Gamers have been earning money from gaming for a long time. Not just sponsored esports gamers but twitch and YT gamers as well. And no there's nothing wrong with that.
What is wrong are all the current sales pitches associated with blockchain games that tell everyone they too can make money by gaming in what is essentially pyramid schemes.
So no, nothing wrong with making money by gaming when it's real. Scams are something else altogether.
Honest product for an honest price.
Thats what has been forgotten. Everyone is in for as much as they can get and that sucks for games and everything else in this world these days.
Imho
The block chain games are all about some gamers making money from other gamers. Whether anyone makes money at all remains to be seen but regardless, that creates a totally different gaming environment that IMO, is very messed up.
If I produce something of value in game, something you find value in, and you buy it. What in the world is wrong me getting paid for that item? You'd rather just pay Amazon?
Are you actually creating something of value that wouldn't exist if you hadn't done it? Or are you just doing something that results in changing some bits in the game database that developers could trivially do themselves if they wanted to? And if the latter, why should the developers want you to get paid for it, rather than cutting out the middleman and selling the items directly themselves?
The royalty.
And why would developers prefer a 2.5% royalty from your selling an item over keeping 100% of the purchase price by selling it themselves? If you make it 10% or 20% or anything that isn't 100%, the same argument still applies.
What kind of mmorpg would that be if all items were purchsed from an in game vendor?
Instead of a crafter making a piece of armor, the developer just would sell it?
No, no, no. Not all items. Just all items that should be attached to NFTs. If players are going to get items by pulling out their wallet, why give that money to someone else rather than the developers who brought the game into existence?
We would be talking about limited cash shop items in this case correct?
WoW mints a limited set of 5000 armor skins all unique . Each skin sells for $50. They all sell out. 250k is made. Forever for the life of thes rare items Blizzard will receive 2.5%
Let's try to imagine a limted set of Armor from Vanilla WoW. A nearly 20 year old item form the most popular mmorpg ever, selling today. $2500? $5000? What about the rarest one out of that set. $50000? Something like this would mean the world to some degen WoW player who's put in a 1000 hours a year for the past 17 years. Pretty damn cool if you ask me. Now factor in how many times that item has been sold and resold of the years. This is how value can be built for both the gamer and the developer from a top down approach.
Now lets look at a bottom up approach where players craft NFTs the same market principles and conditions that govern in game economies still apply. The way in which this can/is/will be done wil vary. These items could be sold for ETH or USDC which is a RMT system, or they can be sold for in game currencies with ETH USDC conversion rations driven by real world market conditions. In both scenarios Blizzard will receive a fee from the conversion of currencies.
Both of these methods generate long term value for the player and the developer. Where as the current system we are in delivers no value for the player and diminishing returns in value for the developer.
If Blizzard is getting paid 100% for the skins up front, and then gets a 2.5% commission on any subsequent resales later, then I would see that as no worse than if they had the same sale but the skins were bind on pickup.
But let's not forget how we got to this discussion. Seven quote indents back was your post saying:
"If I produce something of value in game, something you find value in, and you buy it. What in the world is wrong me getting paid for that item? You'd rather just pay Amazon?"
So in your proposal, are you the artist who created the skin? Are you buying and reselling NFTs? What is your role that makes you think you should get paid for the limited edition skins?
I am the gamer who crafted the NFT.
To your post on why, on a top down cash shop approach. I would be the gamer who bought the limited NFT 20 years ago.
And what exactly did you do to craft the NFT? Was it a trivial amount of effort that the developers could easily have done themselves? Or did you create the artwork for the skin?
Gamers have been earning money from gaming for a long time. Not just sponsored esports gamers but twitch and YT gamers as well. And no there's nothing wrong with that.
What is wrong are all the current sales pitches associated with blockchain games that tell everyone they too can make money by gaming in what is essentially pyramid schemes.
So no, nothing wrong with making money by gaming when it's real. Scams are something else altogether.
Honest product for an honest price.
Thats what has been forgotten. Everyone is in for as much as they can get and that sucks for games and everything else in this world these days.
Imho
The block chain games are all about some gamers making money from other gamers. Whether anyone makes money at all remains to be seen but regardless, that creates a totally different gaming environment that IMO, is very messed up.
If I produce something of value in game, something you find value in, and you buy it. What in the world is wrong me getting paid for that item? You'd rather just pay Amazon?
Are you actually creating something of value that wouldn't exist if you hadn't done it? Or are you just doing something that results in changing some bits in the game database that developers could trivially do themselves if they wanted to? And if the latter, why should the developers want you to get paid for it, rather than cutting out the middleman and selling the items directly themselves?
The royalty.
And why would developers prefer a 2.5% royalty from your selling an item over keeping 100% of the purchase price by selling it themselves? If you make it 10% or 20% or anything that isn't 100%, the same argument still applies.
What kind of mmorpg would that be if all items were purchsed from an in game vendor?
Instead of a crafter making a piece of armor, the developer just would sell it?
No, no, no. Not all items. Just all items that should be attached to NFTs. If players are going to get items by pulling out their wallet, why give that money to someone else rather than the developers who brought the game into existence?
We would be talking about limited cash shop items in this case correct?
WoW mints a limited set of 5000 armor skins all unique . Each skin sells for $50. They all sell out. 250k is made. Forever for the life of thes rare items Blizzard will receive 2.5%
Let's try to imagine a limted set of Armor from Vanilla WoW. A nearly 20 year old item form the most popular mmorpg ever, selling today. $2500? $5000? What about the rarest one out of that set. $50000? Something like this would mean the world to some degen WoW player who's put in a 1000 hours a year for the past 17 years. Pretty damn cool if you ask me. Now factor in how many times that item has been sold and resold of the years. This is how value can be built for both the gamer and the developer from a top down approach.
Now lets look at a bottom up approach where players craft NFTs the same market principles and conditions that govern in game economies still apply. The way in which this can/is/will be done wil vary. These items could be sold for ETH or USDC which is a RMT system, or they can be sold for in game currencies with ETH USDC conversion rations driven by real world market conditions. In both scenarios Blizzard will receive a fee from the conversion of currencies.
Both of these methods generate long term value for the player and the developer. Where as the current system we are in delivers no value for the player and diminishing returns in value for the developer.
If Blizzard is getting paid 100% for the skins up front, and then gets a 2.5% commission on any subsequent resales later, then I would see that as no worse than if they had the same sale but the skins were bind on pickup.
But let's not forget how we got to this discussion. Seven quote indents back was your post saying:
"If I produce something of value in game, something you find value in, and you buy it. What in the world is wrong me getting paid for that item? You'd rather just pay Amazon?"
So in your proposal, are you the artist who created the skin? Are you buying and reselling NFTs? What is your role that makes you think you should get paid for the limited edition skins?
I am the gamer who crafted the NFT.
To your post on why, on a top down cash shop approach. I would be the gamer who bought the limited NFT 20 years ago.
And what exactly did you do to craft the NFT? Was it a trivial amount of effort that the developers could easily have done themselves? Or did you create the artwork for the skin?
I leveled my tailoring for hours. I leveled my enchanting for hours. I earned the recipe over hours.
Most of you guys are trying to rationalise your dislike and not providing any logic. This is like one of those lootbox threads. Thank God I didn't get involved this ti... Oh shit!
Constantine, The Console Poster
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
I've made so much money off of gaming, enough to retire at 53, put 2 kids thru OSU, own 3 homes etc . Was the best decisions of my life and life altering ,all from loving PC games.
It reminds me of the scene in Thor Ragnarok where the Grandmaster is visibly uncomfortable when Topaz uses the term slave, but is placated when she edits herself and uses the phrase "the prisoners with jobs".
I have a general principle in life. Sometimes there is a dispute that one side wants to describe accurately in clear and straightforward terms. The other side objects to the use of clear language, but insists that it can only be described in ridiculous euphemisms that obfuscate not merely which side they're on, but what the dispute is even about. When this happens, the former side is right and the latter side is wrong, and it generally is that simple.
There are a whole lot of disputes (likely even most disputes) that this principle won't settle. But when it applies, it's nearly always correct.
sometimes when its illegal to tell the truth, or your audience is so demoralized that they cant accept the truth, you have to use stories, parables and metaphors to convey the message and hope it reaches a few.
On the other hand some like to project what they want things to be and you have to keep an eye out for that as well. Movies are notorious for this.
Most of you guys are trying to rationalise your dislike and not providing any logic. This is like one of those lootbox threads. Thank God I didn't get involved this ti... Oh shit!
If you think we aren't providing any logic behind our dislike, then I simply don't think you are paying attention.
We've already seen gaming content and entertainment suffer as it gets more and more compromised by run away monetization.
How much worse do you think the gaming experience will become if these vulture blockchain arseholes try to turn it into a second job? Over the past two decades we've watched gaming megacorps grow and devour smaller independent studios, destroying any unique ideas or identity they brought to industry. What we are being left with is banal pap just good enough to get people interested so they can use their games to further fleece the player through gambling mechanics rather than actual game play. Add crypto into the mix and RNG loot boxes will look tame by comparison.
Penny stocks, Enron, World.com, Bernard Madoff, Parmalat, Coalgate, Daewoo group, BCCI, Baring Bank, Jeromy Kerviel, 2G Spectrum, BitConnect, PlexCoin, OneCoin. I've seen it all, over and over. People just won't fecking learn that there is no such thing as free money. Somebody always pays.
Just look at how hard these people are shilling blockchain gaming. They aren't doing it for the benefit of you or me, or the gaming experience. They are doing it to dupe the public into propping up their little house of digital cards with their own very real currency, while they give you useless play money instead. They could care less if the market crashes as they've already been payed up front in actual secure and protected currency. Its bad enough these get rich quick "to the moon" scammers have been destroying the investment markets, but now they want to start pissing in our little gaming pool. If blockchain is the future of gaming, then no thank you. As that is going to be one very bleak future indeed.
I've made so much money off of gaming, enough to retire at 53, put 2 kids thru OSU, own 3 homes etc . Was the best decisions of my life and life altering ,all from loving PC games.
Most of you guys are trying to rationalise your dislike and not providing any logic. This is like one of those lootbox threads. Thank God I didn't get involved this ti... Oh shit!
If you think we aren't providing any logic behind our dislike, then I simply don't think you are paying attention.
We've already seen gaming content and entertainment suffer as it gets more and more compromised by run away monetization.
How much worse do you think the gaming experience will become if these vulture blockchain arseholes try to turn it into a second job? Over the past two decades we've watched gaming megacorps grow and devour smaller independent studios, destroying any unique ideas or identity they brought to industry. What we are being left with is banal pap just good enough to get people interested so they can use their games to further fleece the player through gambling mechanics rather than actual game play. Add crypto into the mix and RNG loot boxes will look tame by comparison.
Penny stocks, Enron, World.com, Bernard Madoff, Parmalat, Coalgate, Daewoo group, BCCI, Baring Bank, Jeromy Kerviel, 2G Spectrum, BitConnect, PlexCoin, OneCin. I've seen it all, over and over. People just won't fecking learn that there is no such thing as free money. Somebody always pays.
Just look at how hard these people are shilling blockchain gaming. They aren't doing it for the benefit of you or me, or the gaming experience. They are doing it to dupe the public into propping up their little house of digital cards with their own very real currency, while they give you useless play money instead. They could care less if the market crashes as they've already been payed up front in actual secure and protected currency. Its bad enough these get rich quick "to the moon" scammers have been destroying the investment markets, but now they want to start pissing in our little gaming pool. If blockchain is the future of gaming, then no thank you. As that is going to be one very bleak future indeed.
So because the gaming industry has screwed us over before, blockchain and NFTs are bad.
It reminds me of the scene in Thor Ragnarok where the Grandmaster is visibly uncomfortable when Topaz uses the term slave, but is placated when she edits herself and uses the phrase "the prisoners with jobs".
I have a general principle in life. Sometimes there is a dispute that one side wants to describe accurately in clear and straightforward terms. The other side objects to the use of clear language, but insists that it can only be described in ridiculous euphemisms that obfuscate not merely which side they're on, but what the dispute is even about. When this happens, the former side is right and the latter side is wrong, and it generally is that simple.
There are a whole lot of disputes (likely even most disputes) that this principle won't settle. But when it applies, it's nearly always correct.
I believe the late great comedian George Carlin called this occourence "Soft Language".
I miss George Carlin, boy would he have a field day in these times of ours
Most of you guys are trying to rationalise your dislike and not providing any logic. This is like one of those lootbox threads. Thank God I didn't get involved this ti... Oh shit!
If you think we aren't providing any logic behind our dislike, then I simply don't think you are paying attention.
We've already seen gaming content and entertainment suffer as it gets more and more compromised by run away monetization.
How much worse do you think the gaming experience will become if these vulture blockchain arseholes try to turn it into a second job? Over the past two decades we've watched gaming megacorps grow and devour smaller independent studios, destroying any unique ideas or identity they brought to industry. What we are being left with is banal pap just good enough to get people interested so they can use their games to further fleece the player through gambling mechanics rather than actual game play. Add crypto into the mix and RNG loot boxes will look tame by comparison.
Penny stocks, Enron, World.com, Bernard Madoff, Parmalat, Coalgate, Daewoo group, BCCI, Baring Bank, Jeromy Kerviel, 2G Spectrum, BitConnect, PlexCoin, OneCin. I've seen it all, over and over. People just won't fecking learn that there is no such thing as free money. Somebody always pays.
Just look at how hard these people are shilling blockchain gaming. They aren't doing it for the benefit of you or me, or the gaming experience. They are doing it to dupe the public into propping up their little house of digital cards with their own very real currency, while they give you useless play money instead. They could care less if the market crashes as they've already been payed up front in actual secure and protected currency. Its bad enough these get rich quick "to the moon" scammers have been destroying the investment markets, but now they want to start pissing in our little gaming pool. If blockchain is the future of gaming, then no thank you. As that is going to be one very bleak future indeed.
So because the gaming industry has screwed us over before, blockchain and NFTs are bad.
gotcha
No, because blockchain and NFTs are scams, they don't belong in gaming, or anywhere else.
Most of you guys are trying to rationalise your dislike and not providing any logic. This is like one of those lootbox threads. Thank God I didn't get involved this ti... Oh shit!
If you think we aren't providing any logic behind our dislike, then I simply don't think you are paying attention.
We've already seen gaming content and entertainment suffer as it gets more and more compromised by run away monetization.
How much worse do you think the gaming experience will become if these vulture blockchain arseholes try to turn it into a second job? Over the past two decades we've watched gaming megacorps grow and devour smaller independent studios, destroying any unique ideas or identity they brought to industry. What we are being left with is banal pap just good enough to get people interested so they can use their games to further fleece the player through gambling mechanics rather than actual game play. Add crypto into the mix and RNG loot boxes will look tame by comparison.
Penny stocks, Enron, World.com, Bernard Madoff, Parmalat, Coalgate, Daewoo group, BCCI, Baring Bank, Jeromy Kerviel, 2G Spectrum, BitConnect, PlexCoin, OneCin. I've seen it all, over and over. People just won't fecking learn that there is no such thing as free money. Somebody always pays.
Just look at how hard these people are shilling blockchain gaming. They aren't doing it for the benefit of you or me, or the gaming experience. They are doing it to dupe the public into propping up their little house of digital cards with their own very real currency, while they give you useless play money instead. They could care less if the market crashes as they've already been payed up front in actual secure and protected currency. Its bad enough these get rich quick "to the moon" scammers have been destroying the investment markets, but now they want to start pissing in our little gaming pool. If blockchain is the future of gaming, then no thank you. As that is going to be one very bleak future indeed.
So because the gaming industry has screwed us over before, blockchain and NFTs are bad.
gotcha
No, because blockchain and NFTs are scams, they don't belong in gaming, or anywhere else.
Both aren’t necessarily bad, but they can be used in bad ways.
Most people looking to get rich usually struggle with that little angel and devil that argue with each other between our ears
I personally do not think there is anything wrong with Blockchain or NFT, even in gaming.
But as I see it, making money will be a lot like sports, where only like the top 10% of the players make any good bankroll, and everyone else is either decent, or went off to other professions, like gym coach.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I personally do not think there is anything wrong with Blockchain or NFT, even in gaming.
But as I see it, making money will be a lot like sports, where only like the top 10% of the players make any good bankroll, and everyone else is either decent, or went off to other professions, like gym coach.
How many of the fans or supporters are making anything, though? That's the way game companies treat their customers, as fans. We aren't the athlete on the field, we're the guys in the stands. The companies are trying to convince us we're the attraction.
That may appeal to egotistical types, but not me. I don't see myself as a 'Star'; I'm more a role player.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I personally do not think there is anything wrong with Blockchain or NFT, even in gaming.
But as I see it, making money will be a lot like sports, where only like the top 10% of the players make any good bankroll, and everyone else is either decent, or went off to other professions, like gym coach.
The problem I see (good analogy, btw), is that professional sports provide entertainment that millions participate in watching, each contributing a tiny amount of money to finance bloated salaries.
Are people going to sign up for these games by the millions just to watch others get rich?
...better be some entertainment value there.
You're taking about the e-Sports model. Players compete; viewers bring the money. So far, there really hasn't been the tens of millions that they hoped for. Flying a drone is far more engaging than watching the DRL on TV.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Most of you guys are trying to rationalise your dislike and not providing any logic. This is like one of those lootbox threads. Thank God I didn't get involved this ti... Oh shit!
If you think we aren't providing any logic behind our dislike, then I simply don't think you are paying attention.
We've already seen gaming content and entertainment suffer as it gets more and more compromised by run away monetization.
How much worse do you think the gaming experience will become if these vulture blockchain arseholes try to turn it into a second job? Over the past two decades we've watched gaming megacorps grow and devour smaller independent studios, destroying any unique ideas or identity they brought to industry. What we are being left with is banal pap just good enough to get people interested so they can use their games to further fleece the player through gambling mechanics rather than actual game play. Add crypto into the mix and RNG loot boxes will look tame by comparison.
Penny stocks, Enron, World.com, Bernard Madoff, Parmalat, Coalgate, Daewoo group, BCCI, Baring Bank, Jeromy Kerviel, 2G Spectrum, BitConnect, PlexCoin, OneCoin. I've seen it all, over and over. People just won't fecking learn that there is no such thing as free money. Somebody always pays.
Just look at how hard these people are shilling blockchain gaming. They aren't doing it for the benefit of you or me, or the gaming experience. They are doing it to dupe the public into propping up their little house of digital cards with their own very real currency, while they give you useless play money instead. They could care less if the market crashes as they've already been payed up front in actual secure and protected currency. Its bad enough these get rich quick "to the moon" scammers have been destroying the investment markets, but now they want to start pissing in our little gaming pool. If blockchain is the future of gaming, then no thank you. As that is going to be one very bleak future indeed.
It was a joke mate. But like all good jokes, there is truth in what I said, too. You are biased against it, because it can be abused, and you are right about that, but you also choose to ignore the wonderful things that it can bring as well.
I don't mean you personally, this is a vast generalisation on my part.
Regarding your own post above, yes, you are right about most of not all of that. But I believe that's just one side of this coin.
Constantine, The Console Poster
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
Most of you guys are trying to rationalise your dislike and not providing any logic. This is like one of those lootbox threads. Thank God I didn't get involved this ti... Oh shit!
If you think we aren't providing any logic behind our dislike, then I simply don't think you are paying attention.
We've already seen gaming content and entertainment suffer as it gets more and more compromised by run away monetization.
How much worse do you think the gaming experience will become if these vulture blockchain arseholes try to turn it into a second job? Over the past two decades we've watched gaming megacorps grow and devour smaller independent studios, destroying any unique ideas or identity they brought to industry. What we are being left with is banal pap just good enough to get people interested so they can use their games to further fleece the player through gambling mechanics rather than actual game play. Add crypto into the mix and RNG loot boxes will look tame by comparison.
Penny stocks, Enron, World.com, Bernard Madoff, Parmalat, Coalgate, Daewoo group, BCCI, Baring Bank, Jeromy Kerviel, 2G Spectrum, BitConnect, PlexCoin, OneCin. I've seen it all, over and over. People just won't fecking learn that there is no such thing as free money. Somebody always pays.
Just look at how hard these people are shilling blockchain gaming. They aren't doing it for the benefit of you or me, or the gaming experience. They are doing it to dupe the public into propping up their little house of digital cards with their own very real currency, while they give you useless play money instead. They could care less if the market crashes as they've already been payed up front in actual secure and protected currency. Its bad enough these get rich quick "to the moon" scammers have been destroying the investment markets, but now they want to start pissing in our little gaming pool. If blockchain is the future of gaming, then no thank you. As that is going to be one very bleak future indeed.
So because the gaming industry has screwed us over before, blockchain and NFTs are bad.
gotcha
If something happens once, it's a mistake. If something happens every time a new business model is introduced, it's by design.
We haven't gotten screwed over one time the industry has a new business model. We've gotten screwed over every time the industry has a new business model.
Most of you guys are trying to rationalise your dislike and not providing any logic. This is like one of those lootbox threads. Thank God I didn't get involved this ti... Oh shit!
If you think we aren't providing any logic behind our dislike, then I simply don't think you are paying attention.
We've already seen gaming content and entertainment suffer as it gets more and more compromised by run away monetization.
How much worse do you think the gaming experience will become if these vulture blockchain arseholes try to turn it into a second job? Over the past two decades we've watched gaming megacorps grow and devour smaller independent studios, destroying any unique ideas or identity they brought to industry. What we are being left with is banal pap just good enough to get people interested so they can use their games to further fleece the player through gambling mechanics rather than actual game play. Add crypto into the mix and RNG loot boxes will look tame by comparison.
Penny stocks, Enron, World.com, Bernard Madoff, Parmalat, Coalgate, Daewoo group, BCCI, Baring Bank, Jeromy Kerviel, 2G Spectrum, BitConnect, PlexCoin, OneCin. I've seen it all, over and over. People just won't fecking learn that there is no such thing as free money. Somebody always pays.
Just look at how hard these people are shilling blockchain gaming. They aren't doing it for the benefit of you or me, or the gaming experience. They are doing it to dupe the public into propping up their little house of digital cards with their own very real currency, while they give you useless play money instead. They could care less if the market crashes as they've already been payed up front in actual secure and protected currency. Its bad enough these get rich quick "to the moon" scammers have been destroying the investment markets, but now they want to start pissing in our little gaming pool. If blockchain is the future of gaming, then no thank you. As that is going to be one very bleak future indeed.
So because the gaming industry has screwed us over before, blockchain and NFTs are bad.
gotcha
If something happens once, it's a mistake. If something happens every time a new business model is introduced, it's by design.
We haven't gotten screwed over one time the industry has a new business model. We've gotten screwed over every time the industry has a new business model.
Yet a sub is the same price it was 20 years ago, and boxes the same as 30.
Content is the issue. Can we expect change when nothing has changed? Content is changing right now. For the first time in years, there is hope.
Most of you guys are trying to rationalise your dislike and not providing any logic. This is like one of those lootbox threads. Thank God I didn't get involved this ti... Oh shit!
If you think we aren't providing any logic behind our dislike, then I simply don't think you are paying attention.
We've already seen gaming content and entertainment suffer as it gets more and more compromised by run away monetization.
How much worse do you think the gaming experience will become if these vulture blockchain arseholes try to turn it into a second job? Over the past two decades we've watched gaming megacorps grow and devour smaller independent studios, destroying any unique ideas or identity they brought to industry. What we are being left with is banal pap just good enough to get people interested so they can use their games to further fleece the player through gambling mechanics rather than actual game play. Add crypto into the mix and RNG loot boxes will look tame by comparison.
Penny stocks, Enron, World.com, Bernard Madoff, Parmalat, Coalgate, Daewoo group, BCCI, Baring Bank, Jeromy Kerviel, 2G Spectrum, BitConnect, PlexCoin, OneCin. I've seen it all, over and over. People just won't fecking learn that there is no such thing as free money. Somebody always pays.
Just look at how hard these people are shilling blockchain gaming. They aren't doing it for the benefit of you or me, or the gaming experience. They are doing it to dupe the public into propping up their little house of digital cards with their own very real currency, while they give you useless play money instead. They could care less if the market crashes as they've already been payed up front in actual secure and protected currency. Its bad enough these get rich quick "to the moon" scammers have been destroying the investment markets, but now they want to start pissing in our little gaming pool. If blockchain is the future of gaming, then no thank you. As that is going to be one very bleak future indeed.
So because the gaming industry has screwed us over before, blockchain and NFTs are bad.
gotcha
If something happens once, it's a mistake. If something happens every time a new business model is introduced, it's by design.
We haven't gotten screwed over one time the industry has a new business model. We've gotten screwed over every time the industry has a new business model.
Yet a sub is the same price it was 20 years ago, and boxes the same as 30.
Content is the issue. Can we expect change when nothing has changed? Content is changing right now. For the first time in years, there is hope.
The negative change in box and sub happened with additional models. It's not just a sub anymore - it's a box, a sub, expansions, account service charges, and probably a cash shop (thanks, WoW).
If Blizzard is getting paid 100% for the skins up front, and then gets a 2.5% commission on any subsequent resales later, then I would see that as no worse than if they had the same sale but the skins were bind on pickup.
But let's not forget how we got to this discussion. Seven quote indents back was your post saying:
"If I produce something of value in game, something you find value in, and you buy it. What in the world is wrong me getting paid for that item? You'd rather just pay Amazon?"
So in your proposal, are you the artist who created the skin? Are you buying and reselling NFTs? What is your role that makes you think you should get paid for the limited edition skins?
I am the gamer who crafted the NFT.
To your post on why, on a top down cash shop approach. I would be the gamer who bought the limited NFT 20 years ago.
And what exactly did you do to craft the NFT? Was it a trivial amount of effort that the developers could easily have done themselves? Or did you create the artwork for the skin?
I leveled my tailoring for hours. I leveled my enchanting for hours. I earned the recipe over hours.
I played the game.
Far back in the thread, you wanted to be paid for having created something of value. In your example, however, you haven't done that. The game's developers designed and implemented an item that has value to some other players. You've created one copy of that item. The developers could trivially have created millions of copies of that item. So why should the developers want for someone who buys the item to pay 97.5% of the proceeds to you, rather than 100% to the developers?
In an in-game context, you can argue that your character created something of value inside the game and sells it to other characters for an in-game currency that isn't readily exchangeable for real-life money. That's normal gameplay, and I have no objection to that.
But players don't need to be paid to play a game. Developers do need to be paid to create it. Developers generally want for money that is paid into the system by players to go to the developers and not other players. The developers need players' real-life money, not their in-game items.
You can argue that with NFTs, an item will tend to be be resold more often because a buyer anticipates reselling it later. But if developers are only going to get a 2.5% commission on each sale, they need an average NFT to be resold 40 times to make as much money as if they simply sold it directly and got 100% of the purchase price. That seems unlikely.
I personally do not think there is anything wrong with Blockchain or NFT, even in gaming.
But as I see it, making money will be a lot like sports, where only like the top 10% of the players make any good bankroll, and everyone else is either decent, or went off to other professions, like gym coach.
How many of the fans or supporters are making anything, though? That's the way game companies treat their customers, as fans. We aren't the athlete on the field, we're the guys in the stands. The companies are trying to convince us we're the attraction.
That may appeal to egotistical types, but not me. I don't see myself as a 'Star'; I'm more a role player.
A handful of fans do make money off of running fan sites. Some make money off of sports gambling, which is closer to NFTs. Of course, a lot more lose money on sports gambling than make it.
Most of you guys are trying to rationalise your dislike and not providing any logic. This is like one of those lootbox threads. Thank God I didn't get involved this ti... Oh shit!
If you think we aren't providing any logic behind our dislike, then I simply don't think you are paying attention.
We've already seen gaming content and entertainment suffer as it gets more and more compromised by run away monetization.
How much worse do you think the gaming experience will become if these vulture blockchain arseholes try to turn it into a second job? Over the past two decades we've watched gaming megacorps grow and devour smaller independent studios, destroying any unique ideas or identity they brought to industry. What we are being left with is banal pap just good enough to get people interested so they can use their games to further fleece the player through gambling mechanics rather than actual game play. Add crypto into the mix and RNG loot boxes will look tame by comparison.
Penny stocks, Enron, World.com, Bernard Madoff, Parmalat, Coalgate, Daewoo group, BCCI, Baring Bank, Jeromy Kerviel, 2G Spectrum, BitConnect, PlexCoin, OneCin. I've seen it all, over and over. People just won't fecking learn that there is no such thing as free money. Somebody always pays.
Just look at how hard these people are shilling blockchain gaming. They aren't doing it for the benefit of you or me, or the gaming experience. They are doing it to dupe the public into propping up their little house of digital cards with their own very real currency, while they give you useless play money instead. They could care less if the market crashes as they've already been payed up front in actual secure and protected currency. Its bad enough these get rich quick "to the moon" scammers have been destroying the investment markets, but now they want to start pissing in our little gaming pool. If blockchain is the future of gaming, then no thank you. As that is going to be one very bleak future indeed.
So because the gaming industry has screwed us over before, blockchain and NFTs are bad.
gotcha
If something happens once, it's a mistake. If something happens every time a new business model is introduced, it's by design.
We haven't gotten screwed over one time the industry has a new business model. We've gotten screwed over every time the industry has a new business model.
I wouldn't say that players have been harmed by the business model of some solo developer creating something in his free time and posting it online while asking for voluntary donations. And yes, that is a newer business model, as it didn't happen thirty years ago, or at least not in a place that most of the general public could access.
If Blizzard is getting paid 100% for the skins up front, and then gets a 2.5% commission on any subsequent resales later, then I would see that as no worse than if they had the same sale but the skins were bind on pickup.
But let's not forget how we got to this discussion. Seven quote indents back was your post saying:
"If I produce something of value in game, something you find value in, and you buy it. What in the world is wrong me getting paid for that item? You'd rather just pay Amazon?"
So in your proposal, are you the artist who created the skin? Are you buying and reselling NFTs? What is your role that makes you think you should get paid for the limited edition skins?
I am the gamer who crafted the NFT.
To your post on why, on a top down cash shop approach. I would be the gamer who bought the limited NFT 20 years ago.
And what exactly did you do to craft the NFT? Was it a trivial amount of effort that the developers could easily have done themselves? Or did you create the artwork for the skin?
I leveled my tailoring for hours. I leveled my enchanting for hours. I earned the recipe over hours.
I played the game.
Far back in the thread, you wanted to be paid for having created something of value. In your example, however, you haven't done that. The game's developers designed and implemented an item that has value to some other players. You've created one copy of that item. The developers could trivially have created millions of copies of that item. So why should the developers want for someone who buys the item to pay 97.5% of the proceeds to you, rather than 100% to the developers?
In an in-game context, you can argue that your character created something of value inside the game and sells it to other characters for an in-game currency that isn't readily exchangeable for real-life money. That's normal gameplay, and I have no objection to that.
But players don't need to be paid to play a game. Developers do need to be paid to create it. Developers generally want for money that is paid into the system by players to go to the developers and not other players. The developers need players' real-life money, not their in-game items.
You can argue that with NFTs, an item will tend to be be resold more often because a buyer anticipates reselling it later. But if developers are only going to get a 2.5% commission on each sale, they need an average NFT to be resold 40 times to make as much money as if they simply sold it directly and got 100% of the purchase price. That seems unlikely.
Do you read what you write or do you just type?
We just went over this. You cut the quote then pose the same argument with the same question. Either your memory is fading, which I do not believe, or you are trying to run a forum trick from 2011.
Either way. Re read all you cut then answer your question.
If Blizzard is getting paid 100% for the skins up front, and then gets a 2.5% commission on any subsequent resales later, then I would see that as no worse than if they had the same sale but the skins were bind on pickup.
But let's not forget how we got to this discussion. Seven quote indents back was your post saying:
"If I produce something of value in game, something you find value in, and you buy it. What in the world is wrong me getting paid for that item? You'd rather just pay Amazon?"
So in your proposal, are you the artist who created the skin? Are you buying and reselling NFTs? What is your role that makes you think you should get paid for the limited edition skins?
I am the gamer who crafted the NFT.
To your post on why, on a top down cash shop approach. I would be the gamer who bought the limited NFT 20 years ago.
And what exactly did you do to craft the NFT? Was it a trivial amount of effort that the developers could easily have done themselves? Or did you create the artwork for the skin?
I leveled my tailoring for hours. I leveled my enchanting for hours. I earned the recipe over hours.
I played the game.
Far back in the thread, you wanted to be paid for having created something of value. In your example, however, you haven't done that. The game's developers designed and implemented an item that has value to some other players. You've created one copy of that item. The developers could trivially have created millions of copies of that item. So why should the developers want for someone who buys the item to pay 97.5% of the proceeds to you, rather than 100% to the developers?
In an in-game context, you can argue that your character created something of value inside the game and sells it to other characters for an in-game currency that isn't readily exchangeable for real-life money. That's normal gameplay, and I have no objection to that.
But players don't need to be paid to play a game. Developers do need to be paid to create it. Developers generally want for money that is paid into the system by players to go to the developers and not other players. The developers need players' real-life money, not their in-game items.
You can argue that with NFTs, an item will tend to be be resold more often because a buyer anticipates reselling it later. But if developers are only going to get a 2.5% commission on each sale, they need an average NFT to be resold 40 times to make as much money as if they simply sold it directly and got 100% of the purchase price. That seems unlikely.
Do you read what you write or do you just type?
We just went over this. You cut the quote then pose the same argument with the same question. Either your memory is fading, which I do not believe, or you are trying to run a forum trick from 2011.
Either way. Re read all you cut then answer your question.
So basically, if you can't seriously address what I said, you resort to ad hominem to obscure that? You're the one who is running in circles here arguing that you should get paid real-life to create something of value without actually having to create something of real-life value.
Comments
I played the game.
On the other hand some like to project what they want things to be and you have to keep an eye out for that as well. Movies are notorious for this.
SHUT UP SCORCH!!!
gotcha
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
No, because blockchain and NFTs are scams, they don't belong in gaming, or anywhere else.
Most people looking to get rich usually struggle with that little angel and devil that argue with each other between our ears
edited for clarity
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
But as I see it, making money will be a lot like sports, where only like the top 10% of the players make any good bankroll, and everyone else is either decent, or went off to other professions, like gym coach.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I don't mean you personally, this is a vast generalisation on my part.
Regarding your own post above, yes, you are right about most of not all of that. But I believe that's just one side of this coin.
We haven't gotten screwed over one time the industry has a new business model. We've gotten screwed over every time the industry has a new business model.
Content is the issue. Can we expect change when nothing has changed? Content is changing right now. For the first time in years, there is hope.
In an in-game context, you can argue that your character created something of value inside the game and sells it to other characters for an in-game currency that isn't readily exchangeable for real-life money. That's normal gameplay, and I have no objection to that.
But players don't need to be paid to play a game. Developers do need to be paid to create it. Developers generally want for money that is paid into the system by players to go to the developers and not other players. The developers need players' real-life money, not their in-game items.
You can argue that with NFTs, an item will tend to be be resold more often because a buyer anticipates reselling it later. But if developers are only going to get a 2.5% commission on each sale, they need an average NFT to be resold 40 times to make as much money as if they simply sold it directly and got 100% of the purchase price. That seems unlikely.
We just went over this. You cut the quote then pose the same argument with the same question. Either your memory is fading, which I do not believe, or you are trying to run a forum trick from 2011.
Either way. Re read all you cut then answer your question.