It's a nice idea. I mean, who doesn't want to have fun and make money?
I reckon it'll lure people in the same way streaming did: people who want to play games and make money. But just like streaming, the average person/player will never earn enough to make it worthwhile, guaranteed (I feel very confident in guaranteeing that). Those that do will be a very, very small percentage of the playerbase.
Like my mum told me: If it sounds too good to be true, it is.
But it's not. Trust me it sounds crazy to me too when I tell my 73 year old mother the money I've made breeding and racing digital horses.
Here's the thing for me. there is no way I could dig in and spend the time, give the thought needed, that I do with Zed Run if I didn't love it.
For example I started playing a game called Meeb Masters it's like Axie. It's boring as shit to me. I can't bring myself to play even though I spent money on the Meebs. The cool thing though is I can sell them anytime I want. Which I just might do right now.
Games with NFTs are hardly the first games ever to launch. The rest of gaming history is relevant here.
When do games tend to have the most active players? Do games tend to steadily gain active players forever? Or do they peak at some point and then drop off after that? A large fraction of games peak at or shortly after launch. Some actually peak before their official launch. Some never even make it to launch.
What do you think will happen to the value of NFTs in a game when the playerbase mostly disappears? Think they'll keep going up and up forever? Or do you think they'll drop precipitously? How about when the company pulls the plug on the game so that the items in the game are no longer actually usable there, even if you can still trade them?
The eventual value of most gaming NFTs is going to be zero. That doesn't mean that there isn't money to be made in the short-term while a game is popular. Gold farmers have been doing that in other MMORPGs for many years, and this would largely legalize the practice. But it does mean that they're not long-term investments.
Games with NFTs are hardly the first games ever to launch. The rest of gaming history is relevant here.
When do games tend to have the most active players? Do games tend to steadily gain active players forever? Or do they peak at some point and then drop off after that? A large fraction of games peak at or shortly after launch. Some actually peak before their official launch. Some never even make it to launch.
What do you think will happen to the value of NFTs in a game when the playerbase mostly disappears? Think they'll keep going up and up forever? Or do you think they'll drop precipitously? How about when the company pulls the plug on the game so that the items in the game are no longer actually usable there, even if you can still trade them?
The eventual value of most gaming NFTs is going to be zero. That doesn't mean that there isn't money to be made in the short-term while a game is popular. Gold farmers have been doing that in other MMORPGs for many years, and this would largely legalize the practice. But it does mean that they're not long-term investments.
Play a game have fun. Make some money for your time if you want. Don't sell anything if you want. It's your choice.
For what it's worth (no pun intended) WoW has been dying for 10 years now. There will be an UO soon without question. How long has UO been dieing? I'll bet you this, those items from year one have some serious value to those that hold. What's wrong with that? 20 years later whats wrong with that gamer making money if they chose?
I wish I had something to show besides youtube vids from the games I've played in the past. Most don't have that. What's wrong with always having those items, game or not?
There is a link under the articles video, it is entitled "Read the full story here". It is not entitled "Introduction to a video", because that's all we got. I do realise this is the videos discussion section but we need somewhat more information on the videos content surely?
Playing 200 to 600 dollars to "get started" in the biggest P2E game there is shows you where these games are going. For someone in the western world this money can be developed into game resources that give you what is described as a "minimum wage, or less".
Other P2E games rely hugely on luck, if you don't get lucky you lose out, there is a reason I call this 'casino gameplay'.
I notice that Horse Racing game BCbully goes on about is shown here as an example of exactly the sort of game you don't want to play.
This video is a deep look at what is going on in P2E, best I have seen. If you search You Tube for cryptocurrency games nearly all you find is videos lauding the whole concept by those who have a vested interest in P2E.
I just listened to the video.
Pretty much spot on imo. Pretty much what I've been saying in this thread. I went a bit further though.
I'm going to go with big gimmick. Final answer, Regis.
Ok Old eeer New World example. A person buys house (NFT) in your guilds provence. All guild members receive portion of that NFT cost.
Now guilds are throwing events in their town trying to attract residents.
Why the people who know more about mmorpgs than any people in the world are so aggressively closed minded to tech that can meaningfully change the bland bullshit they've been playing for 20 30 years is beyond me.
Was mentioned several times, everyone wants to get in early and profit big afterwards, fun for many perhaps, but definitely not me.
I don't like landrushes, auctions, market manipulation even when it's only worthless in game currency, tieing those all to real world currency is the last thing I'd ever want to do.
When playing EVE I always paid for a sub, six of them on an annual basis towards the end.
Even though I was bringing in enough ISK to never have to sub I still did anyways because I didn't want the "pressure" of having to make enough ISK to keep paying, already enough of that in my real life over the years.
It's true, I do want something new and exciting in the MMORPG space, but this particular trend just isn't offering anything of interest, at least to me anyways, YMMV.
I agree with eveything you said right here. Idk about the video, but that land rush stuff is not for me. I don't fund the production of games. I play them.
That being said those who still do back projects through kick starters, founder packs, w/e, these offerings, land, in game items, Initial Coin Offerings etc. are for them. These people may even actully get something of vaule for the risk they take on instead of the way things have been. In the case of ICOs they get that vaule immediately. The coins can be resold.
Didn't you 'back/donate/lend" CU some money? What did you get in return for your hard erned money? Shouldn't you get some type of intrest on the loan while they build game. Shouldn't you get something for your good fath and for assuming risk? It sure as hell doesn't look like you're getting a game...
The industry is being changed by force. THANK GOODNESS. 2010-2021 The 80's all over again.
Shh, let's not talk about my CU "donation," certainly not one of my better decisions but it was an inexpensive learning lesson that kept me from making bigger mistakes like many SC whales have made.
I'll probably sit on the sidelines for now until the day comes when someone creates a MMORPG that I'm interested in playing, (a very rare occurrence these days) regardless if has blockchain elements in it's design or not.
Monetization models usually don't influence my decision to play a fun new game, but they can be onerous enough to spoil my enjoyment some when too intrusive on the overall design.
I've well enjoyed POE, FO76 and ESO the past few years, but all three have annoyed me with their cash shop designs in ways paying 10 years of EVE subs never did.
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
There is a link under the articles video, it is entitled "Read the full story here". It is not entitled "Introduction to a video", because that's all we got. I do realise this is the videos discussion section but we need somewhat more information on the videos content surely?
Playing 200 to 600 dollars to "get started" in the biggest P2E game there is shows you where these games are going. For someone in the western world this money can be developed into game resources that give you what is described as a "minimum wage, or less".
Other P2E games rely hugely on luck, if you don't get lucky you lose out, there is a reason I call this 'casino gameplay'.
I notice that Horse Racing game BCbully goes on about is shown here as an example of exactly the sort of game you don't want to play.
This video is a deep look at what is going on in P2E, best I have seen. If you search You Tube for cryptocurrency games nearly all you find is videos lauding the whole concept by those who have a vested interest in P2E.
I just listened to the video.
Pretty much spot on imo. Pretty much what I've been saying in this thread. I went a bit further though.
Scot stop being a tool.
No where did he mention Zed Run.
Come on, are we not past calling each other silly names? You are right he did not mention it, but when talking about the 'games that are just swapping one job for another', graphics from that game were in the background, I don't regard that as a coincidence. You will know those graphics better than I check it out, in the last section of the video.
As much as I don't really like where this is going, owning digital assets, metaverses and gaming surrounding crypto are going to stay and the the boom of such games is about to take place in as fast as 2 years time. Whether you make or lose money or scams is another topic altogether but it's definitely coming.
Games with NFTs are hardly the first games ever to launch. The rest of gaming history is relevant here.
When do games tend to have the most active players? Do games tend to steadily gain active players forever? Or do they peak at some point and then drop off after that? A large fraction of games peak at or shortly after launch. Some actually peak before their official launch. Some never even make it to launch.
What do you think will happen to the value of NFTs in a game when the playerbase mostly disappears? Think they'll keep going up and up forever? Or do you think they'll drop precipitously? How about when the company pulls the plug on the game so that the items in the game are no longer actually usable there, even if you can still trade them?
The eventual value of most gaming NFTs is going to be zero. That doesn't mean that there isn't money to be made in the short-term while a game is popular. Gold farmers have been doing that in other MMORPGs for many years, and this would largely legalize the practice. But it does mean that they're not long-term investments.
Play a game have fun. Make some money for your time if you want. Don't sell anything if you want. It's your choice.
For what it's worth (no pun intended) WoW has been dying for 10 years now. There will be an UO soon without question. How long has UO been dieing? I'll bet you this, those items from year one have some serious value to those that hold. What's wrong with that? 20 years later whats wrong with that gamer making money if they chose?
I wish I had something to show besides youtube vids from the games I've played in the past. Most don't have that. What's wrong with always having those items, game or not?
Needing to pay several hundred dollars to get started without knowing if you'll even like the game is not really compatible with the way that I've played games in the past.
I'm not necessarily against games allowing players to sell things to each other, or even using NFTs to facilitate it. I have no problem with EVE's PLEX system, for example, nor with analogous things in a number of other games. I am against needing to pay hundreds of dollars to get started that you can't easily get refunded if you decide that the game is dumb and quit almost immediately.
I'm also against the game being really just a pretext to host NFTs. In order for a blockchain game to be good, it needs to be a good game that merely uses blockchain as a side feature. Most of the blockchain games that I've seen present themselves as if blockchain and NFTs are the point of the game, and the game itself is an afterthought.
Guild of Guardians, which the video highlights, certainly does that. If you go to their home page, there are several sections to the page, all of which are about NFTs or buying stuff. The FAQ page is mostly about NFTs and buying stuff, and even most of the questions that aren't about NFTs have an answer that is.
The only blockchain game in development that I've seen where the site makes it look like the game is the point of the game rather than blockchain being the point of the game is Infinite Fleet. That doesn't necessarily mean that Infinite Fleet will be good; in most of the bad games that have ever launched, the game was the point of the game and there wasn't any blockchain. But at least has a chance, which is more than can be said of most blockchain games.
In order for a blockchain game to be good, it needs to first be a good game. Blockchain and NFTs have to merely be a side feature, and one of many side features. If NFTs are the point of the game and everything else is built around NFTs, then the game is going to be garbage.
I'm going to go with big gimmick. Final answer, Regis.
Ok Old eeer New World example. A person buys house (NFT) in your guilds provence. All guild members receive portion of that NFT cost.
Now guilds are throwing events in their town trying to attract residents.
Why the people who know more about mmorpgs than any people in the world are so aggressively closed minded to tech that can meaningfully change the bland bullshit they've been playing for 20 30 years is beyond me.
Because we have been playing actual games that appeal to us because of their game play for those 20-30 years and will continue to do just that instead of jumping on the NFT and "real" money trading bandwagon when those games are just garbage meant only as a minimally viable delivery vehicle for the NFT and dreams of earning while you play that they're actually trying to sell.
You've obviously drunk the koolaid but just so you know, your constant proselytizing is anything but humble.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I notice that Horse Racing game BCbully goes on about is shown here as an example of exactly the sort of game you don't want to play.
No where did he mention Zed Run.
17:35
I remember watching that. Funny thing is I didn't think he was talking about Zed when watching. I didn't even notice the horses. I was in full agreement with his words. I believe because I know the time I've put in, the enjoyment I've goten and the reward for my effort. The more I learn the better I get, so I keep digging. I'd play the game for rankings alone, skill factor. Making over 3k in a month on top of the other things is a real "hell yeah" in my book.
Hell maybe in a couple months I might have a horse give a way on this site. With the barrier for entry I can see it's hard to grasp that there is a game there.
What we are going to see over the next couple years is there will be metaverse games like Blocktopia and Zed Run and there will be traditional mmorpgs and mmos. I beleive we will be able to see the difference between the two.
I notice that Horse Racing game BCbully goes on about is shown here as an example of exactly the sort of game you don't want to play.
No where did he mention Zed Run.
17:35
I remember watching that. Funny thing is I didn't think he was talking about Zed when watching. I didn't even notice the horses. I was in full agreement with his words. I believe because I know the time I've put in, the enjoyment I've goten and the reward for my effort. The more I learn the better I get, so I keep digging. I'd play the game for rankings alone, skill factor. Making over 3k in a month on top of the other things is a real "hell yeah" in my book.
Hell maybe in a couple months I might have a horse give a way on this site. With the barrier for entry I can see it's hard to grasp that there is a game there.
What we are going to see over the next couple years is there will be metaverse games like Blocktopia and Zed Run and there will be traditional mmorpgs and mmos. I beleive we will be able to see the difference between the two.
Just that little snippet of zed run is kind of cringe worthy, because it is all about big money, and they do briefly go into the actual mechanics of the game, but don't really show it.
Most, if not all blockchain games make you buy into it to even get started before you can make money.
That isn't the case with Blankos Block Party though. You can log in and play and actually earn your first few NFTs through the party pass, but it takes a lot of daily playing to do it, and even if you earned the free NFTs, the chance you could sell them for a lot of money is all luck based on the mint number.
Guild of Guardians says they will be a free to play game, and really understanding what that means in terms of the NFTs you can earn is what matters.
What we've seen is that in game economies do work a lot of the time, but they all start with earning things of value in the game, with no real inherent risk.
I think some of these games scare players that by making the wrong choice of what they buy, could leave them with no way to make their money back.
It's like if you want to get into axie, but you don't have a whole bunch to spend, what if you just buy the 3 cheapest axies, would it even be worth it at that point. (probably yes if you planned on making money through selling SLP but SLP has taken a drastic drop in just a month so, still).
If the developers are so confident on the way they will be able to earn money, they should be letting players get NFTs through playing, with the knowledge they'll always get their funds on the backend when it gets sold. I shouldn't have to spend hundreds on a pony to get started.
Even infinite fleet says they will have non NFT ships you can start with in game and eventually earn NFTs just through playing. I'm not a space game fan, but at least the model sounds right to me.
As noted above the Guild of Guardian web site repeatedly touts the "benefits" of playing and getting paid far and away over promoting any sort of interesting or fun game play.
I also noticed it is a mobile block chain game, so a double negative for me in that regards, PC Master Race now and forever.
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
lol no thanks. I have a job and don't want to ruin my hobby with making it a job. I feel the same about my music and art. It's something I do for me, or with friends, but not for money. Keeping it separate keeps it safe and sacred for me. If others can mix the two then good for them, but I prefer it not to be that way.
Is Shaklee and Amway a scam? Maybe, many would say not, but I'm not interested in MLM stuff either. Crypto and the NFT craze feels a lot like those to me. If you get burned then you only have yourself to blame for trying to get rich quick and easy.
lol no thanks. I have a job and don't want to ruin my hobby with making it a job. I feel the same about my music and art. It's something I do for me, or with friends, but not for money. Keeping it separate keeps it safe and sacred for me. If others can mix the two then good for them, but I prefer it not to be that way.
Is Shaklee and Amway a scam? Maybe, many would say not, but I'm not interested in MLM stuff either. Crypto and the NFT craze feels a lot like those to me. If you get burned then you only have yourself to blame for trying to get rich quick and easy.
This is the same reasoning I applied when many of my gaming mates talked about how great it would be to become a gaming journalist. I didn't want gaming to become a job.
lol no thanks. I have a job and don't want to ruin my hobby with making it a job. I feel the same about my music and art. It's something I do for me, or with friends, but not for money. Keeping it separate keeps it safe and sacred for me. If others can mix the two then good for them, but I prefer it not to be that way.
Is Shaklee and Amway a scam? Maybe, many would say not, but I'm not interested in MLM stuff either. Crypto and the NFT craze feels a lot like those to me. If you get burned then you only have yourself to blame for trying to get rich quick and easy.
The scariest thing about Crypto is that 98%+ of it will go bust.
edit: a better way to say it is that 98%+ of the companies will fail
lol no thanks. I have a job and don't want to ruin my hobby with making it a job. I feel the same about my music and art. It's something I do for me, or with friends, but not for money. Keeping it separate keeps it safe and sacred for me. If others can mix the two then good for them, but I prefer it not to be that way.
Is Shaklee and Amway a scam? Maybe, many would say not, but I'm not interested in MLM stuff either. Crypto and the NFT craze feels a lot like those to me. If you get burned then you only have yourself to blame for trying to get rich quick and easy.
This is the same reasoning I applied when many of my gaming mates talked about how great it would be to become a gaming journalist. I didn't want gaming to become a job.
Sorry Scott.
Just like @Kyleran on his phone I accidentally hit the WFT button.
Changed it to an Awesome because of your job comment
lol no thanks. I have a job and don't want to ruin my hobby with making it a job. I feel the same about my music and art. It's something I do for me, or with friends, but not for money. Keeping it separate keeps it safe and sacred for me. If others can mix the two then good for them, but I prefer it not to be that way.
Is Shaklee and Amway a scam? Maybe, many would say not, but I'm not interested in MLM stuff either. Crypto and the NFT craze feels a lot like those to me. If you get burned then you only have yourself to blame for trying to get rich quick and easy.
This is the same reasoning I applied when many of my gaming mates talked about how great it would be to become a gaming journalist. I didn't want gaming to become a job.
Sorry Scott.
Just like @Kyleran on his phone I accidentally hit the WFT button.
Changed it to an Awesome because of your job comment
I had not noticed and I have done that myself so np mate.
Going to take this opportunity to ask Stephen who does these articles to do some follow ups when he thinks there is more to add. Personally I think CC MMOs could result in the biggest change to the MMO-scape since cash shops and even if you do not think overall that MMOs suffered from that change as I do, it was a sea change.
lol no thanks. I have a job and don't want to ruin my hobby with making it a job. I feel the same about my music and art. It's something I do for me, or with friends, but not for money. Keeping it separate keeps it safe and sacred for me. If others can mix the two then good for them, but I prefer it not to be that way.
Is Shaklee and Amway a scam? Maybe, many would say not, but I'm not interested in MLM stuff either. Crypto and the NFT craze feels a lot like those to me. If you get burned then you only have yourself to blame for trying to get rich quick and easy.
The scariest thing about Crypto is that 98%+ of it will go bust.
edit: a better way to say it is that 98%+ of the companies will fail
imho
I think that most crypto currencies will fail. I also think most of these NFT art projects are going to fail as well. Personally I think any arbitrary status symbol with no practical use eventually fails.
Gaming is truly the only real haven for NFTs to make any sense. Cryptocurrencies will continue to boom for as long as its the wild west out there. Just like the whole .com bubble that many of us lived through, there is actually a lot of parity between the two right now.
But even in that whole fiasco there were winners and losers. Some people in the end will bet on the winning crypto currencies and many will bet on the losers.
Games stand outside of that though. It brings a speculative investment market into games in ways we didn't really have before, and truthfully it shouldn't matter one way or the other if people are buying up a currency or governance token, as long as the players in the game are playing and having fun.
It can also be fun to make money, which is why so many crappy blockchain games find big audiences. But the major difference is, we're not sitting on a J curve of earnings, and not everyone can always earn enough money that it's worthwhile to play just for cash. For every winner of that special drop or buyer of that limited NFT there are hundreds of losers.
lol no thanks. I have a job and don't want to ruin my hobby with making it a job. I feel the same about my music and art. It's something I do for me, or with friends, but not for money. Keeping it separate keeps it safe and sacred for me. If others can mix the two then good for them, but I prefer it not to be that way.
Is Shaklee and Amway a scam? Maybe, many would say not, but I'm not interested in MLM stuff either. Crypto and the NFT craze feels a lot like those to me. If you get burned then you only have yourself to blame for trying to get rich quick and easy.
The scariest thing about Crypto is that 98%+ of it will go bust.
edit: a better way to say it is that 98%+ of the companies will fail
imho
I think that most crypto currencies will fail. I also think most of these NFT art projects are going to fail as well. Personally I think any arbitrary status symbol with no practical use eventually fails.
Gaming is truly the only real haven for NFTs to make any sense. Cryptocurrencies will continue to boom for as long as its the wild west out there. Just like the whole .com bubble that many of us lived through, there is actually a lot of parity between the two right now.
But even in that whole fiasco there were winners and losers. Some people in the end will bet on the winning crypto currencies and many will bet on the losers.
Games stand outside of that though. It brings a speculative investment market into games in ways we didn't really have before, and truthfully it shouldn't matter one way or the other if people are buying up a currency or governance token, as long as the players in the game are playing and having fun.
It can also be fun to make money, which is why so many crappy blockchain games find big audiences. But the major difference is, we're not sitting on a J curve of earnings, and not everyone can always earn enough money that it's worthwhile to play just for cash. For every winner of that special drop or buyer of that limited NFT there are hundreds of losers.
I agree with most of your comments. I really don't see anything positive about giving a video game object a speculative real world value. I look at the attitudes and behaviors in the video gaming community, the way things are now and try to imagine how bad it will get when we introduce speculative serious money mechanics.
Way too much emotion of the stupid kind involved. The damage will not be worth it. Some could give a crap how much damage they do.
There is Zero value added and now your introducing capital gain taxation into video gaming. I know a lot of people like to keep Uncle Sam out of their video games.
Imho
edit: I don't know about the rest of you... But I just want to play games and I definitely don't want to be the one being played.
It's a nice idea. I mean, who doesn't want to have fun and make money?
I reckon it'll lure people in the same way streaming did: people who want to play games and make money. But just like streaming, the average person/player will never earn enough to make it worthwhile, guaranteed (I feel very confident in guaranteeing that). Those that do will be a very, very small percentage of the playerbase.
Like my mum told me: If it sounds too good to be true, it is.
It really depends on you what mean by "average person"--I'm talking about streamers.
There are thousands of people who are just streaming their play. Yes they make little to no money. But they are not really doing anything, just streaming what they are playing, not even taking challenges or doing something planned. Why should they?
It has turned into a legit profession for those who try to actually make content. This is a broadcasting business nonetheless. You got to actually work, put time into it, stick to schedules, interact with your audience, try to make content that is popular to some extent, etc. People who do that usually are able to reach about 20 concurrent viewers. And 20 concurrent viewers grants you a liveable income.
I have worked with a lot of streamers since 2012, and I can't remember anyone who had the principle and the desire and yet not managed to make it. It is a job like most other jobs. You get into it, you learn it, you dedicated your life to it, and you make money.
Now making big is a whole another story. But a tolerable income is not that hard.
Constantine, The Console Poster
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
Needing to pay several hundred dollars to get started without knowing if you'll even like the game is not really compatible with the way that I've played games in the past.
I'm not necessarily against games allowing players to sell things to each other, or even using NFTs to facilitate it. I have no problem with EVE's PLEX system, for example, nor with analogous things in a number of other games. I am against needing to pay hundreds of dollars to get started that you can't easily get refunded if you decide that the game is dumb and quit almost immediately.
I'm also against the game being really just a pretext to host NFTs. In order for a blockchain game to be good, it needs to be a good game that merely uses blockchain as a side feature. Most of the blockchain games that I've seen present themselves as if blockchain and NFTs are the point of the game, and the game itself is an afterthought.
...
In order for a blockchain game to be good, it needs to first be a good game. Blockchain and NFTs have to merely be a side feature, and one of many side features. If NFTs are the point of the game and everything else is built around NFTs, then the game is going to be garbage.
I am quoting Quizzical because it directly addressed one of the issues that I feel is important, the cost of entry. As P2E games take off, they have quickly escalated the cost of entry, which eliminates many potential players. This is part of the reason that many have endorsed the scholarship approach, so a player can start playing with $0 upfront (the upfront cost is covered by someone else). However, this just delays the issue, as someone has to keep paying the upfront cost for the game to grow. With this approach, the best that we can hope for is a MLM type approach that brings in enough new players to keep the game going long term.
This is why I expect someone to eventually apply a F2P model to the P2E approach. With these combined, you could easily add unlimited non earning accounts, with earning slowly growing as you add investment. This would allow for free players to enjoy the game, but for players that invest to earn some returns as well. It would still allow for investors to run scholarships for those that want to earn with no investment, but all of this would be done AFTER players are playing the game. I see this as the future for most online games.
Oh, and for how this all began, the oldest game that I am aware of that has any variation of P2E was Project Entropia (now Entropia Universe)
Needing to pay several hundred dollars to get started without knowing if you'll even like the game is not really compatible with the way that I've played games in the past.
I'm not necessarily against games allowing players to sell things to each other, or even using NFTs to facilitate it. I have no problem with EVE's PLEX system, for example, nor with analogous things in a number of other games. I am against needing to pay hundreds of dollars to get started that you can't easily get refunded if you decide that the game is dumb and quit almost immediately.
I'm also against the game being really just a pretext to host NFTs. In order for a blockchain game to be good, it needs to be a good game that merely uses blockchain as a side feature. Most of the blockchain games that I've seen present themselves as if blockchain and NFTs are the point of the game, and the game itself is an afterthought.
...
In order for a blockchain game to be good, it needs to first be a good game. Blockchain and NFTs have to merely be a side feature, and one of many side features. If NFTs are the point of the game and everything else is built around NFTs, then the game is going to be garbage.
I am quoting Quizzical because it directly addressed one of the issues that I feel is important, the cost of entry. As P2E games take off, they have quickly escalated the cost of entry, which eliminates many potential players. This is part of the reason that many have endorsed the scholarship approach, so a player can start playing with $0 upfront (the upfront cost is covered by someone else). However, this just delays the issue, as someone has to keep paying the upfront cost for the game to grow. With this approach, the best that we can hope for is a MLM type approach that brings in enough new players to keep the game going long term.
This is why I expect someone to eventually apply a F2P model to the P2E approach. With these combined, you could easily add unlimited non earning accounts, with earning slowly growing as you add investment. This would allow for free players to enjoy the game, but for players that invest to earn some returns as well. It would still allow for investors to run scholarships for those that want to earn with no investment, but all of this would be done AFTER players are playing the game. I see this as the future for most online games.
Oh, and for how this all began, the oldest game that I am aware of that has any variation of P2E was Project Entropia (now Entropia Universe)
The high entry cost is intentional: Letting your members earn money can give you large influx of new members who pay high entry fee for the privilege of being able to earn in future. It's tried and tested method by pyramid schemers that those entry fees can exceed what you let your existing members earn and keep your operation profitable for quite a long time.
Entropia Universe is a good example of how much people would earn if the game was built around idea of stable population instead of around the idea of entry fees being used to pay existing players.
Comments
Here's the thing for me. there is no way I could dig in and spend the time, give the thought needed, that I do with Zed Run if I didn't love it.
For example I started playing a game called Meeb Masters it's like Axie. It's boring as shit to me. I can't bring myself to play even though I spent money on the Meebs. The cool thing though is I can sell them anytime I want. Which I just might do right now.
When do games tend to have the most active players? Do games tend to steadily gain active players forever? Or do they peak at some point and then drop off after that? A large fraction of games peak at or shortly after launch. Some actually peak before their official launch. Some never even make it to launch.
What do you think will happen to the value of NFTs in a game when the playerbase mostly disappears? Think they'll keep going up and up forever? Or do you think they'll drop precipitously? How about when the company pulls the plug on the game so that the items in the game are no longer actually usable there, even if you can still trade them?
The eventual value of most gaming NFTs is going to be zero. That doesn't mean that there isn't money to be made in the short-term while a game is popular. Gold farmers have been doing that in other MMORPGs for many years, and this would largely legalize the practice. But it does mean that they're not long-term investments.
For what it's worth (no pun intended) WoW has been dying for 10 years now. There will be an UO soon without question. How long has UO been dieing? I'll bet you this, those items from year one have some serious value to those that hold. What's wrong with that? 20 years later whats wrong with that gamer making money if they chose?
I wish I had something to show besides youtube vids from the games I've played in the past. Most don't have that. What's wrong with always having those items, game or not?
I just listened to the video.
Pretty much spot on imo. Pretty much what I've been saying in this thread. I went a bit further though.
Scot stop being a tool.
No where did he mention Zed Run.
I'll probably sit on the sidelines for now until the day comes when someone creates a MMORPG that I'm interested in playing, (a very rare occurrence these days) regardless if has blockchain elements in it's design or not.
Monetization models usually don't influence my decision to play a fun new game, but they can be onerous enough to spoil my enjoyment some when too intrusive on the overall design.
I've well enjoyed POE, FO76 and ESO the past few years, but all three have annoyed me with their cash shop designs in ways paying 10 years of EVE subs never did.
"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
But the model wont work 99% players wanting to earn , 1% wasting money isnt sustainable
I'm not necessarily against games allowing players to sell things to each other, or even using NFTs to facilitate it. I have no problem with EVE's PLEX system, for example, nor with analogous things in a number of other games. I am against needing to pay hundreds of dollars to get started that you can't easily get refunded if you decide that the game is dumb and quit almost immediately.
I'm also against the game being really just a pretext to host NFTs. In order for a blockchain game to be good, it needs to be a good game that merely uses blockchain as a side feature. Most of the blockchain games that I've seen present themselves as if blockchain and NFTs are the point of the game, and the game itself is an afterthought.
Guild of Guardians, which the video highlights, certainly does that. If you go to their home page, there are several sections to the page, all of which are about NFTs or buying stuff. The FAQ page is mostly about NFTs and buying stuff, and even most of the questions that aren't about NFTs have an answer that is.
The only blockchain game in development that I've seen where the site makes it look like the game is the point of the game rather than blockchain being the point of the game is Infinite Fleet. That doesn't necessarily mean that Infinite Fleet will be good; in most of the bad games that have ever launched, the game was the point of the game and there wasn't any blockchain. But at least has a chance, which is more than can be said of most blockchain games.
In order for a blockchain game to be good, it needs to first be a good game. Blockchain and NFTs have to merely be a side feature, and one of many side features. If NFTs are the point of the game and everything else is built around NFTs, then the game is going to be garbage.
You've obviously drunk the koolaid but just so you know, your constant proselytizing is anything but humble.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
There is an old adage that I believe rings just as true here, as it does anywhere.
“If something sounds too good to be true, then it probably is”
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Hell maybe in a couple months I might have a horse give a way on this site. With the barrier for entry I can see it's hard to grasp that there is a game there.
What we are going to see over the next couple years is there will be metaverse games like Blocktopia and Zed Run and there will be traditional mmorpgs and mmos. I beleive we will be able to see the difference between the two.
Most, if not all blockchain games make you buy into it to even get started before you can make money.
That isn't the case with Blankos Block Party though. You can log in and play and actually earn your first few NFTs through the party pass, but it takes a lot of daily playing to do it, and even if you earned the free NFTs, the chance you could sell them for a lot of money is all luck based on the mint number.
Guild of Guardians says they will be a free to play game, and really understanding what that means in terms of the NFTs you can earn is what matters.
What we've seen is that in game economies do work a lot of the time, but they all start with earning things of value in the game, with no real inherent risk.
I think some of these games scare players that by making the wrong choice of what they buy, could leave them with no way to make their money back.
It's like if you want to get into axie, but you don't have a whole bunch to spend, what if you just buy the 3 cheapest axies, would it even be worth it at that point. (probably yes if you planned on making money through selling SLP but SLP has taken a drastic drop in just a month so, still).
If the developers are so confident on the way they will be able to earn money, they should be letting players get NFTs through playing, with the knowledge they'll always get their funds on the backend when it gets sold. I shouldn't have to spend hundreds on a pony to get started.
Even infinite fleet says they will have non NFT ships you can start with in game and eventually earn NFTs just through playing. I'm not a space game fan, but at least the model sounds right to me.
I also noticed it is a mobile block chain game, so a double negative for me in that regards, PC Master Race now and forever.
Amen
"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
edit: a better way to say it is that 98%+ of the companies will fail
imho
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Just like @Kyleran on his phone I accidentally hit the WFT button.
Changed it to an Awesome because of your job comment
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Going to take this opportunity to ask Stephen who does these articles to do some follow ups when he thinks there is more to add. Personally I think CC MMOs could result in the biggest change to the MMO-scape since cash shops and even if you do not think overall that MMOs suffered from that change as I do, it was a sea change.
Gaming is truly the only real haven for NFTs to make any sense. Cryptocurrencies will continue to boom for as long as its the wild west out there. Just like the whole .com bubble that many of us lived through, there is actually a lot of parity between the two right now.
But even in that whole fiasco there were winners and losers. Some people in the end will bet on the winning crypto currencies and many will bet on the losers.
Games stand outside of that though. It brings a speculative investment market into games in ways we didn't really have before, and truthfully it shouldn't matter one way or the other if people are buying up a currency or governance token, as long as the players in the game are playing and having fun.
It can also be fun to make money, which is why so many crappy blockchain games find big audiences. But the major difference is, we're not sitting on a J curve of earnings, and not everyone can always earn enough money that it's worthwhile to play just for cash. For every winner of that special drop or buyer of that limited NFT there are hundreds of losers.
Way too much emotion of the stupid kind involved. The damage will not be worth it. Some could give a crap how much damage they do.
There is Zero value added and now your introducing capital gain taxation into video gaming. I know a lot of people like to keep Uncle Sam out of their video games.
Imho
edit: I don't know about the rest of you... But I just want to play games and I definitely don't want to be the one being played.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
There are thousands of people who are just streaming their play. Yes they make little to no money. But they are not really doing anything, just streaming what they are playing, not even taking challenges or doing something planned. Why should they?
It has turned into a legit profession for those who try to actually make content. This is a broadcasting business nonetheless. You got to actually work, put time into it, stick to schedules, interact with your audience, try to make content that is popular to some extent, etc. People who do that usually are able to reach about 20 concurrent viewers. And 20 concurrent viewers grants you a liveable income.
I have worked with a lot of streamers since 2012, and I can't remember anyone who had the principle and the desire and yet not managed to make it. It is a job like most other jobs. You get into it, you learn it, you dedicated your life to it, and you make money.
Now making big is a whole another story. But a tolerable income is not that hard.
This is why I expect someone to eventually apply a F2P model to the P2E approach. With these combined, you could easily add unlimited non earning accounts, with earning slowly growing as you add investment. This would allow for free players to enjoy the game, but for players that invest to earn some returns as well. It would still allow for investors to run scholarships for those that want to earn with no investment, but all of this would be done AFTER players are playing the game. I see this as the future for most online games.
Oh, and for how this all began, the oldest game that I am aware of that has any variation of P2E was Project Entropia (now Entropia Universe)
Entropia Universe is a good example of how much people would earn if the game was built around idea of stable population instead of around the idea of entry fees being used to pay existing players.