"You spend over 3,000 hours in a game, maybe $500 in upgrades, you get $0 value back."

bcbully

Thoughts from outside this forum. Some random guy with more followers than this forum has users. Good read in the comments if you have twitter.

https://twitter.com/DCLBlogger/status/1477401484077658114

Slapshot1188

We literally just covered this.  TAXES

I do not want to need a CPA to play my games.

Ridelynn

How is that any different than what people have always done in EQ, WoW, Eve, etc?

Because you think everyone is going to trade their stuff for $1000's? No way - money doesn't just appear out of no where, it always comes from someplace else. Even when nations just "print" money - that still comes out of something (usually in the form of all other money just becoming less valuable - the net total value remains the same).

Sure, you can have a game that legitimizes account/item trading outside of the game. You don't need crypto/NFT/whatever buzzword to do that. But don't go thinking the entire game population is going to be able to retire off their game earnings - you'd have a handful of people who can eek out some money -even some very high profile ones that make a lot of buzz -- and the vast, vast majority of people playing like they always do - paying for the privilege. One person making $1000 is going to need more than 1,000 players paying more than $1 to fund that - by the time the developer, publisher, clearing house, etc all take their cuts.

In the end - no different than what people have always done in EQ, WoW, Eve, etc.

Same thing with, say, Youtube --- a few people can make some money there, and some of those people get pretty high profile coverage and even real capital-M Money - but don't go thinking that everyone is gonna go get rich posting their random cat videos. 

dinogn

This is a joke, he paid for 3000€ of "fun" and now want the money he paid and the bonus,
Next time I buy a pizza i'll ask the restaurant to pay me back for staying at their place.
Noice.


But seriously, remember the white knights when p2w was introduced? remember when loot box was introduced? One day you'll remember the introduction of NFT the same way.

Nilden

I got a better question.

Why would anyone support this?

It just dissolves any immersion the game would have since it's all about mastercard and visa. Monetization is now the focus of the game. The entire game is not designed around  fun and fairness but to be the ultimate in pay 2 win. Pay 2 everything.

Screw NFTs, screw blockchain, cash shops are cancer and I will play something else. Something I know the other people that are there want to play a game for fun not grind out working at their slave labor gamejob.

Nilden

dinogn said:

This is a joke, he paid for 3000€ of "fun" and now want the money he paid and the bonus,
Next time I buy a pizza i'll ask the restaurant to pay me back for staying at their place.
Noice.


But seriously, remember the white knights when p2w was introduced? remember when loot box was introduced? One day you'll remember the introduction of NFT the same way.

Honestly this is like most of what he posts. It's completely disingenuous. As if anyone who plays a game for 3000 hours is not getting value out of it. 

finefluff

Playing the game is the value… The statement presents a false equivalency between value and dollars.

The player would also have different motivations in those two scenarios. In the $0 back scenario, the player is paying only for his enjoyment of playing. In $1000s back scenario, the player is investing his time and money for future earnings. The possibility of earning changes a player’s motivations and manner of playing. That for me is why I will avoid NFT games. I don’t want to be influenced by the possibility of earning. But everyone has their preferences…

bcbully

finefluff said:

Playing the game is the value… The statement presents a false equivalency between value and dollars.

The player would also have different motivations in those two scenarios. In the $0 back scenario, the player is paying only for his enjoyment of playing. In $1000s back scenario, the player is investing his time and money for future earnings. The possibility of earning changes a player’s motivations and manner of playing. That for me is why I will avoid NFT games. I don’t want to be influenced by the possibility of earning. But everyone has their preferences…

I am doing both.

laserit

Thegames are so bad people feel they need to be payed to play them?

 I pay to be entertained, I’m not payed to be entertained.

You get what you pay for, if your lucky.

bcbully

Stizzled said:

Reading through the twitter thread it seems that thoughts from outside our forum aren't so different from our own. Pretty much nothing but negative responses and he only managed 1k likes from his 160k followers.

Nah, definately more positive than negative.

161 retweets, 81 quotes, 1129 likes in a couple hours. Pretty ok.

More likes than negative posters on this forum that's for sure. What we have like 10 people on this forum that post the same FUD in every thread, 15 tops? You included.

finefluff

bcbully said:

finefluff said:

Playing the game is the value… The statement presents a false equivalency between value and dollars.

The player would also have different motivations in those two scenarios. In the $0 back scenario, the player is paying only for his enjoyment of playing. In $1000s back scenario, the player is investing his time and money for future earnings. The possibility of earning changes a player’s motivations and manner of playing. That for me is why I will avoid NFT games. I don’t want to be influenced by the possibility of earning. But everyone has their preferences…

I am doing both.

That's fine. Nothing wrong with having fun and making money doing it. The distinction I was trying to make was playing for its own sake versus playing for gain. You can have fun while playing for gain, but the play is not for its own sake.

When there is the possibility of earning, all players will be influenced by the earnings potential. Their play will follow the money. Maybe some are influenced by it more, others less, but when earnings potential is there, it changes how the player plays. I want my play to be more "pure" in a sense (self-directed?). I prefer games to not have achievements for a similar reason. 

finefluff

NFTs and RMT ruin the promise of virtual worlds.

Dattelis

The problem is that many people aren't being honest as to why they are pushing this. The simple fact is they bring people in to cash out early. Its not much different than an influencer taking on a sponsor. In a way its worse because there's no fixed rate for any of this.

bcbully

finefluff said:

bcbully said:

finefluff said:

Playing the game is the value… The statement presents a false equivalency between value and dollars.

The player would also have different motivations in those two scenarios. In the $0 back scenario, the player is paying only for his enjoyment of playing. In $1000s back scenario, the player is investing his time and money for future earnings. The possibility of earning changes a player’s motivations and manner of playing. That for me is why I will avoid NFT games. I don’t want to be influenced by the possibility of earning. But everyone has their preferences…

I am doing both.

That's fine. Nothing wrong with having fun and making money doing it. The distinction I was trying to make was playing for its own sake versus playing for gain. You can have fun while playing for gain, but the play is not for its own sake.

When there is the possibility of earning, all players will be influenced by the earnings potential. Their play will follow the money. Maybe some are influenced by it more, others less, but when earnings potential is there, it changes how the player plays. I want my play to be more "pure" in a sense (self-directed?). I prefer games to not have achievements for a similar reason. 

You're speaking in certains here. I don't agree with all players will follow the money.

If money is not a player priority, they will play the game and money will come along the way. Just like some people play WoW just to earn gold and sit on piles of it. Others are dead broke with server first to their credit and tons of items. 

bcbully

Dattelis said:

The problem is that many people aren't being honest as to why they are pushing this. The simple fact is they bring people in to cash out early. Its not much different than an influencer taking on a sponsor. In a way its worse because there's no fixed rate for any of this.

Please give an example.

Please explain what you mean by "no fixed rate". Thank you.

WalkinGlenn

Good lord man, at what point is the shilling going to stop with this OP. 

bcbully

WalkinGlenn said:

Good lord man, at what point is the shilling going to stop with this OP. 

I said awhile back I'm going to drag this forum kicking and screaming, if need be into the present. 

Knowledge is a beautiful thing, and we all have gained.

laserit

Torval said:

Ridelynn said:

How is that any different than what people have always done in EQ, WoW, Eve, etc?

Because you think everyone is going to trade their stuff for $1000's? No way - money doesn't just appear out of no where, it always comes from someplace else. Even when nations just "print" money - that still comes out of something (usually in the form of all other money just becoming less valuable - the net total value remains the same).

Sure, you can have a game that legitimizes account/item trading outside of the game. You don't need crypto/NFT/whatever buzzword to do that. But don't go thinking the entire game population is going to be able to retire off their game earnings - you'd have a handful of people who can eek out some money -even some very high profile ones that make a lot of buzz -- and the vast, vast majority of people playing like they always do - paying for the privilege. One person making $1000 is going to need more than 1,000 players paying more than $1 to fund that - by the time the developer, publisher, clearing house, etc all take their cuts.

In the end - no different than what people have always done in EQ, WoW, Eve, etc.

Same thing with, say, Youtube --- a few people can make some money there, and some of those people get pretty high profile coverage and even real capital-M Money - but don't go thinking that everyone is gonna go get rich posting their random cat videos. 

I think the "people" that are going to make money from this are the same gold farming operations that are already in business. They're already setup to take advantage of this kind of platform. They will make bank off the backs of sweatshop labor (like they already do) and sell that to players just like you say. They will control the market and what players pay.

The "developers" of the crypto games will take their cut. The crypto clearinghouse doing the actual Eth/Btc trades will take their cut. It is basically a way to legitimize gold farming so developers don't have to waste money on fighting and banning them.

For the cheaters already buying gold under the table this will provide a say way for them to wallet warrior their way to the top while funding the third world farmers and the developers.

I don't see any benefit to the average gamer at all and lots to lose as this is sure to increase the overall cost of playing not lower it.

Fighting and banning them

They are going to make a fortune off them. They are now going to be a welcomed asset.

TwistedSister77

tzervo said:

My 3000 hours are valued way more than a couple $1000. It is the reason I do not mind paying to play right now. The game being fun is way more important than the game being able to give a couple $1000 back. So even if you simplify the situation down to this, it does not matter in the grand scheme of things. All that matters is if the game is fun.

Completely agree..  not even a $3 per hour metric... screw that.

Time is the one thing nobody can buyback... fun is fun... work is work..  

laserit

TwistedSister77 said:

tzervo said:

My 3000 hours are valued way more than a couple $1000. It is the reason I do not mind paying to play right now. The game being fun is way more important than the game being able to give a couple $1000 back. So even if you simplify the situation down to this, it does not matter in the grand scheme of things. All that matters is if the game is fun.

Completely agree..  not even a $3 per hour metric... screw that.

Time is the one thing nobody can buyback... fun is fun... work is work..  

Ask anyone who fills a paycheck.

Time is Money.

shetlandslarsen

If the game is 10x time more fun then anything else out there. Then maybe just maybe ill play it.

Otherwise I plan to stay away from anything Pay to earn , crypto and NFTs for as long as I possibly can. 

It may be the future but ill fight it. I am old and stubborn anyways. 

Scot

On the basis of the shallowness of arguments Matty has put forward, hopefully people can see why I don't think it matters how many followers you have. What does Kim Kardashian think about P2E, then we will really find out whats going on?

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Magnetia

This guy talking like dropping $500 on every game is normal

TwistedSister77

laserit said:

TwistedSister77 said:

tzervo said:

My 3000 hours are valued way more than a couple $1000. It is the reason I do not mind paying to play right now. The game being fun is way more important than the game being able to give a couple $1000 back. So even if you simplify the situation down to this, it does not matter in the grand scheme of things. All that matters is if the game is fun.

Completely agree..  not even a $3 per hour metric... screw that.

Time is the one thing nobody can buyback... fun is fun... work is work..  

Ask anyone who fills a paycheck.

Time is Money.

You actually agreed with me... Time = Money... but try buying TIME with money.

Yes, I'm aware of Billionaires with money... slightly better age(sometimes)... but insignificant.  

Nobody escapes.  Yes, I busted my behind for hourly wages at one point.

Ps Rockefeller and cohorts would be alive this day... 

ConstantineMerus

TwistedSister77 said:

laserit said:

TwistedSister77 said:

tzervo said:

My 3000 hours are valued way more than a couple $1000. It is the reason I do not mind paying to play right now. The game being fun is way more important than the game being able to give a couple $1000 back. So even if you simplify the situation down to this, it does not matter in the grand scheme of things. All that matters is if the game is fun.

Completely agree..  not even a $3 per hour metric... screw that.

Time is the one thing nobody can buyback... fun is fun... work is work..  

Ask anyone who fills a paycheck.

Time is Money.

You actually agreed with me... Time = Money... but try buying TIME with money.

Yes, I'm aware of Billionaires with money... slightly better age(sometimes)... but insignificant.  

Nobody escapes.  Yes, I busted my behind for hourly wages at one point.

Ps Rockefeller and cohorts would be alive this day... 

If we ever to achieve immortality Billionaires will be the ones getting it. It could become a luxury, like many other luxurious. Not everyone can afford a yacht, a penthouse, a supercar, trips to the fun island, and not everyone will afford immortality.