this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2024
55 points (98.2% liked)
Games
16457 readers
1079 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem is, what can they do with the blockchain that they can't do without it?
If you're thinking NFTs or a crypto replacement for in-game currency, what's the benefit versus just using a normal marketplace to sell in-game assets? Yes, they technically exist outside the game, but their value is still intrinsically linked to the game. If the game goes offline, the currency and NFTs suddenly have no use and their value will plummet. You'll also get people "investing" in the currency and fucking with the value who don't even play the game. Further, you're dealing with transaction fees every time they're traded with crypto, in addition to whatever CCP is skimming off the top.
You mention wanting a secure, legit system, but they could build a marketplace for that that handled it using the existing currency, there's no need to introduce a new, inefficient one to accomplish that.
Maybe I'm missing some really awesome use case; if so, can you clue me in?
Exactly. A blockchain is just a slow, inefficient, append-only distributed database. The only excuse for using one is if you lack a central authority, but in this case CCP has to be the central authority because everything in the DB only works with their game. So, just use a normal DB, it gives you everything the blockchain does in this case, but is much more efficient.
I merely mean that it wouldn't seem out of place and would potentially have more benefits than negatives. It just makes sense for the spreadsheets in space game. I'm not asking for it, but don't see any reason to be against it until we see what effect it actually has. 🤷🏻♂️
Adding blockchain tech can do a lot of things here actually.
Both these are realizable with smart contracts.
While it of course will lose its value you at least have the mementos available. Of course you either need a service to be up that can show you a visual representation or make a backup of the visual data yourself, but for a culturally important game like EVE that is very unlikely to be an issue
As for transaction fees that is not at all necessary for blockchain/crypto. Especially not a centralized one like would be the reasonable approach here. Sure CCP might want a cut, which they could call a transaction fee, but double dipping would be dumb and just make the whole thing fail.
As for currency value being influenced by external actors sure, that is a risk but also an opportunity. The people playing the game has access to make currency just by playing, people outside need to pay to get it. If anything it would make the amount of bots and miner accounts skyrocket, which might be annoying to players.
As for marketplace without blockchain it requires more trust and I'd argue is harder to realize in a secure manner. Blockchain started out as the next evolution in transaction safe databases, that preserves history, and that is exactly what you want for keeping track of in-game items and currency imo. Crypto as most know it is not all that blockchain is or will be. But equally blockchain can't solve everything like Cryptobros think it can.
Further making their own marketplace might put regulatory crosshairs on them in some markets and also would alienate the large third party marketplaces that are important to the games longevity up until now. Blockchain however could be made to make it easy for them to adapt to the new and make it easier for more sites to pop up and due to the nature of the tech you can build it such that no marketplace operator can easily scam users.
Really I see no issues at all using blockchain tech, and only slight issues with making it a full on, exchange tradeable cryptocurrency, and that's mainly from follow on effects.
So NFTs, basically?
So much dumb shit has been done under the banner of NFT that I want to disagree but yes, if each ID in your blockchain represents a unique variant of an item, and we want to that to persist then yes NFT would fit the bill as a correct term for it.
NFTs don't need to be limited, they don't need to have transaction fees to move them, they don't need to contain a link to an image and masquerade as if you own that image. All they need to do is prove that you have control of it by virtue of it being in your care. Then that proof confers the ability to use the item it represents in game. For currency you naturally wouldn't use NFTs, though you could if you're adamant you want a more "cash like" experience with change back and all that jazz.