4 ms·
Well, the decentralization of it would promote interoperability between game vendors and protect the consumer from vendor lock-in. If game company A goes out o
by cyberge99 5y ago
Well, the decentralization of it would promote interoperability between game vendors and protect the consumer from vendor lock-in.
If game company A goes out of business, they won’t take your digital asset with them.
Additionally, a skin (for this example), could also be rendered decades from now in a retro-style game arcade within the metaverse. The permanence of the blockchain will probably outlive most access keys to it.
A father could pass down his private keys and digital assets to his child as his legacy.
It’s a brave new metaworld.
- potatolicious 5y ago> Additionally, a skin (for this example), could also be rendered decades from now in a retro-style game arcade within the metaverse. The permanence of the blockchain will probably outlive most access keys to it. But this isn't how any blockchain is currently implemented. With NFTs the underlying asset is not actually stored on the blockchain - URLs are, and the URLs are just as prone to being dead as the companies that own them. I can see maybe a point with decentralization being a guard against bitrot, but that isn't how it works? Hell, there are already NFTs with dead URL pointers, so they are now nothing more than certificates of authenticity to content that is unviewable. The hypothetical retro skin will die when the company that issued it goes out of business - all the blockchain will give you is a permanent faint outline of the content where it used to be, it doesn't preserve the content itself.
- plokiju 5y agoThe content itself can be preserved by putting it on chain, in IPFS, or in some other future persistent content storage system. There are a lot of junk NFTs now, but it doesn’t have to be that way
- astlouis44 5y agoExactly, and the delivery model for this will likely be HTML5 via the web.