4 ms·
> In the long-term, CCP wants EVE Frontier to be decentralised and (close to) eternal. A game that—by virtue of all being written to a magical series of distrib
by KK7NIL 2y ago
> In the long-term, CCP wants EVE Frontier to be decentralised and (close to) eternal. A game that—by virtue of all being written to a magical series of distributed ledgers—could easily be spun up again if a meteor happens to hit its servers. "We want to have a clear path to a decentralised system," says Pétursson, where "we, CCP, just have the same access to the system as anyone really building on the system." Where players are effectively co-developers, in other words.
- solardev 2y agoThat's total nonsense though unless they're open sourcing the game server code itself, creative assets, the player logins and save game states, etc. Otherwise you just end up with a bunch of worthless NFT-equivalents once the game itself shuts down, or you end up having a bunch of third-party reverse-engineered & emulated servers like the ones that already exist for Everquest, WoW, and City of Villains.
- KK7NIL 2y agoIndeed, this is the problem with crypto games, there's no intrinsic value to the currency (and crypto as a whole). The question is whether they'll get third parties to develop for their blockchain to the degree that it becomes self-sustaining (seems unlikely). But it's not like other in-game currency hold their value after the game folds either. Just don't dump your 401k into crypto ISK.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 2y agoPresumably this means the game state is susceptible to a 51% attack. Without anyone having financial incentives to participate in the backend hosting, I assume the server count is merely sufficient to handle the load.
- woleium 2y agono idea how it’s done in the game, but you can have validation methods other than proof of work. e.g. When blockchain is used as a distributed ledger for international trade, a consortium decides who can have a validating server.