6 ms·

> I bet there's a good alignment between people making outrageous LLM claims and people who shilled for those other things too, for how they were "right around

> I bet there's a good alignment between people making outrageous LLM claims and people who shilled for those other things too, for how they were "right around the corner". I'm still waiting for NFT's to take over the video gaming space, its just around the corner!

FridgeSeal 2y ago
Pppphhh we don’t make video games anymore. We just get the latest LLM to boil a lake so we can aimlessly wander an incoherent fever-dream! It’s the future of gaming!!1!
AlexandrB 2y ago
Video games? What's that? We're all supposed to be using NFTs in the metaverse at this point.
- PaulHoule 2y ago
  Isn't that Microsoft's plan with Game Pass and buying the whole western game industry? You'll have a choice between Axie Infinity or Nikke: Goddess of Victory.
  - Animats 2y ago
    > Nikke: Goddess of Victory. Oh, that's funny. The Goddess of Victory is Nike.[1] But the game people are probably scared of the shoe company that uses the same name. There was also the famous Nike anti-aircraft missile, once deployed around major American cities.[2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nike_(mythology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nike_(mythology) [2] https://nikemissile.org/ https://nikemissile.org/
    - alterom 2y ago
      To their defense, Nikke reads much closer to the original Greek name than Nike.
- 3a2d29 2y ago
  I remember a post on Blind where someone was passionately arguing that if we put house ownership on the blockchain, 2008 wouldn't have happened because a big part of it was not knowing who owned what homes.
LargeWu 2y ago
Gaming is actually a pretty reasonable use case for NFT's, or blockchain generally. At it's core, an NFT is a digital asset with verifiable ownership. Many, many games have the concept of owning digital assets; the fact that they're not on a blockchain is an implementation detail. All the hype around monkey-ape pictures and microtransactions was offputting to a lot of gamers, making the whole thing come off like a big cash-grab (which it mostly was), but from a purely technological standpoint, blockchain might not be a terrible solution for games with transferable digital assets.
- wnevets 2y ago
  its gonna happen its just around the corner!
  - throw646577 2y ago
    It's like tapping HN on the knee with a reflex hammer, isn't it?
- throwaway48476 2y ago
  Most people are tired of 400gb of cosmetics. They want less but higher quality. The NFT people also lied through their teeth about how NFTs work.
  - LargeWu 2y ago
    So, the use case I'm thinking of is more along the lines of non-cosmetic assets. Take FIFA Ultimate Team, for example. The way it works currently is that each player in the game has one or more "cards", or sets of stats. Special versions come out all the time which have significant impact on gameplay. FIFA has an in-game market where you can buy/sell/trade cards, for in-game scrip. Want to sell your special Killian Mbappe card you just pulled? Congrats, you can get 1,000,000 FifaCoins, not redeemable for real money. Of course, you can certainly buy FifaCoins for real money. A blockchain implementation could potentially allow people to sell that card directly to somebody else, for real money (or more specifically, crypto tokens that can be redeemed for real money). Would you rather have 1,000,000 FifaCoins, or $100? Whether or not this is desirable to games is a different question, but the game is already essentially pay-to-win, so it's not like it would ruin the game from that perspective. It already has microtransactions. The main reason you probably won't be seeing this is because it would cut the publisher (EA) out of the loop, which is very, very lucrative for them.
Zambyte 2y ago
NFTs have been popular in videogames for over a decade. They're just almost always using a centralized network (see: the Steam community market).
- wnevets 2y ago
  > They're just almost always using a centralized network (see: the Steam community market). That doesn't sound like a NFT to me. "A non-fungible token (NFT) is a unique digital identifier that is recorded on a blockchain" [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-fungible_token https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-fungible_token
  - Zambyte 2y ago
    Non-fungible tokens are not even necessarily digital. They are merely tokens[0] that are not fungible[1], as the name suggests. Digital non-fungible tokens are stored in a digital database, of which blockchain is one kind. [0] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/token https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/token [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fungibility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fungibility
    - wnevets 2y ago
      As the authority on the subject you should definitely correct the Wikipedia page
- quickthrowman 2y ago
  Please link me to the public blockchain explorer for Steam community items. I’ll wait.
  - Zambyte 2y ago
    There isn't one, because there is no blockchain. You already know that so why comment this?

FridgeSeal 2y ago

Pppphhh we don’t make video games anymore. We just get the latest LLM to boil a lake so we can aimlessly wander an incoherent fever-dream! It’s the future of gaming!!1!

AlexandrB 2y ago

Video games? What's that? We're all supposed to be using NFTs in the metaverse at this point.

PaulHoule 2y ago
Isn't that Microsoft's plan with Game Pass and buying the whole western game industry? You'll have a choice between Axie Infinity or Nikke: Goddess of Victory.
- Animats 2y ago
  > Nikke: Goddess of Victory. Oh, that's funny. The Goddess of Victory is Nike.[1] But the game people are probably scared of the shoe company that uses the same name. There was also the famous Nike anti-aircraft missile, once deployed around major American cities.[2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nike_(mythology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nike_(mythology) [2] https://nikemissile.org/ https://nikemissile.org/
  - alterom 2y ago
    To their defense, Nikke reads much closer to the original Greek name than Nike.
3a2d29 2y ago
I remember a post on Blind where someone was passionately arguing that if we put house ownership on the blockchain, 2008 wouldn't have happened because a big part of it was not knowing who owned what homes.

LargeWu 2y ago

Gaming is actually a pretty reasonable use case for NFT's, or blockchain generally. At it's core, an NFT is a digital asset with verifiable ownership. Many, many games have the concept of owning digital assets; the fact that they're not on a blockchain is an implementation detail. All the hype around monkey-ape pictures and microtransactions was offputting to a lot of gamers, making the whole thing come off like a big cash-grab (which it mostly was), but from a purely technological standpoint, blockchain might not be a terrible solution for games with transferable digital assets.

wnevets 2y ago
its gonna happen its just around the corner!
- throw646577 2y ago
  It's like tapping HN on the knee with a reflex hammer, isn't it?
throwaway48476 2y ago
Most people are tired of 400gb of cosmetics. They want less but higher quality. The NFT people also lied through their teeth about how NFTs work.
- LargeWu 2y ago
  So, the use case I'm thinking of is more along the lines of non-cosmetic assets. Take FIFA Ultimate Team, for example. The way it works currently is that each player in the game has one or more "cards", or sets of stats. Special versions come out all the time which have significant impact on gameplay. FIFA has an in-game market where you can buy/sell/trade cards, for in-game scrip. Want to sell your special Killian Mbappe card you just pulled? Congrats, you can get 1,000,000 FifaCoins, not redeemable for real money. Of course, you can certainly buy FifaCoins for real money. A blockchain implementation could potentially allow people to sell that card directly to somebody else, for real money (or more specifically, crypto tokens that can be redeemed for real money). Would you rather have 1,000,000 FifaCoins, or $100? Whether or not this is desirable to games is a different question, but the game is already essentially pay-to-win, so it's not like it would ruin the game from that perspective. It already has microtransactions. The main reason you probably won't be seeing this is because it would cut the publisher (EA) out of the loop, which is very, very lucrative for them.

Zambyte 2y ago

NFTs have been popular in videogames for over a decade. They're just almost always using a centralized network (see: the Steam community market).

wnevets 2y ago
> They're just almost always using a centralized network (see: the Steam community market). That doesn't sound like a NFT to me. "A non-fungible token (NFT) is a unique digital identifier that is recorded on a blockchain" [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-fungible_token https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-fungible_token
- Zambyte 2y ago
  Non-fungible tokens are not even necessarily digital. They are merely tokens[0] that are not fungible[1], as the name suggests. Digital non-fungible tokens are stored in a digital database, of which blockchain is one kind. [0] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/token https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/token [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fungibility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fungibility
  - wnevets 2y ago
    As the authority on the subject you should definitely correct the Wikipedia page
quickthrowman 2y ago
Please link me to the public blockchain explorer for Steam community items. I’ll wait.
- Zambyte 2y ago
  There isn't one, because there is no blockchain. You already know that so why comment this?