Late last year, Ubisoft announced Quartz, an NFT platform that is to be adopted across some of the firm's most popular games. The reaction from the general public was negative, to say the least, and it doesn't seem like the venture was all that successful commercially, either.
However, Nicolas Pouard, VP at Ubisoft's Strategic Innovations Lab, has been speaking about the future of Quartz and feels that gamers are hating on the idea because they currently don't understand the benefits of NFTs.
Pouard said:
I think gamers don't get what a digital secondary market can bring to them. For now, because of the current situation and context of NFTs, gamers really believe it's first destroying the planet, and second just a tool for speculation. But what we [at Ubisoft] are seeing first is the end game. The end game is about giving players the opportunity to resell their items once they're finished with them or they're finished playing the game itself. So, it's really, for them. It's really beneficial. But they don't get it for now.
Also, this is part of a paradigm shift in gaming. Moving from one economic system to another is not easy to handle. There is a lot of habits you need to go against and a lot of your ingrained mindset you have to shift. It takes time. We know that.
When asked if he expected the negative reaction, Pouard said:
Well, it was a reaction we were expecting. We know it's not an easy concept to grasp. But Quartz is really just a first step that should lead to something bigger. Something that will be more easily understood by our players. That's the way we think about it and why we will keep experimenting. We will keep releasing features and services around this first initiative. And our belief is that, piece by piece, the puzzle will be revealed and understood by our players. We hope they will better understand the value we offer them.
Pouard adds that Ubisoft is "listening to what our fans are telling us" and that the next move is to "make sure what we're doing will make even more sense to gamers."
NFTs have been a hot topic over the past few months, with the likes of Konami, Sega, EA and Square Enix either experimenting with them or discussing them openly in public.
[source finder.com.au]
Comments 267
if NFTs are a "paradigm shift" in gaming, I'm glad to be left a phase behind.
Ubisoft (of all companies) telling people "you just don't get it" really isn't going to endear anyone this NFT idea.
There is nothing to get. They are worthless
Trying to justify the use of NFTs is like trying throw money into GameStop's stocks. There's no realistic benefit in the long-term.
2nd, 3rd and 4th generation: Arcades that cheat, games you can't beat without a strategy guide
5th and 6th generation: Expansion Packs
7th generation: DLC, Season Passes
8th generation: Microtransactions, Loot Boxes, Battle Passes
9th generation: NFTs
“So really, it’s for them…”
So it isn’t an extra way for you to line yer pocket, mr executive?
@ModdedInkling The GameStop stocks event was a protest, it was about making rich people lose a lot of money, some small people got money from it, but it was about sending a message.
I think everyone gets the benefits here - Ubisoft gets more money!
@ModdedInkling
The gamestop example is a good analogy to crypto as a whole
You only make money on them if a bigger idiot comes after you to pay even more than you did for it.
NFTs are as "beneficial" for gamers as you (Ubisoft) selling microtransaction "timesavers" are. It's artificial solutions created by artificial self-made problems.
Ubisoft are not doing this "for the gamers" as much as they want to pretend it is. They're not even tricking their own abused employees that this is a good thing to get into.
"Beneficial.....to us" I can't believe they left that last two words out.
'"The end game is about giving players the opportunity to resell their items once they're finished with them or they're finished playing the game itself."
People have the right to resell their stuff without nft in garage sales or online marketplaces
Say HELL NO to NFT.
Tell to them we hate NFT.
I'm sick of this.
I hope every NFT supporter goes bankrupt.
Oh boy! This will be a great read 🍿🥤😋
It's unfortunate that enough people will probably partake in this crap for it to continue. Let's hope Mario + Rabbids doesn't have them, or if it does, it's not intrusive.
And no company will do something that doesn't benefit them, somehow. That's just absurd to insinuate otherwise.
Your boss: Workers "don't get" what makes long hours, low pay and no respect so beneficial
Theoretically, could it be used to sell digital games from player to player?
Look Nick... I got Mario & Rabbids on sale for $9.99. Thats the beginning and end of my monetary transaction with Ubisoft for this product. Stop adding extra steps to the process.
@CharlieGirl agreed gotta love the condescending tone of this guy! Ohhh sorry we just don’t understand my bad.
You're right, I don't get the benefits of NFTs... probably because for the consumer there is none.
I'm planning to get Mario + Rabbids Sparks of Hope and the Switch version of Rayman Legends. After that I'm most likely done with Ubisoft
@LzWinky That can already be done entirely without NFTs in the picture. Ubisoft is trying to make it sound like NFTs are the only thing that makes certain things capable but that's furthest from the truth.
Anything NFTs are advertised as being "capable of" is something that was already possible long before they came along.
@BLD Crypto has a future, if people decide to use cryptocurrency as an actual currency, not as an investment, something to buy low, sell high, that's not how currency works, there are people who buy dollars and euros in hopes of selling for more, but their main reason is allowing trade for americans and europeans.
There are people who use crypto as money, there are stores that accept crypto directly, but there is still a long way to go, and those cards that allow you to buy things in crypto, but the store still gets normal money, don't count.
These CEOs are next level scum bags
"gamers really believe it's first destroying the planet, and second just a tool for speculation."
When you let GAMERS be a straighter moral compass than yourself you've really messed up
I'd really love to see the data UbiSoft has that says NFTs are safe for the environment or even remotely ethical, because the whole thing smells like a huge grift that's destroying our already fragile planet.
Me dumb gamer don’t get what good company want to do for me. Me sorry to them for not thanking them. I don’t get they want to milk more money.
another reason why people hate Ubisoft, so tone deaf
@CodyMKW
Try selling your in-game items at a garage sale and let me know how that goes.
@victordamazio There's an auto repair shop in my town that's accepting cryptocurrency now. Still don't know how to react to that one without an eye roll.
@HammerGalladeBro Actually, there is, it's a promise of giving money to players, you can play games and get money.
And of course, this will be great in theory, but terrible in practice, games are a hobby, not a job, of course fun is going to be sacrificed to allow money to be earned from games.
And NFTs are an attempt of solving a problem that didn't exist, way before NFTs, we already had games that allowed players to get money by playing, and we had people becoming rich by playing games.
You telling me that a company that implimented Online Passes cares about the consumer being able to sell the content they own?
They are gaslighting gamers in to participating in their digital content scam.
Well, he's right, I don't get it. And I don't have an urge resell to items after I'm done with the game either, but... haven't many games like Warframe done this without any tokens for years?🤔😅
As an informatic professional and someone who (mostly) understands NFTs I have to agree with Ubisoft this time, there is a misconception about them damaging the ecosystem, and that is what mainly angered people. Proof of work, used currently to mine cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin is what consumes too much energy, not NFTs in general. That is why models like proof of stake have been designed, to fix the energy problem.
Read about it, don't just follow an angry mob over something you don't fully understand. Blockchain technology is amazing.
@LzWinky Yes.
Someone who is trying to sell you stuff is also insisting you need it because it is some how beneficial to you financially later on. Not every one of a kind item in games will increase in value and the vast majority of them will be worthless after purchase. The way they describe it is people will be lining up to buy every useless item in every game for a greater value than you originally paid for it.
@Donutsavant you're right and you should say it
@westman98 I literally came into the comments just to make sure someone posted some variation of this meme. I’ve never seen something it fit better with than this.
Would the marketplace owner even want players to be able to resell their digital goods? How does that benefit them at all?
If a game developer wanted to create a market place around a game, I don't know why they would need NFTs to do it?
@Aurumonado Ubisoft would take a percentage of each transaction!
@victordamazio "something to buy low, sell high, that's not how currency works" that is also one of the perks of currency. People use the fluctuations of other countries' currencies to make money. Have you heard of forex trading?
Greetings you dumb peasants.
You don't get it, now you can resell your games, or something. When could you ever do that before, since we took away that ability? Well can not actually do it now, but later maybe, if you pay in advance. And not for credit you can use anywhere else but in our stores, so we get to keep all the money, and sell the credit at a profit again. Or something. Profit is good for you, somehow, despite being your direct loss. Just believe it, and it may become seemingly true.
Think of all the money we can make together. For us, that doesn't include you.
Money.
Proof of stake is a nice idea, but no popular crypto implements it, including ETH that NFTs are based on.
I recommend this great 2 hour video by Folding Ideas on the topic of crypto, NFT and popular pro-NFT arguments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ_xWvX1n9g
@inenai Its not just the energy consumption that worries people. I can think of a dozen different ways that this will be used in very negative ways. Take the example cited in original article: resell items, now how will that be implemented? I can easily picture scenarios where limited edition items/weapons are obtained and sold at extravagant rates where ubisoft and co takes a cut again and again. So now developers are told to design games in a way that focuses on creating in game items that are ether rare or so grindy to obtain that people will pay up, unlike current models that facilitate this everything goes through the developer incentivizing greatly the game itself.
Level design games like Mario maker, now you have to pay for the levels (I dont think nintendo personally will do this but who knows)
Each of the big devs or platform holders could create their own crypto currency and tie it to their games, now all the purchases in in-game shops require this currency and now you have an example of the new 'Meta Verse' internet. Everything will be capitalized beyond recognition.
Finally people are doomer about this change because we just had loot boxs, microtransactions etc. Even DLC was originally implemented in negative ways and that should have been a very uncontroversial addition to gaming from the start.
@inenai Getting past the energy consumption issue doesnt really solve its redundancy and dubiousness. So many "amazing" ways it can be used can already be done in more pragmatic ways.
Their example is that players can resell their digital items and games... but they could just make a digital buy-back program, peer-to-peer marketplace, or auction house.
With that in mind, it raises the question of what Ubi gets out of trying to impose NFTs into the equation? Given their track record, I doubt they're doing all this just for our sakes...
@meeto_1 You can already charge for limited edition items, how is that going to be a new thing? People are already paying for that stuff today, people are even charging other players for stuff that isn't even unique, I don't think that would be new problem really.
I am just one of those play for fun saps. I only play single player or local multiplayer games at this point, so anything with an online component usually gets ignored.
I don't think I have ever bought an in game item so these don't really impact me as far as interfering with my games go, but the potential environmental impacts effect all of us.
"It's not me, it's you."
@westman98 Right... now watch as they make a ton of money from NFTs and laughing all the way to the bank. There's a reason why executives make millions and millions. This is not burger flipping.
Let's face it, NFTs are certainly far more worthwhile for a gamer than microtransactions ever were, yet the microtransaction model is literally dominating the industry right now. If you think NFTs are not here to stay, you're in for a ride.
Good thing Nintendo most likely won't bother with it, just like most other trends. The only company worth supporting with as much money as possible currently. Send a message.
Welcome to the meta verse! Yeah no thanks I will see myself out while deciding which mega man is the best xxx
How tone deaf can one company be?!
@DTFaux I am not sure what Ubisoft IN PARTICULAR is trying to get out of it, apart from competing because eventually many companies might want to use NFTs, all I'm saying is the technology in itself isn't killing the planet like many people think. I've seen way too many comments against NFT because it hurts the planet, when it actually just is a digital solution to proving stuff is original. What you do with it might be good or bad (or HOW you do it, as I said, proof of WORK is indeed consuming too much energy and I hope proof of stake becomes a thing soon), not the technology itself. And being able to recover your money once you stop using something digital doesn't sound bad. Today a company creates a game, clones it into endless amounts of copies digitally still charges each like a physical game. Being able to re sell it and recover that money doesn't sound so bad to me! I'd love to sell games I bought and don't like, or stuff I paid for in games I don't play anymore. I fail to see how that is a bad thing in itself.
@InkIdols You could say the same about microtransactions, yet a simple mobile game with microtransactions can rake in millions in revenue. Don't confuse good business with tone deafness. You are not the target audience.
Wow that'll sure help, telling the players they ''don't get it''. Ubisoft please.
Yeah, it's beneficial for Ubisoft above all. They want to earn their share of money when I sell an account or a game. Unlike now, where I get all the money when I sell something I already bought.
@inenai why would Ubisoft (or any game developer) need to use NFTs to run a market place? you'll never be able to take a weapon from COD to Halo to Fortnite.
What is the benefit of NFT's for this use case?
No i don't want to mine crypto or have nfts get in the way of artistic direction in gaming... Like how microtransactions and free to play have screwed up many games...so tired of grinding a battle pass for only a few guns and mostly stupid stickers and emotes or whatwver in call of duty... You used to be able to unlock everything in games by just playing...i miss those days
@dr-gorgo But you cannot sell a digital copy of a game like at all
@Dragonslacker1 they really are pushing that agenda.. and people who can't handle the real world anymore wi gladly live a fake life in a fake world pretending to be anyone but themselves...ugh I can't wait for the world to end
"Oh, you guys don't like NFT's?"
"You just don't get it."
A very condescending and indirect answer, but okay...
What I hear is, “ we won’t let you sell your items or games digitally for cash but we will introduce this crypto that we can charge you fees on and you can sell your dogital games and items then for less than what GameStop would give you for them and then pay more fees to transfer that crypto to real grown up money.
They could already implement a store to allow us to buy and sell our items but they do t want to do that when they get nothing out of it.
I’ll stick with physical or no game
Well isn't he a condescending piece of *****.
You hear that gamers. You're too dumb to understand that the negative impacts of a technology from a company notorious for exploiting them far out weighs any benefits they clearly haven't figured out themselves.
This guy should run for office in the US he would fit in with the rest of the slimy politicians like it was second nature.
@MarioBrickLayer Again- I see more benefit for users than for companies in this case. I just think that in itself should make the games way more appealing to the players - that is why companies would want to compete against each other implementing this technology before someone else does. Thus why they say players don't get it.
Blockchain is HARD to understand. Most people (me included half of the time) actually really don't get it. If they did, they'd all be investing in cryptocurrencies, since today it is the only way to own your money without a bank in the middle. No one to take the money away from you. But to trust that, you need to trust the technology (and for the third time: proof of work sucks- I will buy ethereum when they finally start using proof of stake).
I don't claim to have the absolute truth, but I actually have a degree in informatic technology (yes, and even I sometimes have a hard time understanding the technology because it IS very complex) and work in the video game development industry, and I discuss blockchain with my peers now and then, so I MIGHT have a somewhat educated view in the matter.
Most people I've seen complain didn't even make an ATTEMPT at understanding the technology.
Ubisoft think we are all STOOPID!
@inenai I stopped reading where you said most people would be investing in cryptos if they understood it.
All cryptos charge fees for transactions. That alone right there keeps me away period and will continue to do so.
Also game companies just want to make a buck from these fees. Their introducing their own crypto and charging fees to buy and sell with it and then another fee to transfer it to cash. They get your money and then they don’t want you to spend it elsewhere and to prevent that they are going to tax and fee you to death. NFT’s in gaming is a horrible idea and is only a scam for the companies. If it had any good for the consumers they would have implemented this long ago with their game store coins etc.
There is zero benefit for the consumer and the environmental damage that it creates through extremely high power consumption makes it only worse.
@ParadoxFawkes they can do that all they want but a fake life and world doesn’t pay the electric bill.
I too miss the days of having to actually play a game to unlock items and not some cockamamie scheme of a battlepass
Being able to resell an item locked to a specific game, or at best platform or publisher, is not an appealing proposition.
The real appealing proposition is to not introduce an elaborate system of ownership whereby speculation and scamming may run rampant.
I get that they need to run a micro-transaction system of sorts because this generates additional revenue that keeps business going, especially considering the price-point of the game as a product is unrealistically low when you factor in all the development resources and economical inflation, but consumers just won't budge on that price point even though it may be to everyone's detriment.
The underlying utter contempt they have for us anytime they talk about NFC and metaverse is so obvious and similar that I suspect there was some industry wide memo or retreat last year where they were given their marching orders on this *****.
I personally "don't get" why people even like ubisoft at all anymore. Ignorance is bliss!
@inenai "But you cannot sell a digital copy of a game like at all"
Trading and selling digital goods is already a thing that's possible and has been done a long time ago before NFTs. You're not fooling anyone, bud.
The only reason you wouldn't be able to do it, is if the platform holder didn't allow you to do it.
NFTs are not a "new solution" or invention of anything. They are false scarcity and value in lies. If you can somehow prove that isn't the case then more power to you but that's simply the truth of it and why they are labelled scams.
NFT is just a way for companies to get rich. That's all...
@inenai you're talking about the underlying technology rather than the customer/gamer use case/benefit. You could build a market place around a FPS like COD with or without NFTs, I could write up a data model in 10 minutes to support this...
Gamers won't think...WOW I can use NFT's to buy better weapons in COD...they will think WOW I can buy and sell weapons in COD...there's a big difference, no COD player will care if it uses NFTs or not.
I also have a degree in Information Technology and spend my days talking about system development and user experience, I might also know what i'm talking about...
so again, I'll ask the question, what benefit do NFT's bring to a closed market place around a game?
@Dirty0814 Please don't tell me you think banks don't charge fees for transactions.
@ModdedInkling BRUH. UBISOFT LEGIT JUST SAID "Energy Efficient NFTs"
Like what
NFTs can't benefit the environment. They benefit pretty much no one
And Ubisoft don't get what the Players are saying.
LISTEN TO YOUR AUDIENCE, DONT TELL THEM WHAT THEY SHOULD LIKE
@CodyMKW He’s talking about digital games and items could be resold but the thing is with any crypto there is a fee to buy it then there is a fee for the transaction and most likely going to be a Ubisoft fee for selling it on their platform. Then there would be a fee for transferring your crypto to real cash. So basically you have $1 - 2%= .98¢ - 10% ( most likely Ubis fee) = .89¢ - 2% = .87 - 2% = .85. So basically after each transaction you would lose 15% of your monies in fees regardless.
Also note that if no fees are going to be associated with any transaction Ubi will probably just raise the price of their items to make up for that lost income.
@inenai I have free checking and free savings with 2 banks actually so no they do not. Also my brokers charge a fraction of a fraction of a percent to handle my money. Cryptos charge anywhere from 2-10% fees and that’s not including Ethreum.
Yes I know all about crypto and how it works and what it is all about. I have made money off of it even but I will not ever say it’s a good thing because unless you hold onto it long term and I mean years you are literally in the hole gamers are not going to be investing i crypto but trying to use it to buy and sell their items from what they say here so it literally is a scam for Ubi to be able to charge fees. I even laid out an example above. So maybe it is you that should educate yourself some more.
Also banks that do charge fees those fees are way less than any crypto transaction. Crypto is also not regulated by the government which means you can be screwed on any transaction and have no way at all of contesting it, your account hacked and you could lose everything as well and nothing you can do.
What a f****** patronising d***
I'm waiting for someone to actually explain the benefits. All I see is more overcomplicating stuff we already have. Sell in game items? Been able to do that without NFTs for years in games like CS GO. Sell used digital games? That has nothing to do with NFTs and everything to do with publishers allowing it in the first place and the stores to support it.
All anyone seems to say is the same buzzwords that mean nothing and say people just "don't get it."
@MarioBrickLayer I'm honestly not sure and I'd love to investigate more to better understand all of this. I just hate to see people hate on NFTs because they think they are damaging the environment and they stop at that.
Here’s a friendly reminder that Nicolas Pouard is a piece of trash:
“Cannot share the structure yet, but the angle would be how play to earn is blurring the line between work and leisure, which is kind of the main pillar of western modern culture. By changing this, it’s the whole society structure which is on the verge to be transformed in depth.”
https://twitter.com/Ni_ko_lah/status/1378065352068829184?s=20&t=eoFK3cFZBJyG1Ocy2hyE9w
Notice how he uses “play to earn” like the Square president said “play to have fun” both in the context of things standing in the way of NFT hell.
@BenRK benefits Ubi. All crypto sales would allow them to charge fees. I laid out a example a couple comments up. It also is a way to try and keep the money on their platform, if it wasn’t the gaming community would come out with one crypto but as you see they are all making their own just like all the coins out there as it is. It’s nothing but a few scam for the creators which include these game companies.
@Dirty0814 I meant the people pushing NFTs not explaining the benefits.
@inenai Fair enough in trying to quell the energy consumption concerns. Still, that's a moot point when a company is struggling to properly justify new tech at the same time they're implementing it.
Because crypto/blockchain/NFTs started under the idea that it's a money-making opportunity ("Get in on this new money before it takes off!"), the PR shift to "But think of what good it'll do for society! [Citation Needed]" feels like an ends to justify the means.
Also, IDK where you got the idea where I said/implied that being able to resell digital content would be a bad thing. It's just that you can do that without NFTs.
@SalvorHardin exactly. I play for fun but not with my pocketbook. At that point it’s okay to cry
It’s interesting that he mentions that players believe that it is destroying the planet as if they are incorrect despite him not mentioning that point again and proving why we are incorrect about that (at least in what Nintendo life has on here), it’s almost as if we do understand the concept of an NFT and it is in fact Ubisoft that doesn’t seem to understand that we value our planet more than some stupid add ons for video games or rubbish looking apes with their private parts hanging out… Nah we must be the idiots, the rich guy said so after all!
No cap I hate Ubisoft, and this is just kindling to the problematic inferno that they're becoming
@inenai not only the environmental damage, but they've been doing a lot of harm to the arts community lately. A lot of people are feeling unsafe while others are getting their work stolen and resold at exorbitant prices without their consent, or often even their knowledge. Not to mention the fact that it's by definition a ponzi scheme.
@inenai Fair enough! I just think game companies are jumping on a bandwagon and don't get it and aren't thinking about gamers.
There is so much to work out regarding NFTs, such as, if you bought the Mona Lisa from the Louvre for £200m and I owned a poster copy, there is a tangible difference between yours and mine, but if you own an original piece of digital art (with an NFT to prove it) and I own a copy, what is the difference?
@MarioBrickLayer How about this:
Player A buys an item for 5, plays the game, develops the item (makes it better), then is tired of the game and wants to get their 5 back.
Player B has the choice to either buy an upgraded item for 5 from player A or a new copy of the item for 5 from the game.
If player B buys from player A:
-Player A gains money back
-Player B gets better item for same price, doesn't give more money to game
-If transaction pays fee, game earned, say, 0.5 instead of 5 when Player B decided they wanted a copy of the item.
With NFT you cannot: Hack a developed item into existence, or fake the transactions, since it's super-hard to hack blockchains.
That is one use I can see that is beneficial for the players.
@BenRK their not going to explain them because there are none.
@Jellyghost But the difference between having an NFT is that if you don't, your art can be sold (copies or phisical items using said art) without you seeing any benefits anyway, that already happens. But with an NFT that the very artist generates of their work, they could forever earn a fee whenever that NFT is sold, they can earn from their work. As far as I know, it actually tries to fix that exact problem
@TimGibson Not all, just enough to make this profitable. And it will be wildly so.
@inenai I agree with that use case, I could see someone like Ubisoft building a market place where you could support that exact scenario - I don't know how popular that would be, but lets ignore that for the purpose of this discussion.
I don't think hacking is a big enough issue (especially in online games) to require the use of NFT's. NFT's can't stop other hacks and cheating. Existing encryption is enough to support protecting player purchases.
So I really don't think there is a killer feature that NFT's bring to the table which can't be supported with existing tech.
the translation is players realise that buying nothing that you dont own have no rights to is worse than horse armour. any muppets that lose money on NON EXISTENT FLUFF deserves to lose it
Oh I get it Ubisoft! You generate digital items. You sell them to consumers. Your board/investors/CEO make millions. Consumers are left with digital items that they might be able to sell to another gullible consumer. If not, then they're stuck with something that doesn't do anything. No thank you.
I understand a ponzi scheme just fine thanks...
@Dirty0814 “All cryptos charge fees in every transaction”
This is so wrong in so many levels.
XRP is the first and main example that comes to mind.
Second… don’t banks do exactly the same but with higher fees? I’d like you to make an international transaction without paying a huge fee between the multiple banks it needs to go through.
And almost every comment in here is proving Ubisoft right. How interesting.
@inenai @MarioBrickLayer first of all they wouldn’t be offering any extras for your game for the same price. Second if the seller offered extras that’s on them.
Ubi would charge fees for any transaction made, again I posted an example of how the whole blockchain transaction would work. You get charged fees for buying the crypto so your dollar now is worth less. Then the seller would most likely pay Ubi a fee to post on their marketplace just like anywhere else, G2A, CDKeys, eBay, Amazon just to name a few all do this. So then you lose that fee so say 5%, then you have to transfer the funds back to cash which again will be a fee. Now the whole point in them using their own crypto is so they can try and keep your money and you avoid paying the fee or you paying them regardless to take your money.
In the end both the seller and buyer pay fees and Ubi would walk away with about 15%+ of what any transaction would be and the seller would be out that money. So say your 5 bucks nets the seller only 4.25 and then there would be the transfer to bank account fee if that was wanted on top of that. Let’s not forget you will most likely only be able to sell your used digital games for GameStop trade in prices or eBay prices. eBay is much better for the seller but a 60 dollar game still wouldn’t get you but maybe 45-50 and at 50 bucks you’ll still only walk away with 42 and still have to pay to transfer to your bank but I will expect used digital games to not at all sell for the price of physical and if it is a store where you put it up for sell and Ubi resells it then you will get real screwed and get GameStop crap tradin prices.
Ubi wins, you lose regardless.
@anoyonmus
You made me laugh. That's like saying a gas car doesn't pollute the air. I swear, even PR like this shouldn't be remotely dumb just to convince people that it's "good."
If it allows me to sell back digitally downloaded games, count me in. Lol
@dkxcalibur With the current system, you still are buying digital items, they get their millions, and you can’t resell it.
@inenai Im glad someone is at least informed on how things work and not just spewing things they read on forums 👍
@BLD
And at the end of the day, all it will cause is unnecessary panic to the shareholders, just as what I think will happen to NFTs when that bubble inevitably bursts.
This reminds me of that time Xbox told people to “‘deal with it” for DRM. People did not take kindly to that.
I don't get NFTs you say Ubisoft?
Maybe that's why the last time I did play your games was before they contained aggressive micro transactions (let alone NFT) and when the games were actually good
All these companies wasting millions on games that are crap, yet back in the day with smaller budgets these companies made more often good games.
Yeah they do it themself.
@CharlieGirl To be fair, next to nobody in this comments section has a fair and reasonable take on what an NFT even is. The majority are just knee-jerking “NFT BAD” without actually knowing why...
@fafonio I mean- I TRY to give my opinion and learn in the process? I'm open to people proving me wrong.
I just think there is much hate against companies for trying to make profit in new ways. I mean that's their whole goal.
@MetalMan LOL What are you talking about? Millions of people still buy Microsoft games and products. If they didn’t take kindly to it, they sure are happy to keep giving MS their money!
@BloodNinja NFTs on its own are not particularly bad.
But they way these companies use them is bad, the method is thus the problem, not the product.
In a ideal world NFT in games could (read carefully) be a good thing, but that's not the reason for this push, it is to earn more and more money, and not because it is meant as a good thing for the gamers like Ubisoft claims.
@victordamazio
I thought it was a prank/challenge/experiment started on Reddit, rather than a protest. Other than losing money, all it proved was that dumping a bunch of money into their stocks just to get back a higher return doesn't really change things in the long run; all it did was move some money between people.
@fafonio I made an international transaction several times, over recent years. Each time, my fee was in the vein of around $7. Is that considered huge, these days? lol
@ModdedInkling true but I am not joking. They actually said that in the trailer.
"Energy Efficient NFTs"
@Rayquaza2510 What happens when games companies earn less and less money, then?
@BloodNinja Sure, but when I'm buying the current digital products, I'm not under the impression that I can sell them to others. I'm okay with the experience. I can justify purchasing a game that provides me with 15-200 hours of gameplay. That provides me with a great story that allows me to escape for a little bit. Me personally, I'm not interested in collecting digital items.
@Bloodninja you didn't fully read what I said did you...
@inenai the problem is that most if not all of them only care about profit and pleasing shareholders.
It's not anymore about games being fun, it's about hyping it out to a unreasonable level, push different methods to "enhance" the experience with micro transactions and so on.
I understand these companies want money, but instead of wasting millions on stupid PR (because most PR they do is the stupid one, they never bother with positive PR), wasting millions on development (crush aside) for a game that has "paper thin gameplay and story" just to milk it out with loot boxes, useless DLCs (most companies don't do good DLCs anymore), microtransactions and now even NFTs on the horizon.
Really these big game companies are themself at fault here, they spend their money in wrong ways and so the people that still accept this c.r.a.p and buy it.
P.S. I have played multiple games in the past 2 years that didn't do this kind of stuff so aggressively and yet made profit.
So it is possible, but the big boys at EA, Ubisoft, Take-Two and so on prefer not to.
@dkxcalibur So you revealed the truth about yourself: as long as it fulfills some kind of satisfaction in you, then the product is good. That’s not the fault of an NFT, then.
If Ubisoft don't get that players "not getting NFTs" is a sign that they neither need nor want them, therefore making it a bad idea to continue pushing for them... then I don't know what that makes them.
But pray go on Ubisoft, do "shift" to a Paradigm where no player will follow you, let's see how that works for you.
@Rayquaza2510 Let’s try again, what happens when a games studio earns less money?
@RudyC3 People said the same nonsense about Steam DRM when it first came about, but that’s because most people are actually pretty short sighted.
@BloodNinja read what I said, you try to get around that...
Ubisoft is gross.
@Rayquaza2510 Uh, your logic is pretty easy to get around, and you’re proving it by not answering a simple question. I’ll try again: what happens to games studios and their employees when they don’t make enough money?
@RudyC3 Other things players don't want:
1. Microtransactions
2. Paid DLC
3. Preorder bonuses
4. F2P/P2W
Yet companies make the majority of their money exactly from those things. They go where the money is, and in the near future, NFTs will be exactly that, the new big money making opportunity for them, potentially something beneficial for players depending on implementation.
If you don't like it, don't support it and support companies that don't implement NFTs. It really is that simple. They really don't give a damn about what some vocal gamers think (even if they are right, that's irrelevant to them).
Who is this guy kidding by calling NFTs a paradigm shift? And Russia's amassing of troops on the Ukraine border is also a paradigm shift.
This is being forced by developers. It's not something that many gamers are clamoring for. Please, don't talk to me like I'm a 5-year-old.
@Burning_Spear NFTs are absolutely a paradigm shift. It might not be for the better, depending on your perspective, but it is.
@BloodNinja I gave a clear answer, just because it does not please you and you don't (want to) understand it, is sadly not my fault.
But if that is your opinion, so let it be.
P.S. spend their money wisely, like I said before and precisely what you ignored.
I have said enough.
Removed - flaming/arguing
"...gamers really believe it's first destroying the planet, and second just a tool for speculation."
"The end game is about giving players the opportunity to resell their items once they're finished with them or they're finished playing the game itself. "
Derisively says that the upset audience only sees it as a tool for speculation. Only example of use provided is one of speculation.
If you ever hear someone telling you the value of a thing is in the reselling of said thing and you don't know what the term "economic bubble" means, look it up.
Ubisoft’s PR debacles have been far more engrossing to me than any of their games for almost a decade now.
@Rayquaza2510 lmfao
This is fun. Let’s try again. What happens when a games studio fails to make profit? Do they stay open? Do they keep all their employees?
Or do they close down, and fire employees?
Which scenario is good for gamers? The one where the studio profits and still gets to make games and pay employees, or the one where the company fails, has to stop making games and has to fire it’s employees?
Come on I’m not asking you a hard question!
@inenai except companies are looking to utilize NFT's as way to make a quick buck by declaring features that can be done without it.
Proof of ownership and reselling goods do not need blockchain to work, even in the digital world. There are already means to verify your digital library, and digital storefronts for trading digital goods. Also, NFT's as they are pushed now only make money by getting someone to buy it for more than you did. It is an investment, and one that many rightly fear will turn their escapist hobby of fun into a tiresome job where everyone is just plugging away trying to earn something they can resell.
Crypto and blockchain will be more feasible when used as a decentralized currency, the problem is that these game publishers are pushing them as centralized investments. Ubisoft NFT's won't mean anything in the ecosystem of EA, or Take-Two right now.
@DawgP Currently, if we buy something and it’s outside the refund stipulations, we can’t do anything with it, and are literally stuck with it. How are we worse off by at least being able to resell our digital goods, in a similar fashion that we can do with physical ones? Nobody has this complaint about car ownership, for example.
“What’s the worst thing about owning a car?”
“You have the opportunity to resell it!”
That’s what we are saying about games right now lmfao, and it’s ridiculous. I have so many digital games that I don’t play anymore. It would be great to be able to sell them, but I’m stuck with them. Any improvement to the current system is welcome.
@BloodNinja "lmfao"
I have heard enough, can't take someone seriously if that is how their sentence does start.
Not to mention I already saw that you refuse to read that answer, and only expect to hear what pleases you, while I don't expect anything not even you wanting to read what I said.
So before I start to sound like a broken record like you already do, I stop reacting to you here and others should too, unless they share your expected answer 100%.
@victordamazio Cryptos are, without exception, remarkably selfish currency systems that only serves to benefit those already weathy with traditional currency enough to buy enough computer equipment.
The nicest that can be said about the technology is that its resilient to Man-In-The-Middle attacks, but at the cost of being open to numerous other, easier methods of fraud and scam.
Tbf Ubisoft is right here, most players are to dumb to understand NFT and blockchains. Yet they complain about issues like preservation of videogames, NFT and blockchain can literally fix that!
It's the same hate internet was getting back when it was first released, it wouldn't do anything that wasn't already possible and everyone hated it. Now we can't imagine a life without the internet.
@Rayquaza2510 You literally didn’t directly answer the question. You’re rambling like a politician that’s asked a direct question that he is afraid to answer, and it’s hilarious to me.
You people that think profit is bad never cease to amaze me.
You: “NFT bad! Bad because profit! Profit bad! Because bad!”
Why the hell is it bad for a company to seek profit? Gaming isn’t a charity, ya dingus!
I'm still waiting for someone to actually explain the benefits to the end user. All "benefits" I'm seeing is stuff that has nothing to do with NFTs and meaningless buzzwords. Digital reselling can be done without NFTs and there are games out there where you can already resell in game items, and those were out for years.
@dBackLash Finally, someone with critical thought. Took you a while to show up! Where you been?! LOL
People were saying the same stuff when Steam DRM came about, and now that’s seen as a normal, industry standard.
The ONLY thing NFTs are proving is that people are fearful of change. Nothing more.
@BloodNinja Yeparooster! What's your point. Usually when I post something personal, I tell the truth.
@BenRK I’m fairly certain that I’m stuck with the 50 or so Steam games I don’t play for the rest of my life. The only option for me would be to sell my Steam account, but then I wouldn’t be able to play the games I do still enjoy. Can’t there be some kind of middle ground for guys like me that want to be able to sell individual games to people who might find more value in the ones that weren’t for me? We can already do this with physical goods and nobody bats an eye; why not digital?
@dkxcalibur I made my point. The problem is with the way you see things, and not some problem inherent in NFTs. I literally said that in my reply to you. So at least you are truthful LOL
@BloodNinja you are a dingus.
And yes I still did react because this popped up before I left the site.
I keep it simple for you.
I DIDNT SAY THEY CAN NOT HAVE ANY PROFIT
you read it that way
They can have profit, and they don't need microtransactions or NFTs for that.
And well I could explain it, but you don't read anyhow (proved multiple times here, you just refuse) so why bother.
And now I log out immediately and don't visit this site for the rest of the day.
@BloodNinja But does that have anything to do with NFTs? It's the publishers and store fronts that are preventing you from reselling digital games, and I don't see that changing even with NFTs.
@Rayquaza2510 You literally stated that profit for companies is bad for gamers! LOL “it is to earn more and more money, it is not good for gamers” Come on, you can’t answer direct questions, and you can’t even keep up with your own points. Why are you bothering commenting? Lmfao!!!!
I mainly play games for fun. Though I have a feeling if I buy games from companies that support NFT’s then I’m going to be called “not a true gamer” and get an angry mob riding on my tail. :/
@BloodNinja That was exactly my point, some reading comprehension wouldn't hurt. The majority of gamers don't know or care what NFTs are, they are just going to use the service like good little boys and make Ubisoft lots of dough. What the vocal antagonists think is entirely irrelevant.
People having petty feuds with BloodNinja? There are no surprises here. It feels I’m back at IGN everytime I see his username pop up
This interview was so damn insulting. So much so, that it has convinced me to skip the Mario + Rabbids sequel that's coming up. The original was the only Ubisoft game I've enjoyed in the last decade. But screw them. Until they commit to dropping NFTs entirely, they've lost me as a customer.
....Then why bother using them at all then, if our 'tiny brains' can't comprehend them? You don't see gaming companies putting quadratic math problems into games willy-nilly, after all....
Maybe it's because I'm nearing the 40 year mark, but the biggest thing about NFTs for me is... They bring nothing to the table that I need. Every day since NFTs first darkened our doorstep, I have woken up, went about my day, and not once felt like I was missing out on anything related to that. I exist without them and that is what matters. Sorry, Ubisoft. Your latest attempt to ferret money out of me failed. Why not use all this energy to make games that can garner acclaim and profit through being absolutely fantastic instead of predatory secondary approaches?
Not sure if Ubisoft don't get why folk don't like em. I mean, it's ok for Ubisoft to drool at the prospect of them...but don't call us stupid while doing so. Microsoft, feel free to buy Ubisoft too. I can live without them.
@BenRK Right now, platform holders don’t allow resale of digital goods. An NFT would enable people to sell things outside that market place and transfer ownership elsewhere. For the purposes of ownership and reselling, it gives more flexibility to the end-user that seeks to regain a little bit of what they originally spent, just like with physical goods.
So while current platform holders don’t allow it, you better believe that there will be third party companies getting ready to be the middle man in all your NFT transactions. Similar to how a used car company might be compared to a brand name dealership.
He's right guys, NFTs' awful impact on the planet will finally put us out of our misery.
@BloodNinja That assumes that said publishers and store fronts even allow NFTs to be tied to digital games or allow you access to that information. I simply don't see Steam allowing you to sell a game on GOG or the Epic Game Store or vice versa.
@Troll_Decimator Eh, you came across differently. Not my fault that your initial point was seemingly antagonistic. Yes, reading comprehension is important, but clearly stating ones intentions is equally important in conversation where we have no audio cues or body language to assist in deciphering meaning. Best to think of those facets of dialogue before questioning everyone’s basic ability to read.
I think this only demonstrates that Ubisoft execs "don't get it" either. Guy says gamers don't get it and then doesn't explain what is it. He's like "you see, what people don't understand is that you can sell NFTs when you're done playing." That's his level of understanding? Dude, we all get that part. The question is why. WHY are we buying and selling these things?
Can you imagine the hassle of selling your stuff when you finish a game? You just want to move on. I don't want to go into a restaurant and sell my fork to the next customer when I'm done.
@BenRK I’m not sure if it matters if you personally can see it or not. It’s happening right before our eyes; it’s just in its infancy. It’ll be industry standard like Steam DRM is, even though back when that came about people were similarly ruffled about it.
@BloodNinja If I can't see it, can't use it, then there is no benefit for me to have it.
Ok gamers that don't know any better, it's time to stop talking about how you are going to boycott Ubisoft, and actually boycott them. That means not buying the new Mario VS Rabbids too!
Thank you for the Ubi-splain!
NOW we understand. It's for US!
Thanks again, Nicolas, for all of your Strategic Innovations. I'm not sure if it's the strategy I like more, or the innovation, but either way, I'm too dumb to tell them apart.
Is it going to make games more fun? No? Then I don't care.
@BenRK Right, but thats strictly personal. This may not be for you, but like all things, it will be for other people.
@PoliticallyIncorrect Done and done! Haven’t bought an Ubisoft game since the first AC on PC. Haven’t missed a thing!
@BloodNinja I don't think saying "it's not for you" is really going to sell anyone on NFTs. I'm skeptical of NFTs, but I'm open to people actually explaining what benefits they see. Everything you've told me depends entirely on publishers and store fronts actually going that route. Not to mention there is nothing stopping them from doing that right now without NFTs. When the biggest pro NFT argument I've seen is something that doesn't require NFTs...
@BloodNinja To be fair with DRMs, consumers didnt learn to love them, because they still dont provide any substantial benefits to the consumer (it's almost exclusively beneficial to businesses). They only became less of a problem because internet access has improved. But when you have no internet, you're out of luck.
The internet, on the other hand, has shown its use over time. But it also wasnt "everyone" who doubted it. It stuck pretty well by the time it hit mainstream.
NFTs feel more like DRMs, where companies are hoping we get worn down by their push and just accept things. But it's having trouble sticking because Crypto bros and the like already gave the game away. So now we're all just tired of hearing about it until it can actually prove its use.
@BenRK I’m not trying to sell you on it. I was explaining why I think it will be good for me and others like me, to at least try and bridge some gap in understanding. If you don’t like them you don’t have to buy any or participate in their resale.
@BloodNinja I thought you were trying to sell me on them. That's what I asked for in my first post.
@DTFaux I see where you are going with this, but DRM is beneficial to the customer.
If there was no DRM, piracy would basically run off without the leash. This could potentially hurt some games studios, forcing them to close. Having less choices is bad for consumers, so having protections like DRM is helpful for everyone in different ways. It helps companies become less victimized by piracy, and it helps customers by knowing that their favorite companies aren’t going to go bankrupt because everyone is just freely downloading pirated versions instead of supporting the people that make their games.
@BenRK That's Ubisoft’s job
@jrt87 This is one of the many reasons I am introducing my son to NES, SNES, N64, PS1, etc. games while he is young. The golden age of gaming has long passed I am afraid...
@BloodNinja Well, you seem so pro NFT, and I invited you to explain why, but everything you've told me doesn't require NFTs and then you ended it by shrugging. Ubisoft on the other hand has called me an idiot, so at least you put in more effort then they did.
@inenai I get the sentiment, and attempts to fix those problems, but as it stands now it's just not worth it unless you're only in it for the money. It's much more sustainable and secure to just buy an artists' work from their own shop, get prints or buy merch or just support them on patreon/other donations. It feels too pretentious to say that crypto is the "best way to support artists" when it's only ever presented itself as a marketing scheme at best
...and they will keep telling us how 'good' this is for all of us until we start believing it like the good little drones that we are.
Don't worry ubisoft, the masses will still by your games despite their moaning
@inenai
And what is used to buy and sell NFTs? Cryptocurrency. It's ridicilous try claim "NFTs don't ruin enviroment, it's much more ecological" when all transactions use cryptotcurrency which is extremely harmful and energy eater at the moment. It wouldn't exist without cryptocurrencies.
It's like claiming it's totalyl fine buy producs made by childlabour because I am not the one making them work.
@BenRK I explained exactly why. If you don’t like the explanation, which is to move digital goods closer in ownership to physical, I’m shrugging because it’s not my job to convince you and you already stated that you can’t see their use. If you can’t see something, why do I have to make you see? LOL We are just gamers talking among ourselves. Is NFT a requirement? Damn straight it is. The only way to shake up the digital marketplace is to do something out of the ordinary, and if you even glance at how divisive the comments are, you’ll see proof that they already achieved their goal.
@BloodNinja NFTs aren't required though. Take a look at the Steam Marketplace some time to see what I mean.
I am a skeptical person, but I'm open to being proven wrong. There has been no pro NFT argument I've seen from anyone anywhere that makes it click for me. So if it clicked for you, why wouldn't I try to understand why?
"The end game is about giving players the opportunity to resell their items once they're finished with them or they're finished playing the game itself. So, it's really, for them. It's really beneficial. But they don't get it for now."
No. No it is not.
You know what was beneficial for us? When games were 100% complete by the time they were ready for purchase and when we 100% owned our copy of the games we purchased. If I decided I wanted to sell my copy of Final Fantasy III (FFVI) on my SNES to someone for $60-$80, then guess what? I get all of that money in cash and the new owner of that game 100% owns it and the new owner does not need to purchase any additional DLC.
PS - I will never actually sell any of my SNES games, so don't bother asking.
@LzWinky Yes but that can be done now without NFTs it would just need to be written into digital store fronts, there is no advantage to making anything NFT other than destroy the planet.
@BenRK Because you firmly rooted yourself in not wanting to understand, and it's no sweat off my back You said so yourself:
"If I can't see it, can't use it, then there is no benefit for me to have it."
NFTs are required because something needs to shake up the moldy, stagnant current market. Frankly, it's working! People are already purchasing artwork with NFTs coded into them for huge sums. There will be a lower cost market for people reselling digital games at lower prices than cost, too.
And just imagine how the prices will skyrocket once a game's licensing expires, or it gets removed from a market place. You can't buy Dark Souls PTDE on Steam anymore, and it sells for over $100 on key websites. Some games just aren't available to purchase, anymore. Games with NFTs will enhance the longevity of any game that has expired licenses or is removed from a digital market place. It'll be like the collectible games market, only digital.
“I think gamers don't get what a digital secondary market can bring to them.“ yeah we don’t because it can’t bring anything
@loyalroyal1989 Meanwhile, we are typing our responses on computers and phones whose manufacture has worse impact on the environment than an NFT ever will. Don't worry, the environment will DEMOLISH us. Just ask the dinosaurs or any civilization that is fossilized. Nature will be fine. WE should be the ones worried! hahah!!
@BloodNinja I was responding to your message where you said "I’m not sure if it matters if you personally can see it or not." That doesn't mean I'm "firmly rooted into not wanting to understand." It means your point didn't make NFTs suddenly make sense.
NFTs are not required to resell digital games as things are right now. There is nothing stopping Steam from letting you trade/sell games right now. NFTs aren't going to magically change that. Heck, in this particular case, NFTs only serve to make things more complicated. Steam knows what games you own. If they started letting you sell your used digital games, they know if you can or can't with no NFT in sight.
God I hate Ubisoft's corporate bulls-t.
This is what I took with me from that quote:
First it will destroy the world, then it will be a tool for speculation and after that, in the end game, gamers might get something out of it. (After Ubisoft have made millions selling air that is...)
Seriously though, if Ubisoft really wanted a second hand market for gaming related things that can be done without this stupid energy-guzzling system. Games like Second Life and similar have done this for ages now. Seems to me most players are perfectly fine with sharing created levels, in-game content, etc anyway without this type of systems though.
If Ubisoft wanted us to be able to re-sell digital content than they could have done that at any time. NFTs don't enable that to happen unless Ubisoft allow it to, and they don't need NFTs to allow it to happen.
@BloodNinja I get the argument that it adds an extra layer of defense against piracy, but has there been much proof of how much money it's actually saved companies and studios?
Anyone who cares to jump through the hoops to consume paid media for free (and/or lacks the funds to begin with) is still doing it, while everyone willing to pay already do.
@BenRK The change is already occurring. Whether you believe it or not is your business. The digital marketplace will do it's thing, regardless of your opinion of it! Can you at least come to terms with that?
@Troll_Decimator
https://www.twitter.com/lizaledwards/status/1472778732578299912?t=n__vre9PBFtbYI2IdUngkQ&s=19
Ubisoft made under $400 from 15 sales as of mid-December 2021, likely losing them thousands in minting fees.
As of now, NFTs have been a miserable failure for Ubisoft.
@DTFaux Proof? Yeah, gaming's booming, and DRM certainly hasn't slowed anything:
"Market Overview -
The global gaming market was valued at USD 173.70 billion in 2021, and it is expected to reach a value of USD 314.40 billion by 2027, registering a CAGR of 9.64% over 2022-2027. Due to nationwide lockdown, people stay home, and some turn to game platforms to pass the time."
That's proof that there are more people are buying games than they are pirating them.
@westman98 If a basketball player misses a single shot, is he or she a failure? I mean, how stringent are your standards such that you think NFTs are a "miserable failure" because of a single low sales statistic? That's like calling an NBA player a failure for missing a free-throw shot or something.
This is hilarious. Some people just can't help themselves. They just HAVE to become a meme.
@BloodNinja You don't seem to be understanding much of what I'm saying. Go get some coffee or go take a nap depending on the time of day it is for you. Might help.
@BenRK I'm understanding you just fine, and I'm bringing different points with greater clarity to the conversation. It's clear at this point you are just here to be antagonistic, though!
@BloodNinja I don't think bringing up examples of why NFTs are not needed is being antagonistic. Called a conversation, or at worst a polite debate. Most antagonistic thing I've said is suggesting you get coffee.
I like how companies have degraded to straight up insulting gamers who logically think NFTs are the dumbest thing ever.
"We know they aren't an easy concept to grasp"
"I think gamers don't get what....blah blah blah"
"They don't get it for now..."
"Gamers really believe it's destroying the planet"
"We hope they will better understand the value we offer them."
Are you f**king kidding me? We understand what NFTs are and that's why we hate them, you greedy garbage soulless steaming trash heap company. I'll never ever ever EVER buy an NFT. Especially considering how abysmally they've handled the well deserved bad press around NFTs.
The gaming industry has turned into a huge joke.
@BenRK This is the point the conversation became antagonostic, in case you need it spelled out:
"You don't seem to be understanding much of what I'm saying. Go get some coffee or go take a nap depending on the time of day it is for you. Might help."
You turned the conversation away from whatever we were talking about and made it personal. Need anything else? I'm pretty done with your senseless arguing.
@BloodNinja OK, but what I was asking was if there was proof of how much companies were saving thanks to DRMs.
Gaming booming due to the pandemic (per your quote) could equally be attributed to people being inclined to pay for products, regardless, than their inability to pirate. Any inference beyond what's being presented is just appealing to one's confirmation bias.
And this ignores that it's hard to measure just how many folks are pirating to begin with.
@BloodNinja Heh, bringing up the Steam Marketplace is hardly "senseless arguing." You're the one who doesn't seem to be accepting that there are other points of view here and refuse to explain yours once someone has brought up an example as to why that's incorrect. As soon as I explain why NFTs are not needed, you give up.
Also, seriously, coffee is good.
These may seem like strong words, but I feel like I really despise Unisoft and what they stand for.
"Tap here to load to 207 comments" [takes off glasses] hoo boy, let's go
@TheBigK Allow me to sum it up.
q;aljksdhflkajhdufipqwlkjebdlf;uqsadfljkbjghawqsdlfkjashiudvlaks;idoujdmajskcjzv.asj,dkhcjbsdlkarehjrhuwlasjdfhkvaskdjvhaselkfhjhquwdsaklvjahsdflkajsbhdjufj beldsi[vahslkd;lidojsalkcjhivjuiaLKDFJHUsdijfuhjasD;LJFHJasldfj
And some name calling and people being dramatic.
NFTs are seen as negative beyond just games. They have an uphill climb if they want to do this. Maybe they should just figure out a different way to present the idea that gamers are able to sell their digital items to each other. Doesn't that already exist somehow? Why do they need NFTs to do this?
Quite amazing how Ubisoft is doubling down on NFTs and doing so while shutting down Hyperscape.
@DTFaux The pandemic isn't the sole reason for gaming's boom, I hope you can see that! If you want to find hard numbers on how much DRM is saving companies, google search "DRM cost gaming." Denuvo, for example, costs $140,000 for 12 months and $2,000 for each additional month of protection after that first year. If a game sells millions, that's a very low cost to a high budget game.
Steam DRM costs $100 flat feet to publish a game, and they keep 30% of the games sales for using their platform. So you can use those numbers to get some estimates of how much a company is gaining or losing in the long run based on the impact their games have on the market. There are other costs involved, of course, such as marketing, paying their programmers, artists, composers, and other team members. But as far as DRM goes, the cost varies from platform to platform.
I can't seem to find the cost that Nintendo charges for their DRM. It's possible that they negotiate it per developer. I would imagine they want larger cuts from larger developers.
@Shambo Ruddy hilarious and on the nose. 👍
@BloodNinja I know the pandemic isnt the sole reason, but my point was that the data you shared wasnt enough to go off of.
How much Denuvo and Steam charge does give some perspective on how much companies are willing to pay, but how much they're saving against piracy per their investment eventually becomes nebulous the further you get away from the investment cost.
And a counterargument to this is that GOG sells games ranging from AAA to indie (games you can also find on Steam), and their entire gimmick is being DRM-free.
Wow, so lost. This makes me want to actively avoid buying Ubisoft games as long as this person has any position of power. I think he doesn't understand how dumb the masses are for buying NFTs of jpgs, etc, especially for investment or for the purpose reselling.
@Entrr_username I'm sure they'll blame the gamers for not understanding how good hyperscape is, too.🤣
@DTFaux How much a company is saving or losing...you're gonna have to look at individual games sales, calculate how much they spent on DRM, and go to a piracy website and see how many times that title was downloaded to see the losses. Then do some quick math and you'll get your answer. The easy answer is, did the company profit? If the answer is yes, don't worry about the small stuff.
GOG's choice not to use DRM is a bad argument, because it doesn't prove anything specific to DRM:
GOG - estimated 92 million in revenue last year.
Steam - estimated 600 million in revenue last year.
If you're looking for a specific answer, GOOGLE IT instead of asking me for everything, because I'm only going to be able to quote numbers from my own google searches anyway LOL
@victordamazio TBH, Expansion packs are generally okay, some are great. Most of them feels like "ethical" DLC.
@westman98
I can't remember how to upload images here...
@Imerion Exactly. They act like they're doing this solely for the gamers' benefit, lol. They're doing it to profit, while convincing gamers it's useful for them (the former is fine, as long as they were honest about it, & don't blame gamers because most want nothing to do with it). If they knew from the beginning that gamers wouldn't benefit at all, does anyone think they wouldn't be claiming the exact things they're claiming here? They have many other ways they could "allow" gamer to benefit, without this...charade, if that were their main concern.
To me, NFTs of images are to the digital content what "One True Voice" were to boy bands. Anyone who wants to dump their money or time into it, have at it; But, don't get salty when others want nothing to do with it. Only time will prove one way or the other, so it's pointless to argue the merit of this at this time. The point is, it's wrong to look down on others because they aren't interested in what you want them to be interested in.
@Spider-Kev you probably have to upload it to a site lile imgur.com, then share a link here.
Team Fortress 2 implemented a player-driven digital economy decades before NFT's became mainstream. NFT's are not a prerequisite to cultivating a digital economy beneficial to gamers. The design of the marketplace itself is the important part.
Blockchain and crypto technology is undeniably the future. But luring gamers into grinding for NFT's that may or may not be desirable across a digital ecosystem is not in any way inherently beneficial.
This is just the latest coat of paint on a universal scheme. Season passes, micro transactions, and everything in between were all different methods with one unifying goal: trick gamers into dedicating all their time and money on one single product. (or on single publisher ecosystem)
@westman98 Except this is about the long term game. Right now the Quartz NTF they released is implemented only in 1 unpopular game and nobody cares, it is entirely a prototype/experiment as a proof of concept. Rest assured once they start adding it to more and more games it will gain traction. But I wouldn't care if it didn't, I don't plan to partake in this.
@BloodNinja I've noticed you generally don't read well and you just skim, this is not only for my own post. No offense, but try harder.
@BloodNinja Just to note: a piracy site wouldn't be the end-all-be-all, because access to APKs, ISOs, Rom, and other files on hand could easily be transferred and distributed via torrents, cloud sites, or just peer to peer (not even considering all the respective sites out there). At best I could get a loose estimate, but... why do I have to crunch numbers if you're the one arguing that DRMs are saving companies and devs from bankruptcy?
And my GOG point is that there's a viable business that can operate and make bank without relying on DRMs. And that devs/publishers have no issue doing business with them despite the lack of DRMs. Your use of revenue numbers doesn't disprove that, and really only makes the case that Steam is -at the very least- the more popular PC platform (like how majority uses Google over Bing, Ask, DuckDuckGo, etc.)
Lastly, if I cared to "do my own research" on loose data that may not even exist, I would've done that by now. But again, I'm not the one making claims that would have to be backed up by numbers. My initial comment to you was about how consumers didn't swoon over DRMs over time, and how it mostly benefits companies; not unlike this NFT gold rush we're seeing now. No one forced you to choose the hill you picked to die on, with all due respect.
Does this guy think anyone believes his bs they want nft's so they can make more money not for the benefit of consumers
I’ve been around the gaming industry a long time, I’ve been a reader of this website for many many many years and this is the first time that I don’t understand something.
I think the Switch is going to be my last gaming device since industry is going in a direction that I can no longer comprehend.
The public gets it. The public doesn't like it.
@Troll_Decimator At least you're up front about being a troll.
@Ulysses I have to ask, and I'm genuinely curious. People say "blockchain and crypto are the future" a lot, but I don't know how. I only see it as another possible tool in someones tool box so to speak, not as an otherwise massive thing. Especially right now as it's only people trying to grind money out of computers.
@DTFaux Nobody's dying on a hill, though. I gave you what you can do to research the question you asked. I'm not gonna waste time on it. I'm trying to bring more balance to the conversation among all the extremists that are just knee-jerking NFT BAD PROFIT BAD. You asked me a specific question about DRM that I admitted I can't answer, but I led you to the way that you can answer it yourself. There's no hill, but if you like to put me on a pedestal I can't stop you.
I calls these microtransaction to make money for them - instead of them doing the work and making physical games for us.
Me: "Marketing ***** don't know what a paradigm shift is."
Very strange... I am pretty certain that bartering, or buying and selling has existed for centuries without the need for blockchains or NFTs
I mean I concede that much of the human species is comprised of people with just average intelligence and these newer technologies may prove a challenge to grasp but at the end of the day the bottom line is that human greed, selfishness and the desire to take advantage of the weak or weak minded is driving much of the madness I have witnessed in my 40+ years of existence. Crypto, blockchains, NFTs, mass purchases of GPU hardware.... makes no difference what the initial purpose was at the inception of these technologies or stock market like behaviours, even if it was purely innocent. Everything is about personal selfish gains more so now than ever.
These companies used to shepherd the sheep(consumers) in order to collect the wool(money) periodically. Now they and others are trying to lead many of us as lambs to slaughter(poverty, homelessness, sickness and actual death)
I guess they figure there are enough dumb humans around constantly reproducing that in the end the thousands that get culled will be replaced by younger just as stupid sheep.
One must be careful about the road we choose to go down, sometimes when we go too far there is no turning back and a reckoning awaits us.
@ModdedInkling GameStop makes sense, but NFT never will in near future.
I know one thing. UBI's game sales with NFT will tank.
It's irrevelevant if NFT is optional or not. Majority refuses to support any game having NFT as an option.
UBI clearly never read about all the flaws and bottlenecks with NFT.
Oh so it was my fault all along for disliking NFTs...thanks for showing me the error of my ways Ubi.
There is NOTHING beneficial about NFTs. F*** block chain and f*** large scale crypto mining. Any NFT can be duplicated, be it a picture or a video. The duplicate copy won't be the original but it can be identical. In my book, NFT stands for 'No F***ing Thanks.' Even Keanu had to laugh at how ridiculous NFTs are: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywixfd63_Uk
@BloodNinja I think you are being overly charitable to these companies if you think they'll use this tech to transfer more ownership and control over more traditional style content to the customer, and not use it almost exclusively in F2P titles, on in game content, to over inflate and stimulate in game economies.
Hell, we have a very well documented history of how these companies implement these kinds of models.
@BloodNinja @inenai since when does NFTs are about being able to sell my digital copies of games. So far everything I have read has been about things within games not the games themselves. Is this intended at all?
The other point I want to bring up is if it’s so great to own my own unique weapons/costumes/gear/whatever in said game let’s say oh I don’t know Black Ops 2 and now today I want to sell those items. Problem is the game is old and the player base is so small will I make a profit from selling them? Will I even make my money back is it really worth it to sell something I bought for 2 quid and get back 50p. At that point will I even bother.
Sorry just not seeing the benefits of this whole thing. But I can see why these companies are trying to convince me that this is all for me. Hahahahaha yeah right.
@BloodNinja
1) Where was talk about selling digital games mentioned? If you think companies are going to just let you make second-hand sales and settle for only taking a cut at the expense of making direct "new" sales, I'd argue that you are daft. It's not like digital platforms couldn't revoke and add ownership of a game to different accounts for you; Steam already has the ability to put games in your inventory as gifts to be sent to others, and they have a marketplace. NFT tech isn't required to make digital resale a possibility, it could be done already. Nor is item resale in-game a new thing. Remember the quickly-defunct real-money auction house that accompanied Diablo 3's (PC) release?
But if I have missed such an announcement, by all means point it out and set me straight, especially as it pertains to this specific quote that was snipped.
2) The issue I'm raising and putting a spotlight on is that the emphasis with buying a car isn't on reselling the care as the primary reason for buying the car. You don't (or at least shouldn't) finance a car on the idea that you're going to sell it back for a particular amount, especially not more than you paid for it.
There is a reason I pointed out the term "economic bubble". I am extrapolating off of patterns of behaviors seen time and time again through human society, including several such instances in rather recent times. Bubbles are a thing we do as humans; we are drawn to them and they bite us every time. The tech might be new, but the behaviors and motivations of the people behind it are no different. A skeezy businessman is a skeezy businessman.
@Richnj We don't, actually. NFTs are a new thing.
The corporate bootlicking in this thread, whew. I could understand a Ubisoft shareholder earnestly hammering some of these talking points, but that’s about it. The benefit to the consumer will be negligible and niche at best, just like all the other exploitative practices publishers have trotted out over the years.
@BloodNinja You literally just need to look back at microtransactions, lootboxes, season passes, pre-order DLC, and online passes.
NFTs being new does not exclude them from being exploited. And we very well know that these companies will twist any and every supplementary monetisation model to be as profitable as possible, even at the cost of consumer experience.
Lets be honest here. If Ubisoft had some grand consumer friendly plan for NFTs it would be shouting it from the rooftops and actually telling you how they will benefit the player. They aren't giving details because the details make them look bad.
@Richnj That's fine. I'm sure they will implement it in a way that's fair for everyone, like the other stuff you mentioned.
@BloodNinja Everything I mentioned has been widely condemned as not being fair. So much so that they dropped online passes and lootboxes have been investigated and talked about governmental regulation, in multiple countries.
@Richnj Yeah, some companies don't do it in a fair way. Doesn't mean you have to be overly negative towards all companies.
@BloodNinja My bad about the late response. I asked the question about how much money is saved against pirates because YOU raised the point that "DRMs are good for everyone, because companies save money against pirates." That's the metaphorical hill in question.
Not to be too hard on you, but the burden of proof was yours to back up your claim, and if you couldn't provide even a reasonable ballpark estimate to those claims, then your point doesn't stand (cuz I'm not doing your homework for you). But this kinda goes into into the crux of all of this:
The devil doesn't need any more advocates regarding NFTs, because tech and crypto bros have been putting the cart before the horse for the past year at least. So many practical examples listed that NFTs can provide are made redundant by preexisting and/or more efficient means, and every flaw/vulnerability raised seems to be hand-waved (like how art-based NFTs were supposed to help artists, but they've only incentivized art theft, while most artists who went in on good faith have seen negligible return on investment).
When so much push for NFTs is based on profit motive, and vested interest for them is exclusively among companies and early investors... consumers who clearly have little to gain while it's being push on us have every right to be wary, if not annoyed. That's hardly an "extremist" position...
@DTFaux The burden of proof is not on me to prove. I’m not a journalist, not involved in games in any way, and I’m certainly not a lawyer where burden of proof actually means something. If you’re too lazy to google the same crap I am then that’s on you. You either want to learn another point of view or you don’t. If you don’t, save your energy and reply to someone else.
Don't you just love the spin a conman will try to make a dollar? Yep, I'm just too dumb to get it so I'll just avoid it even if that means emulation and piracy are the only way to play a good game.
Ponzi scheme, generally.
In games as described? Maybe not entirely useless. Your hot pink and forest green pool noodle mount isn't gonna be worth much when you're done playing that game, though.
Turns out when you scam your playerbase for years on end they eventually catch on to your latest attempts at a cash grab. Knowledge is a corporation's worst nightmare.
So he identifies that people are concerned by the environment impact and then says nothing more about it. Instead decides to patronise everybody. We know exactly what this is pal, and we do not want it.
So it gives loot in games more value? Ubisoft are so far in now they can't even imagine there's people that enjoy games for gameplay and stories etc and not for the endorphin hit from loot
@BloodNinja All the biggest companies benefit from the exploitation of these models. Even if it's just by just being the platform holder that scoops up fees.
A couple of good companies doesn't excuse what the industry as a whole is engagaing in.
So they want to sell us products that are not worth replaying so we can resell them to other players so they can get a cut of that sale so they can keep making money of 'discarded' games.
Or they want to make all loot and extras in games a purchase and the games they sell us are just graphical shells we get the 'privilege' to play.
I cannot think of any scenario how this could benefit players.
If I think I will play a game only once or not till the end, I will wait for sale, the time enjoyed vs the money invested needs to be a good balance.
More and more big companies treat games like a consumer product, which they are to a degree, instead of a work of art a means to expression or just good entertainment.
We are back to the days of the arcade again where games are made to bleed wallets one quarter at the time.
@chiefeagle02 The planet is not fragile.
A unconvenient truth is that earth will manage just fine if we destroy ourselves to extinction.
The eco systems will eventually rebalance themselves and things will go on as if nothing happened.
It's mostly OUR livelyhood that is at stake which is certainly a topic of concern for us as species.
We also as a whole need to take responsibility for the messes we made but we only 'recently' discovered our impact as mankind.
@khululy That's a fair point. I realize my comment was skewing anthropocentric. Thank you for that.
Removed - inappropriate language; user is banned
@victordamazio The idea of crypto was good. But it very quickly became just another pyramid scheme. And that's probably all it will ever be.
@wsz Corporate and government bootlicking has become the new "cool" thing to do for the youth, who somehow believe they're being rebels lol
@Richnj I think you’re over exaggerating. Keep in mind that the players are what keep the industry alive. If all of these things were as bad as you say, people would simply stop buying them. We both know that’s not the case! People are already clamoring to bid on high-priced NFTs, so I’m thinking that they are just another thing for people to enjoy.
But do we not get it?
@victordamazio 10th generation: No games at all- just ideas sold to you for $79.99.
If you ask me we need another industry wide crash. It's gone too far.
Even by Ubisofts standards that is one hell of blissfully ignorant and at the same time stunningly condescending statement to make.
It's also a nonsensical state. Even assuming there is a demand for a resell avenue, it is simply silly to fall back on NFTs for such a usecase. We've had "action house" and the likes for years and years. It's inane to operate a blockchain for the purpose of "trading" virtual gaming goodies.
I don't get why people are talking about this so much. It's like a car dealer talking about factory production line robot technology to the customer. No one should care. The tech might be great, but no one cares. You sell games that are fun and allow people to relax and dream, and if it does that, people buy it. No one cares if you are using a triple-x-gtd-f-me-64-bit-***** to provide your stupid ***** "game". If it works, we'll see what it does.
I personally think their description of selling and buying ***** is the exact opposite of what I want to do with games. I don't care whether I will buy or sell using -NFT or IOU, or any *****. Buying and selling ***** for real absolutely sucks, as in sucks the life out of me. But the tech is interresting, perhaps can be used for something, I don't know. But as a gamer, I DO NOT CARE! As a nerd, perhaps I might, even as a game dev perhaps maybe, but as a gamer I don't want to hear about either a sales pitch for a technology, or people complaining that a certain tech suck, I want silence.
@BloodNinja My dude, I've been learning other points of views, but I'm not obliged to be convinced by them if you don't have solid enough data or estimates to back them up. It'd be one thing if you actually had the numbers/data to prove me wrong... but how are you gonna call me lazy for not wanting to look up information that you can't seem to find yourself??
It's a step in the right direction that you have the humility to acknowledge that you lack the means to produce the data relevant to your argument, but then the next logical step is to admit that maybe your stance isn't as grounded as you once thought. Debates are a two-way street.
Trying to put the onus on me to prove you right, and then try and make me look like the inconsiderate one for not accepting your flawed opinions at face value, is [thematically fitting] a rhetorical smoke bomb.
He's got a point - NFTs could be used as a less efficient, more environmentally damaging, scammy alternative to traditional digital marketplaces.
@DTFaux Good thing we aren't in a debate. We're just talking amongst ourselves on an obscure portion of the interwebs. We both have access to the same information and you can fix your knowledge or not; your choice. Don't take it so seriously my bruh.
@BloodNinja The venue literally doesn't matter. You and I were giving thoughts and opinions on different sides of the same subject. Whatever politically correct definition you want to use, that's a debate, man...
And I'm trying not to be rude about this, but it's wild to me that you keep trying to pin your inability to argue a point you stood by of your own volition on me as if I don't understand where you're coming from (when I very much do, I just don't agree with it), and then tell me not to take it seriously?? I'd have even begrudgingly accepted "Agree to disagree", but you're really gonna be this petty and childish? I don't think that's very Ninja Approved of you...
@DTFaux How is it petty to acknowledge that we both have access to google, and can search for any answers we want? You seem too easily offended about very small things. If all you want to do is debate, there are other, more fitting places for that. There’s a reason debates have moderators, for example. I argued my point well enough; you just didn’t like that I essentially outplayed you. Can we put this to rest? My thumbs are tired, and you’re being awfully difficult. Feel free to reply so you can do the human thing and get the last word in, but don’t expect any more replies from me. Good day.
NFT is the new microtransaction.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...