5 ms·

I really don't understand the use case of NFTs for in game assets. How is using a block chain to trade assets an improvement over the in game marketplaces we al

I really don't understand the use case of NFTs for in game assets. How is using a block chain to trade assets an improvement over the in game marketplaces we already have for games like TF2, DotA2, etc?

duskwuff 5y ago
The usual answer is that representing those assets as NFTs will somehow make them portable to other games. This is, of course, a pipe dream. First of all, there's no business reason for any game to implement this feature -- they'd be undercutting their own sales of cosmetic items by honoring sales of items by their competitors. Second, actually porting assets between games is nontrivial; even if two games are built on the same engine, there are significant barriers to transferring assets between them (like differences in physical scale, art style, or game mechanics).
- kobasa 5y ago
  It's a growth/marketing tool for new games to leech specific types of people from other games. You can target a very specific demographic of people (say whales, or hardcore grinders) and reward only those people.
conanbatt 5y ago
That you can have cross-game assets and universes between different games and developers. Your special Dota skin works as a skin World of warcraft (?) or it might work in ancillary services around the game: could be used as a feature unlock or even log-in for services around the core game. It can setup a marketplace of unique items without the game founders having to create anything at all, or users recurring to unsafe selling and buying mechanisms. Game applications are definitely interesting to explore and experiment with.
- zkldi 5y ago
  This idea doesn't work at all. For your dota skin to work in world of warcraft, the developers of WoW would have to acknowledge that 0x1fab... corresponds with $ITEM in $GAME and then spend the time actually implementing that item in the game. Since that would take an inordinate amount of effort for *absolutely no benefit for WoW or Dota*, this would only ever feasibly be used *between games made by the same company*, which at that point they would just use a centralised database for obvious reasons. The Movable-Game-Assets thing has been done before on a huge scale by the biggest gaming company in the world, with nintendo's Amiibos. Look at how they turned out! Barely any games on the switch actually support the full set of amiibos, and those that do don't give much. Amiibos already implement the exact thing you're talking about without any blockchain at all.
  - conanbatt 5y ago
    > This idea doesn't work at all. For your dota skin to work in world of warcraft, the developers of WoW would have to acknowledge that 0x1fab... corresponds with $ITEM in $GAME and then spend the time actually implementing that item in the game. Yes? Why wouldn't that work? Since that would take an inordinate amount of effort for absolutely no benefit for WoW or Dota, this would only ever feasibly be used between games made by the same company, which at that point they would just use a centralised database for obvious reasons. > The Movable-Game-Assets thing has been done before on a huge scale by the biggest gaming company in the world, with nintendo's Amiibos. Look at how they turned out! Barely any games on the switch actually support the full set of amiibos, and those that do don't give much. Amiibos already implement the exact thing you're talking about without any blockchain at all. Nintendo is a super closed system. But also there is a difference in kind: games that implement API for cross-game assets will get users, players and payers, by implementing an entry way to an already existing community. The future is uncertain, but if you are not curious about this i don't know what to tell you.
    - zkldi 5y ago
      > Yes? Why wouldn't that work? Because videogames are different? There's absolutely no logic connecting items in one game to another in almost all cases. As such, the set of items the developers would actually want to implement (ever) would be only those that make sense inside their game, and they'd have to reimplement the models and statistics. Even more so, the effort necessary to implement new items in any game means that they'll only ever bother with the most expensive items (that also happen to make sense within their world), which restricts the set of items *massively*. Oh, and the developers get absolutely nothing back for doing this except a PR disaster. Furthermore, it's entirely centralised anyway. You have to trust the game client to interpret 0x1fabc3... as $ITEM when the game client could completely lie and change what item that corresponds to, or how useful it was. This is quite literally just an expensive API call. NFTs serve literally no purpose here. There's no decentralisation, there's no reason why items in videogames should ever be cross-compatible anyway (It's literally like asking why you can't write C# and Haskell in the same file and just have it work).
dqpb 5y ago
I imagine the first usecase will simply be indie developers wanting to provide a marketplace experience without building their own marketplace.
- Ekaros 5y ago
  That is actually first somewhat reasonable implementation I have heard. Still, traditional SaaS in this field might be better option. Not that I think it is big enough market for anyone to enter considering all the involvements in financial side and potential legal implications.

duskwuff 5y ago

The usual answer is that representing those assets as NFTs will somehow make them portable to other games. This is, of course, a pipe dream. First of all, there's no business reason for any game to implement this feature -- they'd be undercutting their own sales of cosmetic items by honoring sales of items by their competitors. Second, actually porting assets between games is nontrivial; even if two games are built on the same engine, there are significant barriers to transferring assets between them (like differences in physical scale, art style, or game mechanics).

kobasa 5y ago
It's a growth/marketing tool for new games to leech specific types of people from other games. You can target a very specific demographic of people (say whales, or hardcore grinders) and reward only those people.

conanbatt 5y ago

That you can have cross-game assets and universes between different games and developers. Your special Dota skin works as a skin World of warcraft (?) or it might work in ancillary services around the game: could be used as a feature unlock or even log-in for services around the core game. It can setup a marketplace of unique items without the game founders having to create anything at all, or users recurring to unsafe selling and buying mechanisms. Game applications are definitely interesting to explore and experiment with.

zkldi 5y ago
This idea doesn't work at all. For your dota skin to work in world of warcraft, the developers of WoW would have to acknowledge that 0x1fab... corresponds with $ITEM in $GAME and then spend the time actually implementing that item in the game. Since that would take an inordinate amount of effort for *absolutely no benefit for WoW or Dota*, this would only ever feasibly be used *between games made by the same company*, which at that point they would just use a centralised database for obvious reasons. The Movable-Game-Assets thing has been done before on a huge scale by the biggest gaming company in the world, with nintendo's Amiibos. Look at how they turned out! Barely any games on the switch actually support the full set of amiibos, and those that do don't give much. Amiibos already implement the exact thing you're talking about without any blockchain at all.
- conanbatt 5y ago
  > This idea doesn't work at all. For your dota skin to work in world of warcraft, the developers of WoW would have to acknowledge that 0x1fab... corresponds with $ITEM in $GAME and then spend the time actually implementing that item in the game. Yes? Why wouldn't that work? Since that would take an inordinate amount of effort for absolutely no benefit for WoW or Dota, this would only ever feasibly be used between games made by the same company, which at that point they would just use a centralised database for obvious reasons. > The Movable-Game-Assets thing has been done before on a huge scale by the biggest gaming company in the world, with nintendo's Amiibos. Look at how they turned out! Barely any games on the switch actually support the full set of amiibos, and those that do don't give much. Amiibos already implement the exact thing you're talking about without any blockchain at all. Nintendo is a super closed system. But also there is a difference in kind: games that implement API for cross-game assets will get users, players and payers, by implementing an entry way to an already existing community. The future is uncertain, but if you are not curious about this i don't know what to tell you.
  - zkldi 5y ago
    > Yes? Why wouldn't that work? Because videogames are different? There's absolutely no logic connecting items in one game to another in almost all cases. As such, the set of items the developers would actually want to implement (ever) would be only those that make sense inside their game, and they'd have to reimplement the models and statistics. Even more so, the effort necessary to implement new items in any game means that they'll only ever bother with the most expensive items (that also happen to make sense within their world), which restricts the set of items *massively*. Oh, and the developers get absolutely nothing back for doing this except a PR disaster. Furthermore, it's entirely centralised anyway. You have to trust the game client to interpret 0x1fabc3... as $ITEM when the game client could completely lie and change what item that corresponds to, or how useful it was. This is quite literally just an expensive API call. NFTs serve literally no purpose here. There's no decentralisation, there's no reason why items in videogames should ever be cross-compatible anyway (It's literally like asking why you can't write C# and Haskell in the same file and just have it work).

dqpb 5y ago

I imagine the first usecase will simply be indie developers wanting to provide a marketplace experience without building their own marketplace.

Ekaros 5y ago
That is actually first somewhat reasonable implementation I have heard. Still, traditional SaaS in this field might be better option. Not that I think it is big enough market for anyone to enter considering all the involvements in financial side and potential legal implications.