Pay for a box, in this case you NFT avatar and play. Craft/mint NFT items and toss them on the auction house just as you would in any other mmorpg.
Done with the game, sell your avatar, and items.
Hmm, gamers have been doing that since UO, probably even longer.
Developers discouraged such for "reasons", most selfish of course, but some for the good of the game.
This is not the improvement you claim it to be.
Here's an example. One challenge games have is to provide enough money sinks to prevent game economies from imploding due to runaway mudflation.
In EVE (and I imagine many MMORPGS) do you know what one of, if not the biggest money drain is? Players leaving the game, either temporarily or permanently.
When I left EVE over 5 years ago I basically took 80B ISK out of circulation.
Imagine the negative impact had I been able to sell my ISK for crypto on my way out. Amplify that by a hundredfold if some of the players whose weath actually is in the trillions did the same.
There are so many other ways selling items of power could destroy the gameplay. Imagine if the in game stations in null sec could be sold for crypto.
No need to fight a war taking over a star system or region, just offer enough crypto to buy it all outright to seal the deal.
Incoming attack by rampaging Pandemic Legion forces? No worries, hop on the Crypto market and beef up your alliance fleet with as many dreadnoughts and supers as you can afford to repel the assault.
PL force, sensing such a move might decide to try and buy up all of the available stock beforehand, pushing the market place prices way up and now everyone is playing an entirely different sort of "meta" game.
Now, perhaps if such exchanges were limited to only NFT based cosmetics then not nearly such a big deal except in games where cool cosmetics can be crafted and sold by players.
Except I think that ship sailed long ago when cash shops became the rage, most games these days sell the best cosmetics in their stores leaving player made choices far fewer than in days of yore.
Even that game you always tout, when you leave that great character you built should be retired, not sold to someone else so they can continue it's legacy without having to do the work it took you to get it there.
It's one big reason I've never sold any character I've created in any game, it just doesn't seem "right" to do so.
Others with "different" moral standards don't feel the same of course, but that's OK, Madonna taught me we all live in a "material" world.
But isn't it fun when every element of a game ultimately boils down to "Who has the biggest wallet?"
Can we just stop talking about these kinda games period?
Even, if I am for now against this kind of model, I want to stay informed. I don't want this website to apply a P2E censorship.
This is a real gaming industry trend. Ignoring it would be IMO worse than learning/discussing it.
No. Amplifying it.. giving it a reach far beyond their small fanbase... that's far worse.
History has shown this time and time again with these things. A fire with no oxygen will die. But one well fed with air and fuel... well it can become all consuming.
It's isn't CENSORSHIP to not act as the PR for this stuff. Nobody is saying that folks should be banned for talking about it.... but giving it visibility and free promotion? Hell no.
"History has shown this time and time again with these things. A fire with no oxygen will die. But one well fed with air and fuel... well it can become all consuming."
I think it is already too late for this to happen... at least in the near future. Millions are already invested and P2E games are pumping out like crazy.
You are very naive if you think that just stopping talking about it will stop this heavy machine.
For it to die now, it will need at least a decade if it dies at all.
Hardly. The vast majority of those numbers come from mobile or from games like Axie…. Certainly not MMORPGS
There is simply no need to amplify things like LOA going blockchain. If anything they should do an article on how it’s a betrayal of the original Kickstarter and the customers that got them started.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Aaaan would it be a bad thing if someone offered 1,000,000, to the guild owning a sector? Js
Well, it would be good for my wallet, but really ugly for the game.
I bet you a lot of people in EVE would feel the same, and say "gfto we aint selling!' and to me that is frecking awesome.
I can imagine a Corp leader selling off everything the Corp group amassed and slinking away while the rest of the Corp is left without a sector or any compensation for it, yes.
And I can already see lawsuits regarding the same if in-game assets become real financial assets.
Can we just stop talking about these kinda games period?
Even, if I am for now against this kind of model, I want to stay informed. I don't want this website to apply a P2E censorship.
This is a real gaming industry trend. Ignoring it would be IMO worse than learning/discussing it.
We haven't given the 'ignoring it' option much of a try; every day there's another article shoving this concept down our throats.
I'm not convinced that I should be interested in *any* kind of play to earn model. I don't see why I would want my game to become like a job, in any fashion.
It doesn't merit a try. The needless suppression of information is long condemned in the free world. If you're not interested in a topic you are free to not read it. Nobody else is going to click the related link against your will to force that content upon you.
Can we just stop talking about these kinda games period?
Even, if I am for now against this kind of model, I want to stay informed. I don't want this website to apply a P2E censorship.
This is a real gaming industry trend. Ignoring it would be IMO worse than learning/discussing it.
We haven't given the 'ignoring it' option much of a try; every day there's another article shoving this concept down our throats.
I'm not convinced that I should be interested in *any* kind of play to earn model. I don't see why I would want my game to become like a job, in any fashion.
It doesn't merit a try. The needless suppression of information is long condemned in the free world. If you're not interested in a topic you are free to not read it. Nobody else is going to click the related link against your will to force that content upon you.
Again... there is a difference between "needless suppression of information"... and amplifying it.
The first means that I prevent you from disseminating your information The second means that I am simply not disseminating it for you
That is a fundamental difference.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Can we just stop talking about these kinda games period?
Even, if I am for now against this kind of model, I want to stay informed. I don't want this website to apply a P2E censorship.
This is a real gaming industry trend. Ignoring it would be IMO worse than learning/discussing it.
No. Amplifying it.. giving it a reach far beyond their small fanbase... that's far worse.
History has shown this time and time again with these things. A fire with no oxygen will die. But one well fed with air and fuel... well it can become all consuming.
It's isn't CENSORSHIP to not act as the PR for this stuff. Nobody is saying that folks should be banned for talking about it.... but giving it visibility and free promotion? Hell no.
"History has shown this time and time again with these things. A fire with no oxygen will die. But one well fed with air and fuel... well it can become all consuming."
I think it is already too late for this to happen... at least in the near future. Millions are already invested and P2E games are pumping out like crazy.
You are very naive if you think that just stopping talking about it will stop this heavy machine.
For it to die now, it will need at least a decade if it dies at all.
Hardly. The vast majority of those numbers come from mobile or from games like Axie…. Certainly not MMORPGS
There is simply no need to amplify things like LOA going blockchain. If anything they should do an article on how it’s a betrayal of the original Kickstarter and the customers that got them started.
Yeah MOP has a better attitude towards this. They excoriate them while reporting.
Can we just stop talking about these kinda games period?
Even, if I am for now against this kind of model, I want to stay informed. I don't want this website to apply a P2E censorship.
This is a real gaming industry trend. Ignoring it would be IMO worse than learning/discussing it.
We haven't given the 'ignoring it' option much of a try; every day there's another article shoving this concept down our throats.
I'm not convinced that I should be interested in *any* kind of play to earn model. I don't see why I would want my game to become like a job, in any fashion.
It doesn't merit a try. The needless suppression of information is long condemned in the free world. If you're not interested in a topic you are free to not read it. Nobody else is going to click the related link against your will to force that content upon you.
Again... there is a difference between "needless suppression of information"... and amplifying it.
The first means that I prevent you from disseminating your information The second means that I am simply not disseminating it for you
That is a fundamental difference.
Reporting on developments in gaming on a site devoted to gaming isn't amplification. It is fulfilling one of the main purposes of such a site... informing the reader on gaming related topics.
Can we just stop talking about these kinda games period?
Even, if I am for now against this kind of model, I want to stay informed. I don't want this website to apply a P2E censorship.
This is a real gaming industry trend. Ignoring it would be IMO worse than learning/discussing it.
We haven't given the 'ignoring it' option much of a try; every day there's another article shoving this concept down our throats.
I'm not convinced that I should be interested in *any* kind of play to earn model. I don't see why I would want my game to become like a job, in any fashion.
It doesn't merit a try. The needless suppression of information is long condemned in the free world. If you're not interested in a topic you are free to not read it. Nobody else is going to click the related link against your will to force that content upon you.
Again... there is a difference between "needless suppression of information"... and amplifying it.
The first means that I prevent you from disseminating your information The second means that I am simply not disseminating it for you
That is a fundamental difference.
Reporting on developments in gaming on a site devoted to gaming isn't amplification. It is fulfilling one of the main purposes of such a site... informing the reader on gaming related topics.
News stories you don't like are still news.
Not even close. You know how many "news" stories do not get pushed each day?
Maybe instead of that article on CryptoBro game 321.. they could do an article on current happenings in EvE.. or DAoC.. or EQ... or UO... or EQ2... or any of the other games.
If you think its not amplification then why do you want it posted? What purpose does it server other than to amplify the PR of that company?
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Can we just stop talking about these kinda games period?
Even, if I am for now against this kind of model, I want to stay informed. I don't want this website to apply a P2E censorship.
This is a real gaming industry trend. Ignoring it would be IMO worse than learning/discussing it.
We haven't given the 'ignoring it' option much of a try; every day there's another article shoving this concept down our throats.
I'm not convinced that I should be interested in *any* kind of play to earn model. I don't see why I would want my game to become like a job, in any fashion.
It doesn't merit a try. The needless suppression of information is long condemned in the free world. If you're not interested in a topic you are free to not read it. Nobody else is going to click the related link against your will to force that content upon you.
By that qualification, no one has a right to complain about political posts, either.
Just don't read them, right?
Whether we want to admit it or not, we all participate in setting parameters for discussions by being here and adhering to the rules laid out. Those rules include restrictions on what information can be shared. That's just the reality- that we all largely agree on one restriction does not make it any less a restriction.
So, if the majority of users feel speculative risk assets aren't a topic worth discussing here, there's absolutely nothing wrong with a collective making such a choice. It is exactly what MassivelyOP did, and like it or not... It didn't stifle discussion on other topics, it didn't destroy the site traffic. On the other hand: if they don't change it, the only resource as a poster who dislikes it is to stop visiting the site in favor of other sites who do restrict that topic to taste.
Comments
There is simply no need to amplify things like LOA going blockchain. If anything they should do an article on how it’s a betrayal of the original Kickstarter and the customers that got them started.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Well, it would be good for my wallet, but really ugly for the game.
Dark days indeed my friends.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
And I can already see lawsuits regarding the same if in-game assets become real financial assets.
It doesn't merit a try. The needless suppression of information is long condemned in the free world. If you're not interested in a topic you are free to not read it. Nobody else is going to click the related link against your will to force that content upon you.
The first means that I prevent you from disseminating your information
The second means that I am simply not disseminating it for you
That is a fundamental difference.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Then he makes a different game than what was crowdfunded.
Then he sells game he made with money he raised for a different project to a crypto bro.
Pretty cool...
https://biturl.top/rU7bY3
Beyond the shadows there's always light
Reporting on developments in gaming on a site devoted to gaming isn't amplification. It is fulfilling one of the main purposes of such a site... informing the reader on gaming related topics.
News stories you don't like are still news.
Maybe instead of that article on CryptoBro game 321.. they could do an article on current happenings in EvE.. or DAoC.. or EQ... or UO... or EQ2... or any of the other games.
If you think its not amplification then why do you want it posted? What purpose does it server other than to amplify the PR of that company?
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Just don't read them, right?
Whether we want to admit it or not, we all participate in setting parameters for discussions by being here and adhering to the rules laid out. Those rules include restrictions on what information can be shared. That's just the reality- that we all largely agree on one restriction does not make it any less a restriction.
So, if the majority of users feel speculative risk assets aren't a topic worth discussing here, there's absolutely nothing wrong with a collective making such a choice. It is exactly what MassivelyOP did, and like it or not... It didn't stifle discussion on other topics, it didn't destroy the site traffic. On the other hand: if they don't change it, the only resource as a poster who dislikes it is to stop visiting the site in favor of other sites who do restrict that topic to taste.