4 ms·

I don't think the underlying game is fun or interesting and the blockchain shtick is the only thing it's got going for it which imho is a detractive quality. I

I don't think the underlying game is fun or interesting and the blockchain shtick is the only thing it's got going for it which imho is a detractive quality. I think its only merit is that it sated the author's interests.

detritus 4y ago
Mm, quite - I can't help but feel that most Blockchain-based-Thing announcements are little more than exercises in domain-specific omphaloskepsis.
- natpalmer1776 4y ago
  I don't know if it is intentional, but your use of omphaloskepsis seems to be an ironic form of omphaloskepsis in its' own right.
  - detritus 4y ago
    That's very sweet of you, but no, it's just a damn good word.
    - cinntaile 4y ago
      I don't know, we call it navel-gazing in English?
      - detritus 4y ago
        Ah yes, English – that famously-consistent and unbaggaged language with just one word, entirely native, per concept. Rot and cobblers for excessive prose!
    - misnome 4y ago
      Thank you for gifting me a new word today!
Adraghast 4y ago
"See, look! An application for blockchain! I told you it's not just for speculative assets!"
- black_puppydog 4y ago
  "And by the way, you can buy this house-tile contract as an NFT!"
im3w1l 4y ago
I get what you are saying, but I see it from a more positive perspective. I wouldn't play it, but it's a really cool tech demo and proof of concept. I was amazed that it managed to run as smooth as it did, with every action corresponding to a blockchain transaction. And how easy it was to create new tokens, and contracts for automatically exchanging them. So I did enjoy the video and learned new things. And it made me think that making an interesting on-chain game is actually possible, even if this was not it.
- hresvelgr 4y ago
  > And it made me think that making an interesting on-chain game is actually possible, even if this was not it. Sure, it's possible. But I would add that any on-chain game would be equally good, if not better by not being on the chain. I dare anyone to show me a game that is only good by existing on the blockchain. I'll wait.

detritus 4y ago

Mm, quite - I can't help but feel that most Blockchain-based-Thing announcements are little more than exercises in domain-specific omphaloskepsis.

natpalmer1776 4y ago
I don't know if it is intentional, but your use of omphaloskepsis seems to be an ironic form of omphaloskepsis in its' own right.
- detritus 4y ago
  That's very sweet of you, but no, it's just a damn good word.
  - cinntaile 4y ago
    I don't know, we call it navel-gazing in English?
    - detritus 4y ago
      Ah yes, English – that famously-consistent and unbaggaged language with just one word, entirely native, per concept. Rot and cobblers for excessive prose!
  - misnome 4y ago
    Thank you for gifting me a new word today!

Adraghast 4y ago

"See, look! An application for blockchain! I told you it's not just for speculative assets!"

black_puppydog 4y ago
"And by the way, you can buy this house-tile contract as an NFT!"

im3w1l 4y ago

I get what you are saying, but I see it from a more positive perspective. I wouldn't play it, but it's a really cool tech demo and proof of concept. I was amazed that it managed to run as smooth as it did, with every action corresponding to a blockchain transaction. And how easy it was to create new tokens, and contracts for automatically exchanging them. So I did enjoy the video and learned new things. And it made me think that making an interesting on-chain game is actually possible, even if this was not it.

hresvelgr 4y ago
> And it made me think that making an interesting on-chain game is actually possible, even if this was not it. Sure, it's possible. But I would add that any on-chain game would be equally good, if not better by not being on the chain. I dare anyone to show me a game that is only good by existing on the blockchain. I'll wait.