5 ms·

Intermediaries like Apple are not the ones building and interested in this, it is the game developers like those currently building Dark Forest and their player

Intermediaries like Apple are not the ones building and interested in this, it is the game developers like those currently building Dark Forest and their players. This should not run on ETH mainnet, it should run on a L2 rollup that allows transactions to be submitted with fees that are in fractions of a cent. The L2 can be built atop ETH to allow users to permissionlessly withdraw tokens to it and to inherit the security of that chain.

yunohn 4y ago
Apple/Google do not want to allow fee-less in-app transactions. The game developers also don’t want to allow a free in-game market. This is something only consumers want, but then the creators won’t make money. Either way, consumers won’t get to decide this. Why do you need a roll up? What security do you need if the L2 itself is able to manage a simple ledger…
- mattdesl 4y ago
  The game developers can charge for the upfront cost of purchasing the game and starting an account. They can also charge a take-rate for each transaction in their official marketplace (this is how OpenSea makes money, and it's also how Minecraft Marketplace makes money). There are also plenty of indie game developers who are happy to publish games for free, without taking profit. > Why do you need a roll up? What security do you need if the L2 itself is able to manage a simple ledger… The main benefit of the roll up compared to a simple ledger is that you can still use all the same blockchain features such as issuing ERC20/ERC721 assets, creating decentralized markets, escrowed auctions, and so forth. The benefit of a rollup compared to a side-chain like Polygon is that it is theoretically more secure. At no point can the rollup owner control user funds, and they also cannot block a user from withdrawing their assets from the L2 back to ETH mainnet.
  - yunohn 4y ago
    One time payment games and micro transaction games already exist. Consumers prefer the former and despite the latter, and absolutely hate ones which have both! Are you a gamer at all? The roll up part makes no sense at all, I think you’re missing my point entirely.
    - mattdesl 4y ago
      The game developer can decide how to monetize. They can charge $0 or $1 or $50 for the game itself, and take 0% or 5% or 25% from each transaction in the UGC marketplace. An "Ethereum Rollup" is just a "fast blockchain" that has very similar security guarantees as Ethereum. If you wanted to take payments, create UGC markets, and record asset ownership without a blockchain, you are back to centralized services and their constraints. I do play and develop games and have spent $ on games, and would like more of my $ to go toward the game publisher and content creators rather than intermediaries and app stores. I also would like to own digital assets that are more composable, and not tied to a single company's servers or app stores. This is the model that Dark Forest[1] is exploring. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUtIiVUwB5o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUtIiVUwB5o

yunohn 4y ago

Apple/Google do not want to allow fee-less in-app transactions. The game developers also don’t want to allow a free in-game market. This is something only consumers want, but then the creators won’t make money. Either way, consumers won’t get to decide this. Why do you need a roll up? What security do you need if the L2 itself is able to manage a simple ledger…

mattdesl 4y ago
The game developers can charge for the upfront cost of purchasing the game and starting an account. They can also charge a take-rate for each transaction in their official marketplace (this is how OpenSea makes money, and it's also how Minecraft Marketplace makes money). There are also plenty of indie game developers who are happy to publish games for free, without taking profit. > Why do you need a roll up? What security do you need if the L2 itself is able to manage a simple ledger… The main benefit of the roll up compared to a simple ledger is that you can still use all the same blockchain features such as issuing ERC20/ERC721 assets, creating decentralized markets, escrowed auctions, and so forth. The benefit of a rollup compared to a side-chain like Polygon is that it is theoretically more secure. At no point can the rollup owner control user funds, and they also cannot block a user from withdrawing their assets from the L2 back to ETH mainnet.
- yunohn 4y ago
  One time payment games and micro transaction games already exist. Consumers prefer the former and despite the latter, and absolutely hate ones which have both! Are you a gamer at all? The roll up part makes no sense at all, I think you’re missing my point entirely.
  - mattdesl 4y ago
    The game developer can decide how to monetize. They can charge $0 or $1 or $50 for the game itself, and take 0% or 5% or 25% from each transaction in the UGC marketplace. An "Ethereum Rollup" is just a "fast blockchain" that has very similar security guarantees as Ethereum. If you wanted to take payments, create UGC markets, and record asset ownership without a blockchain, you are back to centralized services and their constraints. I do play and develop games and have spent $ on games, and would like more of my $ to go toward the game publisher and content creators rather than intermediaries and app stores. I also would like to own digital assets that are more composable, and not tied to a single company's servers or app stores. This is the model that Dark Forest[1] is exploring. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUtIiVUwB5o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUtIiVUwB5o