Yep. Some artists add copyright license transfer as a bonus and some others didn't. It's a mess. There's no build in license transfer thingy.
The General State of Gaming NFTs in 2022 *spawn*
- Thread starter Shortbread
- Start date
Yep. Some artists add copyright license transfer as a bonus and some others didn't. It's a mess. There's no build in license transfer thingy.
The value is dubious at best, because they are a new asset class that has not been tested by time.
They are a scam at worse, because in the realm of videogames made by huge publishers, they come with false claims.
You do own the NFT for life.
In the realm of videogames, you do not own the asset it represents.
...
I do cryptography for a living...
Last edited:
That response completely misses my argument. This is a thread about NFTs in gaming. If they are just being used and abused, that's what people will talk about and complain about. And they are only being used and abused because that opportunity has opened up. It doesn't matter how much potential you see; once the cat is out of the bag, the concept takes on its own momentum and becomes whatever people make of it. Whatever NFTs in gaming could have been, they are just overselling tat and that appears to be their only future without anything happening to salvage the tech from this corruption.
I go back to your earlier reply...
Every mention of NFT ever made these days is in relation to exorbitant amounts of money and violations. This is fuelling a gold-rush, and the high profile nature of NFT and blockchain is corrupting people's attitudes so they are thinking in terms of blockchain because it's new, not because it's considered in balance alongside all solutions. None of the games publishers who have spoken of NFTs have presented a single positive use case that makes gamers say, "oh yeah, that'd be cool." Instead, NFTs are being used for single item sales which are completely unnecessary, and for ludicrous nonsense in the wider market, selling avatars for hundreds of thousands of dollars where the content of the 'non-fungible' is completely fungible!
The reason to believe there are no good uses is because no-one is presenting them.If we were hearing stories about how this thing and that thing we like and care about is happening and only through the potential of NFTs, we'd be supporting it. You can't ask the general gamer to get on board and back NFTs without a body of evidence showing it's good, or at least under the burden of a large body of evidence showing it's bad!
But your debate is judging whether a technology has or doesn't have merit, whether it should or not exist, based on ideology concepts of right or wrong whose responsibility falls exclusively on the actors perpetrating them, and not the tech.
None of those philosophical society issues are the fault of the technologies. And the proposal to shutdown the tech to impose regulators, is extremist and unfair. Mainly, because regulation exists and crimes on the blockchain remain crimes prosecuted by current law enforcement.
Like he said, he would build a game around the blockchain. The game would be like any regular videogame on steam. A piece of software that you download or run on a browser, which itself is an API that connects to the blockchain to insert and retrieve data. The blockchain part itself, is paid by the users in the form of transactions fees.
The rules that dictate the game logic with regards to blockchain tokens that you win or lose (NFT), are written by the developer in-game and pushed to the blockchain as a transaction. Or, he could run smart-contracts but its far more expensive (for the user).
https://www.ibm.com/topics/smart-contracts
NFT is not an asset, its a tool to build contracts. It cannot be dubious or a scam. What is written into a contract CAN be a scam, regardless if it was written using NFT, paper, e-mail etc.
That asset becomes identified by the token therefor you own it for life. If that asset no longer has a game beneath it, its not the asset concern. It remains proof that you earned it, like you earned a trophy on PSN. You have it, and other people in the "know" recognize it.
...
Congratulations. You work on a tool which other tools use to make their own tools, therefor you know how every tool on top works. You could say you work on blockchain itself. The comments you made are from someone who doesn't know the tools.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
That is how society judges all technology, all inventions, all ideas, all products, all behavior, etc. Not much (if anything) in the world is inherently bad. What determines whether people find value (good or bad) in something is in how it is used combined with the values of the society within which it is being used.
A sword, a chainsaw, a vehicle, firearms, explosives, poison, acid ... none of those are inherently bad. When used in a good way they are all useful tools within the narrow scope to which they are used. However, all of them can be put to bad uses and hence all of them are regulated and surrounded by numerous laws that restrict and control how they can be used or even who can own them.
Now, imagine those same things, except that because of their nature, there is no way to regulate their use or restrict who may or may not use them. That would turn them into a real world example of an NFT. They aren't inherently bad. And depending on how they are used, they are beneficial to society and people. But unregulated and uncontrolled? Now it gets scary.
Basically you cannot talk about a technology without also talking about how it is used ... and how and to what length its use should be restricted.
Regards,
SB
Financial crimes on the blockchain are crimes persecuted in "real life" @Silent_Buddha.
Regulation exists and is applied in the countries that have it. There are rules for entry (KYC) and for exit (Taxes). There are rules that must be followed while you are in it as well.
The protection for individuals from falling into traps or scams are the same as in any other financial sector. Education. To blame blockchain and NFT for the crimes that already exist everywhere else, its ridiculous.
You all have the right to discuss what evil can be done in the blockchain space. And I have the right to point out that none of it was born in the blockchain or that its exclusive to the blockchain. From many of the opinions here, people don't understand this fact, and use it as a weapon to say such things as "kill it all".
Regulation exists and is applied in the countries that have it. There are rules for entry (KYC) and for exit (Taxes). There are rules that must be followed while you are in it as well.
The protection for individuals from falling into traps or scams are the same as in any other financial sector. Education. To blame blockchain and NFT for the crimes that already exist everywhere else, its ridiculous.
You all have the right to discuss what evil can be done in the blockchain space. And I have the right to point out that none of it was born in the blockchain or that its exclusive to the blockchain. From many of the opinions here, people don't understand this fact, and use it as a weapon to say such things as "kill it all".
...
You are arguing semantics.
It is a contract, representing the ownership of an asset.
These assets are a new asset class.
I'm guessing you meant, it is not the token's concern.
I agree, but you haven't explained to me one thing.
If that happens, (and in the case of videogames, it will happen), what do you ultimately own, besides a contract?
Silent_Buddha
Legend
There are no protections against bad uses of NFTs. Because of its decentralized nature it's extremely easy to abuse with little to no recourse that a victim can turn to. This makes it the perfect tool for people that wish to make a quick buck or scam people out of their money. It's difficult to envisage a more perfect method with which to scam people out of their money.
Does that mean there are no valid uses for NFTs? No. But it does mean that for the most part it's going to be used and abused to separate gullible people (whether college educated or not) from their money. For example, game publishers and developers implementing NFTs in their games purely to generate more revenue when what those NFTs are being used for in those games don't need or benefit from being associated with an NFT in any way, shape, or form. They're purely being used to make gamer's believe there is value in the NFT in that game when no such value actually exists.
That means that over time, NFTs will build a negative reputation which will affect their future acceptance as a viable tool. You can already see it in action with a growing tide of negative commentary revolving around NFTs even from previous proponents of NFTs. And the most vocal people commenting negatively about NFTs (as currently being used) are those that were proponents of NFTs mere months/weeks ago.
Cannot stress this enough.
- NFTs on their own are neither good nor bad.
- NFTs will be judged based on how they are used and implemented.
- Currently this is almost all bad.
SB
When you said its "unproved" therefor liable to be a scam, you were referring to the tool NFT, to the contracts? to the tokens created by this tool?
If the tool, the tool is governed by mathematics. The contracts are built by the platform where you buy the tokens and should be audited for flaws (user beware). The tokens are unique and live in the blockchain.
So the tool cannot be scam. But what was programmed with it can be a scam. What the contract mentions (like the fineprint in everyday contracts), can be scam. The asset converted to token which the contract refers to can be scam.
I believe you meant the tool NFT it self.
From a user perspective, as a gamer myself, I suppose if no new assets of the same class can ever be made again because the game closed, then what I have is a collectible which had a finite supply. Its proof that you won it regardless of developer servers closing down. Other people may want it, or not. Its the same old conversation of demand supply. The NFT tech does not care of any of this.
In the example you gave, if the victim saw a token on a random website selling NFT' that he wanted to buy and made the choice to press "Buy", and made that choice without reading the contract, without checking for auditing, without doing homework, how is it different than someone buying into a scam in craigslist?
He can then file a crime with the competent authorities, same as with craiglist, and the authorities may or may not find the suspect.
You see, these types of arguments against NFT are very much relevant anywhere, not just NFT or blockchain. It remains user beware and the difficulty of getting out of the scam is agnostic to the blockchain. Education.
No, I mean the asset class, meaning "virtual assets".
The tool is just a tool.
Although this tool is specific to the asset class.
Just like having a trophy of a PS3 game.
You can prove you played it.
Or having the contract of my Dali painting.
Proof I owned it.
That is why, I insist, that if someone claims you will own that pink rainbow unicorn Glock 17 with an rmr that can scope to 1km and do triple headshots, for life, is not telling the truth.
I agree, but did you understand what I wrote as well? that the "scam" is subject to the parts of the contract that have to be built or written, and not subject to the NFT tool it self, which is what has a bad reputation in social media? because the scam is like any other scam in real life.
Well of course if the developer chooses to shutdown the game and he said you could play it forever, its again, like any other kind of scam in real life. The token though, its yours.
But this is discussing what the bad actor did with the tool. The bad actor should be the one having memes made about him, not the tool he used. Which is my point.
Then it would be great if you can show some examples of what is put on the blockchain that is not a URL. Since it looks like most of what passes for a NFT/digital representation is a URL on the blockchain.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
If they dramatised this thread and made it into a movie I definitely would not watch it. 
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
As the paint dries. Digital Art. An NFT story.
Yes, because that's what we get in the real world. You keep arguing a textbook theoretical position, but we've moved beyond a high level concept to real life in the hands of real people.
What you fail to understand is the difference between the theoretical and real, and you interpreting 'NFTs' based on white-book specifications and dictionary definitions while everyone else is talking about NFTs in terms of what they actually are being used for. It's like a political professor trying to argue Communism isn't bad by talking about the Communist Manifesto to a load of people looking at what real world Communism is and saying they don't like an oppressive state. "Communism isn't necessarily an oppressive State," you'd argue, but that's what it becomes. Note this example can be used for other political and religious ideologies to - what you actually get often isn't what the original idea was.
Much of what's happening and bad isn't a crime. Someone selling an avatar for $500,000 fuelled by cryptomining and a society willing to pay for that isn't against any law, but it's a really bad direction that encourages more investment in bad NFT practices. Gold-rushes are always bad.
That doesn't help at all! Is the game a real-time local client for a fast action game, or a turn based strategy sim? Can the blockchain handle low latency realtime client interactions? What are the strengths/limits of such a system? What's different between that and client-client interactions, with a player hosting a game and friends connecting to their game with their local machine as a host? How does scaling up to the 'massive massive' scale work and contrast with cloud compute scaling? Where does anti-cheat fit in and what does the blockchain bring over existing systems? what machines are doing the 'server side' processing and who's paying for their electricity and upkeep etc.
It'd actually be nice to have a real discussion about the tech's real place in gaming.
I do hope @iroboto or anyone else can weigh in with a realistic look at blockchain networked gaming topology with a healthy discourse on what works and what doesn't.
Last edited:
LOL the players would need to mine for the game to actually run.
The client would run largely like VGA Planets not sure if you played this one. Or think Diplomacy if you need a board game representation.
You put in your moves but your moves are compiled only when your block is processed. Use proof of stake the currency you own in the game to process the blocks, you are given some additional currency for processing them.
When it comes to combat the system will have to play that out, it would be a simulation completed by the system. Still thinking on how this one would work.
Last edited:
I'm having trouble getting my head around this.
Perhaps because the blockchain is using words with different definitions that aren't transferable or obvious? 
Is this game operating in realtime or turn-based?
Why do you get currency for processing a game block?
Is that currency usable as currency in other systems? So can you play the game, accrue 300 Crytobucks, and then buy an NFT avatar on a system that accepts Cryptobucks?
What's the origin of the currency to give to players processing bucks?