opposed to now where it exists outside them (for the most part).
@victordamazio You seem like you know what your talking about... do you have a good resource to learn about blockchain/NFTs you can link?
Not to sound completely conspiratorial — I’m not super well-verses in this stuff — do you worry that the way the establishment is maligning the blockchain as “anti-environment” is a way nip alternative economies in the bud? There’s something very suspicious about it but I don’t know enough to say for sure.
I feel like the point is being missed that a big corporation is asking people to contribute to the work that THEY own and instead of paying them with money, they are paying them with pretend items that cost (next to) nothing to disseminate.
The market for NFTs is like the market for commemorative plastic cups. When people start collecting them as ‘an investment’ they no longer have scarcity or value. Not that a digital item could ever really be scarce.
What does play to contribute even mean?
NFTs are like Crypto's, tools for a small group of people to get rich very very quickly. Then use that money to control the rest of the people.
@TryToBeHopeful I agree, but I think that’s too obvious. NFTs have already shown they can garner immense value, even when nobody understands them.
I don’t know about plastic cups, but baseball cards and CCGs have made whole cloth markets out of perceived scarcity of things.
The way they make it sound, it's going to be a mix of Microtransaction and user generated content, in hopes to earn money off the trading of said object.
Don't get why NFT tech is needed though (aside from being the new "investors demand it"-Buzzword, as similar things have been done with profile bound content (Second life, Roblox...)
@Spiders but not new baseball cards. From what I remember that was a 90s bubble. And I was well into baseball cards in the 90s. Once people started collecting to invest their collections became worthless.
NFT value is a bubble. People are buying because they want to be able to sell. It’s not like real art (sorry) where someone might want to boast they own a Monet, or expect its value as a one of a kind masterpiece will rise. It’s stupid pictures of stupid monkeys. You only have to read Twitter for 5 mins to see the goofballs who can clearly not afford to waste £10000 on a jpeg talk about how they’re hiding it from their wife who ‘just wouldn’t understand’.
Last time I checked, I only touch games to “play to have fun”
I only watch movies to enjoy my time
I only read novels to enjoy my time
In fact, I only engage in leisure activities to "have fun"
Square can F off
@SwissCheese of course it’s not necessary. They could just pay people with in game currency which would also have negligible cost to them. But why buy an in game skin, when you could buy an in game skin with a unique serial number that no one else has? /s
I'll avoid any games featuring NFTs just like I avoid any games featuring microtransactions and lootboxes. Should NFTs somehow manage to become the future for gaming I might actually be able to clear my backlog after all.
Second, third, fourth and fifth generation: Arcades that cheat and games you can't beat without a strategy guide, magazine or hotline
Sixth generation: Expansion Packs and copy-paste sequels
Seventh generation: DLC and Season Pass
Eight generation: Microtransations, Loot Boxes and Battle Passes
Ninth generation: NFTs
Microtransactions are not the end of the world. You can play Fortnite for free, not spend a penny, and benefit from all the people who did, without it affecting your gameplay or chance of winning.
They way they're done in FIFA on the other hand is a scourge.
'People who "play to have fun" currently make up the majority of players.'
I mean, I don't know what to say to that.
@AlexHarford The problem is, a lot of artwork is being stolen and sold as NFTs.
For example, I was on Equestria Daily (a My Little Pony news blog, if you haven't heard of it) recently, and they were reporting that a lot of MLP fanart has been stolen and being sold as NFTs.
Looking at the website where the art is being sold myself, I could confirm this. I immediately recognized artwork from an MLP fan artist by the name of Uotapo, who hails from Japan (and as we all know, Japan is notorious for their overly-strict copyright laws, but in this scenario, it's justified).
I sent them a Note on DeviantArt explaining the situation, and they said that they have sent a takedown request. Whether the takedowns actually happen remain to be seen.
Needless to say, it may seem like a good idea on paper, but in reality, it is very much a scam, and it gets worse when the artwork is being stolen, and the original artist doesn't get anything out of it.
Even the serial number issue could be profile bound, not needing NFT-crap.
I guess NFT / Blockchain is something all the big game companies hablve to look into as investors demand it...
Just as "subscription model"/"gaming-as-a-Service" was the last/current fad.
People that are into NFTs for games are strictly people that chase moonshots in cryptocurrency. They might tell you otherwise, but they are just lying to you and possibly also to themselves.
NFTs offer nothing that we couldn't do already. Look at steam marketplace for example. NFTs do the same with a much higher impact on the environment.
"But I don't really own my TF2 hat, while with NFTs I would". Sure, but if valve brought down TF2 even if it was using NFTs you would still have no use for your damn hat, so what is the difference? You still rely on the companies to support your NFTs.
Also to add to the above. You technically own a piece of text that links to the hat (so it relies on a regular DB to link to it). So if TF2 went down you would just own a piece of text and no hat.
And everything stays and stags upon another...
Some people are just overreacting, they must think games force you to get NFT's or you need NFT's to enjoy the game. Its just optional like microtransactions and season passes etc but if you don't want to play a game just because it's added something that's OPTIONAL then that's your loss, the game company won't miss you
Yes, no matter the tech used, it's all digital and you don't "own" anything, as you are reliant on the service being kept active by the game publisher
You don't need NFT which is a nightmare for the environment, due to the processing power needed to do anything that hasn't been done another way (profile bound loot...)
@TryToBeHopeful For sure, but the baseball card and comic bubble still happened, and just last year Pokémon cards were making news.
I agree with you in principle, but these things have a way of happening without them making sense on paper.
In my opinion, the object of a game is to have fun. Everyone plays to have fun. Do you sit down and devote your time to a game that you don't think is fun for an hour? No.
Games should not primarily be about making money.
@SwissCheese I think NFT enables the marketplace that profile bound loot does not, and that market is where you apply gambling, addiction and FOMO pressure without the regulations. Plus their talking about “user generated content”, so this is a way tokenize this new kind of labor, even though it’s being called a game.
@victordamazio Which is a big reason why I have largely stopped watching certain Let's Players, such as Markiplier and Jacksepticeye (aside from Mark's Try Not to Laugh or Sean's Meme Time or Funniest Home Videos series).
It just feels more like a business than like you're experiencing something with them in the same room, like it used to be. They seem to be more interested in growing their channels and sponsorship deals than actually caring about the fans that got them there in the first place. It feels less intimate now.
It didn't help when they made their videos at least 2-3 times as long as they used to be. I don't know about you, but I don't want to have to spend 30-60+ minutes watching a single video, unless it's a movie or TV episode. I prefer my Let's Plays to be below 20 minutes and broken up into bite-sized chunks.
That's why I prefer the Game Grumps more now than I used to. They've largely kept the same format over the years, despite being a business from the get-go, and I love the witty banter between Arin and Dan and their infectious laughing fits.
Once I am able to restart my own YouTube channel (COPPA really did a number on it), I'd like my own channel to be like that format from 2013-2015.
It people who think themselves smart and outwitting others who "don't get it".
It's nothing but gambling though, with some few making all the money.
At some point the (digital) objects on offer will outweigh demand by far, making prizes fall to nothing, leaving poor buggers scraping for some leftover worth.
Happens all the time with cards and fad based products. Digital is even worse, as you could just copy-pasta for all eternity or just have an algorithm create new stuff ad infinitum
@Mikmoomamimocki Unfortunately most entities that make games aren’t making them for fun, but to make money.
Also, unfortunately, many people now play games not to have fun, but because they are addicted.
@SwissCheese why is it a nightmare, if I play fortnite how will NFT's effect me playing the game? It won't affect the actual gameplay what so ever
@UltimateOtaku91 It's only optional until it isn't. You can claim microtransactions are optional as much as you want but games like Ghost Recon Breakpoint clearly showed that the lines can and will be crossed with this stuff and it will affect your enjoyment of the game. You are incredibly naive if you are thinking that companies won't find a way to do the same with NFTs
@Mikmoomamimocki but what if you could make money whilst having fun? I've played genshin for over 100 hours and enjoyed but if I got a couple NFT's along the way then what's wrong with that if I was to sell them? Also are you saying any game that has NFT's (which are optional) can't be fun?
It's not about it affecting you, it's about how it effects the environment and the processing power (and thereby needed energy) needed to verify ownership.
To you, who plays the game, it will likely make little difference.
It's almost like playing video games is meant to be fun
@MajinSoul in what way would NFT's not be optional? And i've never played a game where I'm forced to pay for microtransactions to carry on playing.
And by the sounds of it NFT's are just going to cosmetics and profile based items such as icons etc which won't impact the actual gameplay what so ever.
Also if your a single player only Person then NFT's won't show in those games. NFT's will stick with online games and free to play games
Can't you sell items or your account on eBay or something, like it was possible for WoW and whatnot?
@UltimateOtaku91 you think having something unlockable in a game that can be sold for money won't affect gameplay? OK keep telling yourself that
@SwissCheese it's a decent game if you don't get hung up on trying to get all the characters, just get the characters you want then concentrate on getting artifacts, it's only not fun for those who spend hundreds of hours grinding just to try get all the characters
Well this is horrifying. Squeenix further digging their own grave.
@carlos82 OK so if apex legends has NFT's how would that effect the actual gameplay?
@SwissCheese yes you can sell items on eBay now such as fortnite skins etc but they are less value as their are multiple people with the same skin. But with NFT's you would be the only Person with that item/skin hence the value would be much more
@MajinSoul Same goes for the argument that "All games should have an easy mode, disabled people should be allowed to play the game".
There are people who don't have arms, are paraplegic or are even blind who play videogames and even finish them, it's clear people who ask for this are not disabled and just suck at videogames, and yes, the easy mode is just an option until it becomes the only option.
@IGN_Commenter Please explain why this can't be done already without the carbon cost?
As stated earlier, it's not about gameplay but what NFT is and needs.
Seems like you're ignoring said issue on purpose
@UltimateOtaku91 they could tie the most desirable unlockables to them or even limit how many players can unlock them, its not hard to imagine. Also what is one benefit of having an NFT in a game? You mention selling items but they've been able to do that for years without them
@SwissCheese @icomma ah I see I didn't think about it in terms of the environment and power consumption kind of way, sorry.
And yes I agree microtransactions/loot boxes are not good and obviously developers just want more money or they need more money.
I mean I get the reasoning behind it, why sell a game to 5 million people, when you could make it free to play and get 30+ million people playing it and spending money on microtransactions and loot boxes and battle passes.
@icomma That's basically the idea. But it would be a skin with something unique about it like a serial number or a bar code. Very silly.
My understanding is that an NFT is a little bit of plaintext that says that you own something and wreaks havoc on the environment. Why is this necessary for games?
I just want to play video games, I don't care about making money or feeling satisfied that I "own" a virtual item. And I think that most people feel this way too.
Admittedly, I still don't really grasp the concept behind blockchaining and NFTs. So it might be something I'd have to see in action to probably understand.
However, this commentary on the matter just sounds highly condescending, patronizing, and completely dismissive of player concerns
@icomma I'm sure NFT's are unique items that only you could own, if not then what's the point, they might aswell just be called microtransactions
Willie hears ya
Willie don't care.
@Mikmoomamimocki that's exactly what NFT's are and you can still play the game the way you want whilst ignoring them.
The thing is whilst that one is unique. They can create a million in slightly different shades or with a different frame. So they are unlimited. They have no value. Other people can use the image. It’s pointless. Much like FUT. they can start again instantly or pump out more cards/NFTs. It’s a scam. Worse than any of the other gaming scams really. This is literally money for nothing
@TryToBeHopeful it’ll never ever be a skin. It’ll be a picture of a skin. But they will still sell the actually skin to everyone and it won’t be there is one pic of skin there will be 100s. Its worthless.
@icomma in that case what's the difference to normal micro transactions and loot boxes that give you skins? I've got over 40 skins in overwatch so are they classed as NFT's? As I own them?
If so then NFT's have been around for years so why the fuss now.
I always thought NFT's were unique digital items that only you could own/have such as a skin or icons etc
@IGN_Commenter Right. Like a wage incentivized me to work for someone else’s profit. Why do you think nobody read the article?
@icomma Don't worry, I know what NFTs are and how stupid they are, but that is how they were being marketted by games companies. Basically DLC tradeable on the blockchain.
UBI got so many dislikes they had to take down their NFT video.
Even then UBI will continue with NFT plans.
I know one thing. Even when NFT is optional, i refuse to buy any game with NFT as it's incomplete games.
NFT is a flawed system and i won't list all the reasons here.
You can find all the drawbacks on "search".
The main problem with NFT is that there is no proper infrastructure for this today anywhere.
If server with your NFT goes down, you lost the NFT with current internet.
NFT probably won't work decent until 10-20 more years.
@UltimateOtaku91 They’re not unique AFAIK, only the conceptual ownership is unique.
@icomma or is it for example I own a fortnite skin, it's got my digital ID on it which says I'm the owner but other people can still buy that skin?
If so I'd expect some profit off every sale made 😂
@UltimateOtaku91 It's that you could have a skin with the number 56789 written down the leg. And people would want to buy that skin off you because you're so good at fornite. But of course they wouldn't because that's silly.
I for one am looking forward to exciting future games featuring Monkey Cloud, Monkey Lightning and Monkey Neku
@UltimateOtaku91 NFT is a unstable value system.
It's worth high price one day, and next day it's worthless.
One of the many NFT flaws.
So he openly admits that the majority of gamers "have reservations" regarding (i.e. strongly oppose) the stuff he's proposing, but then claims the people who " play to contribute" (i.e. say "Shut up and take my money" no matter how incomplete, how glitch and bug-ridden a game might be, no matter how greedy and control/gating after the point-of-sale the business models become) are "worth exploring" (i.e. going to be their priority going forward). NFTs are just one more facet among the many that the mega-publishers are seeking to profit from after the sale; it's NEVER about value for the consumer anymore. Even by corporate-speak standards this amounts to pissing on the consumers who've made his company filthy rich and calling it rain. It shows the sheer level of hubris the industry has come to have when they're telling us to our face they know what we want, but they will dictate what we get because they believe we'll keep paying for it anyway.
Letting greed and control after the original point-of-sale guide your business models as opposed to genuine passion and creating the best game experiences for players (along with actual value) is precisely what will alienate your consumer base. Releasing unfinished/incomplete games (343/Halo Infinite) because you've found alternative means of monetizing them may make you extra $$$ off of some people, but others (like myself) WILL call you out for it and some will even begin to walk away. Right now the industry's business models and lazy, sloppy practices (like releasing glorified betas instead of waiting until they are READY) are pushing steadily toward ruining the hobby itself, and it's because they think that gamers will all just roll over and continue forking out money because we "don't have a choice/don't really care either way". But they forget that there are plenty of other entertainment options out there, and that some of us can and will actually draw the line at some point and say, "NO MORE".
Individually we may not make any difference to these mega-corporations, but we still can each make our own individual choices and vote with our wallets. And if enough consumers do so (as opposed to voicing futile rants in social media or just rolling over and continue giving them money) and draw a line that begins impacting the one thing they care about (their bottom line), we can effect change and, at least to a degree, take this great hobby back.
@TryToBeHopeful and then another person has the same skin but with 56788, then yeah that would be silly and no value other than some special numbers such as 666 etc
If its like that then it's pointless and won't go far. If for example fortnite have a unique skin that totally different then it would have value but that's a lot of effort creating a skin for one Person to own instead of selling the same skin to thousands who would pay £7.99 for it.
So what does the developer get out of creating these NFT's that they aren't already getting out of Micros transactions and loot boxes
I don't think NFT as a concept is necessarily awful, but the current implementation is flawed and causes more problems than it fixes.
One could also argue that NFTs are an answer to a question that very few people have asked. There are other methods for digital ownership and (from gaming perspective) user generated content.
@icomma so whilst I'm the owner of said "rainbow Santa's outfit" I don't actually get anything. It just so I can say "oh I own that popular outfit" but I'm making no profit from people buying something i own?
No thanks, I'd rather stick to micro transactions
Non unique "DLC tradeable on the blockchain"
Otherwise on point.
Diablo 3 Auction House 2.0
@RetroOutcast And all of Taito's stuff
I expect some Youtuber exclusive give away outfits though...
Though then again, they wouldn't need NFT for this and could do it as is with promo codes... Which you couldn't sell... This is going to be a rabid rabbit hole...
"enter random YouTuber"-designed exclusive Apex Legends outfit/skin, limited to 1000 units/NFTs
Either win one of 10 promo codes or buy for 100$ a pop, guaranteed to rise in price on the second hand market
This is gonna make a lot of people poor...
If there is a sustainable market for it, you will be served.
No need to worry.
People who play to have fun are CURRENTLY the majority of players? Wtf is wrong with SE. I’m sure Nintendo is knocking on the door with this stuff too
Here, let me translate what he said:
People like to create and contribute to gaming communities for intrinsic reasons , however we at (insert video game company) believe that NFT’s will finally allow us to financially benefit from the goodwill of others and this gain trumps the desire of our customers to play games for fun.
Me nodding at everyone's comments pretending to know what NFT means...
Oh shut the hell up Square Enix.
You're trying to profit off of NFTs and no one is buying your scam tokens.
It's getting annoying, and pathetic, with how out of touch they are.
The whole reason i play games is not to contribute.
"I realize that some people who “play to have fun” and who currently form the majority of players"
There's something so funny about this line to me....like he's hopeful that one day most people won't play games to have fun.
"I see this as one reason that there haven’t been as many major game-changing content that were user generated as one would expect."
I mean...isn't the reason because they don't support people modding console games? There are plenty of PC games that have massive modding scenes with an endless amount of user generated content.
They always talk about blockchain and NFTs but no one ever told us what exactly they want to do which really requires the blockchain. so far they could do everything just with out the blockchain. Tell me one feature that needs a blockchain!
Yes but most game developers do not directly benefit from mods (since they are mainly free) but with NFTs the developer (or the publisher which is far more likely) will benefit with everything that is sold... they just want to maximize their profit...
@icomma so basically the wealthy will buy NFT's and flaunt them as a trophy of some sorts.
Just saw ghost recon breakpoints first NFT which you got for free for playing 600 hours, is this the lengths people are willing to go to earn them, and are companies locking them behind ridiculous requirements such as this
Either way now I understand better what an NFT is I will avoid them but I won't avoid the actual game itself, as now I know that these NFT's won't have an impact on the actual gameplay and sounds like they will be missing from single player only games
Don't like this so I'll stick with the older games once this takes over.
@UltimateOtaku91 So you ask how NFTs would impact Apex. You as a consumer would not notice it a lot, since they cannot do what is already been done with conventional systems. Thats the point. getting unique gear is already possible, selling unique gear is also possible so why would you need NFTs for it? the only reason is that the creator of the NFT gets a share whenever you sell it.
its a pyramid scam.
And microtransaction ofc changed the gaming world in a very bad way even though you never buy them. games are build and balanced in a different way, in a worse way since they want to give you an incentive to buy their microtransactions. if you don't understand it than it's maybe your first console was already with microtransaction games. And so will NFTs change the system to a worse since it's just not necessary to make excellent games.
I think a lot of people are missing the point for NFTs and are jumping on a bandwagon that is dissing it for the bandwagon's sake.
The idea to own a creation with a unique digital signature that will outlast any archive attempting to store data without blockchain technology is the raddest sci-fi creation that we puny mortals can do for the history of human civilization.
Am I mistaken? The library of Alexandria fell. Blockchain tech filled with NFTs and a token economy shuttling it won't fall.
What am I missing? How is this not cooler than squids trying to lick each other's ears and eyeballs with no trace of proof to show for it?
why do you believe that a blockchain will not fall? if ubisoft decides to shot down their game server your nft is worth nothing...
The more I see major game companies talk about this, the more relieved I am that the indie scene is growing and has never been more successful.
I've no doubt this is where gaming is going next, but fear not people, there will always be studios out there that just want to make fun games.
Basically "We want more content but don't want to hire more talented and diverse people to create it because that costs money. We could pay money as an incentive for UGC like many other games have done for years but again that costs money. But now there is this scam where we can give you a valueless token in return for your efforts that you can artificially create value for and it's on you to sell it and get that money off someone else for it."
Don't fall for this. They're using this (still environmentally disasterous) new tech to get free labour. This is not about empowering players. This is not about creating better content. It's money grabbing.
@falkyn Regular internet is still required to make sure we can use the things we paid for, without regular internet, NFTs are just a proof of purchase without your purchase.
@jojobar no. blockchain tech fundamentally is decentralized where no single hub source shutting down can do anything about the information already stored on the chain. ubisoft shutting down servers to take down data is a centralized premise, which is why blockchain tech is needed to emerge to fight against any tyrannic foundation.
"Play to contribute" is basically a step away from The Matrix, isn't it?
I guess one man's dystopia is another capitalist's roadmap.
Somehow that was even more eyeroll-worthy than I anticipated.
Still nothing that would explain why anyone would WANT to have NFTs. People seeking monetary reward incentives normally do so via contribution to NEW works, not existing ones. Pirate DVDs filled with GTA mods (yes, we Eastern Slavs used to see these on store shelves, too 😆) don't count.
This whole thing feels like one spectral fad, and even if it miraculously persists like cryptocurrencies did (you know, completely virtual money that most people can't seem to spend due to the crippling FOMO bundled with it?), I don't envision myself remaining anything but indifferent to it. As discussed elsewhere, the reported environmental impact does sound bad, but not remotely as bad as the plethora of longtime ecological issues we keyboard warriors think and do even less about.
TL; DR I don't give a damn about NFTs but no one will fool me into believing in any loud protesting fandom's moral capacity of caring for the "defended" stuff either. Caring is more of a human thing.
I don't see how blockchain factors into their stated goal. They don't need blockchain to reward players with tokens.
@SwissCheese I think fortnite will end up being the worst for it as it has an in game system where you can gift people your skins. Allowing you to sell your skins on ebay then adding them as a friend to give them the skin they bought
@victordamazio nfts are paving a path to internet 3.0 where google and youtube and spotify won't be gods to data storage and access. literally a different stratosphere from regular internet that can make regular internet obsolete.
@falkyn Cool, once again the excuse of using blockchain to fight against the system and stick it to the people in power and big corporations.
And how you use blockchain technology? Sell crappy randomized monkeys and other stuff, just to make sure that PNGs, JPGs and GIFs can also be used for tax evasion and money laundering just like rich people are doing with paintings for years.
And all the while gaming continues to die as an artform.. a trend already started this last decade with microtransactions, half finished games that use Dlc to flesh out the game... corporate business people making the decisions and places like EA and Ubisoft instead of game creators and developers.. just so it can end up like garbage like the movie industry
But as with the rest of the world, we will be looking into the wants of the few before the many since that seems like a future we want, instead of having fun.
I understand that people make a living off gaming, writing reviews, developing games etc…. Rest of us gaming is a hobby that passes time or is fun with friends and family. I guess it’s the 1% that live in their parents basements, spending their days gaming in the metaverse that nfts are for. Since I know they are not anything I care to learn or be a part of.
Sqaure Enix spent so much time working on Final Fantasy VII Remake that they just became the Shinra Company.
@AlexHarford They were never about helping artists. I'm one myself, and on top of that, hundreds of professional, and even deceased modern artists have had their works stolen and minted as NFTs against their will. Same artists have attracted clowns from the NFT and Cryptospace who act like the said artists are crazy for being against the get rich quick schema.
If you seriously believe the lie that NFTs were about helping artists, then you have to do more digging...
I don't think I could care less about this. If you're all for exclusive digital distribution of licences to games you deserve what you get.
@icomma Yes, I did.
It's a nuanced discussion and most gamers don't have any interest in that.
Some facts, first of all. NFTs aren't inherently good or evil. They're a technology, nothing more and nothing less. And "the environment" is a weak argument. Proof of Stake networks have been around for years. But even Proof of Work networks, they're going to exist regardless, so minting NFTs doesn't change that one way or the other.
The current fad of minting NFT to sell in a Tulip Mania scam is a joke. This is where the bad impressions come from. That and ridiculous pyramid scheme crypto. But not all crypto is like that, and I think NFT has a real world use case.
It can be good or bad, depending how they use it. I simply don't trust their intent.
What do you want with the NFT if there is no game there anymore where you can use it ?
@ParadoxFawkes You are completely off your rocker. Vast majority of games today, even with DLC, have complete stories and endings, and full gameplay experiences. Just because a game doesn't come with all the DLC content packaged doesn't mean it's half-finished.
If no DLC were announced for a game at all, you would be singing a different tune about that game, but as soon as you hear about DLC you'll whine from the rooftops about how it's unfinished even though the game has a complete story and experience and the DLC is just extra content.
@JaxonH Problem is the only available use case is the one that's the most infamous... and as I stated before, is being run by scammers, thieves, as well as people who have transmogrified their entire persona around their NFTs.
-and the environment isn't a weak argument either. Especially when you consider that massive mining farms exist, that have appropriated hundreds if not thousands of GPUs and other computer parts just for themselves. I've seen one of them. All those GPUs could be being used in computers for far more useful things than generating a digital token. Plus when all those GPUs die out, they'll be either sold to people who don't know any better or trashed, generating more waste.
This also is another reason, in long form.
@MegaVel91 in general DLC is not bad nor good. Some Companies use it well (CDPR) other do not (Capcom Street Fighter etc.).
@icomma Thank you! The hat it's wearing is based on one I have IRL. A Cadet cap with a Smash pin button from the 2014 Smash 4 Wii U/3DS demo event at Best Buy.
@icomma Are you not aware of Ethereum 2.0 that will make the mechanism of mining also obsolete? The environmental impact argument is dated to the proof-of-work model found with blockchains like bitcoin, however the proof-of-stake model, which are unique to evolved blockchains, solves this problem, no longer needing gpu-revving machines to power its processing.
Imagine not playing a video game for fun. Madness
@falkyn You sound like an evangelist. Back yourself up, cause nobody who has a decent head on their shoulders will take you on faith alone.
@MegaVel91 do your own research. ethereum 2.0
@HedgehogEngine proof of stake.do your own research.
Everything in the world uses resources of some kind. When you play video games you're using electricity. Imagine how much is wasted annually on video games, movies, tvs, all the batteries and SD cards made for Nintendo Switches...
If you're going to use the resources argument against it, but don't take a similar stand against everything else you do in life that has a similar effect, it comes across as selective.
I'm not trying to say NFTs in games are a good think. I don't think they are. I think they could be if done right, but I doubt they will. But the reason has nothing to do with resources or environment or any other excuse that only seems to get applied to crypto but doesn't seem to matter when it comes to everything else ppl do in life.
That's gonna exist regardless. The implication that using NFTs is somehow making it worse doesn't hold water. Ppl already having mining farms, whether they use NFT or not. But again, mining doesn't exist on Proof of Stake Networks.
I'm not here to defend anything, I'm just tired of there being no nuance to discussion. Everyone thinks they know everything and have all the answers, instead of asking questions to come to a more informed conclusion.
@jojobar nft is simply a data unit within a data storage system for decentralized blockchain technology better equipped for eternity.
@victordamazio you're only barking at secondary effects not associated with the primary directive. Don't blame the dough, blame how anyone else chooses to use it.
@falkyn More like "I can't be arsed, so I'll have you do the homework."
Not my job to prove your claims right, bucko.
@JaxonH Nuanced discussion went out the window as soon as people started using NFTs to steal from people for the sake of trying to escape to delusions of grandeur in regards to wealth. Stepping on other people's hard work.
There's also 100 million Switches vs just a few thousand full node validators on a Proof of Stake network. And that's not counting other video game systems, tvs, phones, tablets, computers...
Point being, arguing against the use of something simply because it uses energy doesn't make sense, unless you're going to adopt an Amish lifestyle. Selectively deeming one thing as ok because you benefit from its entertainment, while selectively deeming another not ok because you don't, isn't reasonable logic.
@WallyWest Xcloud isn’t very good. The latency for it is too high. gFN is a bit better in this regard. I agree cloud gaming isn’t failing, but does have some high hurdles to pass to make it competitive against owning hardware.
@falkyn You're joking right? It's literally the same exact scam everytime with NFT and Blockchains. Everyone buys in to the Blockchain, getting a token or two saying they own a specific instance of digital art (not the rights to the art, just that one instance), then the Blockchain disappears and with it all the proof of ownership and the cryto currencies.
Even ones that don't end up that this are prone to the same human error anything else is. Someone hacks your accounts and transfers your crypto or NFT to them? Nothing you can do about it now. The Blockchain says it's theirs and you've removed the central authority that could dispute this.
On one of the more "environmentally freindly" Blockchains running 'proof of service' rather than 'proofof work'? Well you just need someone to buy a 51% stake and now they control it, the value of all your 'assets' is at their whim. Which is why several billionaires are pushing those currencies so they can do exactly that to them. You can even spread that 51% stake over multiple accounts so nobody can see you doing it.
@JaxonH How's this for reasonable logic then? Those GPUs and similar parts are being used by the cryptospace purely for the sake of mining. Not for doing anything else, just that one specific function.
GPUs when used in actual, fully functioning computers and game consoles are used for multiple tasks. Including but not limited to speedy rendering and physics simulations.
It's like the difference between having a GPU solve X + Y = Z all day, every day and nothing else, and having a GPU render out pictures of Mt.Fuji or Mt.Everest from multiple angles. One is using a graphics rendering hardware purely for it's computational functions, while the other uses those functions to create something that can be easily appreciated.
That's what makes one more acceptable over the other: it has more net benefit to more people overall.
We'll. Were almost there with this all digital nft cloud gaming crap. As soon as it becomes the norm I'm out. I want no part of this future that gaming or hell mankind is going down. What a time to be alive indeed.
There is no such thing as mining on a Proof of Stake network. You're talking about dated technology, the gen 1 cryptos that processed algorithms. Proof of Stake doesn't have mining farms. When I say a few thousand validator nodes, I mean computers that simply stay on with the full wallet software and validate. They're not mining or using any more energy than any other computer that's on. And when there's 1,000x more Switches out there, at a few hundred hours usage per year... it's using less energy.
You're correct there are other alternatives, but those alternatives come with a cost... counterparty risk. That's the whole reason crypto came to be in the first place. Sure, you could accomplish similar things in other ways but at a cost of security. Crypto tilts the scales in favor of security. It has a use case, even if it's been misused by many thus far.
A lot of your concerns are valid. It's true there's been rug pulls and there's always the threat of a majority attack.
I don't wish to dispute the legitimacy of those concerns because I agree with them. But I do wish to explain why theyre not concerns for every crypto. Not all blockchains are the same. Some are Proof of Work (PoW), others Proof of Stake (PoS). The ones that grow large enough and are decentralized enough will never see that happen. Proof of Stake networks work because your own future is at stake with the network. Unlike Bitcoin, you're disincintivised to be a bad actor. Because if you tank the network you tank yourself, because you had to own a majority of Stake to do the attack. It would be suicide for yourself at a cost of billions of dollars, with no advantage. This is why PoS works. At least... it works for the ones that become decentralized enough. This is why I advise against small market cap cryptos and those which haven't been around long. They're a major gamble.
As for hacking, no blockchain has been hacked. The only way you can lose is if you keep your coins on a hot wallet or trading platform. Cold wallets can't be hacked unless someone physically stole it and somehow knew your password to use it, and they're programmed to permanently break after 10 wrong attempts. You can restore your wallet with a seed phrase though.
Plenty of idiotic things going on in the world. But that shouldn't be an excuse for ignorance among the level headed.
You keep saying "mining" but there's no mining on Proof of Stake networks. I would encourage you to educate yourself further on the matter.
I have reasonable objections to the inclusion of NFT in video games. My objections are, I don't trust the intentions of these companies to use the technology for good to promote permanent ownership of DLC content. They claim they want to use it as an incentive for user generated content and contributions, which sounds well and good. But once that foot is in the door, it kind of opens pandora's box.
I would love to see digital purchases tied to Non-Fungible Tokens, as it would be a huge win for consumer ownership rights. But something tells me that's not what they're planning.
@SirZappy I've been using XCloud a lot recently mainly to play Forza Horizon 5 and other then a hit to resolution its been fine and like i was playing it from the console.
Removed - inappropriate
@falkyn What I am looking for is you to actually have the stones to back up your claims, rather than go "It's gonna be good just trust me" like so many of you expect people to do when throw out your word salad to people.
I feel that nfts should be held far and away from gaming in general,I don't know why so many companies are trying to implement it when just about every time they announce it they is a wave of backlash followed by usualy an apology,one of my favorite games "dead by daylight" helped make an nft there was backlash to the point where ign covered it,gamers don't want nfts its not that hard to understand
@JaxonH I keep mentioning mining because PoW, as Hedgehong Engine mentioned, is still the norm, and the promise of a move from PoW to PoS has been being advertised for years now, yet the exodus from PoW to PoS has never happened. Why? Cause so many have too much invested in PoW. A wholesale move to PoS, will never happen unless those Proof of Work farms and such currencies, fail entirely.
And that is why I will keep talking about mining. It's obsolescence is a non-factor if it continues to be widely used, and so long as it is, that issue of waste for the sake of mining cryptocoins will still persist, and will continue to be an issue. You can't just magically sweep that under the rug just because a handful of Proof of Stake ops exist.
Basically SE has become Shinra, and they'll never see that irony.
@Ogbert competition already exists within the blockchain realm to make owning majority in anything for manipulation a non-existential threat concern like a rug pull insignificant with the existence of the multiple blockchains in the decentralized space - for instance, square enix isn't associated with ethereum 2.0 proof of stake, it is associated with double jump.tokyo on the flow blockchain instead.
@Pod Well User Generated content for Neverwinter online and Star Trek Online made the games way more fun, but the devs saw players making better content than their own so they shut it down.
Removed - flaming/arguing
I'm turning more and more to "old" games now. There's a lot of great games I didn't play.
"I realize that some people who “play to have fun” and who currently form the majority of players have voiced their reservations toward these new trends"
The amount of red flags going off in just this one sentence alone is blinding.
To quote the Angry Video Game Nerd in regards to this NFT boom in gaming: "Whoever came up with this is an *******!"
another muppet there will only be one or two games that will be succesfullwith it at most.while all comapnies chasing it will burn what little goodwill they have left. Look at mobile gaming hardly anyone can sell a game now and now china is cracking down money is gone. people willplay one of two games they invested time in anything else DOA
I have some hope that NFTs in gaming are simply not profitable and that the current move towards from big game devs is just them trying to appeal to shareholders. You can tell from a lot of quotes and from this one in particular, that these execs have no idea what they're talking about.
Some Kendall Roy tech clown sat down with them for a meeting and pitched the concept with enthusiastic tech jargon. It sounds like a new revenue stream with expansive possibilities. It's new tech, it's a gold rush, and they don't want to be left behind. So they announce it to excite shareholders and who cares if none of it is concrete or makes sense to them? Credulous fools pay insane amounts of money for literally nothing. It's free money. It's the perfect scam.
Sounds amazing to a shareholder, but will it go anywhere? I seriously doubt it. I just don't see the market for it.
Whenever some greedy method of making absurd amounts of money at great cost to the consumers is introduced, you can bet it's going to eventually spread to all of the big gaming corporations in time.
Be forewarned: Nintendo is rarely an exception, ultimately.
There's more than a handful. The big 2 networks still using PoW are Bitcoin and Ethereum, and Eth is trying to transition. Even so, PoW does exist, but that's not an argument against using NFTs, that's an argument against PoW coins specifically.
Just because PoW exists doesn't mean one doesn't have the choice to use whichever network one chooses. Simply choose to use PoS, simple as that. You're free to argue against PoW, and for the most part I agree, but that doesn't change the fact that NFT can be minted on PoS networks just as easily as PoW. In fact, PoS is much preferred, as gas fees are ludicrous on PoW like Ethereum.
PoW might never be obsolete because youre right, people do have too much invested and dont want to let go, and that sucks, but that's kind of irrelevant to the discussion.
That's fair, since PoW is still in use. But I would say we're at a tipping point with Cardano and Solana now having smart contracts and Ethereum devs are beginning to build there instead. If Ethereum ever successfully goes PoS the transition will be complete. Even so, one can simply choose to work with a PoS network over PoW.
I think the security issue is more about inflation protection and economic catastrophe, such as when bank runs happen or bail ins as we saw in Greece. Security from debasement and theft as much as it as from hacking.
@MegaVel91 I'm also an artist (although it feels weird saying it) and have read widely about NFTs to see if it was something I should be involved in. I decided it wasn't.
Here's one article about the original intention behind NFTs:
In an ideal world, they could be a good thing. But we live in the world we live in.
@RetroOutcast please also get Nier and Final Fantasy away from them.
Call me old fashioned but I miss when games were just games.
For the record though, I trust gold for security against currency debasement more than I trust crypto. Reason being, gold has stood the test of time for thousands of years, has a history of storing value as a monetary metal in countries all over the world, and it's the one thing Central banks buy billions of dollars worth of behind the scenes (meaning, they know if SHTF gold is the fallback).
Gold doesn't have any counterparty risk. Don't need to store digital data to keep it, doesn't depend on internet to transfer it or prove ownership. I keep some crypto as well because diversification is key. But ultimately, both have drawbacks. Gold is permanent with no counterparty risk, but inconvenient to divide and transfer. Crypto depends on the digital infrastructure but is incredibly convenient to divide and transfer.
I'm still not sure why gold backed crypto hasn't caught on more. It's the ultimate solution, the ultimate money. Basically taking us back to the days when dollars were backed by physical gold in the vaults. But it seems this new generation doesn't understand the merits of gold.
@MegaVel91 ummm no dude ... There's a reason why indies like Hades won game of the year... And you play anything like call of duty? Its disgusting how its tailored to spend more money after you already bought the game and the battle pass but thats not good enough to get all the coolest guns and operators... dlc like say for breath of the wild is fantastic... It adds alot to the experience... but games like far cry and assassin's Creed... I might as well always wait for the ultimate edition to drop to 20 bucks if i want the full experience... Greed has ruined the entire industry.. we're lucky if we get 2-3 great original games a year that arent sequels or remakes or another shameless free to play experience built around microtransactions
Whatever he says. Just keep it out of Dragon Quest, please.
Everyone felt it in his/her bones when the new technology was first mentioned on this site: Its another trick used by the industry to take away our rights!
No, please no!!
Well ok. Square Enix wasn’t exactly a company I cared for because their games didn’t appeal to me, now they’re a company I don’t care for because their ideology doesn’t appeal to me. Adding in this garbage to games is a bad choice. I can see it now. In order to get a sequel to a game we must buy all the NFTs in a particular collection, how fun!
@icomma that's a big yikes my guy
Yes, I play to have fun, that is why I buy games, Guess Square-Enix does not like that we want to have fun.
Another point to consider, and you've been hitting on it yourself with things you've said about how much you could make by selling them, is that the NFT thing is basically creating a massive economic bubble. If you're not familiar with the concept, look up and familiarize yourself with what "economic bubble" is.
And if NFTs become ingrained into the perception of video games when that bubble bursts, it is going to bring things under and add more fuel to the fire to socially demonize and villify video games as a whole. So while you might not notice much specifically for Apex Legends adding NFTs or whatever, you will notice a whole lot across the board when you have news stories running all over the place about sensationalized "I am homeless because of video games" or "Video games have bankrupted X Many people" as a result of an NFT bubble burst.
I am not understanding what “NFT’s” or “Blockchain” means. I barely get Crypto currency. Maybe it is time to stop playing video games. I don’t really have the time anymore…
But does he? cue moon men
The amount of disinformation and ignorance towards NFT is hilarious.
With all due respect, the majority of people here don't know ANYTHING about it and how it can be applied to gaming, nor how play-to-earn games can change lives around the world.
The "you pay to own something, but you won't own it" argument is extremely hypocrite as long as you buy digital games without complaining. They aren't in your shelf, right?
Take Axie Infinity for instance, the most popular NFT game that made more money than Ubisoft in 2021, made by only 3 people.
People who invest an amount of money can earn that money back, make more money out of it, and still have fun (although the game is still in alpha).
The Philippines are most bullish on Axie than other countries, and the reality today is that poor people are already making a better income than their regular salary out of a game. Isn't that wild?
Now, there are some differences when it comes to big companies, but the technology behind blockchain is the same for everyone. The best part is that big companies have more devs and more resources to keep the games going.
If an indie company could make a simple yet fun NFT game, I'm excited to see what AAA NFT games will look like.
I feel like a angry mob will come at me if I buy anymore Square Enix games if they support NFT’s😬
SquareEnix is clueless these days. We still don't have Chrono Trigger on the Switch, no original Final Fantasy collection, and they can't even bother to just throw the Kingdom Hearts games on the console outside of a weak "cloud" version. What the hell is going on with this once great company?
@DiggleDog Who'd have thought the 2005 jokes (when Square-Enix bought out Taito and it was feeling like they were going to become the Japanese analogy of '90s EA) about a 1997 video game would become more relevant in 2022?
You remember when games like Unreal Tournament had thousands upon thousands of UGC skins, maps, etc?
Hmm, I wonder why that all disappeared in recent generations of games. Could that be because these companies don't let you create your own servers anymore...
NFT won't change jack *****, it's a solution in search of a problem. The problem was never there in the first place. Only destructive politics from these companies.
@Mikmoomamimocki I know there's some streamers/speedrunners who will devote time to learning awful games.
I'll bet competitive Pokemon players have put themselves into a situation where the game has long since stopped being fun and become a job.
Please, please tell me the first NFT they'll make will be one of Shinra Corporation.
Thats the kind of thing im hoping is the case (and does seem likely)
as you said its a new thing so i imagine it sounds enticing to shareholders and the like.
Its often why its a good to see a large amount of pushback against something, as much as people can dismiss something as "whining" though as an example... if it wasn't for online complaints we would have had an always online Xbox one with mandatory Kinect.
@Varnen This is what people say when they want you to buy into a pyramid scheme.
@Mgalens It is chilling that the president of Square Enix has acknowledged he is aware of the push back but says they'll still go ahead with it. Other companies have backed down publicly, but I suspect they still want to see how they can make it work. They probably feel the public just isn't ready for it and they jumped the gun. They think they need to normalize it first.
But like I said, I cannot see how this is actually profitable. I just don't see the demand. Maybe I don't get it. At best, they can get the investment con going for the short term, make some money and then the market will die down or overheat and collapse.
from what i gather some reassurance seems to be that its not something that will just show up suddenly, and they will likely be keeping an eye on how viable it is based on other uses of it since iirc games have to be built with blockchain in mind.
(there were a few topics about it on the FFXIV subreddit since people were worried that NFTs would suddenly show up in the game)
This reads like a post on /v/. "Fun is a buzzword" style.
Square Enix President is out of touch with society and doesn’t gaf about global warming.
@falkyn again, what do you want with this data if there is no ubisoft server for the game that supports this nft? its just a waste of resources
Well, it's a good thing I'm not into SE franchises anyway. What a condescending attitude.
@Fake-news Same here. :/
@jojobar Say for instance you have a screenshot of a game you played. You could save it today on google drive and google will store it for you. Google then can blow up in a bomb and be gone tomorrow, then you will have lost your screenshot that you gave to them to store. If you stored it instead on a blockchain, there is no single source that can blow up where you lose access to your screenshot so long as you keep the key that gives you access to it - you could then simply access it from a different part of the chain - hence, decentralization. Nintendo is also guilty of this. If Nintendo blew up today, then no one has access to Nintendo thereafter since it is a centralized system.
@ParadoxFawkes I have played games like CoD, but I've also played Hades and many more indies and games by triple A publishers over the years. I also grew up in the 90s in the era well before DLC as we know it today was even feasible let alone possible.
-and having played games all of my 30 years of life, I can tell you outright that the notion of any game that has DLC being unfinished, is bullshart. Look at Age of Calamity and it's predecessor. Look at Shin Megami Tensei V and it's two predecessors: IV and Apocalypse. Look at Animal Crossing's latest outing.
The main reason most indies don't do what the big companies do is cause most of them don't have the budget to even consider it in the beginning, and most can only do it after the money comes rolling in from successful sales, or using that money to try to put out another successful project.
That isn't to say there aren't any predatory DLC practices (Excuse me while I leer at the examples you mentioned and Tales of Arise, even...), but to act like a game is unfinished just because DLC exists for it is to not see the forest for the trees.
The whole, complete game already exists. You can play it from start to finish without the need for the DLC at all.
I get this still even if you own the data, how can you use it if no game is there that supports your nft item? you have the data but the data is worthless. its like you own a club nintendo star coupon from the game cube era, you own it but there is not club nintendo page anymore where you can use it.
an NFT makes only sense if it doesn't come from a company. what do you think why all the companies want to use NFTs? just for fun? For the consumer there is nothing they can't do already without the Blockchain.
Scam Enix still think that everyone is gonna throw money at them for being lazy and how they think people are gonna throw money at them for supporting fake craps. Not gonna work, these fake craps won't save your business SE.
NFT's are coming, regardless of how mad you are about it. The possible money that could come from NFT's to companies will outweigh any outrage from a certain group of fans. At the end of the day, most of these companies are publicly traded, and they have a responsibility to their shareholders to make as much money as they can. NFT's are the future of triple A games, it's coming, guaranteed. Get used to it.
@JaxonH Yeah so you made a comparison to if a building burns down the stuff inside is gone but blockchains are forever and then agree they are not. And with games we have the addition of the item they are attached too is also reliant on the game still being active and supported.
As for a proof of stake takeover, even if unlikely and costly the fact remains it's actually quite easy. And monetary gain is not the only motivation to do it. Sure it might cost you millions but if you can tank the reputation of a rival by collapsing their Blockchain and bring people over to you? There are many cases where it could be worth the cost.
And hacking, yeah I'm not saying that the chain itself is hackable. I'm saying that like with any system the security is only as safe as the user. Blockchain is not inherently more secure, NFTs that are taken are not longer yours and the Blockchain only verifies that. It's not yours forever if someone steals it, and they can be stolen.
I totally get why people are excited about decentralising finance and such. Do I think it's worth the environmental cost for the more secure PoW system? Nope. But that's a different discussion. I don't get why people think it's a good fit for gaming though? It offers literally nothing that can't already be done from a centralised authority with more security and the same downfalls regarding stopping a game service. It does not benefit the player at all.
@icomma you missed the comment already made about proof of stake. do your own research.
@jojobar NFTs don't need anything else to exist on a blockchain. Just like if you saved a picture in your desktop folder, then you can open your folder and look at the picture. If you want to open your picture in your folder in a program like photoshop, then you could. but the picture doesn't need photoshop to exist in your folder. NFTs are stored in blockchain - blockchain is the structure of the next stratosphere of internet beyond the capabilities of centralized data storing. Games can be made after the fact to utilize NFTs in the blockchain space.
"We know you hate it but we're gonna do it anyway, because we don't care what you love or hate, if we force it onto you then you have no choice to gobble it up, so why wouldn't we!"
Well, it hasn't been done to any reputable blockchain that reached critical mass in decentralization, so while one can theorize potential motivations, it's incredibly unlikely to happen. There's only a small handful of multi-billionaires in the world who would even have the capacity to do so, and even then most networks are too decentralized with coins ppl are sitting on staking earning interest as rewards, they couldn't even if they wanted.
PoS is just as secure, I think. Or close enough the difference is negligible.
I'm not one excited for it entering gaming, but I do understand why someone would be. A decentralized blockchain is immutable and cannot be changed. 3rd party records are not. If I buy digital content in an Ubisoft game, then buy a new system, maybe I can't access that content (this has happened to me, with the preorder bonus for Trials Rising, which I still haven't received). I have no proof of ownership or any claim to make. But if I had a token as proof of ownership on an immutable ledger maintained on a public blockchain, that could be used to obtain the content. If such things were integrated into digital purchases, simply linking your account with public address of blockchain could prove ownership and the game automatically triggers content re-download, for example.
My issue is, I don't suspect that's how they plan to integrate it.
@Friendly This right here. I forget not all CEOs are like Phil. Dude is amazing and I wish more people was like him
Nope, not partaking in that crap.
@UltimateOtaku91 I play for fun, I don't make an account to play so I can farm items and sell the account later. If that was the case I'd of done sold my Steam account ages ago after buying every game on Steam.
We just want to have fun. We don't want gaming to turn into a money laundering pyramid scheme. KEEP YOUR STUPID NFTS OUT OF GAMING, THANK YOU.
Let me explain this simply of why NFTs in gaming are a terrible idea.
To those who claim you can use those NFTs in other games.
That would require making new assets in each game after the game the NFTs are made in to allow those items the NFT is attached to, in order for it to be used across games.
This also doesn't account for the difference in functionality between systems or mechanics, and with each new game, the amount of assets needed to accommodate those NFTs would grow exponentially to the point it's no longer physically, or monetarily viable for the company, so they'll abandon it.
The most you could expect out of that is the NFT acting as a sort of ticket for redeeming a special version of an existing item already made for another game, cause data like that is easier to do and takes up less space. But that also doesn't change the issue of exponential growth of the data needed to accommodate them all.
-and all of that is before we get into the fact we already have seen what a real market would do with real money exchanging hands would do to a game. IIRC it was Diablo 3's auction house and from what I've read, it completely ruined that game.
There's a very long article on why this is bad, that explains it better than I am, it's pretty long though, but worth reading:
Here is the link: https://docseuss.medium.com/look-what-you-made-me-do-a-lot-of-people-have-asked-me-to-make-nft-games-and-i-wont-because-i-m-29c7cfdbbb79
From someone working at a developer and as one.
@icomma next you'll say that the concept of freedom and its subsidiaries shouldn't exist and anyone that opposes you gets thrown on the guillotine. This is when socialism turns to communism, and from the way you say that you'd agree with the communist mentality.
If you become a dictator in the future I'd make sure you fall to your pet guillotine, just like the army you'd slay to wrench the concept of freedom from people's hands.
@Varnen Get out of here crypto bro. We don't need people like you in the gaming community if all you care about is making money
Removed - flaming/arguing
I got like forty comments deep before I gave up figuring out what NFT stands for
Probably thought the avengers game was going to be a huge success too. Get rid of this clown.
@UltimateOtaku91 From what I've seen of Ubisoft's example it would be something like a helmet with a unique serial number on it. Don't expect these "one of a kind unique NFT skins" to be anything incredible. For all we know your skin could be different because it has a 1 instead of a 2 in it.
Let's not forget that the publishers don't want to waste too much money actually designing unique outfits that only 1 person will ever own...and if they do then don't expect that you'll ever be able to afford it.
ok maybe we talk about different things. if you talk about singleplayer games your right but i had the whole time multiplayer games in mind and when the server goes down all your stuff is worthless.
@The-Nate Oh no I completely forgot about them having hold of Taito properties..ew.
NFTs are going to happen in gaming, it's a perfect fit. Most people just don't understand anything about blockchain so uninformed gamers tend to be against it. But millions of gamers already happily spend lots of money paying for microtransactions in games. NFT is just bring that market outside of the game and make it a public market So these in-game assets can be freely traded and possibly used in other games. It just opens up the whole thing. Gaming NFTs are going to become huge. Just like every game doesn't have a "seasons" or doesn't have micro transactions or doesn't have online play or doesn't have whatever feature, not every game is going to have NFTs, but there will be a segment of games that have NFTs and it's going to be a big market. NFT is just make paid for it in-game assets much more usable and purposeful.
Personally I'm not at all into buying stuff in game, So this doesn't directly appeal to me, But the advantages are obvious. And if game companies integrate NFTs in interesting and useful ways it could be very very cool and I could totally see owning some gaming NFTs.
"NFT is just bring that market outside of the game and make it a public market"
Completely false, as you can only use and trade the NFT/Item within the game.
@nintendolife: Please do a well researched opinion piece on the subject so I can reference to it if needed be
"We know you hate it but we're gonna do it anyway, because we don't care what you love or hate, if we force it onto you then you have no choice to gobble it up, so why wouldn't we!"
Also, we are in it for the 💰, not so you have fun playing our games. Paying up front is nice and the release day revenue is nothing to cough at, but we want to have a steady revenue stream and dry out the 🐳 for all they are worth, consequences for their life be damned 😈
@SwissCheese Watch this space...
What even is the benefit of NFTs in video games? Aren’t user generated items unique by nature? Can’t games already set a limit on how many of a certain item can be bought by the player base? What can NFTs do for video games that video games can’t already do?
@Slownenberg I'm @ ing you because you are the most recent poster, but every time someone defends NFTs they say "it's obvious" but don't explain it, as you just did. So if you could, please explain how NFTs would work in games.
People buy items in games using microtransactions already, so there is a market for that.
But how are NFTs going to be an improvement on that?
Why would I want an NFT over a microtransaction?
Is there a difference in-game between an NFT and an item bought in a microtransaction?
Why would I want to buy or sell an item with another user on an unregulated and unsupervised marketplace?
How will the marketplace be made fair?
Who or what will protect buyers from being ripped off?
Who or what will prevent a seller from gaming the system, inflating the price of their NFT through false sales and bidding?
How will NFTs be transferable between games?
Who is going to spend the time coding games so that an NFT in one game will work in another?
How will they account for improving technology, changes in game physics, patches, creative changes or differences across games?
How is this worth the cost of paying employees and maintaining infrastructure to the dev? Where's the money come from? Is the revenue stream sustainable? Will it cover the rising cost of wages and hardware maintenance?
You might think these are a lot of questions and they are certainly more than I would expect you to answer. I wouldn't be able to answer them. I have neither the knowledge nor the ability to do so. But they seem like obvious challenges my non-game dev, non-business executive, non-tech guru brain came up with. And you and others have said NFTs in games is obvious, I'm guessing you've already thought of this and the solutions are simple.
SE made a multimillion dollar investment into a blockchain game called The Sandbox in Q3 2019. It seems like this stance on NFTs and other blockchain tech is pretty on brand for them now.
The fact there are so many replies sure speaks volumes. I still don't truly understand the technology of NFTs or it's use but I still think it's bad for games and probably more.
@TryToBeHopeful a digital item can't be scarce?
Go play RuneScape, a single blue party hat can be bought in game for like 100-200billion gold, you can then sell that blue party hat for a couple thousand dollars.
If NFTs have limited copies such as "1000" or "500" then only that many people in the gaming sphere can even use said item.
Think of it like this, you earn a cool mount in FFXIV turns out it's a super rare 1/10 NFT.
That item can now be taken to other games that support NFTs and people there will likely see it and crap their pants, then you get some rich kid with daddies wallet and you might end up with 10,000$ or more because "oo shiny I want" then 20 years later if it hasn't crashed and assuming the kid still has it, he re-sells it for more.
While it's essentially a created/fake scarcity, once it's set at X number it can't be changed, the item itself can be but not the link.
The issue here is that even after an NFT is sold the original owner/creator can still edit them and it could go from a cool mount to a rug.
Ain't that just what could be expected.
Uh... consoles have shops to buy dlc and mods like for skyrim and you buy points right? Steam has been doing it for like decades I think, wtf is going on that they have to change to nft? Doesn't it make more sense to have a system of popularity and price based on whatever the creator thinks is right?
@Purgatorium Gz, you beat the NFT troll They can't answer these things because they know NFTs just don't work like they wish.
A NFT is nothing but a decentralized receipt of ownership.
It is useless.
It's like keeping a receipt saying you own your laptop despite it being blown to smithereens a few days prior.
You still own it, but there's nothing there. It blew into pieces.
To paraphrase a Square Enix franchise that they buried in favour of more Marvel games:
"We never asked for this"
"What a shame. They were a good company. What a rotten way to die."
And to people who believe in NFTs:
"Maybe you should try getting a job."
@TryToBeHopeful Honestly I think you’re right, I’m just hedging my bets that I am too old to understand it and am missing something... maybe we all are.
Tap here to load 246 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...