• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Square Enix president pens letter highlighting interest in NFT and Metaverse amongst other things

Vognerful

Member



Some big guys are already testing the water.
 

Griffon

Member
Square and Ubi are the worst big publishers so not surprised to see those 2 jump first at NFTs.

That said NFTs are not inherently bad. CSGO/TF2 items marketplace have been around forever and are very similar conceptually.
The difference is that Valve's marketplace doesn't need thousands/millions of Graphic Cards running in warehouses.
Crypto is a retarded technology.
 
Last edited:

HarryKS

Member
You can call it whatever you want really. The naming it not what's important, it's what it represents.
I'm not talking about fixing anyone's problems. There is a paradigm shift taking place, and the internet of 2030s will not be the same internet of today, for better or worse.
Ha. Keep thinking that.

It won't be based on chains. It's regressive.
 

mortal

Gold Member
Ha. Keep thinking that.

It won't be based on chains. It's regressive.
Of course it wont be solely based on blockchain. It going to become integrated.
I don't have to keep "thinking" anything, it's happening now. Apparently I shouldn't believe my own lying eyes and ears lol
 
Last edited:

ARK1391

Member
So I get why people don't like NFTs and why they don't want them in games. And I agree to an extent.

I will say though, if you think of NFTs the same way you do a popular painters work, I know 99% of NFTs are not on that level, if you buy one and display it in your house on a screen in place of a painting. It kind of acts as the same thing. You have the only copy of that artists image. That's the only one. Hanging in your house.

Plus I really like the idea of slightly animated environments on my walls instead of still paintings. Just need a way to hide the power cable and it's essentially the same thing if you frame the screen. It could be neat to do one day.

Carry on.
 

Pejo

Member
S-E reminds me of that kid that wants to sit at the adults table. Jumping on every little thing that seems to be "the next big thing" but doing it in a childish, not well thought out way.
 

HarryKS

Member
Of course it wont be solely based on blockchain. It going to become integrated.
I don't have to keep "thinking" anything, it's happening now. Apparently I shouldn't believe my own lying eyes and ears lol
Not solely based on blockchain?
How can you possibly not have it on chain? Hash.

You sure you know how this works?
 

mortal

Gold Member
Not solely based on blockchain?
How can you possibly not have it on chain? Hash.

You sure you know how this works?
I'm honestly confused what you're even trying to argue now?

Would have me believe that there isn't block technology emerging and being adopted as we speak?
All due respect, but you would have to be denying an observable ongoing phenomenon.
I can't pretend that e-commerce hasn't been integrating crypto as a viable payment method, because I've seen it and participated in it.
I also can't pretend that NFT art is not a "thing" because it's very much verifiably an emerging phenomenon in artist spaces, regardless of ethical concerns.
I also can't pretend that social media platforms, such as Sandbox, aren't being created with the concepts of blockchain built into its UX.
I also can't pretend that various designers and companies within the video games industry aren't presently working to incorporate NFTs into their existing and new IPs.

I also mentioned metaverse because I was alluding to the idea of how we engage socially in virtual spaces is continuing to change.
Which is something that no longer seems so alien when considering the popularity of things like Minecraft and VR chat.
Or even video chat platforms like Zoom with more and more companies making use of remote work.

Are you implying that these things are not taking place? Going back even 15+ years ago, the internet was an undeniably different space than it is presently.
Regardless if you think regressive or not, it's taking place. Which is why I stressed for better or worse.
If you want to make a technical argument as to whether or not you believe these things to be viable, that's fine with me.
For the time being, increasingly more people are learning about them and participating, not less people. So forgive me if I don't see them going away anytime soon.
 
Last edited:

LiquidRex

Member

Barret ain't playing around...
Ed4e6EO.jpg
 

LiquidRex

Member
Didn't Phil Spencer say he doesn't want NFTs in Microsoft gaming store.... I really hope this isn't a backdoor for NFTs to be in titles like Starfield in the future....

I wouldn't be surprised if Todd wants NFTs in his games... Remember the Horse Armour fiasco. 🤦‍♂️
 

MastaKiiLA

Member
I honestly don't get the backlash at NFTs. We have to accept mtx as a part of gaming now, right? Our games are riddled with them. Why not get actual ownership of that virtual shit you pay real world money for? I get it if you don't pay for virtual items, but clearly a shitton of people do. It's what's driving growth in the industry. So, giving gamers actual ownership of items they buy in-game, and giving you the ability to re-sell that item later on is totally in-line with the shit people preach about keeping physical media alive. It's the concept of ownership.

I think years from now, we'll look at NFTs as the norm. Every in-game item you buy can be tethered to your blockchain wallet, and you can hold it indefinitely, or until someone deems that item valuable enough for you to sell it. Personally, I think this is one of the pro-gamer moves that short-sighted comments view negatively because they see that companies can profit off of it. Well, they can profit already by selling a bunch of proprietary shit that can only be used in-game, and can't be exchanged outside of a marketplace that they might or might not setup for you. NFTs mean you can exchange items completely independent of the company that sold it to you. It's decentralized. As long as that remains true, I can't see this as anything but positive.
 

Fuz

Banned
Square needs to fail hard and bakrupt.

And I say this with sadness in my heart - FFXIV deserves a better company.
 

Trogdor1123

Member
NFTs aren't like MTXs that you can ignore.

Their inclusion in any game at all will mean the entire game's system, e.g. the entire loot system, will be designed around NFTs.

So in a fantasy RPG, the highest end, rarest possible loot, will not be available to every player simply by playing the game. They will be hidden behind NFTs that players will have to trade with each other for real money.

Please tell me how you can just ignore something like is described above and still get the full enjoyment out of a game?... Protip: you actually can't.
how will an nft work in a game that gets expansions? Something that is high end today could have ts value wiped out in a second. I hate this stuff
 

MastaKiiLA

Member
how will an nft work in a game that gets expansions? Something that is high end today could have ts value wiped out in a second. I hate this stuff
There are already NFTs that have upgrades for future versions of games bundled in. If the NFT is just a polygon mesh, and they have that mesh included in the game code, then it's a non-issue. The end game is having these 3D objects as just that, 3D objects. A mesh you can add to your in-game character with ease, as computing power massively eclipses polygon budgets. We're at or near the point where polygon details don't matter. UE5/6/7/8 will be able to display anything you can throw at it. I don't think we should be looking at the current game industry, and assume this same model applies in the future. NFTs will be transformative in a way that increases their portability. There is massive incentive in it, especially for the early-adopters. The incentive being the amount of money they can be raised for projects. The team behind Sandbox must be laughing their way to the bank. The inevitable Minecraft NFTs are going to be fucking insane.
 

mortal

Gold Member
This shitty attitude is what I hate the most.
We have to push back, not going on all fours and accept this crap.
How do I have a "shitty" attitude for making a statement regarding the changing digital landscape?
You come at me with a shitty attitude then project it onto me? Don't be an asshole.
 
Last edited:

HarryKS

Member
I'm honestly confused what you're even trying to argue now?

Would have me believe that there isn't block technology emerging and being adopted as we speak?
All due respect, but you would have to be denying an observable ongoing phenomenon.
I can't pretend that e-commerce hasn't been integrating crypto as a viable payment method, because I've seen it and participated in it.
I also can't pretend that NFT art is not a "thing" because it's very much verifiably an emerging phenomenon in artist spaces, regardless of ethical concerns.
I also can't pretend that social media platforms, such as Sandbox, aren't being created with the concepts of blockchain built into its UX.
I also can't pretend that various designers and companies within the video games industry aren't presently working to incorporate NFTs into their existing and new IPs.

I also mentioned metaverse because I was alluding to the idea of how we engage socially in virtual spaces is continuing to change.
Which is something that no longer seems so alien when considering the popularity of things like Minecraft and VR chat.
Or even video chat platforms like Zoom with more and more companies making use of remote work.

Are you implying that these things are not taking place? Going back even 15+ years ago, the internet was an undeniably different space than it is presently.
Regardless if you think regressive or not, it's taking place. Which is why I stressed for better or worse.
If you want to make a technical argument as to whether or not you believe these things to be viable, that's fine with me.
For the time being, increasingly more people are learning about them and participating, not less people. So forgive me if I don't see them going away anytime soon.
You don't know how NFTs work. Or the so-called Web 3.0.

You have a passing knowledge of what NFTs are but not what it really is. There's no shame in that. That's what most people have been fed with in terms of info.
 
Last edited:

chonga

Member
There's a saying, I forget how it goes, but something along the lines of 'if the PR for your product is talking about the technology behind your product, you don't have a product'.

In other words 'our game was written in Programming Language X!' means fuck all to an end user. 'Our games has dragons and shootbangs!' does.

There's also another saying in software development that if you're asking 'how can I use X in my project' then you don't need it, because if you did need X in your project you'd know how it would be useful and right now all these companies are looking for ways to use these things without actually having a need.
 

Edgelord79

Gold Member
I'm honestly confused what you're even trying to argue now?

Would have me believe that there isn't block technology emerging and being adopted as we speak?
All due respect, but you would have to be denying an observable ongoing phenomenon.
I can't pretend that e-commerce hasn't been integrating crypto as a viable payment method, because I've seen it and participated in it.
I also can't pretend that NFT art is not a "thing" because it's very much verifiably an emerging phenomenon in artist spaces, regardless of ethical concerns.
I also can't pretend that social media platforms, such as Sandbox, aren't being created with the concepts of blockchain built into its UX.
I also can't pretend that various designers and companies within the video games industry aren't presently working to incorporate NFTs into their existing and new IPs.

I also mentioned metaverse because I was alluding to the idea of how we engage socially in virtual spaces is continuing to change.
Which is something that no longer seems so alien when considering the popularity of things like Minecraft and VR chat.
Or even video chat platforms like Zoom with more and more companies making use of remote work.

Are you implying that these things are not taking place? Going back even 15+ years ago, the internet was an undeniably different space than it is presently.
Regardless if you think regressive or not, it's taking place. Which is why I stressed for better or worse.
If you want to make a technical argument as to whether or not you believe these things to be viable, that's fine with me.
For the time being, increasingly more people are learning about them and participating, not less people. So forgive me if I don't see them going away anytime soon.
While I want to disagree with you, I can't. This is a really well crafted response.
 

mortal

Gold Member
You don't know how NFTs work. Or the so-called Web 3.0.

You have a passing knowledge of what NFTs are but not what it really is. There's no shame in that. That's what most people have been fed with in terms of info.
I'm very much aware of the basic function of the blockchain within the context of NFTs and crypto.
At no point did I ever claim to be an expert on NFTs or that I know everything there is to know about them.
I'm honestly not even sure what your point is. Seems like you're just going out of your way to be dismissive and patronizing without any sincere intent in informing lol

I'm by no means ashamed and I'm very much learning more about NFTs, both actively and passively. Considering that I've already acknowledge that it's an emerging, ongoing phenomenon.
I'm not so arrogant that I would be dismissive of it because I may have doubts about its merit or how I feel about the ethical implications.
I merely made a comment regarding the changing landscape. You seem really hung up on the semantics more than anything.
Which is really besides the point. If you believe that specific term 'web 3.0' is too hyperbolic , call that it whatever better suits what is taking shape.
 
Last edited:

HarryKS

Member
I'm very much aware of the basic function of the blockchain within the context of NFTs and crypto.
At no point did I ever claim to be an expert on NFTs or that I know everything there is to know about them.
I'm honestly not even sure what your point is. Seems like you're just going out of your way to be dismissive and patronizing without any sincere intent in informing lol

I'm by no means ashamed and I'm very much learning more about NFTs, both actively and passively. Considering that I've already acknowledge that it's an emerging, ongoing phenomenon.
I'm not so arrogant that I would be dismissive of it because I may have doubts about its merit or how I feel about the ethical implications.
I merely made a comment regarding the changing landscape. You seem really hung up on the semantics more than anything.
Which is really besides the point. If you believe that specific term 'web 3.0' is too hyperbolic , call that it whatever better suits what is taking shape.
When I want to make a point about something, I'd rather inform myself about said thing before exposing some form of assessment.

Whilst I agree with the fact that it's part of the current Zeitgeist, I would encourage you to find out how it works and who is pushing for it. If you don't, you're just parroting their talking points.

You want examples? Check out Twetch.

You want to know who's pushing for it? Check out A16z.

NFTs are not what you think they are. The images are not the non-fungible items.
 

LiquidRex

Member
How about my dingdong as an NFT, its shape, length, texture, colour is unique... it's a one of a kind ding dong... You can purchase an electronic receipt saying you're now the original owner... I still get to have it attached to myself, use it how I wish... Put it where I want... That's how it works right? Why should NFTs just be exclusive to digital works of Art, Text, Video's.
 

mortal

Gold Member
When I want to make a point about something, I'd rather inform myself about said thing before exposing some form of assessment.

Whilst I agree with the fact that it's part of the current Zeitgeist, I would encourage you to find out how it works and who is pushing for it. If you don't, you're just parroting their talking points.

You want examples? Check out Twetch.

You want to know who's pushing for it? Check out A16z.

NFTs are not what you think they are. The images are not the non-fungible items.
Although I don't think simply acknowledging its adoption is an unreasonable assessment to make.
I'm aware that the image itself is not what is non-fungible lol. It's the token attached to that digital good serving as a unique digital certificate of authenticity within the blockchain.
A digital image file is technically considered fungible since that file, and its attributes, can be infinitely duplicated. So of course it wouldn't be the image itself, right?

A year ago, I wasn't even aware of the concept of NFTs. I've been listening to multiple views on NFTs over the past year, from both its supporters and detractors.
More sources and examples are always welcome to help round out my my understanding of their use and value.
I'll be looking more into Twetch for sure, as what I've gleamed thus far looks quite interesting.
I've very much keeping an open mind here about all this new technology and how it's changing the way we engage in virtual spaces.
 
I'm honestly confused what you're even trying to argue now?

Would have me believe that there isn't block technology emerging and being adopted as we speak?
All due respect, but you would have to be denying an observable ongoing phenomenon.
I can't pretend that e-commerce hasn't been integrating crypto as a viable payment method, because I've seen it and participated in it.
I also can't pretend that NFT art is not a "thing" because it's very much verifiably an emerging phenomenon in artist spaces, regardless of ethical concerns.
I also can't pretend that social media platforms, such as Sandbox, aren't being created with the concepts of blockchain built into its UX.
I also can't pretend that various designers and companies within the video games industry aren't presently working to incorporate NFTs into their existing and new IPs.

I also mentioned metaverse because I was alluding to the idea of how we engage socially in virtual spaces is continuing to change.
Which is something that no longer seems so alien when considering the popularity of things like Minecraft and VR chat.
Or even video chat platforms like Zoom with more and more companies making use of remote work.

Are you implying that these things are not taking place? Going back even 15+ years ago, the internet was an undeniably different space than it is presently.
Regardless if you think regressive or not, it's taking place. Which is why I stressed for better or worse.
If you want to make a technical argument as to whether or not you believe these things to be viable, that's fine with me.
For the time being, increasingly more people are learning about them and participating, not less people. So forgive me if I don't see them going away anytime soon.
NFTs are just an extension of the crypto spam.

And the main flaw of both NFT and Crypto, is the belief that something can be valuable for being of limited quantity.

Now, this is not the fault of the people being fooled; they were taught this as children like the rest of us. More importantly, the way currency works today now that we are no longer on the Gold Standard, is a manner that is counter-intuitive and deliberately hidden by both financial and political forces.

And it isn't like the truth is being suppressed. People just don't believe it when told.

Crypto is considered valuable because there is a finite amount of it. The same way the US dollar technically is. But unlike the US dollar, you can't pay your taxes with Crypto. And if you don't pay your taxes then state violence is applied to you.

Note that you can't pay your taxes with gold, or rice, or expensive paintings; you had to pay with the currency of your government.

That's where the currency gets its value. You are surrounded by tax payers and they all need money to pay tax, so the money has value.


The government used to collect taxes to fund itself. This was back in the Gold and Silver days, and back then you CAN pay taxes with literal gold and silver. People in Europe HAVE paid taxes by handing over silver dinningware.

But now, taxes are just destroyed when collected. Either just digitally deleted, melted or shredded. Coins are reused more because they are harder to remint. Regardless the point is that the taxes are being destroyed because it is what makes people want money. Governments never needed your taxes, and in fact the tax department of any government have no contact with those who spend money.

Crypto and NFTs are craved by people who don't understand how fiat currency works. They believe that rarity is the source of value, when in fact their inability to function as tax payment makes them nothing but trinkets. Crypto believers think that governments would magically one day let you pay taxes in Crypto, not realizing that was NOT the point of paying taxes!

So the question is how long this comedy of errors would last. Because we already know how digial currencies REALLY work, via the numerous MMO economies that have been around for a decade. You need currency not because it is rare, but because you need to have some to pay a fee of some kind that you can't avoid. And luckily in the real world currency don't magically spawn from killed rats.
 
Last edited:
So I get why people don't like NFTs and why they don't want them in games. And I agree to an extent.

I will say though, if you think of NFTs the same way you do a popular painters work, I know 99% of NFTs are not on that level, if you buy one and display it in your house on a screen in place of a painting. It kind of acts as the same thing. You have the only copy of that artists image. That's the only one. Hanging in your house.

Plus I really like the idea of slightly animated environments on my walls instead of still paintings. Just need a way to hide the power cable and it's essentially the same thing if you frame the screen. It could be neat to do one day.

Carry on.

NFTs are the digital tokens linked to a digital artistic asset like an image, or in the case of videogames, a 3D model of a gun or armour piece.

They are not the same as a real-world famous painter's work, and especially in this case where the artist creating the digital art asset the NFT points to, is a no-name videogame artist, and the value of the work doesn't actually come from the prestige of the artist, but rather the artificial scarcity of the asset in the game.

Consider, how games which currently don't have any meaningful artificial scarcity of in-game items, i.e. every gun/sword/armour piece can be acquired in-game by every player, would somehow be improved by making it such that some item can only be acquired in-game by a tiny minority of gamers and the rest would have to pay real-world money to buy access to said items?

It would simply ruin those games entirely. The only people benefitting are the lucky ones who acquire the items in-game and then get to sell them for insane real-world profit.

These things do not functionally nor experientially improve or benefit games in any way. They merely actively and severely degrade the game design in order to accommodate a tacked on meta-trading exchange. Anyone saying gamers should just accept this as an inevitability are either in on the con, or so insufferably naive that they've jettisoned all common sense and swallowed so much of the dubious NFT cool-aid that they're now drunk on it.
 
NFTs aren't like MTXs that you can ignore.

Their inclusion in any game at all will mean the entire game's system, e.g. the entire loot system, will be designed around NFTs.

So in a fantasy RPG, the highest end, rarest possible loot, will not be available to every player simply by playing the game. They will be hidden behind NFTs that players will have to trade with each other for real money.

Please tell me how you can just ignore something like is described above and still get the full enjoyment out of a game?... Protip: you actually can't.


In Diablo 3 the rarest and best items (primals) are really had to come by. I've had a few drop for me that I cant use and only kept them because they are rare. I dont ever expect to find a primal that I can use for any of the characters I have for this season and I dont feel like not being able to get any primal items reduces my enjoyment of the game at all. So I dont see how super rare items being NFTs changes anything relative to what I'm experiencing right now other than being able to buy it from someone. But that gives you an option that previously didnt exist before (which you can ignore) so I dont see why thats a bad thing.
 
In Diablo 3 the rarest and best items (primals) are really had to come by. I've had a few drop for me that I cant use and only kept them because they are rare. I dont ever expect to find a primal that I can use for any of the characters I have for this season and I dont feel like not being able to get any primal items reduces my enjoyment of the game at all. So I dont see how super rare items being NFTs changes anything relative to what I'm experiencing right now other than being able to buy it from someone. But that gives you an option that previously didnt exist before (which you can ignore) so I dont see why thats a bad thing.

That you personally don't have a problem with super rare item drops that only a few very very lucky gamers will ever see, is pretty irrelevant. You aren't all gamers and cannot speak for them. I personally disagree and think it's bullshit (see how far this kinda argument gets?).

Also, that one single exception can be found that does super rare loot like this, doesn't invalidate the rule. Most games with loot have far less punishing RNG or none at all and are designed such that all players can access all in-game loot within a reasonable amount of play-time. Most games with loot, e.g. Destiny, see fan shitstorms from unsufferably brutal RNG which means many players don't ever get to see the drops of the in-game items they want. In games like this, this stuff is normally corrected with patches later on.

Diablo is probably an exception because of the auction house they had in previous games which serves the same purpose of an NFT system anyway more or less. All games should not and will not be like this and for blindingly obvious good reason.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom