8 ms·

or, you can buy a trading card for a game that embraces blockchain and decentralization. the media which is a PNG and JSON can be stored in ipfs , p2p hosted, a

by web4 4y ago

or, you can buy a trading card for a game that embraces blockchain and decentralization. the media which is a PNG and JSON can be stored in ipfs , p2p hosted, and licensed with CC0. this is a niche .. but you can imagine some communities and players might enjoy owning assets that are not tied to a game company. the company can fold and the game go under, and the asset can still be repurposed for another game, or held as a collectible like we do physical trading cards and stamps. a probably simpler use case for blockchain in gaming is for a simple payment API and market mechanism .. easier to spin up a smart contract and escape payment processor fees and the ridiculous take-rates of Steam and Apple in-app purchases.

Nursie 4y ago
> the asset can still be repurposed for another game Can it? NFTs don't confer copyright, there are all sorts of issues with that. If the original company goes under, rights to its assets are likely to be part of either acquisition or bankruptcy proceedings.
- web4 4y ago
  this is why i say CC0 licensed assets and why the game and publisher has to embrace decentralization. also why this type of usage will be niche and apply to a specific type of game genre. CC-NC license also sorta works but not as well.. assets can then be repurposed for non commercial uses only. other licenses should be developed to operate specifically on these kinds of problems. some projects are already exploring this like BAYC licensing token owners more rights.
  - Nursie 4y ago
    > this is why i say CC0 licensed assets Then who cares if they're on a blockchain? I think it's fair to say I don't really get this artificial scarcity fetish.
    - web4 4y ago
      look at it this way: anybody can google images of the rarest MtG cards and print it out on paper, and bring that to play with. but the other player will probably frown on that. because both players have bought into the idea that the "cards" not the JPG image that makes them is what has value in the gameplay. the same is possible in blockchain setting. ownership of that unique token can hold value for gameplay and collectibility, despite JPG being CC0 and free to download and print out.
      - Nursie 4y ago
        Honestly a game where you get advantages from "rare" cards that people pay huge sums for doesn't really appeal to me in the first place. It's not really any sort of level playing field at that point. Each to their own I guess.
        web4 4y ago
        agree, but that is not the game I am describing. many free to play iOS and Apple games use an in-app purchase model and users are fine to pay $1-2 to add new skin or expand their play. in those cases the assets are locked to your apple account, and also include a 30% take fee. acquiring an nft does not even need to include payment at all. assets can be distributed to users for non monetary reasons, such as some achievement or action taken in the game, or defeating some other player in a pvp battle based on a mix of skills and random chance and as a result winning their hand or rare loot or whatever. it is up to the game to decide these things.
        dmitriid 4y ago
        > acquiring an nft does not even need to include payment at all. assets can be distributed to users for non monetary reasons, such as some achievement or action taken in the game, or defeating some other player in a pvp battle based on a mix of skills and random chance and as a result winning their hand or rare loot or whatever. it is up to the game to decide these things. You've literally described how games work now. No NFTs required
onion2k 4y ago
a probably simpler use case for blockchain in gaming is for a simple payment API and market mechanism .. easier to spin up a smart contract and escape payment processor fees and the ridiculous take-rates of Steam and Apple in-app purchases The payment processor fees are still there though - you just pay them when you convert your fiat currency into crypto, rather than when you use the crypto to buy the 3D hat.
- web4 4y ago
  nope. if a game publisher uses a CEX to exchange the crypto they receive from users into fiat and direct bank account deposit the fees can range from 0% to 0.6% compared to 2-5% for stripe and PayPal or up to 30% for steam and apple. this also does not consider per-transaction fees which in L2 will be very minimal and allow users to engage with micro payments like $0.25 USD asset purchases, which are not realistic with stripe APIs. https://help.coinbase.com/en/exchange/trading-and-funding/exchange-fees https://help.coinbase.com/en/exchange/trading-and-funding/ex... edit: these fees apply both ways, selling and buying crypto, so the user also pays less. and if the user buys $100 USD of tokens like they would at an arcade, all of those tokens can be spent on the game without exchange to fiat needed. this is different than every interaction with processor taking a cut which happens now if you want to buy 5 assets from a game that uses stripe or an app store or whatever.
  - onion2k 4y ago
    if a game publisher uses a CEX to exchange the crypto they receive from users into fiat and direct bank account deposit the fees can range from 0% to 0.6% The only reason the fees are that low right now is because crypto is speculative, and users have no protections. If crypto is useful and buyers expect to be able to do things like refunds or charge backs the fees will do up to cover those costs. Looking at how crypto works right now and suggesting it'll still be the same if people use it as currency is silly.
    - web4 4y ago
      equally silly to assume that regulations will force all centralized exchanges to charge 2-5% or 30% as is the case with current payment processors and app stores. that is not going to happen except in totalitarian countries. the reason those standard take-rates are high are not for consumer protection. interbank fees are about the same or lower as CEX take fees in the range of 0.1-0.5%. corporate infrastructure built on top of these financial systems like PayPal, Stripe and VISA are taking huge profits.
Hamcha 4y ago
I can't see how that is desirable in the slightest. People who like to play with trading card games don't enjoy the artificial scarcity part, they accept it as a necessary evil enforced to them by the manufacturer. I don't think any Magic the Gathering player enjoys telling their friend how expensive it is to get into (all of my friends play Pauper even if they own fetchlands, fwiw)
- web4 4y ago
  it does not have to be expensive. it can be that the entire year of play cost you $10 USD to purchase all your cards, or it could be that you acquired your game loot just through playing for days on end in RPG-like boss drops and not spending anything. scarcity is part of these games. when you open a pack of MtG cards and one item is rare, player will tend to get pretty excited. same with a rare loot dropped in WoW. without this imposed scarcity all assets would have equally unlimited supply and the game would probably be pretty bland, and there would be not as much reason to trade cards and build a hand.
  - piaste 4y ago
    > without this imposed scarcity all assets would have equally unlimited supply and the game would probably be pretty bland, and there would be not as much reason to trade cards and build a hand. Completely false. The strategy game and the collection/trading 'game' are completely different activities, and it is extremely common to enjoy one but have no interest in the other. I played MTG very competitively in my youth, and I sidestepped the scarcity issues entirely by either playing sealed/draft[0] in official tournaments, or by playing in unofficial online tournaments where cards were unlimited (I enjoyed the so-called Eternal formats where many cards had been long out of print and cost hundreds of euros at the time). Pro players also tended to favour drafting - it had a reputation as the most strategic and interesting way to play - and while of course they also played in official tournaments with custom-built decks, quite a few of them were known for having no interest in collecting cards and simply borrowing whole decks from their friends who did have the hobby of trading and collecting (whether or not those friends played the game). [0] A game mode where everybody starts with a small set of random cards, instead of bringing their collection.
numpad0 4y ago
> the asset can still be repurposed for another game no.
- wingerlang 4y ago
  If the NFT is, say, an image. Different games could definitely pull the image(url) from the blockchain and use it in their specific game. Multiple games could share it in that way. Now if that will ever happen I very much doubt.
  - onion2k 4y ago
    That's not actually right unfortunately. Things like resolution, color depth, alpha channels, compression formats, gamma correction, and meta data all impact whether you can use an asset between game engines. Some things can be automatically corrected for or just ignored, but if you want to have an image displayed identically between different games, or apps, or OSs, or even browsers it's basically impossible.
    - wingerlang 4y ago
      That still doesn't make it impossible, does it? The shared resource server would have a set of requirements, and the engines would have to work with that. It would also be an opt-in scenario, so if a game decided they wanted to be a part of this, they simply would work with it. It's not like games would be forced to use it. Again, I am not saying it is a good solution, but displaying a PNG in multiple games from a shared location for /sure/ is possible.
      - onion2k 4y ago
        displaying a PNG in multiple games from a shared location for /sure/ is possible No doubt you can display it obviously, but you can't ensure that it's identical everywhere, especially where the thing displaying it is implemented by separate teams of developers. PNG has built in gamma correction. It's a good example of a format that displays differently depending on where you're viewing it. Game developers would be swamped with support requests saying "My special hat NFT is just a black rectangle!" And that's just for 2D images. If you want to do it for 3D assets... Well, trust me, you really don't.

by web4 4y ago

Nursie 4y ago

> the asset can still be repurposed for another game Can it? NFTs don't confer copyright, there are all sorts of issues with that. If the original company goes under, rights to its assets are likely to be part of either acquisition or bankruptcy proceedings.

web4 4y ago
this is why i say CC0 licensed assets and why the game and publisher has to embrace decentralization. also why this type of usage will be niche and apply to a specific type of game genre. CC-NC license also sorta works but not as well.. assets can then be repurposed for non commercial uses only. other licenses should be developed to operate specifically on these kinds of problems. some projects are already exploring this like BAYC licensing token owners more rights.
- Nursie 4y ago
  > this is why i say CC0 licensed assets Then who cares if they're on a blockchain? I think it's fair to say I don't really get this artificial scarcity fetish.
  - web4 4y ago
    look at it this way: anybody can google images of the rarest MtG cards and print it out on paper, and bring that to play with. but the other player will probably frown on that. because both players have bought into the idea that the "cards" not the JPG image that makes them is what has value in the gameplay. the same is possible in blockchain setting. ownership of that unique token can hold value for gameplay and collectibility, despite JPG being CC0 and free to download and print out.
    - Nursie 4y ago
      Honestly a game where you get advantages from "rare" cards that people pay huge sums for doesn't really appeal to me in the first place. It's not really any sort of level playing field at that point. Each to their own I guess.
      - web4 4y ago
        agree, but that is not the game I am describing. many free to play iOS and Apple games use an in-app purchase model and users are fine to pay $1-2 to add new skin or expand their play. in those cases the assets are locked to your apple account, and also include a 30% take fee. acquiring an nft does not even need to include payment at all. assets can be distributed to users for non monetary reasons, such as some achievement or action taken in the game, or defeating some other player in a pvp battle based on a mix of skills and random chance and as a result winning their hand or rare loot or whatever. it is up to the game to decide these things.
        dmitriid 4y ago
        > acquiring an nft does not even need to include payment at all. assets can be distributed to users for non monetary reasons, such as some achievement or action taken in the game, or defeating some other player in a pvp battle based on a mix of skills and random chance and as a result winning their hand or rare loot or whatever. it is up to the game to decide these things. You've literally described how games work now. No NFTs required

onion2k 4y ago

a probably simpler use case for blockchain in gaming is for a simple payment API and market mechanism .. easier to spin up a smart contract and escape payment processor fees and the ridiculous take-rates of Steam and Apple in-app purchases The payment processor fees are still there though - you just pay them when you convert your fiat currency into crypto, rather than when you use the crypto to buy the 3D hat.

web4 4y ago
nope. if a game publisher uses a CEX to exchange the crypto they receive from users into fiat and direct bank account deposit the fees can range from 0% to 0.6% compared to 2-5% for stripe and PayPal or up to 30% for steam and apple. this also does not consider per-transaction fees which in L2 will be very minimal and allow users to engage with micro payments like $0.25 USD asset purchases, which are not realistic with stripe APIs. https://help.coinbase.com/en/exchange/trading-and-funding/exchange-fees https://help.coinbase.com/en/exchange/trading-and-funding/ex... edit: these fees apply both ways, selling and buying crypto, so the user also pays less. and if the user buys $100 USD of tokens like they would at an arcade, all of those tokens can be spent on the game without exchange to fiat needed. this is different than every interaction with processor taking a cut which happens now if you want to buy 5 assets from a game that uses stripe or an app store or whatever.
- onion2k 4y ago
  if a game publisher uses a CEX to exchange the crypto they receive from users into fiat and direct bank account deposit the fees can range from 0% to 0.6% The only reason the fees are that low right now is because crypto is speculative, and users have no protections. If crypto is useful and buyers expect to be able to do things like refunds or charge backs the fees will do up to cover those costs. Looking at how crypto works right now and suggesting it'll still be the same if people use it as currency is silly.
  - web4 4y ago
    equally silly to assume that regulations will force all centralized exchanges to charge 2-5% or 30% as is the case with current payment processors and app stores. that is not going to happen except in totalitarian countries. the reason those standard take-rates are high are not for consumer protection. interbank fees are about the same or lower as CEX take fees in the range of 0.1-0.5%. corporate infrastructure built on top of these financial systems like PayPal, Stripe and VISA are taking huge profits.

Hamcha 4y ago

I can't see how that is desirable in the slightest. People who like to play with trading card games don't enjoy the artificial scarcity part, they accept it as a necessary evil enforced to them by the manufacturer. I don't think any Magic the Gathering player enjoys telling their friend how expensive it is to get into (all of my friends play Pauper even if they own fetchlands, fwiw)

web4 4y ago
it does not have to be expensive. it can be that the entire year of play cost you $10 USD to purchase all your cards, or it could be that you acquired your game loot just through playing for days on end in RPG-like boss drops and not spending anything. scarcity is part of these games. when you open a pack of MtG cards and one item is rare, player will tend to get pretty excited. same with a rare loot dropped in WoW. without this imposed scarcity all assets would have equally unlimited supply and the game would probably be pretty bland, and there would be not as much reason to trade cards and build a hand.
- piaste 4y ago
  > without this imposed scarcity all assets would have equally unlimited supply and the game would probably be pretty bland, and there would be not as much reason to trade cards and build a hand. Completely false. The strategy game and the collection/trading 'game' are completely different activities, and it is extremely common to enjoy one but have no interest in the other. I played MTG very competitively in my youth, and I sidestepped the scarcity issues entirely by either playing sealed/draft[0] in official tournaments, or by playing in unofficial online tournaments where cards were unlimited (I enjoyed the so-called Eternal formats where many cards had been long out of print and cost hundreds of euros at the time). Pro players also tended to favour drafting - it had a reputation as the most strategic and interesting way to play - and while of course they also played in official tournaments with custom-built decks, quite a few of them were known for having no interest in collecting cards and simply borrowing whole decks from their friends who did have the hobby of trading and collecting (whether or not those friends played the game). [0] A game mode where everybody starts with a small set of random cards, instead of bringing their collection.

numpad0 4y ago

> the asset can still be repurposed for another game no.

wingerlang 4y ago
If the NFT is, say, an image. Different games could definitely pull the image(url) from the blockchain and use it in their specific game. Multiple games could share it in that way. Now if that will ever happen I very much doubt.
- onion2k 4y ago
  That's not actually right unfortunately. Things like resolution, color depth, alpha channels, compression formats, gamma correction, and meta data all impact whether you can use an asset between game engines. Some things can be automatically corrected for or just ignored, but if you want to have an image displayed identically between different games, or apps, or OSs, or even browsers it's basically impossible.
  - wingerlang 4y ago
    That still doesn't make it impossible, does it? The shared resource server would have a set of requirements, and the engines would have to work with that. It would also be an opt-in scenario, so if a game decided they wanted to be a part of this, they simply would work with it. It's not like games would be forced to use it. Again, I am not saying it is a good solution, but displaying a PNG in multiple games from a shared location for /sure/ is possible.
    - onion2k 4y ago
      displaying a PNG in multiple games from a shared location for /sure/ is possible No doubt you can display it obviously, but you can't ensure that it's identical everywhere, especially where the thing displaying it is implemented by separate teams of developers. PNG has built in gamma correction. It's a good example of a format that displays differently depending on where you're viewing it. Game developers would be swamped with support requests saying "My special hat NFT is just a black rectangle!" And that's just for 2D images. If you want to do it for 3D assets... Well, trust me, you really don't.