Re:Justin Kan: Web3 games don’t need to lure players with pr...
by smt88 on Wednesday August 10, 2022 @06:41PM
(#32419340)
> It's a digital asset, it's taxed by 30% each time it gets sold.
Yes. So what? That's already possible without crypto. The game developer decides which player owns what items, and they can charge for item transfers if they want to.
> Players happily pay the price.
This has nothing to do with what I said, and I didn't dispute it. Digital assets are valuable (and have been for decades), and players certainly are happy to pay for them.
> It's the perfect counterexample to your claim that players rage against taxing digital assets on each transaction.
Counterexample != data. Most players don't want crypto in their games. A few players who tolerate it don't mean anything.
But really, I've conflated two points I was making, which is my bad.
Point 1: Crypto adds nothing to digital assets in gaming. They are inherently centralized and can't be decentralized.
Point 2: Games like Axie Infinity, where the gameplay is terrible and serves only as a thin veneer over a speculative market, are not something gamers want. They only serve the creators.
> When you can't see something so blatantly obvious
If it's obvious, why can't you make an argument beyond, "People buy digital assets"?
What value does crypto add?
What are some games that people would not play if they weren't crypto-enabled?
As a player, what benefit does crypto provide me? How does it make the game better or more fun?
Yes. So what? That's already possible without crypto. The game developer decides which player owns what items, and they can charge for item transfers if they want to.
> Players happily pay the price.
This has nothing to do with what I said, and I didn't dispute it. Digital assets are valuable (and have been for decades), and players certainly are happy to pay for them.
> It's the perfect counterexample to your claim that players rage against taxing digital assets on each transaction.
Counterexample != data. Most players don't want crypto in their games. A few players who tolerate it don't mean anything.
But really, I've conflated two points I was making, which is my bad.
Point 1: Crypto adds nothing to digital assets in gaming. They are inherently centralized and can't be decentralized.
Point 2: Games like Axie Infinity, where the gameplay is terrible and serves only as a thin veneer over a speculative market, are not something gamers want. They only serve the creators.
> When you can't see something so blatantly obvious
If it's obvious, why can't you make an argument beyond, "People buy digital assets"?
What value does crypto add?
What are some games that people would not play if they weren't crypto-enabled?
As a player, what benefit does crypto provide me? How does it make the game better or more fun?