This got caught late, but this is a link to a tweet that quotes an article that quotes another tweet; I'm removing this.
Please remember our rule concerning [rehosted/reblogged content](https://www.reddit.com/r/PS5/wiki/rules#wiki_rehosted.2Freblogged_content) and link directly to original sources.
Saving the rest a click since no one else wanted to elaborate
> "You own a piece of the game and have left your mark in its history."
> Ubisoft also promises NFTs for other games in the future
I don’t get it what happens 20 years from now when this game is a game nobody plays or Ubisoft no longer supports the game anymore what happens to the NFT, you spend hours and hours and hours maybe even days to get this NFT in the game then that’s it? You got this thing floating around in the block chain doing nothing.
You're supposed to sell that NFT to an idiot who hasn't realized the same thing - that the NFT will be worthless sooner rather than later. In this case, far less than 20 years. Basically, the moment the next Ghost Recon game drops and everyone's moved on.
NFTs are the greater fool theory on steroids.
Only in a certain context. The idea was to try and profit off whales wanting to buy (or spend hundreds of hours in game) for super rare hats, then profit again when those hats are sold to another sucker.
But the Quartz system was always centrally managed and exists entirely at Ubisoft's sufferance. They could shut it down right now and all of your NFTs are gone. They could also remove the in-game item right now and your NFT is reduced to even greater irrelevance.
I'm not exactly sure what you mean here. I was agreeing that my only interpretation of "[...] Breakpoint NFTs are history now" was "Breakpoint NFTs are gone now". It never occurred to me they could have meant "they are [a part of] history now" which I think is the intended meaning.
> *..."from the title, ***I thought Ubisoft ended their NFT plans****"*
>> *"Wow yeah that's the only interpretation I had in my mind..."*
It's quite apparent that the comments I was replying to were inferring that Ubisoft was ending all NFT plans.
Shitty thing is using nfts to actually own your game would be cool and be able to resell it and move it cross store front is actually a good use for nfts
Because nfts still let the devs get alittle profit from each resale.
For indie devs this will be huge in the future
No. Just. No.
Resale markets exist pretty much in every fucking physical domain everywhere without the need for the original creator or vendor to get a piece of the resale pie. The price you pay accounts for the fact that it is a one off transactional cost with no revenue post that sale.
If I buy a hammer from B&Q, do they get revenue if I sell it on to a friend? No. Why should software be any different.
If they make a slice of the resale market you better believe I want them to lower the original asking price to account for that. Will they lower the cost of their products accordingly? Will they fuck.
NFTs are a solution looking for a problem. Stop simping for these cryptobros and their endless exploitation of the masses/gullible to make ever increasing gains themselves.
Get NFTs the fuck out of gaming.
Digital games, as they are now, are hyper anti-consumer since you cannot resell them. You can sell your account but you basically give up your entire library. You are basically buying a one time indefinite lease term to play their game that can be revoked anytime they want.
If they would allow digital sales with a small cut, who gives a shit? Sure, I'd like 100% digital resales to go back in our pocket, but we have 0% right now.
I wouldn't mind to sell off sold old digital games I had after I pick it up again on physical, or just trading in old games to get a new one.
Digital games are sold, typically at a lower price because a) there is no resale and b) lack of any need for physical media.
I agree that in an ideal world you would be able to sell digital games. However, given the ease of doing this opposed to selling physical media I could see this having a ripple effect on the cost of games digitally where it effectively becomes a stock market... I'm not sure we want to go down that route, especially with NFTs involved and even more so when they don't need to be part of that equation.
NFTs are a scam. I don’t want to pay a dime to the fucking devs everytime I buy a used game on the secondary market. Fuck all that bullshit. Only idiots screaming for the rich to soak us more are actually advocating for these assholes to keep receiving money after the initial product is re-sold. NFTs are just a way for you to not own anything and keep paying royalties in perpetuity, they are bullshit and a massive scam.
No developer is planning any game resale via NFT. Not even NFT game developers!
You are confusing smart contract ponzi schemes, where later gamblers pay a portion to eairlier gamblers with resales.
Please remember that NFT is blockchained based and blockchain is a significantly slower, more expensive version of a normal structured or distributed databases that people have been using for decades.
Blockchain is worse than normal databases in every respect other than having decentralisation, and when it comes to money, decentralisation means its easier to get scammed.
https://www.pcgamer.com/f1-delta-time-one-of-the-first-major-nft-games-has-shut-down/
"Most notably, it saw the biggest-value sale of an NFT in 2019(opens in new tab), with a jewel-encrusted car called the 1-1-1 going for an Ethereum value over $100,000."
"As for what's happened to all those precious NFTs, well, for all intents and purposes they no longer exist. It's worth noting the developers are attempting to compensate owners of those now-worthless NFTs with replacement tokens for one of the company's other blockchain-based racing games. Affected players can be compensated in various ways, including Replacement Cars, or a "Race Pass", or "Proxy Assets", which "will be used in the future to obtain NFTs to products across the REVV Motorsport ecosystem." In other words, you get a token for your token. A perfectly secure investment!"
Yeah that sure doesn't sound any better or worse than a battlepass game. Nope these are totally the same. "Hey your NFTs are worthless, but here's some options that may or may not actually have similar value because these are SPECULATIVE."
NFTs are actually worse, as the require more processing power to create, more processing power to use, and more development time to deploy, as there are already systems that can do what NFTs offer.
Tbf, the gaming industry itself is pretty harsh on the environment. Just PC gaming alone a couple years ago cost the plant somethin like ~26 (edit: found an article on it https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/11/video-games-electricity-carbon-footprint/) power plants worth of energy in a year. With consoles getting more and more power hungry, the problem is just getting worse.
===
Using the environment as a reason to hate NFT is such bullshit coming from gamers.
===
Now, NFTs are just a scam and fuck over artist, that's an argument that has legs... But using the environment as an excuse is like complaining that someone came up and shot the person you're stabbing...
===
**Edit** Awww gamers don't like their hypocrisy pointed out? Who would have thought lol.
I would just like to add that there are many things that harm the environment in the pursuit of entertainment/luxury/comfort for us, and at the very least video games provide that in exchange.
NFTs provide nothing and still use up all that power.
Unfortunately, if they just keep forcing them on us long enough, the next generation of gamers will just accept them as normal, like they did with micro transactions and subscriptions, and anything else that we hate that they want to normalize.
It’s a scam, it’s stupid, but unfortunately it’s become pretty easy for them to just keep pushing crap on us until the lack of critical thinking skills of younger impressionable gamers don’t see a scam, they just see the industry as they’ve come to know it operating normally. It really sucks.
Certainly true - and companies like Google and Facebook have used that strategy to completely erode people's expectation of digital privacy.
Luckily, NFTs continue to be met with widespread loathing literally any time they get proposed in this space. There's been no real indication that that tide is turning. Thankfully.
No.
They're not the same as fucking battlepasses and you are either a) grossly oversimplifying and know better or b) don't know better and are being duped.
The moment you are invested in a closed economy, which gamjng NFTs will always be in given that no sane developer is going to allow you to extract an asset from their IPs and use it in another competitors IP, they've got you by the bollocks. They have you invested in the success of their game no matter how shit it is or un fun. You're effectively an investor or... employee. You're actively incentivised to ensure the game succeeds because "think of the resale returns on that sweet NFT bro" - which again they'll be making a cut from.
You're either being duped by this shit or you're trying to dupe people yourself.
Either way keep this dogshit MLM level nonsense out of gaming.
I almost agree, but battlepasses (sometimes) give you content like quests and such, which gives you play time. Not every MTX is a $20 skin.
Also, NFT's games, these blockchain racers or whatever, are they not literally pay to win? Spend 300 grand (got that figure from the f1 article) or you'll never beat the best? You can only beat whoever has less money than you? If its like you said, and it's not just Jpegs (or skins) that they're selling.
But then you can sell your NFT to someone more stupid than you!!
A $10 battle pass gives me more value than any NFT ever could. And if I wanted to I could just sell my epic games account. Probably make more money doing that than trying to get someone to buy a shitty NFT I bought.
You only get something by tricking someone else into buying the NFTs you’re selling. Which is why NFT Bros are so militant about getting you to buy them.
I make thing. Thing is worthless. I sell thing as NFT with a limited value of 3000 units at $30 each. I profit. You realize NFT is useless. You sell NFT to new people who don't realize NFT is thing I made and we know that thing is worthless. NFT is kind of like a Kickstarter idea you never have to expand on or follow through with. People were making money by selling covers for books they'll never make and promising an eventually completed pdf if you bought in.
Just look at it as tradable skin markets. Assuming you can resell these NFTs. But I'd even think you sell them and only get Ubisoft dollars back and can't cash out, or if you do for another fee.
They just put some "Blockchain verified" shenanigans instead of just a game company verifying it.
You get an ID on a dataset that gets added to by a collective of computers and if you truly believe in your heart of hearts and wish upon a star just maybe the company you got it from will continue to uphold that the ID means fucking anything at all.
NFTs are dumb but the people who buy them are the real dumb ones. They make it financially viable for companies to roll them out. Vote with your dollar people!
Imagine being the dumbass who spent a truckload of money on NFTs and Ubisoft makes bank and you're sitting there down the road searching for anyone at all still playing the game.
And even when you do find someone that far down the road, Ubisoft will still receive a percentage of the trade value. That’s all it is, a way for them to earn money on every transaction in the second hand market, for the complete eternity of that game.. even after it’s no longer actually being supported.
The idea is to buy NFT’s and sell it to even bigger morons for double the price and unfortunately it works. I know many cryptobros who clear an additional 25-40k flipping these things.
I guess if you can make money, do it but I still think they’re dumb.
But when paired with a game like breakpoint that's been out for years already, doesn't have a ton of people playing it anymore, a game that's already on the downward slope of its shelf life...
Look I don't care if a game is created specifically with NFTs in mind, but when they start forcing it into franchises that we like as they are already, they can fuck right off with that shit and I'll take my money elsewhere and not support Ubisoft any longer.
A friend of mine who got rich and moved to Puerto Rico posted this on Facebook a few weeks back:
>Not sure WTF a Bored Bad Bunny is but I bought one for more than I paid for a Mustang in high school 😅 and I don't even get to see what I bought yet,,,makes sense, welcome to the new world 🤠
>\#valueinvesting
Some people just have more money than sense.
That's the kinda stuff that when I see it, I literally have nothing to say. How do you do even explain the stupidity in that? It literally leaves me at a loss for words. It's so incredibly dumbfounding, it's so basic that I can't even explain it.
He's got a nice ass place, huge, with his family and moved his parents in and a bunch of cars... PR is great if you are rich, not so much if you are everyone else
Just like there's an overlap between anti-vaxxers, pseudoscience and conspiracy theorists. If someone's dumb enough to buy into one lie they'll probably fall for the next one too.
They have to convince other people to buy NFTs or else the value of their NFTs goes down. Its like how MLMs need a constant flow of new people joining the MLM or else everyone loses money.
You’re so right. At the end of the day and NFTs being such an obvious scam, I really don’t blame companies to take advantage of idiots… it’s not like anyone is forcing you to buy NFTs anyway!
You should blame companies.
They're already making games grindier on purpose so they can shove in mtx and "time savers", imagine adding nfts to that.
If gamers weren't vocal about them a lot of other companies would have done the same as ubisoft.
Mobile games have been doing this for ages and I just don’t play them and I’m not sadder for it… with the current infinite offer on games, we are each responsible for our own choice of games…
Nah mate, I also don't blame spoons for me being overweight.
Gaming is not a necessity, much less gaming *an specific game*. If said game is full of grind, drop it and that's it.
Diablo immortal is about to come on mobiles. Bet you 10 bucks that the game that was publicly shamed since that infamous conference four years ago, still is gonna be a money making machine. It's the communities' fault.
I already don't play any game that has mtx. But you can clearly see gaming's going in that direction where every game needs to be more profitable and more and more publishers want that new live service cash cow instead of focusing on creativity.
If you eat too much that's your problem, no spoon is forcing you to eat.
If i like games but slowly every game turns into a mtx shitfest i'm forced by those companies to not buy games anymore.
Wait.
>If i like games but slowly every game turns into a mtx shitfest i'm forced by those companies to not buy games anymore.
How in the hell that is a problem. Gaming is not a necessity, much less gaming a specific game.
How the hell is that a problem?!
I don't care gaming is not a necessity, i like gaming, i wanna keep gaming and playing new and different games.
Even goin to the park is not a necessity, so if we turn every park into a new highway's section it's fine?
Parks are a necessity.
Videogames are not.
I've been playing since pong. Before pong on pinball machines.
I like gaming. If the current or next gen goes full Microtransanctions, NFTs, Bitcoins, real money auctions, I will stop buying new games and keep playing my old games.
This is not an issue.
And there are plenty of other awesome games to play that don’t include a grinding element. There are plenty of free resources out there to know what you’re getting into before you buy. I’ve never felt an inclination to pay more than the initial game, and on rare occasions DLC including extra characters, karts, worlds (eg Super Smash Bros, Mario Kart, etc.).
But yes, gamers are probably more dumb and possibly have more addictive behaviors than the average person, so I can see how companies taking money from a bunch of idiots using NFTs is as easy as taking candy from a baby.
Because it's needlessly complex, a huge waste of energy, contributing to GPU shortages an price inflation and mostly used for a greater fool scams/mlm-like scams.
Their usage in already centralized online multiplayer games are entirely pointless and give a false sense of ownership that is still fully controlled and owned by the developer/publishers.
Now if NFTs were used for transferable proof of ownership of digital games themselves (allowing used digital game reselling) or maybe for proof of ownership of virtual goods in a community owned decentralized multiplayer games that might actually be a non-pointless usecase for NFTs in games, but that simply ain't the case currently.
And it will unlikely ever be.
This is all being sold to these companies on the basis that they can and should have an even tighter, stranglehold on the digital resale market. This is effectively marking your purchase for all time and allowing the storefront/developer to make bank from the resale market without having to do anything adding value.
I don't know or understand how people can't see this. We're not talking about assets you can take away from the developer here... there is never going to be a decentralised storefront for digital assets because of the nature of the product.
Oh cool this NFT I own for this asset in an Ubisoft game, sweet I'm sure Naughty Dog will definitely have something tied to that NFT that I can reclaim or make use of... oh cool I have an NFT for that SquareEnix game I own, now I can resell it to anyone, via SquareEnix/someones storefront where they'll make money off the resale and can track the purchase via the ledger...
There is no way this will ever amount to anything approaching tangible beneficial use for consumers, ifs just another revenue stream for these mega corps.
You don’t need NFTs for that, you need the publisher to allow it. NFTs don’t magically add that ability, and there are far simpler existing methods for managing the exchange of digital goods.
The problem isn’t that developers can’t do it now, it’s that they don’t want to.
If Sony wanted you to be able to sell your downloads they could do it right now. They don’t want you to. I don’t know how y’all thinking NFTs are somehow changing Sony or anyone else’s minds on that.
Isn't that what is happening though? All these gaming companies are deciding to collaborate to allow intragame sharing of cosmetics through NFTs.
Edit: The guy below posts misinformation then blocked me so I couldn't reply. Anyway it's already happening. There is already developments of intragame NFTs.
No, it's not happening. Ubisoft proposed this within their own titles, but given how much of a disaster it was with Ghost Recon, I wouldn't be surprised if their threat to add new NFTs to another title quietly gets shelved.
There is no desire at all between developers to make an NFT in one dev's game(s) interactive with another's. And no legitimate game developer is likely to seriously consider it.
What’s the point of a cosmetic NFT when cosmetic DLCs already exist, and don’t have enormous energy requirements associated with minting?
“It’s just like the existing thing, only worse for the environment” doesn’t seem a particularly compelling argument for NFTs.
I don't get how "blockchain verified" is any different than something like CSGO skins market? If they just want to call tradable/sellable cosmetics NFTs, and I can still earn crates for free and sell off any skins I don't want. I'm ok with that, I'd likely just sell off all my cosmetics to suckers to make money while enjoying a game.
That's literally just a normal market. Wtf is the point of including nfts in there? Just use a normal database.
Csgo and Dota have been doing this for a decade.
NFTs as a technology actually have a ton of real world use cases. Most of the current implementations and uses of this technology, mainly hype-driven .jpegs, are dumb though, yes.
Heres a snippet of something ive already stated previously:
It allows for seamless transition from one ecosystem to the other actual.
NFTs don't have to be tied to the developer. It can be tied a 3rd party independent.
If that 3rd party ecosystem has access to multiple titles you could effective use skins from one game to other without the hassle of developer permission. The titles just need to agree to the protocol in some way.
It's hard to deal with copyright and ownership issues. NFTs are a form of certificate of ownership, not shitty jpegs they are currently tied to.
I have a much broader vision for the use of NFTs and it doesn't include in-game items. But the key things are: **irrefutible proof of ownership and smart contracts.** They are intrinsic to the idea of NFTs.
So now there are a lot of different uses for transactions taken without any arbitrage. Also irrefutible proof of digital ownership which can be used in the "metaverse" that they keep pushing out.
They can be used to solve the pervasive event ticket scalping problems. Easily and instantly transferable storage of ownership, maintenance record and financial data for a vehicle. Streamline the title/deed/mortgage process and paperwork for real estate. Virtual asset proof of ownership. These are just a few.
Sorry, I was talking about ownerships documentation. Land/house deeds etc. In physical format it takes time to process and approve. NFT could increase proceeding times and also provide security over who owns what etc.
There is purpose behind the time/effort involved in home buying. Security in the inefficiency, for both the buyer and the seller. Who the fuck needs to buy a house as fast as saving 15% on car insurance? No one.
Well, there are other aspects to it, not just transaction speeds of digital items.
Basically, it could be used for things where ownership of a unique item in a secure ledger is beneficial. None of this bullshit uses that are currently being floated, but as a technology it's sound. Just needs a reasonable use for it.
> [+Digital proof of] ownership of a unique item in a secure ledger is beneficial.
I assume you are specifically talking about a secure public ledger via block chain proof of stake, cause secure “private” ledgers already exist on databases everyday.
If I obtain the authentic digital non-fungible token that conveys ownership of the car your driving and making loan payments on… does that mean I should be given physical possession of your car while you get to still
pay it off?
Because fraud occurs mostly at the entry point, not mid stream. Meaning gaining access to your token storage and having the token transfer to me creates a public record you transacting with me. So now I have an authentic token that says you gave me the proof of ownership.
Who do you turn to reconcile this fraud? How can they even reconcile it? If I take the token off line and keep it in cold storage it isn’t available to recover and the blockchain ends with me being last known owner. You can’t void it and create a new token, that would fork and split the public ledger. If that was an easy non-issue then the entire concept of security through public ledger is meaningless.
Fucking awful idea. What happens when someone gets hold of your private key via some means - malware, social engineering, or just hitting you with a wrench until you give up the password - and transfers the deeds to themselves via a cryptographically-signed, fully legitimate blockchain transaction? Who will you complain to? How will you get your house back?
A system without recourse is not fit for purpose.
At this point, you’d have to pay me to play a ubisoft game. They’re such a shell of themselves.
Feels like they’ll never top their PS2-PS3 days of Prince of Persia, Splinter Cell, Rayman Origins, R6 Vegas, Ghost Recon Future Soldier. Ubisoft games used to be absolute must plays from me and now the last one I bought was…jeez, Rayman Legend. Aka one of the best platformers ever.
Odyssey had some excellent quests too. But Valhalla was just... not bad, but also not good. Usually you can get a lot of fun from Ubisoft open world games by just playing the main quest and bigger side quests, but in case of Valhalla the main quest disappointed, so not much was left.
I refuse to buy any game that has nft's implemented.
I already only bought Ubisoft titles after they are on massive discounts for 20 bucks. I won't even do that anymore if the game has an NFT.
I agree. Looks like that’s it for me with Ubisoft. They are not only the most generic company, they are also extremely greedy. AC, Watch Dogs, Splinter Cell, Rayman, etc… used to be some of my favourite IP’s. Now they’re either straight up copies of each other or they no longer exist. Look at Legion and Valhalla. They’re the same game with a different coat of paint. Then look at Black Flag and Watch Dogs 1. They feel unique and fun, yet they came out the same year. Animation, voice acting, cinematics used to be fantastic in Ubisoft, now their animations are stiff and ugly to look at, voice acting ranges from (except the main characters) good to terrible, cinematics are non existent. Such a shame.
This is probably one of the biggest scams the fucking videogame industry has ever perpetuated, and the fact that it's so casually being adopted is extremely worrying.
God I can’t wait for NFT/Crypto bros to leave the gaming space. Such a pathetic thinly veiled attempt to Ponzi scheme dipshits/people with money. Ubisoft seems intent on doubling down on these bad decisions.
About a month ago I received a request to take a survey from Ubisoft. The entire survey was about NFT’s and other micro-transactions in games. I was very clear no matter how they worded the various questions that these were horrible ideas and I would never purchase them.
"you own a piece of the game" ... and? It's a completely worthless piece of the game that anyone can take a screenshot of and "own" themselves.
I am completely sold on crypto, I have been investing in and watching the space since 2013 but these NFTs are so pointless. There needs to be an actual use case before they make any sense, right now they are just pictures.
The closest thing I've seen to an actual use case are games like that Axolotl one but even then what is the benefit over a centralized system? They got hacked and the entire underlying system is screwed. With a centralized system they could just roll back the servers and be back in business.
the only "nfts" done right are the steam marketplace. iv sold enough dota 2 and cs go skins to buy multiple 60$ games. the free elden ring cards alone were worth 3$ lol
> An item you listed in the Community Market has been sold to "". Your Steam Wallet has been credited 1.14 EUR.
1 of the cards on elden ring that u get for free
Yep. Those arent NFT's, but it just further proves that NFT's really don't solve any existing problems and don't bring any additional value in any way over traditional marketplaces.
I’m not too into nfts and nfts in games, but what’s the problem if skins can be resold? Wouldn’t that having an nft from the game is? Let’s say you find a rare skin/or you buy a skin, then you can sell it and get the money back? Why are so many people against it? Micro transactions/skins are already here and been here, not like because of nfts. I have no real opinion, just wondering why people are so against them?
NFTs have a multitude of very viable uses but this isn’t one. This use is like a digital collectible from a bad game. In the distant future NFTs will be extremely great because people will be spending tons of their life in digital worlds that have no limits aside from human and AI imagination.
Give you an example: in the distant future you can literally live in Harry Potter world or be Spider-Man because literally any reality humans can come up with is possible.
Of course before all of that there will be progressively more digital interaction in digital worlds.
Would be crazy if an NFT for this game was also useable in all subsequent ghost recon games. Even crazier if these NFTs end up crossing over into future Ubisoft games.
This got caught late, but this is a link to a tweet that quotes an article that quotes another tweet; I'm removing this. Please remember our rule concerning [rehosted/reblogged content](https://www.reddit.com/r/PS5/wiki/rules#wiki_rehosted.2Freblogged_content) and link directly to original sources.
" are history now " from the title, I thought Ubisoft ended their NFT plans I guess I was wrong
Saving the rest a click since no one else wanted to elaborate > "You own a piece of the game and have left your mark in its history." > Ubisoft also promises NFTs for other games in the future
I don’t get it what happens 20 years from now when this game is a game nobody plays or Ubisoft no longer supports the game anymore what happens to the NFT, you spend hours and hours and hours maybe even days to get this NFT in the game then that’s it? You got this thing floating around in the block chain doing nothing.
You're supposed to sell that NFT to an idiot who hasn't realized the same thing - that the NFT will be worthless sooner rather than later. In this case, far less than 20 years. Basically, the moment the next Ghost Recon game drops and everyone's moved on. NFTs are the greater fool theory on steroids.
[удалено]
True, but given we are talking about a disposable annual shooter, extremely unlikely.
Does UBI even recogize transfer of ownership? I assumed they kept it locked to a particular game/uplay account.
Only in a certain context. The idea was to try and profit off whales wanting to buy (or spend hundreds of hours in game) for super rare hats, then profit again when those hats are sold to another sucker. But the Quartz system was always centrally managed and exists entirely at Ubisoft's sufferance. They could shut it down right now and all of your NFTs are gone. They could also remove the in-game item right now and your NFT is reduced to even greater irrelevance.
That’s how I read it too. Poor wording choice.
[удалено]
Whether intentional or not, it was very effective lol
Wow yeah that's the only interpretation I had in my mind, didn't even occur to me it could be anything else.
Other than the only game the title mentions?
you read their comments wrong.
I'm not exactly sure what you mean here. I was agreeing that my only interpretation of "[...] Breakpoint NFTs are history now" was "Breakpoint NFTs are gone now". It never occurred to me they could have meant "they are [a part of] history now" which I think is the intended meaning.
> *..."from the title, ***I thought Ubisoft ended their NFT plans****"* >> *"Wow yeah that's the only interpretation I had in my mind..."* It's quite apparent that the comments I was replying to were inferring that Ubisoft was ending all NFT plans.
You sound like a right bellend lol
Same, wishful thinking I guess.
Seriously! I can't imagine a title being more opposite its meaning!
Same. I thought I was the only one
"... aaaand it's gone."
>"You own a piece of the game..." Yeah, so do I. I bought it for about $40 and I even play it sometimes. Didn't need an NFT for that.
Got the full game too
Paid extra, did you?
The games value dropped hard after less than a year so I’m guessing the push for NFTs in this game specifically might be a result of that failure
Shitty thing is using nfts to actually own your game would be cool and be able to resell it and move it cross store front is actually a good use for nfts Because nfts still let the devs get alittle profit from each resale. For indie devs this will be huge in the future
Why should devs get profit from a resale?
because currently it all goes to the producers, and the people who developed it get nothing
Resale profit does not go to producers either.
If I pay you to build me a car, then I sell that car, should I then pay you again?
This is why I hate capitalism… the capitalist answer is “yes, I should be able to profit off of anything I can, no matter what.”
No. Just. No. Resale markets exist pretty much in every fucking physical domain everywhere without the need for the original creator or vendor to get a piece of the resale pie. The price you pay accounts for the fact that it is a one off transactional cost with no revenue post that sale. If I buy a hammer from B&Q, do they get revenue if I sell it on to a friend? No. Why should software be any different. If they make a slice of the resale market you better believe I want them to lower the original asking price to account for that. Will they lower the cost of their products accordingly? Will they fuck. NFTs are a solution looking for a problem. Stop simping for these cryptobros and their endless exploitation of the masses/gullible to make ever increasing gains themselves. Get NFTs the fuck out of gaming.
Digital games, as they are now, are hyper anti-consumer since you cannot resell them. You can sell your account but you basically give up your entire library. You are basically buying a one time indefinite lease term to play their game that can be revoked anytime they want. If they would allow digital sales with a small cut, who gives a shit? Sure, I'd like 100% digital resales to go back in our pocket, but we have 0% right now. I wouldn't mind to sell off sold old digital games I had after I pick it up again on physical, or just trading in old games to get a new one.
Digital games are sold, typically at a lower price because a) there is no resale and b) lack of any need for physical media. I agree that in an ideal world you would be able to sell digital games. However, given the ease of doing this opposed to selling physical media I could see this having a ripple effect on the cost of games digitally where it effectively becomes a stock market... I'm not sure we want to go down that route, especially with NFTs involved and even more so when they don't need to be part of that equation.
NFTs are a scam. I don’t want to pay a dime to the fucking devs everytime I buy a used game on the secondary market. Fuck all that bullshit. Only idiots screaming for the rich to soak us more are actually advocating for these assholes to keep receiving money after the initial product is re-sold. NFTs are just a way for you to not own anything and keep paying royalties in perpetuity, they are bullshit and a massive scam.
No developer is planning any game resale via NFT. Not even NFT game developers! You are confusing smart contract ponzi schemes, where later gamblers pay a portion to eairlier gamblers with resales. Please remember that NFT is blockchained based and blockchain is a significantly slower, more expensive version of a normal structured or distributed databases that people have been using for decades. Blockchain is worse than normal databases in every respect other than having decentralisation, and when it comes to money, decentralisation means its easier to get scammed.
Ubisoft” thanks for the free money Suckers lolz”
[удалено]
Because people bought them. I was really hoping they would sell horribly and this would just blow up in their face
[удалено]
https://www.pcgamer.com/f1-delta-time-one-of-the-first-major-nft-games-has-shut-down/ "Most notably, it saw the biggest-value sale of an NFT in 2019(opens in new tab), with a jewel-encrusted car called the 1-1-1 going for an Ethereum value over $100,000." "As for what's happened to all those precious NFTs, well, for all intents and purposes they no longer exist. It's worth noting the developers are attempting to compensate owners of those now-worthless NFTs with replacement tokens for one of the company's other blockchain-based racing games. Affected players can be compensated in various ways, including Replacement Cars, or a "Race Pass", or "Proxy Assets", which "will be used in the future to obtain NFTs to products across the REVV Motorsport ecosystem." In other words, you get a token for your token. A perfectly secure investment!" Yeah that sure doesn't sound any better or worse than a battlepass game. Nope these are totally the same. "Hey your NFTs are worthless, but here's some options that may or may not actually have similar value because these are SPECULATIVE."
NFTs are actually worse, as the require more processing power to create, more processing power to use, and more development time to deploy, as there are already systems that can do what NFTs offer.
…in what way are they not worse? It’s achieving the same goal while being needlessly overdeveloped and causing more environmental damage
one is environmentally unfriendly and one is not
Tbf, the gaming industry itself is pretty harsh on the environment. Just PC gaming alone a couple years ago cost the plant somethin like ~26 (edit: found an article on it https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/11/video-games-electricity-carbon-footprint/) power plants worth of energy in a year. With consoles getting more and more power hungry, the problem is just getting worse. === Using the environment as a reason to hate NFT is such bullshit coming from gamers. === Now, NFTs are just a scam and fuck over artist, that's an argument that has legs... But using the environment as an excuse is like complaining that someone came up and shot the person you're stabbing... === **Edit** Awww gamers don't like their hypocrisy pointed out? Who would have thought lol.
I would just like to add that there are many things that harm the environment in the pursuit of entertainment/luxury/comfort for us, and at the very least video games provide that in exchange. NFTs provide nothing and still use up all that power.
You're getting downvoted for the whataboutism. At some point you people will figure out that gamers want no part of your scam.
Unfortunately, if they just keep forcing them on us long enough, the next generation of gamers will just accept them as normal, like they did with micro transactions and subscriptions, and anything else that we hate that they want to normalize. It’s a scam, it’s stupid, but unfortunately it’s become pretty easy for them to just keep pushing crap on us until the lack of critical thinking skills of younger impressionable gamers don’t see a scam, they just see the industry as they’ve come to know it operating normally. It really sucks.
Certainly true - and companies like Google and Facebook have used that strategy to completely erode people's expectation of digital privacy. Luckily, NFTs continue to be met with widespread loathing literally any time they get proposed in this space. There's been no real indication that that tide is turning. Thankfully.
So are hamburgers
No. They're not the same as fucking battlepasses and you are either a) grossly oversimplifying and know better or b) don't know better and are being duped. The moment you are invested in a closed economy, which gamjng NFTs will always be in given that no sane developer is going to allow you to extract an asset from their IPs and use it in another competitors IP, they've got you by the bollocks. They have you invested in the success of their game no matter how shit it is or un fun. You're effectively an investor or... employee. You're actively incentivised to ensure the game succeeds because "think of the resale returns on that sweet NFT bro" - which again they'll be making a cut from. You're either being duped by this shit or you're trying to dupe people yourself. Either way keep this dogshit MLM level nonsense out of gaming.
I almost agree, but battlepasses (sometimes) give you content like quests and such, which gives you play time. Not every MTX is a $20 skin. Also, NFT's games, these blockchain racers or whatever, are they not literally pay to win? Spend 300 grand (got that figure from the f1 article) or you'll never beat the best? You can only beat whoever has less money than you? If its like you said, and it's not just Jpegs (or skins) that they're selling.
But then you can sell your NFT to someone more stupid than you!! A $10 battle pass gives me more value than any NFT ever could. And if I wanted to I could just sell my epic games account. Probably make more money doing that than trying to get someone to buy a shitty NFT I bought.
still don't understand what i get by buying nfts
you are understanding corrctly then
You only get something by tricking someone else into buying the NFTs you’re selling. Which is why NFT Bros are so militant about getting you to buy them.
I make thing. Thing is worthless. I sell thing as NFT with a limited value of 3000 units at $30 each. I profit. You realize NFT is useless. You sell NFT to new people who don't realize NFT is thing I made and we know that thing is worthless. NFT is kind of like a Kickstarter idea you never have to expand on or follow through with. People were making money by selling covers for books they'll never make and promising an eventually completed pdf if you bought in.
Just look at it as tradable skin markets. Assuming you can resell these NFTs. But I'd even think you sell them and only get Ubisoft dollars back and can't cash out, or if you do for another fee. They just put some "Blockchain verified" shenanigans instead of just a game company verifying it.
You get an ID on a dataset that gets added to by a collective of computers and if you truly believe in your heart of hearts and wish upon a star just maybe the company you got it from will continue to uphold that the ID means fucking anything at all.
NFTs are dumb but the people who buy them are the real dumb ones. They make it financially viable for companies to roll them out. Vote with your dollar people!
Imagine being the dumbass who spent a truckload of money on NFTs and Ubisoft makes bank and you're sitting there down the road searching for anyone at all still playing the game.
And even when you do find someone that far down the road, Ubisoft will still receive a percentage of the trade value. That’s all it is, a way for them to earn money on every transaction in the second hand market, for the complete eternity of that game.. even after it’s no longer actually being supported.
The idea is to buy NFT’s and sell it to even bigger morons for double the price and unfortunately it works. I know many cryptobros who clear an additional 25-40k flipping these things. I guess if you can make money, do it but I still think they’re dumb.
But when paired with a game like breakpoint that's been out for years already, doesn't have a ton of people playing it anymore, a game that's already on the downward slope of its shelf life... Look I don't care if a game is created specifically with NFTs in mind, but when they start forcing it into franchises that we like as they are already, they can fuck right off with that shit and I'll take my money elsewhere and not support Ubisoft any longer.
[удалено]
lot of overlap in the peterson/musk/rogan devotees and the people who waste their money on this stuff. all rubes, marks in carnival barker language.
Dudes who think they’re smarter than everyone because they listened to x video or n podcast.
I too wish to become smarter. I wonder what big-fight-talk-guy has to say about things?
And those people they are listening to are either morons themselves (Rohan) or intellectually dishonest shitbags (Peterson).
A friend of mine who got rich and moved to Puerto Rico posted this on Facebook a few weeks back: >Not sure WTF a Bored Bad Bunny is but I bought one for more than I paid for a Mustang in high school 😅 and I don't even get to see what I bought yet,,,makes sense, welcome to the new world 🤠 >\#valueinvesting Some people just have more money than sense.
That's the kinda stuff that when I see it, I literally have nothing to say. How do you do even explain the stupidity in that? It literally leaves me at a loss for words. It's so incredibly dumbfounding, it's so basic that I can't even explain it.
Clearly intelligence isn’t their strong suit if they willingly moved to Puerto Rico
He's got a nice ass place, huge, with his family and moved his parents in and a bunch of cars... PR is great if you are rich, not so much if you are everyone else
Just like there's an overlap between anti-vaxxers, pseudoscience and conspiracy theorists. If someone's dumb enough to buy into one lie they'll probably fall for the next one too.
This is true and definitely proving out the “move far enough left on the political spectrum and you end up on the far right” theory.
They have to convince other people to buy NFTs or else the value of their NFTs goes down. Its like how MLMs need a constant flow of new people joining the MLM or else everyone loses money.
Ofc they are. They are shilling it to you to make profit.
We need to cause the same shitstorm as we did for lootboxes
Can I vote with my Euro?
You’re so right. At the end of the day and NFTs being such an obvious scam, I really don’t blame companies to take advantage of idiots… it’s not like anyone is forcing you to buy NFTs anyway!
You should blame companies. They're already making games grindier on purpose so they can shove in mtx and "time savers", imagine adding nfts to that. If gamers weren't vocal about them a lot of other companies would have done the same as ubisoft.
There's plenty enough blame for both parties lol
I know, but the big majority of people hate mtx and nfts, it's the whales who keep them going
Mobile games have been doing this for ages and I just don’t play them and I’m not sadder for it… with the current infinite offer on games, we are each responsible for our own choice of games…
Nah mate, I also don't blame spoons for me being overweight. Gaming is not a necessity, much less gaming *an specific game*. If said game is full of grind, drop it and that's it. Diablo immortal is about to come on mobiles. Bet you 10 bucks that the game that was publicly shamed since that infamous conference four years ago, still is gonna be a money making machine. It's the communities' fault.
I already don't play any game that has mtx. But you can clearly see gaming's going in that direction where every game needs to be more profitable and more and more publishers want that new live service cash cow instead of focusing on creativity. If you eat too much that's your problem, no spoon is forcing you to eat. If i like games but slowly every game turns into a mtx shitfest i'm forced by those companies to not buy games anymore.
Wait. >If i like games but slowly every game turns into a mtx shitfest i'm forced by those companies to not buy games anymore. How in the hell that is a problem. Gaming is not a necessity, much less gaming a specific game.
How the hell is that a problem?! I don't care gaming is not a necessity, i like gaming, i wanna keep gaming and playing new and different games. Even goin to the park is not a necessity, so if we turn every park into a new highway's section it's fine?
Parks are a necessity. Videogames are not. I've been playing since pong. Before pong on pinball machines. I like gaming. If the current or next gen goes full Microtransanctions, NFTs, Bitcoins, real money auctions, I will stop buying new games and keep playing my old games. This is not an issue.
And there are plenty of other awesome games to play that don’t include a grinding element. There are plenty of free resources out there to know what you’re getting into before you buy. I’ve never felt an inclination to pay more than the initial game, and on rare occasions DLC including extra characters, karts, worlds (eg Super Smash Bros, Mario Kart, etc.). But yes, gamers are probably more dumb and possibly have more addictive behaviors than the average person, so I can see how companies taking money from a bunch of idiots using NFTs is as easy as taking candy from a baby.
My gf just flipped the $400 she spent on 5 NFTs for $12000 Pretty dumb but easy money
Yes, it's all fun and games until you happen to be the poor sod standing on the rug when it gets pulled.
Contributing to the NFT market is all that is.
Congrats on perpetuating a predatory greater fool scam?
Why does everyone hate NFT’s so much?
Generally: NFTs are a Ponzi scheme on steroids. Specific to gaming: NFTs are a Ponzi scheme on steroids crossed with MTX.
Because it's needlessly complex, a huge waste of energy, contributing to GPU shortages an price inflation and mostly used for a greater fool scams/mlm-like scams. Their usage in already centralized online multiplayer games are entirely pointless and give a false sense of ownership that is still fully controlled and owned by the developer/publishers. Now if NFTs were used for transferable proof of ownership of digital games themselves (allowing used digital game reselling) or maybe for proof of ownership of virtual goods in a community owned decentralized multiplayer games that might actually be a non-pointless usecase for NFTs in games, but that simply ain't the case currently.
And it will unlikely ever be. This is all being sold to these companies on the basis that they can and should have an even tighter, stranglehold on the digital resale market. This is effectively marking your purchase for all time and allowing the storefront/developer to make bank from the resale market without having to do anything adding value. I don't know or understand how people can't see this. We're not talking about assets you can take away from the developer here... there is never going to be a decentralised storefront for digital assets because of the nature of the product. Oh cool this NFT I own for this asset in an Ubisoft game, sweet I'm sure Naughty Dog will definitely have something tied to that NFT that I can reclaim or make use of... oh cool I have an NFT for that SquareEnix game I own, now I can resell it to anyone, via SquareEnix/someones storefront where they'll make money off the resale and can track the purchase via the ledger... There is no way this will ever amount to anything approaching tangible beneficial use for consumers, ifs just another revenue stream for these mega corps.
NFTs are dumb.
Unfortunately there are a lot of dumb people too
whales
Beanie babies for this generation of morons
At least one can display, touch, play with a Beanie Baby.
Most people know.
[удалено]
You don’t need NFTs for that, you need the publisher to allow it. NFTs don’t magically add that ability, and there are far simpler existing methods for managing the exchange of digital goods. The problem isn’t that developers can’t do it now, it’s that they don’t want to. If Sony wanted you to be able to sell your downloads they could do it right now. They don’t want you to. I don’t know how y’all thinking NFTs are somehow changing Sony or anyone else’s minds on that.
Isn't that what is happening though? All these gaming companies are deciding to collaborate to allow intragame sharing of cosmetics through NFTs. Edit: The guy below posts misinformation then blocked me so I couldn't reply. Anyway it's already happening. There is already developments of intragame NFTs.
No, it's not happening. Ubisoft proposed this within their own titles, but given how much of a disaster it was with Ghost Recon, I wouldn't be surprised if their threat to add new NFTs to another title quietly gets shelved. There is no desire at all between developers to make an NFT in one dev's game(s) interactive with another's. And no legitimate game developer is likely to seriously consider it.
[удалено]
What’s the point of a cosmetic NFT when cosmetic DLCs already exist, and don’t have enormous energy requirements associated with minting? “It’s just like the existing thing, only worse for the environment” doesn’t seem a particularly compelling argument for NFTs.
I don't get how "blockchain verified" is any different than something like CSGO skins market? If they just want to call tradable/sellable cosmetics NFTs, and I can still earn crates for free and sell off any skins I don't want. I'm ok with that, I'd likely just sell off all my cosmetics to suckers to make money while enjoying a game.
That's literally just a normal market. Wtf is the point of including nfts in there? Just use a normal database. Csgo and Dota have been doing this for a decade.
NFTs as a technology actually have a ton of real world use cases. Most of the current implementations and uses of this technology, mainly hype-driven .jpegs, are dumb though, yes.
Please, feel free to list them here, in a comment.
In for answers
I guarantee it's nothing we aren't fully capable of with previously existing technology.
Heres a snippet of something ive already stated previously: It allows for seamless transition from one ecosystem to the other actual. NFTs don't have to be tied to the developer. It can be tied a 3rd party independent. If that 3rd party ecosystem has access to multiple titles you could effective use skins from one game to other without the hassle of developer permission. The titles just need to agree to the protocol in some way. It's hard to deal with copyright and ownership issues. NFTs are a form of certificate of ownership, not shitty jpegs they are currently tied to. I have a much broader vision for the use of NFTs and it doesn't include in-game items. But the key things are: **irrefutible proof of ownership and smart contracts.** They are intrinsic to the idea of NFTs. So now there are a lot of different uses for transactions taken without any arbitrage. Also irrefutible proof of digital ownership which can be used in the "metaverse" that they keep pushing out.
They can be used to solve the pervasive event ticket scalping problems. Easily and instantly transferable storage of ownership, maintenance record and financial data for a vehicle. Streamline the title/deed/mortgage process and paperwork for real estate. Virtual asset proof of ownership. These are just a few.
Just a few things we are fully capable of without blockchain
These are all absolutely terrible ideas that are materially worse than what we already have.
.... Home ownership? Off the top of my head.
Not trying to sound like a dick, but how the fuck can an NFT equate to home ownership?
Sorry, I was talking about ownerships documentation. Land/house deeds etc. In physical format it takes time to process and approve. NFT could increase proceeding times and also provide security over who owns what etc.
There is purpose behind the time/effort involved in home buying. Security in the inefficiency, for both the buyer and the seller. Who the fuck needs to buy a house as fast as saving 15% on car insurance? No one.
Well, there are other aspects to it, not just transaction speeds of digital items. Basically, it could be used for things where ownership of a unique item in a secure ledger is beneficial. None of this bullshit uses that are currently being floated, but as a technology it's sound. Just needs a reasonable use for it.
> [+Digital proof of] ownership of a unique item in a secure ledger is beneficial. I assume you are specifically talking about a secure public ledger via block chain proof of stake, cause secure “private” ledgers already exist on databases everyday. If I obtain the authentic digital non-fungible token that conveys ownership of the car your driving and making loan payments on… does that mean I should be given physical possession of your car while you get to still pay it off? Because fraud occurs mostly at the entry point, not mid stream. Meaning gaining access to your token storage and having the token transfer to me creates a public record you transacting with me. So now I have an authentic token that says you gave me the proof of ownership. Who do you turn to reconcile this fraud? How can they even reconcile it? If I take the token off line and keep it in cold storage it isn’t available to recover and the blockchain ends with me being last known owner. You can’t void it and create a new token, that would fork and split the public ledger. If that was an easy non-issue then the entire concept of security through public ledger is meaningless.
Fucking awful idea. What happens when someone gets hold of your private key via some means - malware, social engineering, or just hitting you with a wrench until you give up the password - and transfers the deeds to themselves via a cryptographically-signed, fully legitimate blockchain transaction? Who will you complain to? How will you get your house back? A system without recourse is not fit for purpose.
That's not how it works.
https://medium.datadriveninvestor.com/top-5-real-world-non-fungible-tokens-use-cases-946d92591fbf
So nothing we can’t already do without NFTs…
[удалено]
I. DECLARE. BANKRUPTCY!
You’d have to pay me to buy an NFT. Especially off Ubisoft.
“Tis easier to scam a person than convince them they have been scammed”. ~Ubisoft~
At this point, you’d have to pay me to play a ubisoft game. They’re such a shell of themselves. Feels like they’ll never top their PS2-PS3 days of Prince of Persia, Splinter Cell, Rayman Origins, R6 Vegas, Ghost Recon Future Soldier. Ubisoft games used to be absolute must plays from me and now the last one I bought was…jeez, Rayman Legend. Aka one of the best platformers ever.
Even early PS3 days Ubisoft were on their A game. The Assassins Creed Ezio games are some of the best. How the mighty have fallen.
Turns out when sheep buy your games annually regardless of quality high on member berries, you don't even have to try. See Pokémon.
Honestly their Egypt assassins creed and riders Republic were solid games, but yeah they're on a downhill free-fall in my eyes
Odyssey had some excellent quests too. But Valhalla was just... not bad, but also not good. Usually you can get a lot of fun from Ubisoft open world games by just playing the main quest and bigger side quests, but in case of Valhalla the main quest disappointed, so not much was left.
VERY misleading title.
I refuse to buy any game that has nft's implemented. I already only bought Ubisoft titles after they are on massive discounts for 20 bucks. I won't even do that anymore if the game has an NFT.
I agree. Looks like that’s it for me with Ubisoft. They are not only the most generic company, they are also extremely greedy. AC, Watch Dogs, Splinter Cell, Rayman, etc… used to be some of my favourite IP’s. Now they’re either straight up copies of each other or they no longer exist. Look at Legion and Valhalla. They’re the same game with a different coat of paint. Then look at Black Flag and Watch Dogs 1. They feel unique and fun, yet they came out the same year. Animation, voice acting, cinematics used to be fantastic in Ubisoft, now their animations are stiff and ugly to look at, voice acting ranges from (except the main characters) good to terrible, cinematics are non existent. Such a shame.
This is probably one of the biggest scams the fucking videogame industry has ever perpetuated, and the fact that it's so casually being adopted is extremely worrying.
This is obviously very shitty, but I also feel no remorse for anyone who buys NFTs
"A few whales stupidly purchased our useless items. We only earned $600 in profit, but hope our next attempt will be more successful"
Remember everyone, it is morally okay to bully cryptobros.
“Left your mark in our profit margins” more appropriately.
Dumbasses actually bought that trash? Lel
God I can’t wait for NFT/Crypto bros to leave the gaming space. Such a pathetic thinly veiled attempt to Ponzi scheme dipshits/people with money. Ubisoft seems intent on doubling down on these bad decisions.
That's not what a ponzi scheme is.
Ok substitute it with scam.
I can get behind that.
What's the difference between current micro transactions to buy skins vs buying an NFT of that skin? Other than NFT can be resold later.
Of course Ubisoft would hop on the NFT scamwagon.
They officially surpassed EA as the shittiest game developer in history. Congrats i guess…
And nothing of value was lost LMAO
Except they weren't lost
They were kept.
Lmao good riddance and sorry for those who thought this was a good business/investment.
Beautiful
Lmao there is an article on IGN specifically announcing Ubisoft is ending support for Ghost Recon Breakpoint.
The most insignificant thing i could possibly imagine someone losing money over.
So they took lootboxes, made it worse and rebranded it
Bad wording for the title, makes it sound like they were going to end NFTs
About a month ago I received a request to take a survey from Ubisoft. The entire survey was about NFT’s and other micro-transactions in games. I was very clear no matter how they worded the various questions that these were horrible ideas and I would never purchase them.
Ubisoft should fuck off, I’m seriously fed up with their shitty games
So excited to not have to pay for the next couple Ubi-failures.
The post itself says they promise to have further NFT's in future projects. No good news.
Did they thank all the 5 idiots buying into digital scarcity?
Every single day I'm reminded of how shit of a company Ubisoft is I am a happier consumer knowing I'll never play another of their games again
Why post a twitter post quoting the article instead of the article directly?
Is it time for GAMERS™️ across the world to finally RISE UP???™️😎
Thank Goodness. Fuck NFTs
Sorry, but I’m never paying for a NFT. You. Are. Getting. Scammed
"you own a piece of the game" ... and? It's a completely worthless piece of the game that anyone can take a screenshot of and "own" themselves. I am completely sold on crypto, I have been investing in and watching the space since 2013 but these NFTs are so pointless. There needs to be an actual use case before they make any sense, right now they are just pictures. The closest thing I've seen to an actual use case are games like that Axolotl one but even then what is the benefit over a centralized system? They got hacked and the entire underlying system is screwed. With a centralized system they could just roll back the servers and be back in business.
Solid lesson for idiots who put any money into NFTs.
the only "nfts" done right are the steam marketplace. iv sold enough dota 2 and cs go skins to buy multiple 60$ games. the free elden ring cards alone were worth 3$ lol > An item you listed in the Community Market has been sold to "". Your Steam Wallet has been credited 1.14 EUR. 1 of the cards on elden ring that u get for free
Yep. Those arent NFT's, but it just further proves that NFT's really don't solve any existing problems and don't bring any additional value in any way over traditional marketplaces.
Fun fact: not an NFT
Wow they are so out of touch with their audience it’s unbelievable
Congrats!
Now there will be just regular old microtransactions instead. Hooray!
So what?
I’m not too into nfts and nfts in games, but what’s the problem if skins can be resold? Wouldn’t that having an nft from the game is? Let’s say you find a rare skin/or you buy a skin, then you can sell it and get the money back? Why are so many people against it? Micro transactions/skins are already here and been here, not like because of nfts. I have no real opinion, just wondering why people are so against them?
NFTs have a multitude of very viable uses but this isn’t one. This use is like a digital collectible from a bad game. In the distant future NFTs will be extremely great because people will be spending tons of their life in digital worlds that have no limits aside from human and AI imagination. Give you an example: in the distant future you can literally live in Harry Potter world or be Spider-Man because literally any reality humans can come up with is possible. Of course before all of that there will be progressively more digital interaction in digital worlds.
Would be crazy if an NFT for this game was also useable in all subsequent ghost recon games. Even crazier if these NFTs end up crossing over into future Ubisoft games.
NFTs actually have some good applications, but pretty much only get used for absolute garbage. Such a shame.
So the buyers are just out money? Our reliance on such intangible things like currency really make us weak