4 ms·

Instead of using cryptocurrencies to add independence in games why couldn’t a platform like Steam do the same thing? The trading card system is quite close. I h

Instead of using cryptocurrencies to add independence in games why couldn’t a platform like Steam do the same thing? The trading card system is quite close. I have a real hard time understanding on how to use cryptocurrencies to create interoperability when game publishers could do it already or just make a standard API with the games you want to partner with which would probably end up being a competitor to steam. NFTs being bought and sold also needs to go through KYC and AML and that’s a nightmare to games with any in game currency since they don’t want to become money transfer authorities for obvious reasons such as money laundering. So just making an interoperability layer that just goes to points going to buying a game would best way to do this instead of this unnecessarily convoluted system that has downtime that you can’t control and variable prices on execution of contracts. Also slowdowns.

drak0n1c 4y ago
I think the motivating factor is an idealistic vision of eventually moving beyond Steam's corporate DRM and percentage cut taken out of all gamer and game dev transactions. Innovators are usually reluctant to entrench the incumbent monopoly firm (recall how IBM was regarded). Agreed that pragmatically speaking Steam may be able to stand up something more efficient and functional than any crypto aspirants in the short term. There was a similar debate on potential interoperability between the dominant social networks and Youtube etc, people wanted an open source, open-governance transfer standard that various networks could plug in to. They didn't want Facebook to own that standard, and now that has evolved into the ownership question of the "metaverse".
charcircuit 4y ago
>why couldn’t a platform like Steam do the same thing It definitely could. But as a society do we want 1 private company deciding how commerce in video games is done and governing its participants and potentially taking a cut from everyone. Web3 supporters think the platform that provides this should be decentralized and not controlled by a single entity.

drak0n1c 4y ago

I think the motivating factor is an idealistic vision of eventually moving beyond Steam's corporate DRM and percentage cut taken out of all gamer and game dev transactions. Innovators are usually reluctant to entrench the incumbent monopoly firm (recall how IBM was regarded). Agreed that pragmatically speaking Steam may be able to stand up something more efficient and functional than any crypto aspirants in the short term. There was a similar debate on potential interoperability between the dominant social networks and Youtube etc, people wanted an open source, open-governance transfer standard that various networks could plug in to. They didn't want Facebook to own that standard, and now that has evolved into the ownership question of the "metaverse".

charcircuit 4y ago

>why couldn’t a platform like Steam do the same thing It definitely could. But as a society do we want 1 private company deciding how commerce in video games is done and governing its participants and potentially taking a cut from everyone. Web3 supporters think the platform that provides this should be decentralized and not controlled by a single entity.