Topic: Lack of NFT technology (Read 259 times)

While maybe it's not tehnically "play to earn", it's not that far away from it. Remember situation before WoW token was implemented? People were farming gold which they were selling to gold resellers. And then those gold resellers would sell the gold to those that have some extra cash and lacked the time. While doing so, shit load of people got scammed or even worse, lost their account due breaking TOS. I still remember my guildie (that was playing the game since beta) loosing an account back in 2008 over measly 100 GBP worth of gold he bought as he didn't have time to farm it and all he wanted was that chopper mount.

So yeah, I say better have stuff like that implemented in-game, than let 3rd parties profit from it because if game is popular enough, they will show up.

This is my point, WoW Token is not "play to earn", it's a way to get subscription for free if you have time to grind, and a way to get gold if you have money (which I would say is bad, because what's the point of having things that require time and effort, but can be bypassed with money? it really cheapens their value in the community).


Tradeability is a design choice, you absolutely don't need blockchain and NFT for that, games like TF2 and CS:GO had it for years. My point is, NFT games are mostly just indie cashgrabs or scams, and technology itself doesn't offer anything revolutionary or useful. Yes a player owns an NFT on blockchain and can send it to anyone, but the company owns game servers and can at any moment change what that NFT represents.

Transacting NFTs with such fees must be a pain in the ass, though...

There are things you can do with bitcoin too. For instance, you can use it to buy something. No?

"It's coexistence or no existence." — Bertrand Russell.

You really can't make conclusions based on one or a few examples though. Yes, D3s auction house was totally scrapped, and a few other game economies that failed, but at the same time we have the likes of RuneScape whereas their economies are still running decently.

Idk about you mate, but if I quit playing a videogame, I definitely want to sell my items so I at least get something in return for all my time.

Goldfarms and all those hacks/scams have existed on the RuneScape MMORPG since like 10 years ago. And here it is, still alive.

Bitcoin also incentivizes hackers and scammers to steal money off people. But yet here we are totally loving it because the positives heavily outweighs the negatives; same thing with games with more "open" economies.

Mate if you hate those cashgrabs, then you should actually probably be pushing for NFTs. Because instead of paying for untradable skins(which looks like what the current games are moving into e.g. Valorant), NFTs are actually easily tradable(blockchain fees aside).

Why do you think that bitcoiners even care about NFTs? Those interested in NFTs won't care about NFTs soon enough. The only use case is the one being discussed right now in gaming. The "artwork" marketplaces will die out sooner or later. I have never done any deals or transactions involving NFTs and I am not crying myself to sleep every night. 

It must be wonderful having to pay $50-100 worth of ETH in transaction fees to move an NFT or other Ethereum-based tokens from one address to the other. Bitcoiners really don't know what they are missing. 

So cheap, much useful, great fun... woof 

True, Diablo 3 RMAH ended up as a failure.


While it's true that some are not interested in making money from games, there are plenty of those that are interested in spending money for stuff in game. Regarding community hating gold sellers, seems like you and I played a different game. People hated those that were exploiting the game via bots and hacks, while huge amount of people were buying and selling gold. Hell, interest for gold was so huge (despite numerous bans) that in the end Blizzard started doing for what once they perma banned players -  selling people gold in exchange for money, while in the same time those that farmed gold can exchange it for gametime, and even sell Blizzard games (that part is breaking TOS, but it's still a popular way to cash out).



Did implementation of WoW tokens brought more hacks and bots? If it wasn't for that change, subscription numbers would be down by like 50% and instead they are making shit load of money by pushing (to some degree as those still exist) gold resellers out.



Not necessarily, if economy part of the game implemented well. The one I hope will done that right is Gold Fever so you might wanna check it out as closed beta should come out by the end of the year. When it comes to GF, I am mostly interested in making passive income by investing in certain things as in the last few years I don't have time anymore to play any games. Unfortunately.

And I also played a lot of games and were making money off them, and I still say that "play to earn" is unsustainable. When Diablo III was released, it featured real money auction house for all in-game items, and while some players made a lot of money from it, the majority of the community hated it and it was soon removed. Most of the gamers are not interested in making money from games, in fact they are very much against the trading of gameplay items - if you played WoW, you know how much the community hates gold sellers. Now imagine if Blizzard turned their WoW token into a blockchain token - now there's suddenly an extra huge incentive to run bots, scam people, hack accounts, etc. because there's an easy way to turn in-game money into real money.

AAA gaming industry is already making stupid money with their gambling mechanics and lazy-ass $60 releases and extra DLCs, whatever they can make with play-to-earn model just pales in comparison to that. But I believe this model isn't even profitable, because it pushes players away from the game.

Funnily enough, that's what actually makes the "Play to earn" games sustainable economy-wise. With people in poor countries farming in-game currency and items, while the middle to upper class people are the ones purchasing these farmed items for their own enjoyment — to either upgrade their characters, or for cosmetic purposes.

As someone who played several  games at the very competitive level (World of Warcraft) and games with complex economy (EVE Online) and made very decent amount of money with both of those, I say that you are wrong there. Anyway, time will tell regarding play to earn concept and in the end, play to earn is more than just some mindless grind for pennies.

NFT doesn't bring anything new to gaming, game companies like Valva have been allowing players to trade their items for real money for a long time already. Gamers don't care whether their stuff is stored in centralized database or on decenetralized blockchains, they just want to enjoy the process. "Play to earn" will never be popular, a large precentage of gamers are middle class people who absolutely don't need to collect pennies for hours of repetetive tasks.

Yep, majority of AAA mmo games like World of Warcraft ban you from selling in-game stuff and services for RL money, but market for that is huge and is not really stopped by that restriction as people do it anyway, so there is a huge demand for a proper play to earn system.

It's true that things are moving somewhat slow; Steam (biggest game store) recently banned all crypto/NFT games from their platform, in fear since CS:GO skin gambling fiasco, but on the other hand Epic (another major game developer and publisher) is "open to games that support cryptocurrency or blockchain-based assets" on their upcoming store so things are moving nevertheless. And if Epic starts making shit load of money that way, I have no doubts that Steam will change their mind and figure out the way to accept those as well.

As an old school gamer who always liked economy part of the game, I must say that I am really looking forward to day where you can legally made serious money while playing proper games (unlike that Alien Worlds, Axie Infinity and Alice crap) without breaking TOS or competing at the highest e-sport level.

Why have hope when you can just move to a cheaper chain? It seems like a thing that's been promised for a while and never actually done, who's storing the eth chain when it's a few petabytes in size also (unless that's why they're switching to PoS)?


OK so the gaming industry is slow but I don't think it's that slow play to earn is probably something that'll take a while to come out, most mmo games ban you from selling stuff anyway in their terms (I think it requires extra licensing).

Yeah you are right, one look at bitcoin price and everything is obvious. What a bad troll attempt...


Wouldn't be so sure. True, heavily inflated and manipulated JPEG market will probably crumble but I think that NFTs will become an important part of for example  gaming industry as "play to earn" is becoming a thing now. And when you take into consideration that gaming is by far the biggest entertainment industry  (bigger than a whole movie and music industry combined), no wonder that games that are using NFTs are popping left and right. Vast majority of them are still browser-style crap, but soon AAA stuff will start coming out, when major game studios realize the potential to make even more money that way.

It must be killing that no one in bitcoin can launder money through fake buys and sells of useless pictures that can be downloaded for free anyway, even without having to understand what an NFT technology is about. Perhaps, had bitcoin had this technology implemented, regulators would have more reasons to hinder bitcoin's adoption. Thankfully, its scrypt language is too simple and unsophisticated to handle complicated ways of scamming. As for the difference between the speed of innovation in bitcoin and altcoins, I must say I am not surprised that centralized projects build things faster, more efficiently, and with minimum friction. At the end of the day, it doesn't require overwhelming consensus to implement new features in an altcoin, what you need is just a decision of the owner of a given altcoin.

Show me a bitcoin maximalist who thinks bitcoin should be good at everything.

Except people were making tokens on Bitcoin blockchain for many years before NFT even became a concept, they were called colored coins. But it didn't gain much traction because fundamentally such tokens are not very useful. NFTs are only popular because the scammers that control the market invested a ton of money into promoting them and pumping the market with their fake trades. In a year or two NFT will be dead like ICO is now.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but I doubt much people in the Bitcoin community actually care about NFTs lol.

You're comparing a protocol optimized for features, vs a protocol that's optimized for security/decentralization/privacy. Dumb comparison.

Expecting Bitcoin to be the best at everything is unrealistic. Sorry maxis.

At least you can do something with Ethereum.  Eth 2 will sort fees out.  Hopefully.

My last eth transaction cost $250 though .

It must be killing bitcoin that it can't do NFTs.  Eth is so much more capable in some respects.