Games that are not available don't count, neither do games that say you'll be able to do it "soon". Pointing a game to an ugly monkey jpeg you "own" doesn't count either. Getting a character, weapon, costume piece, companion, etc, in one game, and transferring it to a completely unrelated game does count.
Someone in the crypto ecosystem working on a framework to make it easy for a game developer to allow import/export of game items as NFTs in a standardized way halfway counts.
Ah yes. We went from "items in the game used outside the game" to "basic sprites and characters".
Define "character", by the way.
> There are companies using it to show ads in decentralized way in the metaverse right now.
And this has anything to do with the original statement?
> I don't understand it
This is the key sentence, and you should have started with it.
> looking at similar patterns in gaccha and
Gaccha: Gaccha, alternatively spelled as Gachchha, is a monastic order, along with lay followers, of the image worshipping Murtipujaka Svetambara sect of Jainism.
Wat?
> game skins
What game skins?
> They are a digit in a database but sold for huge money and have a big secondary market.
Yes, and this has literaly nothing to do with their usefulness outside the game they were built for.
Example: Fortnite skins are built specifically for the Fortnite game engine, using textures available for that engine, applicable to skeletons and meshes designed specifically for that game engine.
How exactly are you going to use it outside of Fortnite's game engine?
> The value of it comes from the association and possibility
Translation: speculation, scams, and tricking people out of their money.
Edit: I mean, there was a huge public outcry because of EA's lootboxes. No cryptobros want these loot boxes everywhere and pretend it's a good thing.
I definitely agree with your assessment that most crypto/web3 stuff these days are terrible ideas.
[0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning_chamber
People can work it out at great expense to developers and at the risk of destroying whatever a game is stylistically.
Again, each game will have its own ways of presenting, combining and displaying objects. A game with highly detailed human-like motion will be radically different from a cartoonish game. A game designed with large textures in mind will not work well with small textures. A game with complex physics will be completely different from a simpler game in how it represents, handles and combines objects. And so on, and so forth, ad infinitum.
Brushing this aside betrays how little you understand of this.
By way if example: websites are completely open systems. You can go in and see all the "assets and objects and items". Websites are also manny, many orders of magnitude less complex than a computer game.
Go ahead, copy a website's CSS and paste it into another. Or copy a chunk of a website's HTML and paste into another. Doesn't work, does it? You can reflect on why that is.
On top of all of that, why would, say, developers of Elden Ring want to allow you to bring in assets from Horizon Zero Dawn or Binding of Isaac? Those are completely different games with completely different stylistic choices.
> I understand why AAA games are so boring nowadays outside of a couple studios.
Ah yes, they are boring because you can't use skins from Fortnite in Shadow of Mordor. That's the reason.
(I haven't yet seen web3 proposed as the solution for JavaScript framework proliferation, but I'm sure it's just around the corner...)
What does it add to Halo Infinite if Deadpool is a playable character in it? Especially if the developers and publishers do not make money selling you a skin that you bought some place else.
What standard? A skin in a game is not a shitty ape jpeg that you can right-click to download. It's a 3D model designed for a specific game. Other games will not have the same models (and nor should they).
> It's not some impossible unsolvable problem unless you don't want it to work
Go and work on it then. So far you've shown exactly zero understanding of the problem. You clearly don't even understand what NFTs are.
Or just offer an image upload feature in their own app and/or website?
The value comes from the association. A baseball hat worn by a famous person is worth more than if it is worn by a normal person even if the hat is the same physically.
If you directly use nft from the chain in some big project, the value of that particular receipt will go up because the association can be made. This cannot be done if it was simply a digital image copied over.
You can't "use nft". Nft is a crappy recipt that tells you that you spent some money. That is it.
In the absolute vast majority of cases the actual asset is some blob of data stored on a company's server somewhere.
Since we're in a subthread about using game items outside the game for which these items were specifically designed, good luck using your "nft" in "some big project".
For example, you can store game state on the chain and generate a svg based on that state which is returned to an external application if they fetch the nft.
There are few examples of it I can dig up if you are interested.
At great expense, yes.
Back in 2017, it cost approximately $76,000 per gigabyte to store data directly on Ethereum: https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/a/896/17413 Now it's multiples of that (i.e. millions of USD per gigabyte).
Of course, that's fine, because Ethereum is not meant to be a data-store, that's where IPFS and FileCoin come in (with their own "proof-of-storage" scheme to sister Bitcoin's world-destroying Proof-of-Work). IPFS should cost less than 1USD per gigabyte while reads are "free" - though I'm unsure how well this will scale over-time. Also, AFAIK, IPFS isn't immutable/append-only storage.
They can't. Again. Context: game assets/game items.
Good luck storing any game asset/item on (any) blockchain.
Yes. Let's say that. Please walk us through how this would work on a technical level, since you are "not a total novice here".
Why would CoD and Battlefield want to introduce NFTs in lootboxes? By having a resale/collectors market on-top it'll drive sales.
Why would Amazon Prime invest in having these sorts of promotional items? They already do in Apex Legends with skins.
Why would Activision and EA want to have cross-game NFTs? Item longevity would inflate the price of the asset again increasing sales of lootboxes for collectables.
The perk of Web3/NFT for these things over say the CS:GO store is you get a lot of that for free within the ecosystem - for example storefronts. Also you don't have to handle payments yourself! And there's a whole world of additional meta one can include to NFTs that you can't get with game assets. For example, and yes I know this is stupid, if my solution above was implemented I could also add a derivative CFD of a Gamestop share in it as a 'Charged NFT'. Why? Fuck knows lol. But maybe someone will come up with some cool features in the future. It's just something that's unique to NFTs and shows additional functionality. (https://www.charged.fi)
> Go and work on it then.
I try work on important things and I don't think video games are that important, albeit they're fun.
> So far you've shown exactly zero understanding of the problem. You clearly don't even understand what NFTs are.
> since you are "not a total novice here"
I don't appreciate your sarcastic tone to be honest, I am not sure if it's intentional or not but you comes across as a jerk with your confrontational attitude.
That's not what I asked.
Walk through the technical steps to implement this: "CoD and Battlefield teams both implement the MP5 and include them as a legendary drop in Lootboxes".
> I don't appreciate your sarcastic tone to be honest, I am not sure if it's intentional or not but you comes across as a jerk with your confrontational attitude.
No, I just don't suffer fools gladly. So far for every question and comment showing your complete lack of understanding how anyting in games works.
Battlefield is EA.
What you're proposing is about as likely as Apple adding Windows and Android support for Airdrop and Universal Control.
Yes, it is. What do cryptocurrencies or web3 or other random crap has to do with them?
1. Not for free
2. This doesn't even begin to answer my question.
> I could buy a gun in CoD for a party hat in RuneScape or whatever.
No, you couldn't. Explained here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30708290
There are companies using it to show ads in decentralized way in the metaverse right now.
I don't understand it like you but I can reason about it looking at similar patterns in gacha and game skins. They are a digit in a database but sold for huge money and have a big secondary market.
The value of it comes from the association and possibility than immediate practical use.