3 ms·

It doesn't need to be a massive, world changing, triple A game to be good. Maybe it'd be very small and niche, but there are plenty of great games like that. A

It doesn't need to be a massive, world changing, triple A game to be good. Maybe it'd be very small and niche, but there are plenty of great games like that. All I'm saying is, I think theres the possibility that the blockchain could be used in interesting ways within game dev. Maybe it'd take the form of cryptocurrency or smart contracts, thats not what I was thinking of but again, used in new and clever ways Im sure theres gold in there. Perhaps it'd be entirely on the backend, the player wouldnt even know its on the blockchain. I'm not sure, but as with any new technology its interesting to think about at least. Either way, it comes back to what I was saying before, the game has to come first. No game will be made good by sticking it on the blockchain, and as with the issues you mention it has to be properly factored into its design. I do get where your coming from though, the blockchain and crypto and all those do have certain associates with them

agentultra 4y ago
Arguably Axie is pretty niche. And so are the other blockchain games out there. The thing they have in common is that they're all equally terrible. It's not because everyone tried to make a terrible game but because the blockchain is terribly limiting and the audience of people its for are not even interested in games to begin with. Part of the reason they're all kind-of samey is that you can only put so much metadata into the hash of a receipt on the chain. In Axie and similar games and NFTs this metadata is used to encode things about the game object and is supposed to make them unique, etc. You end up with character designs that look like poorly implemented procedural oat-meal: one character is not that much different from the theoretically-infinite others. So it's a pretty limited canvas to play with. The other reason is that the people who care about these features that blockchain-games enable don't play games. These features are designed for people who like to gamble: expensive digital assets that they expect will accrue in value. So they play the game by hiring people for peanuts to play the game for them, generating more game characters, in the hope that some of them will be "rare" and worth something that they can sell. This gets back to my original point: no gamers are complaining about a lack of a marketplace where they can buy and sell game assets. There's no pain point there for a gamer. They expect: give money, get game, play game. They get that and they're happy. When there's no pain point, there's no business. So maybe someone will use a hashed linked list in their game engine for some purpose or another, who knows. But I don't see any gamedevs chomping at the bit to make blockchain games. The few that are, like potentially Square-Enix, are probably only in the space because some execs are holding crypto and need a way to get more people buying into crypto. But most gamers? They've rejected micro-transactions already. Games that still have an audience that have micro-transactions relegate them to a side-store where they only sell cosmetic in-game items. Most people can tolerate that. Gatcha games and loot box games are still pretty controversial. And plenty of gamers are hugely put off by any sort of pay-to-win. I have no doubt some studios will try stuff on the blockchain but I'm certain that once their real-world dollars disappear into a black hole those execs will get replaced and the studios that survive will move on.
- bodge5000 4y ago
  > no gamers are complaining about a lack of a marketplace where they can buy and sell game assets I agree, but I'm working off the assumption that buying and selling assets perhaps isn't the only way to make use of the blockchain, or perhaps even crypto in some weird fashion. > But I don't see any gamedevs chomping at the bit to make blockchain games I've been doing gamedev for, give or take, 10 years. Not professionally mind you, its just a hobby. And you're right, I'm not rushing to make a blockchain game, but I do think theres the possibility of doing some interesting things with it. Maybe as a game jam or something, but either way it'd be in the same way that I'm interested in any other new technology, just like you'd be excited for a new language or whatever.
  - agentultra 4y ago
    Presently there's no way to make a game on a smart contract chain without cryptocurrencies, unfortunately. My take on cryptocurrencies is that they should all be put in the trash bin and burned to the ground. So if you're really into it for some reason I'd suggest just going with a hashed-linked list or Merkle Tree you host privately on a raspberry pi and avoid public chains/smart contracts all together if that's something that interests you.
    - bodge5000 4y ago
      I wouldn't say I'm really into it, to be honest its one of those things that'll probably just sit forever in my someday todo list. I just think there could be something interesting in it. Maybe one day ;)

agentultra 4y ago

Arguably Axie is pretty niche. And so are the other blockchain games out there. The thing they have in common is that they're all equally terrible. It's not because everyone tried to make a terrible game but because the blockchain is terribly limiting and the audience of people its for are not even interested in games to begin with. Part of the reason they're all kind-of samey is that you can only put so much metadata into the hash of a receipt on the chain. In Axie and similar games and NFTs this metadata is used to encode things about the game object and is supposed to make them unique, etc. You end up with character designs that look like poorly implemented procedural oat-meal: one character is not that much different from the theoretically-infinite others. So it's a pretty limited canvas to play with. The other reason is that the people who care about these features that blockchain-games enable don't play games. These features are designed for people who like to gamble: expensive digital assets that they expect will accrue in value. So they play the game by hiring people for peanuts to play the game for them, generating more game characters, in the hope that some of them will be "rare" and worth something that they can sell. This gets back to my original point: no gamers are complaining about a lack of a marketplace where they can buy and sell game assets. There's no pain point there for a gamer. They expect: give money, get game, play game. They get that and they're happy. When there's no pain point, there's no business. So maybe someone will use a hashed linked list in their game engine for some purpose or another, who knows. But I don't see any gamedevs chomping at the bit to make blockchain games. The few that are, like potentially Square-Enix, are probably only in the space because some execs are holding crypto and need a way to get more people buying into crypto. But most gamers? They've rejected micro-transactions already. Games that still have an audience that have micro-transactions relegate them to a side-store where they only sell cosmetic in-game items. Most people can tolerate that. Gatcha games and loot box games are still pretty controversial. And plenty of gamers are hugely put off by any sort of pay-to-win. I have no doubt some studios will try stuff on the blockchain but I'm certain that once their real-world dollars disappear into a black hole those execs will get replaced and the studios that survive will move on.

bodge5000 4y ago
> no gamers are complaining about a lack of a marketplace where they can buy and sell game assets I agree, but I'm working off the assumption that buying and selling assets perhaps isn't the only way to make use of the blockchain, or perhaps even crypto in some weird fashion. > But I don't see any gamedevs chomping at the bit to make blockchain games I've been doing gamedev for, give or take, 10 years. Not professionally mind you, its just a hobby. And you're right, I'm not rushing to make a blockchain game, but I do think theres the possibility of doing some interesting things with it. Maybe as a game jam or something, but either way it'd be in the same way that I'm interested in any other new technology, just like you'd be excited for a new language or whatever.
- agentultra 4y ago
  Presently there's no way to make a game on a smart contract chain without cryptocurrencies, unfortunately. My take on cryptocurrencies is that they should all be put in the trash bin and burned to the ground. So if you're really into it for some reason I'd suggest just going with a hashed-linked list or Merkle Tree you host privately on a raspberry pi and avoid public chains/smart contracts all together if that's something that interests you.
  - bodge5000 4y ago
    I wouldn't say I'm really into it, to be honest its one of those things that'll probably just sit forever in my someday todo list. I just think there could be something interesting in it. Maybe one day ;)