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.
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.