The General State of Gaming NFTs in 2022 *spawn*

[Shifty Geezer]

I am taking this at face value and it might be wrong. But LOLZ!

Not even that, really. The images are copiable. Ergo, when Reddit offers me the chance to buy some avatar:



I can copy the avatar image and use it without using NFTs. Apparently there's a monkey face thing for Crytpo avatars used on Twitter etc. with people spending $500,000 on them, and apparently lots of people just copy and duplicate them. So the whole thing of making in non-fungible actually fails when the results are easily infinitely duplicable. The only true NFT is one where the data is entirely encrypted in the NFT and only you have access to it, or, like Great Masters paintings, one you hide away from the world so no-one else can see and copy it.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

There are a lot of benefits to blockchain like smart contracts that most people on this forum have no clue about, and NFTs for gaming might work if they can be made persistent enough to survive a game getting decommissioned, like a weapon that can be used in any Assassin's Creed game for instance.

There are lots of interesting use cases for the fundamental concept, for sure. In gaming, it's largely there to be abused. Kinda like every revolutionary tech ever - we all list amazing ways this, that or the other tech could be used, and it isn't. A lot of the airy-fairy ideas aren't realistic and sound to me like justification to get financial backing and opportunistic investor backing. "We'll be able to do x, y, z! Get in now and think how much money you'll make!" As such it's being pushed too fast in the wrong directions. The internet works because it built up slowly over time among people actually using it. If that's what the blockchain was doing, we'd probably be okay. But the get-rich-quick mentality won't wait and won't make any sensible choices whatsoever because the whole thinking is Big Risk, Big Reward, so they'll happily take risks, even with everyone else's planet.

like a weapon that can be used in any Assassin's Creed game for instance.

How would that technology work? Is the game model and code in the cloud, encrypted on the blockchain, or is the blockchain just going to include a flag for owners of that flag to unlock the item already on the local computer? If the game closes down and you install an old AC on a new console, where is the data to recover the weapon? The game file is in the cloud, or embedded in the game?

(Mod edit: Fixed a quote tag. -Pete)

 

[snc]

 

[dskneo]

It's a necessary negative sentiment. If people just shrug their shoulders, NFTs will happen and the damage will be irreversible when all the content sits on the blockchain. The only way to prevent this shit taking hold is to resist. We're not talking the Luddites raging against the machines displacing their jobs here - we're talking a change driven solely by people who can see a way to make money, and not by people trying to advance humanity and solve real problems.

I'm sorry to say but you are displaying exactly what I mentioned. The current and popular sentiment around the use cases people are currently giving to blockchain/NFT is blocking you from seeing the technology for what it is.


NFT and blockchain are technologies exactly in the the same category as the Internet, thus the moniker "web 3.0".



People use the Internet for completely imoral/illegal/obscene content too. But this concept somehow doesn't apply to blockchain? why wouldn't it? It makes no sense. Unless, you do not understand what blockchain is yet, which explains your quote bellow:

No. Even at 1% of its power requirements, Etherium 2.0 is 10x to 1000x more power hungry than direct, server driven transactions. The underlying concept of consensus driven transactions has to be far less power efficient that direct transactions as a principle of thermodynamics. If 120 clients need to reach consensus to validate a transaction as per Etherium 2.0, as I understand it, that's still 120x the number of computers as need for a single transaction,

I can immediately tell you don't understand the tech yet. I understand even less why you are talking so authoritatively about a subject you clearly don't understand yet.

Standard server databases do not give what the blockchain provides. Any computer with SQL and an SSD is orders of magnitude faster than any blockchain, yet that is missing the point about blockchains by a mile.

 

[dskneo]

The only thing about a NFT concept that I like, is the idea that digital game licenses are sold as NFT and can be traded/sold as part of that license you own.
We can straight up remove discs altogether, predatory practices around disc insurance, and have some control over what happens when a digital marketplace shuts down your title.

Outside of that, I'm not really seeing any benefit to me as the user and all the downsides that Shifty explained above take effect.

Other ideas on what NFTs could do are actually pretty cool possibilities; but lets be realistic about it, not only would game design have to change dramatically, but players behaviours towards games would need to change as well. If you want ot make exclusive items etc, like say in WoW you only release a single Legendary weapon, and only 1 character has it, and that is a NFT weapon that needs to be traded/sold as NFT - designers and players need to come to an understanding that only 1 person ever gets that weapon.

And here's the thing, I've seen MMOs go in this direction somewhat, and they pull this off without NFT - See EvE Online. Or See Star Wars when players finally started to become Jedi.

All amazing stories. But only a handful of players experience it, not sure if that makes a lot of sense.

And what about the Diablo 3 Real money Auction house? They had to remove that AH from teh game because it straight up ruined the game. The AH ruined diablo lol.

Like I said above, the technology doesn't care about the use cases. It only cares about running code.

If people are angry about the use cases that are being run on NFT/blockchain tech, it does absolutely not sense to rally against the technology instead of the people making the software that runs on the technology.

This is baffling to me. I can only explain it by people not having a grasp of what the tech is and what it can do, and instead embracing the dogmatic ideas thrown against the tech on social media.

 

[dskneo]

amen, resist the cult

no offense dskneo when you say
"So, does it currently (today) use too much power for what you get? yes. Is the technology evolving to solve it? yes, in 2022/23!"
What the fuck are you talking about, mate at the moment
1 transaction of bitcoin energy use = ~2 billion visa transactions https://www.marketwatch.com/story/h...ng-the-energy-to-mine-one-bitcoin-11639127573

OK etheruem uses 12x less than bitcoin, plus the eth 2.0 will be even 100x better than that, that still equals
!#$%$!!! (carry the 1) !#$#@$%

OK my calculator on my shoulders saiz a million times more energy than a single visa transaction
In what version of reality is this considered 'being solved'
sorry for sounding harsh, but like some of the vaccine shit, this BS propaganda needs to be killed ASAP or else ppl end up believing it

I resent the remark of what I am talking about being the same as the anti-vax propaganda. Its tasteless, and with regards to blockchain - the anti-vaxer here is you, because you have people explaining what the technology is and what its for, and you call it BS propaganda that needs to be stopped.


If you do not understanding what VISA is and also do not understanding what Blockchain is, how can you formulate a post like yours?


Blockchain is conceptually a method of distributed storing and verification. Its only that. What is being built on top of the blockchain, are programs that only care about running code. Some programs only serve to run transactions. Some do it badly and inefficiently (bitcoin - but to be fair, it was the first and its old). Some do it incredibly fast and efficiently (Nano - the newest tech). Some programs were built to be turing-complete programming languages in which you can write any kind of program you desire (Ethereum) and some of the programs running on Ethereum are ones such as NFT.


It requires some effort on your part, to understand what it is, what it does and what are its benefits. Once you do, the comparison to Visa is like comparing a Self driving car to a horse.

 

[Allandor]

Like I said above, the technology doesn't care about the use cases. It only cares about running code.

If people are angry about the use cases that are being run on NFT/blockchain tech, it does absolutely not sense to rally against the technology instead of the people making the software that runs on the technology.

This is baffling to me. I can only explain it by people not having a grasp of what the tech is and what it can do, and instead embracing the dogmatic ideas thrown against the tech on social media.

Again, you underestimate people in this forum so far. Here are many developers that understand the tech behind blockchain etc. But there is just no use case here other than creating an artificial demand. It won't change anything other than trying to get more money from customers.
Btw, every blockchain so far is vulnerable by the 50+1 attack pattern. So security is only given if the network is big enough to protect you from that which always is extremally energy intensive, even if this is reduced at some point in the ethereum network (they promised to changed that now for years, but so far it hasn't happened). Also for games it is still, you don't own anything. You have just a license you can use while the game is running. You can't make anything with your "license" in the blockchain if the servers for the games are shutting down. And it is always up to the developer what they do with your licensed stuff. If they support it in the next game or not is up to them. It really won't solve any problem we have. Just create new problems.

 

[Malo]

If you do not understanding what VISA is and also do not understanding what Blockchain is, how can you formulate a post like yours?

You really need to get past what block chains are, as a whole we understand their premise. The discussion is what they're being used for currently in the form of NFTs and how they're being abused in the art and gaming space as essentially scams. Your posts come across as nothing but pretentious, rude and not contributing to the discussion at all.

 

[dskneo]

You really need to get past what block chains are, as a whole we understand their premise. The discussion is what they're being used for currently in the form of NFTs and how they're being abused in the art and gaming space as essentially scams. Your posts come across as nothing but pretentious, rude and not contributing to the discussion at all.

I beg your pardon? The narrative before I intervened was 1) Its energetically imoral 2) Does the same as current databases and 3) its being used for get rich schemes.


All of those 3 arguments imply lack of knowledge of what the technologies are, their roadmaps, and most absurdly of all that the tech is to blame for what people are using it for. All this in a tech forum where you argue people are informed. Ah.


That you people consider my attempt to clear misconceptions to be rude and pretentious, its out of the subject and speaks more of your mentality than it speaks of mine.

 

[dskneo]

As you've noted pretty much anything an NFT can do, a properly designed conventional system can do more efficiently.

Used game sales of digital licenses? MS had already planned for that with XBO, but the console gaming community reacted violently to all games being just digital licenses. Normal people have no problems with digital licenses on their phone or PC.

Digital content providers getting a cut of used game sales? Again, something that MS had planned and was working on for the XBO ecosystem. Again, something that the console gaming community reacted negatively to.

Moving game licenses between storefronts/hosting services? Certainly could be done, but requires enough consumer desire for it that companies are incentivized to create such systems. You can, however, see some fledgling steps in that direction with consumer desire for Crossplay eventually forcing the 2 major console competitors + PC to enable it. Cross-Buy/Cross-Ownership across platforms also exists to a limited degree already between mobile, PC and a far more limited extent consoles. It's still not remotely on the level of being able to move your digital license to a different storefront/hosting service, but it's showing some movement in that direction.

Currently, everything I see about NFTs are aligned around quick cash grabs and an underlying design that trades efficiency (grossly so) for distributed systems that make it more difficult, but not necessarily impossible for any one entity to control. However, that same distributed nature means that it also easily enables shady practices with little ability to enforce properly framed transactions or correct errors (either human error or machine error) that may happen. There are so many stories of people being swindled out of their NFT. On a traditional system there are potential avenues for a consumer to regain ownership of something they may have been swindled out of or lost due to human/machine error. NFTs? Nope, once it's changed ownership, nothing you can do. Once you lose ownership due to human/machine error, it's gone...

Regards,
SB

Everytime some tries to defeat the purpose of blockchains and associated technologies by using the argument that you can already do these things using centralized methods, you are missing the entire point behind the tech.

And to that point, I have to ask you, do you know what the letters NFT stand for? Do you understand what they stand for and their context?


This entire debate is a copy paste of the discussions surrounding the introduction of the Internet into our lives in the 90's, which I lived and most of you as well.

 

[senis_kenis]

 

[iroboto]

Like I said above, the technology doesn't care about the use cases. It only cares about running code.

If people are angry about the use cases that are being run on NFT/blockchain tech, it does absolutely not sense to rally against the technology instead of the people making the software that runs on the technology.

This is baffling to me. I can only explain it by people not having a grasp of what the tech is and what it can do, and instead embracing the dogmatic ideas thrown against the tech on social media.

I'm pretty sure we're talking about the state of NFTs in gaming as per the title of the thread. Not the technology behind NFT.
Block chain? Yes, I'm well aware of how it works. The possibilities of block chain? I have family that works in block chain, I am 2 degrees from Craig Wright, we very well could have met in person. I've been to a BTC conference in which they decided to hold in my country. Suffice to say, developers I spoke with were convinced all sorts of better applications, like a better twitter, than twitter, a better ATM, and another a general AI that they could predict the stock market; all using block chain.

I've heard it all, my opinions are reserved for this thread, but really I've heard it all, and all of the discussion around block chain tends to focus around what the technology can be used for what it's capable of, and none of it discussing the business behind it. You can make a better twitter and clean out bots and shit posts because you have to pay to tweet, I am told. So clearly everyone is going to clamber to that. So far, nothing. Technology for the sake of technology is pointless. It's got to have a practical application.

When I speak to other data scientists in their pursuit to solve problems they come off as exceptionally more educated in problem solving. They are solving little piece by little piece to leverage that small victory towards solving a greater problem. When I speak with block chain developers they are still very much finding a problem to solve with block chain. They don't even know where to begin honestly. It's like I'm listening to people trying to sell ice to a eskimo. They don't even understand the solutions that incumbents have solved, why they are even successful.

You don't see people here shit on bit torrent, because it's serves a practical purpose. Distributed bandwidth and serving costs for files that may not want to be served. Makes a lot of sense. I've seen block chain solutions at companies that make a lot of sense, but those are internal tools.

So in it, with respect to this discussion, I don't care about what block chain is capable of. Deep Learning can just about do a lot of AI tasks, but we still use older and simpler means to do a lot of work too, because it's faster, it's lighter and we don't need it for every problem.

There's no issue around block chain, it's a technology built around distribution, and if there is no inherent benefit in being part of the distribution to solve a problem, other simpler, lighter, faster, technologies prevail.

I can make a video game around block chain, and it would work. And it would make sense to do it. But really, the only reason I'd do it, is because as an indie, I can't afford server costs, I can't afford cheat detection, and I can't handle immense real time graphics anyway.

Suddenly MUDS, and old school turn based games can be played Massively Massively online, distributed amongst the players. NFTs will suddenly make sense. Block chain makes sense. Because? The games inherent engine is on block chain, because? Can't afford server costs. Can't afford labour costs.

If we want to admit to that, that's fine. But these AAA developers hauling billions of dollars? They know how to make money and they don't need to leverage block chain for it. For them, right now, they just see this as additional ways to suck cash from whales.

 

[dskneo]

I'm pretty sure we're talking about the state of NFTs in gaming as per the title of the thread. Not the technology behind NFT.

The thread is a spawn from another topic, in which DF gave their collective opinion on NFT's. Some of their arguments - which many people here share - are tainted by the misconceptions I tried to clear.

Had they only criticized the point of developers trying to expand micro-transactions, it would be fair game.

But as it actually happened in the video, they went past it. They manifested their ill conceived facts surrounding NFT to further push their dislike of the idea. The facts they pushed which clearly lack understanding of the technology, is what I addressed in my original post. The backlash you have seen after my post, was a push for the validity of the arguments used on DF, which as I stated, misrepresented the NFT and blockchain tech.

 

[dskneo]

If we want to admit to that, that's fine. But these AAA developers hauling billions of dollars? They know how to make money and they don't need to leverage block chain for it. For them, right now, they just see this as additional ways to suck cash from whales.

.. For which the blockchain and NFT tech has no blame.

The entire point of my participation in this topic.

 

[iroboto]

.. For which the blockchain and NFT tech has no blame.

The entire point of my participation in this topic.

you're right, we can't blame a technology for what it is, but for how we use it. We use blockchain poorly. It's currently largely, a ponzi scheme. I have tools right and tools are technology. My power drill, my weight racks, my ratchet set, hair dryer, all of them are waiting there dormant for me to pick them up and use them when I need to solve a problem with it. And when I'm done, I put them back.

When a tool requires my constant attention, my constant interaction, my constant use, it's no longer a tool. I am no longer monetizing a tool to create benefit for me, I am have become the tool and I am creating monetization for whatever this thing is. And this is largely what the world understands blockchain to be. It's an unfair judgement, but this is what it is, a black mirror of our greed. I have no doubts it's an incredibly useful tool in places where infrastructure for currency is in complete disarray.

I've been told many stories as a child, that some Jewish would leave for other countries during WWII and some carried nothing on them except a pocket full of diamonds. It was an interesting story because it really put into perspective what wealth is, and how small it could be.

In a war torn country where currency can be taken from you, inflated, you can't hide it, you can't bank with it, block chain makes a shit ton of sense. Because supporting the distribution of the system in countries that are on financial collapse, all of it makes sense. But distorted that with greed. We killed it because the original founders of the technology didn't give a damn about actually trying to steer it properly. They just let wall street greed and black market money flood it, and it's totally F'd now from what it could have been for many countries.

And so that's what people see when they think of block chain. The greed, the money laundering, the ponzi scheme. And how NFTs are being used today, an extension of that greed, that money laundering, that ponzi scheme; it's a gold rush to monetize people. Block chain could have served a practical purpose, but it doesn't in its current state. And because there is no governing body to control it, it's become a largely a lawless technology used to transfer wealth.

While I agree with the idea that we can't blame technologies since they can be used for good or evil (see nuclear power), I also empathize with those that look largely on how we use block chain today as being negative. I have yet to see any real positive stories from block chain. All I see are people scrambling to become lambo owners.

 

[dskneo]

While I agree with the idea that we can't blame technologies since they can be used for good or evil (see nuclear power), I also empathize with those that look largely on how we use block chain today as being negative.

That is why I feel, that in the presence of those who can only look at it from the negative perspective, it is the responsibility of those better informed to explain to the others who aren't that the things they are truly unhappy about are unrelated to the technology itself.

Because the technology does what you want, good or bad, and if we do not steer people into the positives, you are unfairly perpetuating the culture of memes/dogma/stereotypes/misconceptions surrounding blockchain/NFT. Just look at this very topic.

 

[iroboto]

That is why I feel, that in the presence of those who can only look at it from the negative perspective, it is the responsibility of those better informed to explain to the others who aren't that the things they are truly unhappy about are unrelated to the technology itself.

Because the technology does what you want, good or bad, and if we do not steer people into the positives, you are unfairly perpetuating the culture of memes/dogma/stereotypes/misconceptions surrounding blockchain/NFT. Just look at this very topic.

unfortunately it seems it's an inherent flaw in the technology itself. It's a tool that once it can be found can be exploited will be. Because there is no oversight once a blockchain is released, and there are no rules and regulations that a governing body can control how it's being used, it will likely, if not always, fall into this trap.

A very difficult problem to solve imo. It needs to be a flawless system, or a flawed system that cannot be overly impacted by exploitation.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

That is why I feel, that in the presence of those who can only look at it from the negative perspective, it is the responsibility of those better informed to explain to the others who aren't that the things they are truly unhappy about are unrelated to the technology itself.

Because the technology does what you want, good or bad, and if we do not steer people into the positives, you are unfairly perpetuating the culture of memes/dogma/stereotypes/misconceptions surrounding blockchain/NFT. Just look at this very topic.

Present an actual meaningful use case then where the environmental impact is justified and its worth pursuing blockchain over other solutions.

Secondly, why do you ignore the direction blockchain is taking and why there is resistance? Kinda like saying, "let's introduce free gun ownership to the UK, " and then seeing murders on the rise and people starting to panic-buy weapons to protect themselves and then saying, "but guns don't have to be used for murder." If that's what blockchain and NFTs are being used for are being pushed for, regardless of potential, the only way to stop that is to push back against blockchain tech, no? And then regulate it so it's not used in destructive ways.

How do you propose to manage blockchain and NFT technological and commercial development if we don't push hard against it's widespread misuse? Especially when so few propositions for its benefits actually require blockchain and you largely just have venture capitalists spouting buzzwords and concepts that don't have realistic solution in or out of the blockchain?

 

[dskneo]

Present an actual meaningful use case then where the environmental impact is justified and its worth pursuing blockchain over other solutions.

Take consideration that if the purpose is to evaluate the blockchain energy effectiveness compared to centralized products removed from the benefits it brings, its not really fair either. But we can try.

The energy usage of one blockchain project has to be divided by everything that is running on it. Which in the case of Ethereum, its a lot. From NFT to Defi to games to contracts to transactions etc.

All Ethereum needs to run and execute the data, is a bunch of nodes and miners providing security. You have to deduct the things Ethereum does not need to provide the service when compared to tradicional finance and databases etc. It does not need:

- Armies of employees
- buildings for those employees
- Electricity for those buildings
- Transportation for those people
- Paper and Office equipment
- the list goes on

Its estimated that the Co2 impact of the some Cefi groups (centralized finance) is bigger than the Co2 impact of Ethereum, without any of the benefits the blockchain introduces and without all the other projects running on it that surpass Cefi abilities to compete.


All the above, is without having into account the PoS transition of Ethereum, with drops the electricity bill to ~1% of what is uses today.

If that's what blockchain and NFTs are being used for are being pushed for, regardless of potential, the only way to stop that is to push back against blockchain tech, no? And then regulate it so it's not used in destructive ways.

No you dont push against the technology, you push against the bad actors, like in every aspect of life. Everything you are using today to post in this forum, is also being used to fuel every type of crime in the world. Electricity, money, internet, computers etc.

And the crimes you speak of, what are you referring to?

Money laundering and get rich schemes can be done in literally everything that has monetary value. Its not blockchain exclusive, and blockchain may not even rank in the top 10 methods to launder money. This idea that its only used from crime is clearly overblown out of proportion.

How do you propose to manage blockchain and NFT technological and commercial development if we don't push hard against it's widespread misuse? Especially when so few propositions for its benefits actually require blockchain and you largely just have venture capitalists spouting buzzwords and concepts that don't have realistic solution in or out of the blockchain?

Like I sated above, the crimes you speak of are overblown and I can only think of one or two that can be done on blockchain. And crimes comited using the blockchain continue to be crimes investigated by authorities.

As for your belief that very few propositions exist that benefit from the blockchain, I look at the ecosystem of it all and I cannot see why you believe that.

 

[zed]

, every blockchain so far is vulnerable by the 50+1 attack pattern

Yes, hopefully soon with quantum computers they can make crypto worthless overnight, sure a lot of ppl are gonna lose a lot of money but its ultimately for the good (esp bad for ppl in poor countries who have brought into the FOMO)

Is crypto a cult?
I've been following it for years, and it displays all the trademarks, check out reddit/bitcoin etc for cult like behaviour
https://www.zmescience.com/science/news-science/nobel-prize-winning-economist-calls-bitcoin-a-cult/
https://www.ft.com/content/9e787670-6aa7-4479-934f-f4a9fedf4829
https://medium.datadriveninvestor.com/bitcoin-isnt-dead-but-it-is-a-cult-1183b4d2318f
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/w...ypto-cult-threatens-all-investors-11621441429

Does blockchain have its uses? Sure
But as its currently chiefly used? No way and its not just the power, think of all the electronic waste, all these machines that I assume can't really be repurposed for other tasks when they have reached their EOL

At least this guy in the US with his 4000 nvidia 3070s will be able to sell his GPU's later on to ppl to play games with