Sony is considering NFTs (probably)

Status
Not open for further replies.

nominedomine

Banned
8 Jul 2022
834
950
What is 100% dystopic on allowing a 2nd hand market of digital items? NFTs are only a secure certificate of ownership of digital items that doesn't depend on the people who made them.

This means that can be sold from a player to another player using 3rd party stores not controlled by those who made the items, but following rules made by the ones who made them like tracking previous ownership of these items (so you can prove it did belong to some celebrity) or giving a percent of transactions for selling them to the item creators.

Beyond that it doesn't imply anything else. It's like collecting games, dlcs, cards or whatever. But in this case digital. Everything else it's up to the implementation of each case.

They could be used to sell 2nd hand digital games or dlc, or to allow players from games like Dreams or Minecraft sell their creations. Or to sell in-game items or loot you got in-game and won't use anymore. And just in case these game servers die/get shut down, since the ownership of these things isn't on their game servers if later someone else like the devs or some fans revive the game in the future items could be used there.

In fact, NFTs don't even imply you have to buy these items with money, but can be given to you for free (by unlocking them or whatever). And also don't imply they can be sold. They can be simply virtual items whose ownership is certified by -in theory- unhackable blockchain that since it's P2P in theory would never be shut down as long as there is a single person supporting it.

There's nothing wrong with it.

P.S.: In this particular case we know that the digital collectibles that Sony is working on is PlayStation Stars, which aren't nfts, even if they are digital collectibles. And as far as we know you won't be able to buy or sell them.
NFTs are garbage created to funnel money from the pockets of degenerate suckers.

They could be used to sell 2nd hand digital games or dlc
Come on are you even serious with this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: IntentionalPun

nominedomine

Banned
8 Jul 2022
834
950
I really can't believe anyone thinks "second hand DLC or game sales" are something that'll ever happen.

Like it blows my mind.. the idea makes zero sense at face value.
They finally get rid of the second hand games market (because people chose to move to digital on their own) just to go out of their way to recreate it using stupid technology for no reason.
 

Yurinka

Veteran
VIP
21 Jun 2022
7,778
6,665
NFTs are garbage created to funnel money from the pockets of degenerate suckers.


Come on are you even serious with this?
You sound like the typical case of people who hates something only because it's new and different even if doesn't understand or know that new thing. For the main reason of being afraid of seeing the current stuff replaced with that new one. I saw it many times before with:
  • 8/16 bit computers users and arcade players hating 8/16 bit consoles
  • Arcade players hating 16 and 32 bit consoles
  • 2D players hating 3D visuals during 32 gen
  • Dpad players hating dual analog controls
  • Cartridge players hating disks
  • Physical game players hating digital games
  • Console players used to have only big publishers hating indie games
  • Hardcore players hating casual games
  • Local multiplayer players hating online multiplayer
  • Hardcore players using traditional controls hating motion based controls
  • Gamers used to games without DLC hating DLC
  • Gamers used to games without DLC hating MTX
  • Gamers used to games without DLC hating
  • Gamers used to games without DLC hating season passes
  • Gamers used to games without DLC hating free game updates, unlockables and free DLC
  • Gamers used to games without DLC hating GaaS
  • Gamers used to paid games hating F2P
  • Console and PC gamers hating mobile game
All these things hated in forums so loudly by 'hardcore' 'real' gamers became mainstream and ended accepted by mostly everyone and didn't replace the thing that was feared to be replaced with the exception of arcades, which are almost extinct. The next ones to be added to the list are, which are on track of becoming mainstream:
  • Gamers used to buy games hating game subscriptions
  • Gamers used to play locally hating cloud gaming
  • Players used to play on tvs and monitors hating VR games
  • Gamers used to paid games or F2P hating NFT and P2E
I really can't believe anyone thinks "second hand DLC or game sales" are something that'll ever happen.

Like it blows my mind.. the idea makes zero sense at face value.
F2P is already more way popular than paid games both in number of players and revenue and is on a growing trend. And revenue from addons (DLC/MTX/season passes etc, mostly from F2P/GaaS) is also bigger than the one from buying games and is also in a growing trend. Subscripions to get games is also growing.

So the trend is that paid to buy games is almost going to dissapear even if there will be always paid games.

Which leads me to think 2nd hand for bought digital games won't exist because won't make sense since most games will be free. But the revenue will come from mostly for digital add-ons but will grow the one from player to player transactions (with the dev getting a portion of the transaction) for unlockable items, bought items or user generated items because companies will be interested on getting new revenue sources. The market trend is also going multiplatform and crossplay. And this is why they'll use NFTs (which btw are platform agnostic/crossplay).

I think players will adopt it because in the same way that people logically prefers to play for free over paying to play, players will also prefer to earn money for playing over not earning money for playing.
 
Last edited:
  • they're_right_you_know
Reactions: Themaskedcrag

Themaskedcrag

Cunning Linguist
13 Jul 2022
87
80
PlayStation Stars program has NFT except by the name that will probably be a thing in future.

That is BTW fine... a way to validate a digital rewards is needed.
Just block trade-in and doesn't sell the rewards... well if it is selling it is not a reward anymore.
They aren't nfts though as they aren't unique, and aren't related to intentifiers on the Blockchain. In this case it appears someone who doesn't understand what nfts are made the same mistake.
 

Yurinka

Veteran
VIP
21 Jun 2022
7,778
6,665
That is something I want Sony looking into...

With NFT we can finally transfer ownership from digital products and that allow it to works just like physical items... you can lend, trade, or just gift a digital game for another user in the same network.

And I agree with I can't understand why some people hates NFTs... it is a tool... who use it to explore consumer should be hated... not the tool.
NFTs come to fix a lot of issues we have in digital ownership today.

Sony can use NFT in digital ownership of their products allowing trade, lend, gift, etc...
Sony can use NFT in digital collection... allowing trade, lend, gift, etc...
Sony can use NFT in rewards... here they can block trade, lend, gift, etc.
Sony can use NFT in trophies... again blocking trade, lend, gift, etc.

There are a lot of possibilities.
Yes, NFT is only a technology to certify the ownership of a digital item. To hate it is stupid and doesn't make sense.
 

nominedomine

Banned
8 Jul 2022
834
950
You sound like the typical case of people who hates something only because it's new and different even if doesn't understand or know that new thing.
I hate it because it sucks, simple as that (like many of the things you listed btw), regardless if sucked allowed them to become popular.

Acting superior because you stan for NFT is exactly the behavior I would expect of people about the be suckered out of their money. Please, invest all your money on NFTs, just do it.

P2E? :LOL:
 

Yurinka

Veteran
VIP
21 Jun 2022
7,778
6,665
I hate it because it sucks, simple as that (like many of the things you listed btw), regardless if sucked allowed them to become popular.
So as we can see, you can't even justify with a solid reason why do you hate it or why it's supposed to be worse than the current model.

Acting superior because you stan for NFT is exactly the behavior I would expect of people about the be suckered out of their money. Please, invest all your money on NFTs, just do it.

P2E? :LOL:
I don't act superior, I only say that hearing someone complaining about some innovation that doesn't even knows, understands or even tried it and being close minded to its potential is something I saw many times before.

I worked as gamedev in the early days of some of the things of the list with teams that where back then and/or are now in some of the market leaders. First as mainly as coder (or designer) and later mostly collecting and analyzing player feedback, suggestions and issue reports. And well, I'm a player since the 80s. It only means I heard it many times, nothing superior.

P2E means Play to Earn, being able to earn money with stuff you created, earned or unlocked in games. Traditionally by selling it to other players. Like Steam cards but with in-game items you don't want to use anymore. There are already some early games out there already generating a lot of money so publishers are working to figure out how to slowly embrace it once matures a bit more.
 
Last edited:

nominedomine

Banned
8 Jul 2022
834
950
I only say that hearing someone complaining about some innovation that doesn't even knows, understands or even tried it and being close minded to its potential is something I saw many times before.
I'm as open minded about NFTs as I am about getting fucked in the bum.
 

ethomaz

Rebolation!
21 Jun 2022
12,088
9,806
Brasil 🇧🇷
PSN ID
ethomaz
I hate it because it sucks, simple as that (like many of the things you listed btw), regardless if sucked allowed them to become popular.

Acting superior because you stan for NFT is exactly the behavior I would expect of people about the be suckered out of their money. Please, invest all your money on NFTs, just do it.

P2E? :LOL:
You don’t need to invest money in NFTs 🤷‍♂️
 

DynamiteCop

Banned
2 Jul 2022
1,107
1,024
I created an NFT, the starting price is $53,837

download-1.jpg
 

nominedomine

Banned
8 Jul 2022
834
950
You don’t need to invest money in NFTs 🤷‍♂️
You do if you think it's so awesome, why wouldn't you?

I really can't believe you guy are going to defend NFT just because the is speculation Sony might get into it, find some self respect.
 

ethomaz

Rebolation!
21 Jun 2022
12,088
9,806
Brasil 🇧🇷
PSN ID
ethomaz
You do if you think it's so awesome, why wouldn't you?

I really can't believe you guy are going to defend NFT just because the is speculation Sony might get into it, find some self respect.
What one thing has to do with the other?
I don’t need to pay to have a NFT item.

Buy, trade, gift, etc is your choice… it is not required or forced.
 

Darth Vader

I find your lack of faith disturbing
Founder
20 Jun 2022
7,365
10,933
With NFT we can finally transfer ownership from digital products and that allow it to works just like physical items... you can lend, trade, or just gift a digital game for another user in the same network.

Animated GIF


This can be done without NFTs

And I agree with I can't understand why some people hates NFTs... it is a tool... who use it to explore consumer should be hated... not the tool.
NFTs come to fix a lot of issues we have in digital ownership today.

They're not solving for any issues and only helped create a bunch of insuferable mouth breathers

Sony can use NFT in digital ownership of their products allowing trade, lend, gift, etc...
Sony can use NFT in digital collection... allowing trade, lend, gift, etc...
Sony can use NFT in rewards... here they can block trade, lend, gift, etc.
Sony can use NFT in trophies... again blocking trade, lend, gift, etc.

laughs GIF


Sony doesn't need NFTs for any of those things
 
  • brain
Reactions: Deleted member 51
24 Jun 2022
3,982
6,954
What is 100% dystopic on allowing a 2nd hand market of digital items? NFTs are only a secure certificate of ownership of digital items that doesn't depend on the people who made them.

This means that can be sold from a player to another player using 3rd party stores not controlled by those who made the items, but following rules made by the ones who made them like tracking previous ownership of these items (so you can prove it did belong to some celebrity) or giving a percent of transactions for selling them to the item creators.

Beyond that it doesn't imply anything else. It's like collecting games, dlcs, cards or whatever. But in this case digital. Everything else it's up to the implementation of each case.

They could be used to sell 2nd hand digital games or dlc, or to allow players from games like Dreams or Minecraft sell their creations. Or to sell in-game items or loot you got in-game and won't use anymore. And just in case these game servers die/get shut down, since the ownership of these things isn't on their game servers if later someone else like the devs or some fans revive the game in the future items could be used there.

In fact, NFTs don't even imply you have to buy these items with money, but can be given to you for free (by unlocking them or whatever). And also don't imply they can be sold. They can be simply virtual items whose ownership is certified by -in theory- unhackable blockchain that since it's P2P in theory would never be shut down as long as there is a single person supporting it.

There's nothing wrong with it.

P.S.: In this particular case we know that the digital collectibles that Sony is working on is PlayStation Stars, which aren't nfts, even if they are digital collectibles. And as far as we know you won't be able to buy or sell them.

I think the big issue with NFTs in terms of gamers accepting them, is that practically EVERY mention of them we've seen from actual companies and businesses wanting to push them, have had the greediest reasons for wanting to do them. Every example of NFTs I've seen thus far has been horribly egregious in terms of the rather ripoff pricing associated with them, combined with the relative (lack of) quality of some of the NFT items I've seen (like the horrible "virtual drawing" NFTs various celebs have made).

No one's really presented a sensible NFT product yet that doesn't stink of greed or restrictions for the consumer. And while Sony might be able to come up with uses for NFTs that are much better than most, the BS they've been doing with GT7's premium cars (in terms of their MTX pricing) doesn't inspire too much confidence on that front, so understandably gamers are worried.

Sure, NFTs as a technology can be used for good, but it's up to companies to actually do that by showing that good use, before customers start accepting them in their products. And that's 100% fair IMO.

That is something I want Sony looking into...

With NFT we can finally transfer ownership from digital products and that allow it to works just like physical items... you can lend, trade, or just gift a digital game for another user in the same network.

And I agree with I can't understand why some people hates NFTs... it is a tool... who use it to explore consumer should be hated... not the tool.
NFTs come to fix a lot of issues we have in digital ownership today.

Sony can use NFT in digital ownership of their products allowing trade, lend, gift, etc...
Sony can use NFT in digital collection... allowing trade, lend, gift, etc...
Sony can use NFT in rewards... here they can block trade, lend, gift, etc.
Sony can use NFT in trophies... again blocking trade, lend, gift, etc.

There are a lot of possibilities.

Those are neat uses, but like @IntentionalPun said I don't know if you actually need NFTs for any of those features. Maybe some underlying aspect of the technology, but at this point it might be better to just take that specific technology which would be useful for enabling those features, spin it out, and rebrand is something not NFTs.

Because truth is NFTs have an extremely bad rap with hardcore/core gamers and it's probably too alien a concept for casuals to wrap their head around yet, much less accept considering the costs associated.

You sound like the typical case of people who hates something only because it's new and different even if doesn't understand or know that new thing. For the main reason of being afraid of seeing the current stuff replaced with that new one. I saw it many times before with:
  • 8/16 bit computers users and arcade players hating 8/16 bit consoles
  • Arcade players hating 16 and 32 bit consoles
  • 2D players hating 3D visuals during 32 gen
  • Dpad players hating dual analog controls
  • Cartridge players hating disks
  • Physical game players hating digital games
  • Console players used to have only big publishers hating indie games
  • Hardcore players hating casual games
  • Local multiplayer players hating online multiplayer
  • Hardcore players using traditional controls hating motion based controls
  • Gamers used to games without DLC hating DLC
  • Gamers used to games without DLC hating MTX
  • Gamers used to games without DLC hating
  • Gamers used to games without DLC hating season passes
  • Gamers used to games without DLC hating free game updates, unlockables and free DLC
  • Gamers used to games without DLC hating GaaS
  • Gamers used to paid games hating F2P
  • Console and PC gamers hating mobile game

Some of these didn't see as much pushback as it may seem. I don't remember people on dpads "hating" analog sticks, for starters because they weren't forced on people and most games (at least on PS1 & Saturn) didn't support them. But also, Super Mario 64 was HUGE right at launch and the N64 had very strong adoption rates in the West, both that game and the console were built around analog controls.

Same way, I don't remember a lot of people hating the switch to discs becoming mainstream. Cartridge games were getting more and more expensive, and storage space wasn't increasing in line with the increase in costs. Systems like the 3DO failed because of reasons aside of supporting discs, because the PS1 did very strong right out of the gate and was a disc-based system at its core.

I wouldn't even be sure arcade gamers hated 16-bit or 32-bit consoles because most people who went to arcades were console gamers anyway, and for certain games if you wanted the absolute best version, you still needed an arcade even towards the end of PS1/N64/Saturn era.

I agree on some of the other things though; thing is, they became acceptable because over time enough examples of beneficial, good usage came from various games and gamers chose to eventually be okay with them because of that. NFT acceptance is, understandably, much further behind and will take some years before it's accepted (IF it's accepted), and that will depend on devs/pubs actually utilizing the technology in ways beneficial to gamers, fair to gamers, and doing so over a long period of time.

All these things hated in forums so loudly by 'hardcore' 'real' gamers became mainstream and ended accepted by mostly everyone and didn't replace the thing that was feared to be replaced with the exception of arcades, which are almost extinct. The next ones to be added to the list are, which are on track of becoming mainstream:
  • Gamers used to buy games hating game subscriptions
  • Gamers used to play locally hating cloud gaming
  • Players used to play on tvs and monitors hating VR games
  • Gamers used to paid games or F2P hating NFT and P2E

F2P is already more way popular than paid games both in number of players and revenue and is on a growing trend. And revenue from addons (DLC/MTX/season passes etc, mostly from F2P/GaaS) is also bigger than the one from buying games and is also in a growing trend. Subscripions to get games is also growing.

So the trend is that paid to buy games is almost going to dissapear even if there will be always paid games.

Which leads me to think 2nd hand for bought digital games won't exist because won't make sense since most games will be free. But the revenue will come from mostly for digital add-ons but will grow the one from player to player transactions (with the dev getting a portion of the transaction) for unlockable items, bought items or user generated items because companies will be interested on getting new revenue sources. The market trend is also going multiplatform and crossplay. And this is why they'll use NFTs (which btw are platform agnostic/crossplay).

I think players will adopt it because in the same way that people logically prefers to play for free over paying to play, players will also prefer to earn money for playing over not earning money for playing.

I don't know if the combination of F2P, aggressive MTX and NFTs are going to be a net benefit to gamers or the industry without some catastrophic consequences. You'd think the presence of NFTs would lead to a general curtailing of MTX pricing and practices (i.e will EVERY single simple color variant of an armor be its own NFT?), but we know publishers don't think like that.
 

IntentionalPun

Veteran
Founder
22 Jun 2022
863
678
Urf
onlyfans.com
All NFTs do is make the "receipt" that you bought "something" transferable to other people on NFT marketplaces.

That's literally it.

It makes no real sense in gaming because any game still needs to integrate with specific NFT marketplaces in order to actually have that "receipt" transfer from one gamer to another. Both of those gamers have to be registered / have an "Ubisoft account" in order to actually trade/sell the dinky little Rainbow Six NFT's they put out.

There's never been anything stopping any company from creating an item marketplace themselves... Blizzard did it with Diablo 3. There's games that have marketplaces for user created content like Minecraft as well.. w/ no NFT's needed.

Because what in the world is the point of "decentralizing" the ownership (of the receipt for 'something') when individual games need to support the specific NFT marketplace for anything to actually transfer (other than the receipt)?

There is none...

It's literally a pointless complication from the perspective of the gamer..

Companies are attempting to use NFTs for one reason: they are a trend, a buzzword.. and one that they hoped would cause gamers to suddenly think in-game items being sellable for real world cash is a good thing.. since in general when that has happened, it was HATED by gamers...

See: Diablo 3 marketplace

But NFTs... are hated by gamers.

They are hated by everyone not an NFT bro at this point, a total laughing stock.. whole ass twitter / instagram accounts / websites exist to track embarrassing things happening in the NFT world. Celebrities fawned over themselves because of how much money was being thrown around in them, and then...

BOOM

Entire NFT market went into the dumps: https://cointelegraph.com/news/floor-price-of-popular-nft-collections-collapse-due-to-bear-market

Rich morons whining about how their $250k NFTs are now "worth only $1000" (pro tip, they aint worth shit).

This isn't some unstoppable force like MTX that weren't actually hated by most gamers... these things are hated by most gamers.. the idea of selling in-game items is hated by most gamers.

It's an idiotic tech fad that is fading away... a solution looking for a problem.. a way for grifters to leach money out of venture capitalist firms and then run when they've scammed people.
 
  • fire
Reactions: Gods&Monsters
Status
Not open for further replies.