5 ms·

Why? People want the physical card.

klmadfejno 5y ago
As a kid, nobody had a clue how to play the game properly. But the pokemon tcg video game forced you to play it properly, and was pretty fun. Digital formats have appeal.
- NoOneNew 5y ago
  I was a kid when Pokemon first hit the states. All of us that collected them knew how to play. The game wasn't difficult and it already attracted a nerdy crowd to boot. At that, "house rules" are typically more fun than original. A digital version would stifle that.
- wincy 5y ago
  Me and my friends went to Toys’R’Us every Saturday for the weekly tournament back in the late 90s, we all knew how to play properly.
- whateveracct 5y ago
  But the TCG game let you get any card in the game without paying extra or there being limits to ownership. That's a good digital format, and adding NFTs to it provides no value-add. Probably negative value-add.
  - klmadfejno 5y ago
    I think I agree. The problem with a traditional TCG is that there's a small set of cards. One could imagine a really cool NFT based game with only unique cards, and permadeath rules that cause you to actually lose the card when used or lost or whatever.
Jarwain 5y ago
Maybe treat the NFT as a license of ownership that must be transferred if the card is traded, and let the owner of the NFT reprint the card for a fee in case the card is damaged or otherwise lost
- gspr 5y ago
  What problem does this solve?
  - cle 5y ago
    The card's ownership is public knowledge? Like, if the physical card is stolen or forged, then it's trivial to see that it's illegitimate. (Not an NFT expert, correct me if I'm wrong please.)
    - gspr 5y ago
      How does it do this?
      - cle 5y ago
        I assume by using the private key to sign a message. If the card holder doesn't also hold the NFT, they can't transfer the NFT to the buyer. My understanding is that NFTs are useful when the cost of preventing theft, forgeries, etc. is higher than the cost of protecting a private key. If "ownership" is agreed to require proof of holding the NFT as well, then it's not good enough to steal some cards from Target, you have to also steal the private key for each card, or coerce the owner to transfer the NFTs to you, etc. I guess we could think of it as a kind of two factor auth?
        gspr 5y ago
        You're describing a contract. But specifically done digitally. We've been able to do that since the 70s. What do NFTs add?
        cle 5y ago
        Proof that the person who claims to be current owner, is the person that the previous owner transferred ownership to (I guess more specifically, proof that they hold the private key). And simultaneously, proof that owner n-1 is who owner n-2 transferred ownership to, etc.

As a kid, nobody had a clue how to play the game properly. But the pokemon tcg video game forced you to play it properly, and was pretty fun. Digital formats have appeal.

NoOneNew 5y ago
I was a kid when Pokemon first hit the states. All of us that collected them knew how to play. The game wasn't difficult and it already attracted a nerdy crowd to boot. At that, "house rules" are typically more fun than original. A digital version would stifle that.
wincy 5y ago
Me and my friends went to Toys’R’Us every Saturday for the weekly tournament back in the late 90s, we all knew how to play properly.
whateveracct 5y ago
But the TCG game let you get any card in the game without paying extra or there being limits to ownership. That's a good digital format, and adding NFTs to it provides no value-add. Probably negative value-add.
- klmadfejno 5y ago
  I think I agree. The problem with a traditional TCG is that there's a small set of cards. One could imagine a really cool NFT based game with only unique cards, and permadeath rules that cause you to actually lose the card when used or lost or whatever.

Jarwain 5y ago

Maybe treat the NFT as a license of ownership that must be transferred if the card is traded, and let the owner of the NFT reprint the card for a fee in case the card is damaged or otherwise lost

gspr 5y ago
What problem does this solve?
- cle 5y ago
  The card's ownership is public knowledge? Like, if the physical card is stolen or forged, then it's trivial to see that it's illegitimate. (Not an NFT expert, correct me if I'm wrong please.)
  - gspr 5y ago
    How does it do this?
    - cle 5y ago
      I assume by using the private key to sign a message. If the card holder doesn't also hold the NFT, they can't transfer the NFT to the buyer. My understanding is that NFTs are useful when the cost of preventing theft, forgeries, etc. is higher than the cost of protecting a private key. If "ownership" is agreed to require proof of holding the NFT as well, then it's not good enough to steal some cards from Target, you have to also steal the private key for each card, or coerce the owner to transfer the NFTs to you, etc. I guess we could think of it as a kind of two factor auth?
      - gspr 5y ago
        You're describing a contract. But specifically done digitally. We've been able to do that since the 70s. What do NFTs add?
        cle 5y ago
        Proof that the person who claims to be current owner, is the person that the previous owner transferred ownership to (I guess more specifically, proof that they hold the private key). And simultaneously, proof that owner n-1 is who owner n-2 transferred ownership to, etc.