|
CaptainSarcastic posted:Yeah, I was going to say the "$30k return" was meaningless unless the friend literally was able to deposit $30k in the bank. Has he at least sold it, or is he looking at other NFTs being «sold» for X dollars, thinking «that could be me soon»
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 13:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 02:44 |
|
|
jokes posted:People make money selling bridges doesn’t mean bridge selling is a cool thing to do Or the way I put it: You can win the lottery, but that doesn't mean buying a lottery ticket was a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 13:59
|
|
|
The weirdest thing I keep hearing about gaming NFTs is how it will lead to some kind of transcendent reality where you can buy unique skins and items and such and have them exist and be useable across multiple games. No one ever explains how this would actually work, either technically or practically. Like, say you bought a unique gun in Ghost Recon using Ubisoft bux or whatever-the-gently caress they're doing. How is that going to work in Assassin's Creed, much less another company's product like Halo or something else where it straight up doesn't fit the aesthetic (or make no sense at all)? What "stats" get ported over? Who decides on the stats from one game to the next, assuming it even fits with the whole ethos of the two games. Also, who has a stake in these assets? The companies pushing these things aren't going to be doing anything with them unless they get a cut. If they're having to host the models, skins, sounds, etc for a given NFT, what do they get out of it post-purchase? Are they looking to just take a cut of the upfront NFT purchase for indefinite hosting and facilitation services? None of these challenges are solved or even mentioned. I know that the value of these things are predicated on the belief that they will have utility that transcends a given game (or particular gaming company) but at no point does anyone explain how they expect these companies to work together, or how these transcendent "things" will automagically become portable between games, etc. It honestly feels to me like one of those fantasies you have as a kid.. "wouldn't it be amazing if X" except where there are apparently intelligent people who think that just articulating the fantasy makes it real. Durzel fucked around with this message at 14:23 on Dec 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 14:19
|
|
|
In the metaverse there will only be one game really: your new real life.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 14:41
|
|
|
The most workable example is custom VR avatars, where the mechanics behind full body tracking means that there's a certain amount of standardisation between games currently, and content creation is massively driven by the community, so it's usually pretty easy to just hand over the avatar and a small fee and someone will happily do the work for you, assuming the model doesn't already come in the correct formats for different games. Even in this relatively ideal scenario there is still work to be done behind the scenes to move avatars from one game to another, and the difference is entirely cosmetic. Also, once VR gets bigger budgets and higher specced machines powering it and can't rely on the same mildly janky home-spun look then avatars are going to start looking really out of place in different games, so the entire concept is already doomed by its own future success.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 14:45
|
|
|
You should focus on why the concept is dumb: why do I need digital property in a medium of infinite possibilities And less on the insurmountable task of building a parser that reads a JSON filled with [red,speckled,camo,farty] and assigns an avatar an appropriate texture and soundtrack.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 14:52
|
|
|
Doctor_Fruitbat posted:The most workable example is custom VR avatars, where the mechanics behind full body tracking means that there's a certain amount of standardisation between games currently, and content creation is massively driven by the community, so it's usually pretty easy to just hand over the avatar and a small fee and someone will happily do the work for you, assuming the model doesn't already come in the correct formats for different games. also, you can already buy VR avatars on online stores and use them in any games that support the file format, no NFTs necessary
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 14:55
|
|
|
Nintendo Mii avatars were NFTs before NFTs were a thing
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 14:57
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:also, you can already buy VR avatars on online stores and use them in any games that support the file format, no NFTs necessary
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 14:58
|
|
|
ymgve posted:Nintendo Mii avatars were NFTs before NFTs were a thing And notably a centralized product. Imagine having multiple competing kinds of Mii's. I guess technically we had that when Xbox and Playstation tried their Mii knockoffs. And obviously it worked really well for them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 15:10
|
|
|
zedprime posted:How do you guarantee only 1% of avatars fart uncontrollably at random intervals if everyone can buy a farty avatar? Not letting everyone who is willing to pay for a farty av buy a farty av, and creating a secondary market for farty avs where people buy used farty avs instead of buying them from you seems like pretty bad business for video game companies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 15:11
|
|
|
Durzel posted:The weirdest thing I keep hearing about gaming NFTs is how it will lead to some kind of transcendent reality where you can buy unique skins and items and such and have them exist and be useable across multiple games. The code you get at the end of Golden Sun is an NFT
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 15:14
|
|
|
loving crypto ads have started playing on the radio in Australia. Company called "Swift" something or other. Which directly led to me at a family gathering tonight having to explain bitcoin to a great uncle who's pushing 90, but worked as an accountant 50 years. I got about two minutes into trying to explain it before he goes "So it's a pyramid scheme, but on computers?" I mean, yeah, got it one mate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 15:30
|
|
|
I don't think people are turning against NFTs, I think that as larger institutions are pushing NFTs more people have become aware of them. They ask, "What an NFT?" and even the most favorable descriptions from cryptobros makes them go, "Well that's loving stupid and awful. Why would anyone want that?" And that's without actually understanding all of the myriad ways that NFTs are lovely, most of those people just think of it as buying Internet pictures.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 15:38
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:I don't think people are turning against NFTs, I think that as larger institutions are pushing NFTs more people have become aware of them. They ask, "What an NFT?" and even the most favorable descriptions from cryptobros makes them go, "Well that's loving stupid and awful. Why would anyone want that?" And that's without actually understanding all of the myriad ways that NFTs are lovely, most of those people just think of it as buying Internet pictures. The leyperson understanding on an NFT has crystalized as "paying for a jpeg" which everyone who's ever used the internet in any way knows is stupid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 15:51
|
|
|
There was a tweet that went 'What if you could buy a football, and then take its stats into baseball... that's how stupid these video game NFT posts sound if you actually know anything about them' Funny thing is that the closest thing to that concept I thought of is Amiibos. And those are still any use because they're made and supported by one company that has an interest in rewarding fan loyalty, and they also serve a secondary function as nice figurines of characters, some of which have very little if any other merchandise available of them. But it comes down to how the whole 'decentralised' buzzword doesn't stand up to a moment's scrutiny unless you've drunk the libertarian kool-aid when you bring actual proven products into the mix. There's a reason that the venn diagram of bitcoiners is the intersection of people who know nothing about computers, maths AND finance, because even rudimentary knowledge of how any of those work in practice will instantly reveal the fundamental problems with crypto-whatever doing literally anything it claims to be able to do. It's the same thing with Star Citizens and their increasingly absurd dreams in the style of 8 year olds on the playground, and has been mentioned that a lot of them- including Chris Roberts himself- obviously haven't actually played a game since 1999, and have no concept of the real practicalities of how a game works and what they can or should do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 16:02
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 16:09
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SageCoffey/status/1471634009860067328
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 16:17
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:There was a tweet that went 'What if you could buy a football, and then take its stats into baseball... that's how stupid these video game NFT posts sound if you actually know anything about them' I think the crypto dream is that their NFTs will be so valuable that companies will practically be forced to do the legwork to incorporate some kind of compatibility for NFTs (even if it's just blockchain-verified cosmetic decals or something) in order to curry favor with the elite NFT-havers of the world.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 16:19
|
|
|
If every individual use of an NFT has a very low value, like .000001 cents, but it lives forever in the blockchain, its pretty easy to see that it has infinite value. If you hate math that's fine, but don't drag the rest of us down with you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 16:23
|
|
|
the holy poopacy posted:I think the crypto dream is that their NFTs will be so valuable that companies will practically be forced to do the legwork to incorporate some kind of compatibility for NFTs (even if it's just blockchain-verified cosmetic decals or something) in order to curry favor with the elite NFT-havers of the world.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 17:06
|
|
|
It's just the same delusion over and over; they want to be the dukes in the new feudal society they believe is around the corner and because of right of being the first sucker to hold the bag they are obviously best qualified to rule the serfs. A new altcoin, whatever stupid blockchain company that announced plans to wedge it into some nonsensical place, now NFTs. And when being an early adopter only means discovering that they're the loser at the poker table of grifts, they move on lamenting that the world can't see their brilliance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 17:11
|
|
|
zedprime posted:Yeah, the fantasy scenario here is like Star Citizen created spaceship NFTs so good, they reap the mint and initial sale, and then sell rights and documentation on the NFT to every other lame game that wants to ride the coat tails of the massively successful ubiquitous spaceship NFT so that you can fly your whale ship in your Candy Crush. It's so ubiquitous new games would never dream not letting you use your spaceship in it and the originator can still claim residuals on licensing or API support. I think the delusion is that people seem to think that NFTs are some kind of previously undiscovered panacea for integration between games and the companies that make them, that solve any and all problems that these integrations would encounter - technical, political, financial, etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 17:19
|
|
|
At best the closest thing to what they're on about is Amazon or Facebook, where unlikely success stories from a morass of tech bubble idiocy turn into horrible juggernauts that dominate the market and that everyone has to deal with and integrate in some form or another. Naturally, completely ignoring all the reasons why Amazon and Facebook actually took off, and why their 'Why would anyone want that?' critics ended up being wrong.Durzel posted:I think the delusion is that people seem to think that NFTs are some kind of previously undiscovered panacea for integration between games and the companies that make them, that solve any and all problems that these integrations would encounter - technical, political, financial, etc. It's pretty much like quack medicine, sovereign citizen, pseudoscience, but for tech. They can't just believe it's a viable and functional alternative, but that it's a miraculous new paradigm being held down by THE MAN and the foolish nonbelievers which is capable of unimaginable things that will solve all their problems and make them rich and successful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 17:30
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:It's pretty much like quack medicine, sovereign citizen, pseudoscience, but for tech. They can't just believe it's a viable and functional alternative, but that it's a miraculous new paradigm being held down by THE MAN and the foolish nonbelievers which is capable of unimaginable things that will solve all their problems and make them rich and successful. Case in point being the two (of three) Cryptocurrency articles currently on the front page of Libertarian news website Reason. Governments Want To Control Crypto So They Can Control Us quote:You know who thinks that cryptocurrencies are the future? Central banks, that's who, and they're jumping on board the crypto bandwagon. But that doesn't mean you should anticipate the folks at the Federal Reserve stepping aside to make way for Bitcoin adoption—far from it. Instead, central bankers want to displace grassroots cryptocurrencies with central bank digital currencies (CBDC) of their own design that absolutely will not protect privacy, and that will let governments control private transactions. Bitcoin: 'A Weapon for Us To Fight Oppression' quote:Senegalese app developer Fodé Diop sees bitcoin as a way to end "monetary colonialism" in the developing world.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 17:34
|
|
|
Durzel posted:This seems to require gaming companies, or indeed companies in general, to collaborate in possibly unequitable ways, when they could just as easily not do that and do their own thing and have 100% of the revenue from their captive audience. I think the unspoken idea is that NFTs will be so popular among gamers that gaming companies will want to implement support for players' existing NFT treasure troves to draw in that massive NFT audience, with things quickly growing to the point where NFT support is required for anyone to want to play the game at all. It's similar to how Bitcoiners would go tell businesses that if they started accepting Bitcoin, they'd get a massive surge of new customers from the Bitcoin community, and that would spark a massive wave of interest among the business world as companies everywhere scrambled to get Bitcoin payment systems up to compete for that incredibly valuable Bitcoin customer base. Of course, in reality, the customer bump would be small and only last about a week before returning to normal levels. NFTs seem better at attracting money than Bitcoin was, but actively drive away players, soooooo
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 17:36
|
|
|
How does crypto protect privacy when you can figure out where every single coin goes?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 17:38
|
|
|
Durzel posted:The weirdest thing I keep hearing about gaming NFTs is how it will lead to some kind of transcendent reality where you can buy unique skins and items and such and have them exist and be useable across multiple games. Much like all “good” uses of NFT, this stuff can be done and has already been done without NFTs. Own this other game, hey you got a bonus! We detected save data from Other Game, importing Item! Every time a “wouldn’t it be awesome if…” thing is mentioned for NFTs, it’s always always ALWAYS something that already exists except less lovely.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 17:43
|
|
|
Zil posted:How does crypto protect privacy when you can figure out where every single coin goes? Because when someone steals money from a wallet they don't know it's YOUR wallet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 17:46
|
|
|
kw0134 posted:It's just the same delusion over and over; they want to be the dukes in the new feudal society they believe is around the corner and because of right of being the first sucker to hold the bag they are obviously best qualified to rule the serfs. A new altcoin, whatever stupid blockchain company that announced plans to wedge it into some nonsensical place, now NFTs. And when being an early adopter only means discovering that they're the loser at the poker table of grifts, they move on lamenting that the world can't see their brilliance. NFTs in particular have that real sovereign citizen vibe where the guys pushing them have intuited that the rules propping up the existing power structure are a lot of arbitrary nonsense, so clearly if you learn to spout your own countervailing nonsense the actually powerful will be helpless to stop you taking over Zil posted:How does crypto protect privacy when you can figure out where every single coin goes? The transactions are public but the accounts are anonymized, so without access to either account all the FBI knows is someone paid someone $10,000 in BTC at 11:55 on Monday
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 18:05
|
|
|
Pseudonymized. They know wallet 17493651848 paid wallet 875714728 a particular amount on a particular date and that record is public and immutable. So once they know who owns 17493651848 they have the whole history.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 18:07
|
|
|
Its refreshing to see Gamer Opinion on NFTs shifting so hard into the negative. It makes sense, given that gaming NFTs are just Team Fortress 2 hats, but with more artificial scarcity.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 18:07
|
|
|
Fish Appreciator posted:Its refreshing to see Gamer Opinion on NFTs shifting so hard into the negative. It makes sense, given that gaming NFTs are just Team Fortress 2 hats, but with more artificial scarcity. Especially any type of land "ownership" is a recipe for disaster. The only time it kind of works is when it's a region that can shift hands rapidly through gameplay that anyone can participate in equally without finances coming into it. Khorne fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Dec 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 18:18
|
|
|
If my options are stuck between buying an overpriced microtransaction skin for $10 or having to buy NFTs in a game because ~oooo digital ownership~, I'll just spend the fuckin' $10 on a knife and gut myself, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 18:29
|
|
|
Yeah players naturally hate gated content. Content that is gated behind regular microtransactions is bad enough, but "unique to you" skins touted as speculative investments feels even more egregious. Whilst I think gamers entitlement and irrationality when it comes to gated stuff is hardly healthy in its own right (I know people have been losing their mind that Halo Infinite has ~$1500 of skins you can only get with real money), when it comes to NFTs which intuitively feel like the companies involved twisting the knife even more I have every sympathy. I am not in the least bit surprised that Ubisoft and Peter Molyneux are two early horses out of the gate with this crud. That ought to speak volumes about who NFTs stand to benefit most. I basically want to punch each and every person in any meeting who talks about "digital scarcity" and artificially finite digital assets, because there is nothing about them whatsoever that is in any way consumer-friendly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 18:33
|
|
|
Durzel posted:I basically want to punch each and every person in any meeting who talks about "digital scarcity" and artificially finite digital assets, because there is nothing about them whatsoever that is in any way consumer-friendly. NFT games seem to want to take the worst lessons from things like trading in ARPGS/MMOs, any type of land ownership, card games, and any type of cosmetic and mash them into the worst possible system that completely undermines gameplay. The dumbest part is it's redundant - steam has achievements, an inventory, and a market that has already been used for this exact stuff in the past. Designers have already moved past it for the most part, but there's this sudden resurgence due to the ridiculous number of people drinking the kool-aid and thinking they're on top of emerging market trends. Khorne fucked around with this message at 18:58 on Dec 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 18:52
|
|
|
TontoCorazon posted:There was that nambla episode What’s libertarian about the North American Marlon Brando Look-Alice’s club? Oh… That nambla. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 18:53
|
|
|
NFT proponents just don't understand the desires of gamers in general. Seen the old adage that gamers want real ownership of their virtual items in games. No, they don't. This isn't something that gamers actually ask for outside of people flipping TF2 hats. Most gamers want microtransactions, RMT, loot boxes, etc. to go away. We want games to go back to being something you just bought and played, and maybe got an expansion pack once in a while, but that you didn't have to pay rent for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 19:07
|
|
|
The only argument I've seen in favor of NFTs in games has been some hand-wavy poo poo like "NFTs are changing the landscape for gaming and beyond. Businesses and those who don't understand the tech will ultimately come around to being educated and understanding their concerns will misguided." That's an actual quote from one of the people replying to the STALKER 2 announcement. NFT bros are always happy to thump their chests about NFTs, but when it comes to explanations of what the actual benefit is, they're nowhere to be found - just a nice "gently caress you, good luck being stuck in the past, loser."
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 19:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 02:44 |
|
|
They’re literally just people who want Ready Player One to be real. That’s it. That’s all they are.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 19:34
|
|
