News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The collapse of cryptokitties, the first big blockchain game by saurik on Thursday September 15, 2022 @06:21PM (#32859194)
In the real world, people play trading card games all the time and a big part of the ecosystem is trading the trading cards. Only, it is really annoying to have to ship around and maintain physical cards, and I want my card collection in the cloud. Some people would thereby prefer to play an online version of, say, Magic: The Gathering, or whatever the Pokémon one is called, etc.

The problem now is... how do you do the trading part? You could go to the trouble of yourself building a marketplace for the cards and then integrating all of the payment methods required, and then dealing with all of the trust and fraud issues that result from people sending money via banks or PayPal that they later chargeback or refund, all while dealing with whatever crazy tax implications come up from running a market.

But you don't want to do any of that: you want to code a game, and it isn't like Wizards of the Coast is trying to take money off of the aftermarket! They just make money by selling the initial randomized official card packs. Because you went digital now you are doing a ton of extra work and are wasting a ton of time dealing with payment processing issues when none of that is related to your actual business model or product design.

And, at the end of the day, doing that giant marketplace is a hard job that other companies specialize in. If I told you eBay provided some kind of digital asset API that let you simply assign tracking numbers to products but then eBay kept track of the ownership as it changed and all your game had to do is ask "what cards does this user still own?" when it opens, I imagine a ton of developers would jump on that bandwagon.

Only, eBay doesn't provide that API, and likely would avoid doing so out of concern you would shut down the game on a whim and cause them issues; and, even if they did, now your entire game backend would then be built around a single marketplace that might randomly pull your game for some reason and shut down your entire company in a way where you are SCREWED as your end-to-end ownership pipeline is modeled inside of eBay's database rather than being something you control and can migrate.

If only there were some off-the-shelf technology for tracking digital assets that you could trivially add as a dependency to your project, letting you write a few lines of code to define your asset and which had APIs for querying ownership... one which was an open ecosystem controlled by a shared protocol instead of a single company, thereby allowing not just one market but any number of competing markets with different ideas on auctions or escrow to exist. Wouldn't that be amazing?!

Well: that's Ethereum; like, that's precisely what Ethereum is doing. If you think collectible trading card games aren't a dumb idea--and even if you hate them and think the premise is bad for gaming, I am going to remind you that these things are SUPER POPULAR and so your opinion doesn't in some sense matter here as you are just ignoring reality--then Ethereum is a GLORIOUS idea that makes it absolutely trivial for game developers to build them and for users to participate.

Re:The collapse of cryptokitties, the first big blockchain game by XCSme on Thursday September 15, 2022 @08:12PM (#32860254)
> If only there were some off-the-shelf technology for tracking digital assets

Isn't this any relational database where you can set the owner_id of an item?

> your entire game backend would then be built around a single marketplace that might randomly pull your game for some reason and shut down your entire company

Most online games have some sort of digital assets they have to keep track of, and that's one of the trivial things to implement.

Re:The collapse of cryptokitties, the first big blockchain game by saurik on Thursday September 15, 2022 @10:40PM (#32861437)
No: most online games don't maintain a marketplace where users can trade their assets for cash, running auctions or whatever similar to eBay. That is the issue here: people want to be able to sell their cards to other players, and now you need to build a mechanism that supports that correctly without becoming riled in the customer support issues.

Also, BTW: part of what makes the physical cards valuable in the long term is that even if the company that sold them goes out of business, the cards don't disappear and they still work to play the game... your dismissive attempt to build this sort of thing using centralized tech is thereby pretty ridiculous on the face of it even if you didn't try to tackle the money issues yourself.

What you want is a game that has no backend and preferably is coded using forwards-compatible technologies like HTML/JavaScript that can use these APIs to access their state for the long term... and again, that's Ethereum.

(Note: I ran a market for apps for over a decade and before that I was a game developer for almost half a decade; I thereby know what things are and aren't hard.)

Re:The collapse of cryptokitties, the first big blockchain game by jchmrt on Friday September 16, 2022 @05:33AM (#32864042)
> That is the issue here: people want to be able to sell their cards to other players, and now you need to build a mechanism that supports that correctly without becoming riled in the customer support issues.

I mean, if you put it like that it sounds as if the main advantage of the blockchain technology here is to offload responsibility for the inevitable issues that arise when people start trading for real money, such as scams or people regretting their purchases. But you're not actually solving these problems, you just gain the ability to point to the decentralized blockchain and claim there's nothing you can do about it.

Re:The collapse of cryptokitties, the first big blockchain game by XCSme on Friday September 16, 2022 @04:14AM (#32863503)
For the marketplace-specific functionality in multiplayer games it could be useful, but I don't see how blockchain makes it any easier to implement or safer. All the stored transactions and data are meaningless if the front-end of the application is not supported anymore, so you can no longer view your items in 3D and use them in-game.

What's the point of owning a Fortnite skin if the game is gone and you can not use or showcase it anymore? Not to mention that even if you somehow manage to retrieve the 3d asset from the information stored in the blockchain, you probably can't legally use it anywhere else due to copyright laws.

Re:The collapse of cryptokitties, the first big blockchain game by 8n4vidtmkvmk on Thursday September 15, 2022 @08:45PM (#32860520)
i think you missed the part about having to run that service yourself and all the headaches that entails
Re:The collapse of cryptokitties, the first big blockchain game by XCSme on Thursday September 15, 2022 @08:57PM (#32860620)
But you already have to run yourself a similar infrastructure for the game itself, the digital asset tracking is just a small part that can be integrated within the existing systems.
Re:The collapse of cryptokitties, the first big blockchain game by audunw on Friday September 16, 2022 @04:55AM (#32863796)
> Well: that's Ethereum; like, that's precisely what Ethereum is doing.

Then why does OpenSea etc. exist?

It seems to me that Ethereum just solves the trivial problem of providing an API to do the trade itself. You could easily have a trusted company providing the exact same service cheaper and more efficiently with a centralized database. If having a unified trading backend provided was something game companies actually wanted, it would have existed already. You don't need blockchain for that. You may have problems with the company providing the platform going belly-up and the backend disappearing, or that they messed with the trades and broke trust. Then you could say Ethereum would be a good replacement providing additional value (in exchange for cost/speed/efficiency though). But the thing Ethereum would be replacing and improve upon never existed in the first place, which tells me nobody really wanted it.

Building a service on top of Ethereum that facilitates the trades, lets you view items, lets you store the data behind the items in a robust way.. that's what would provide most of the value. But that's hard. And it seems we're pretty far from having a really robust/universal solution built on top of Ethereum, for anything more than URL to JPEGs. And even when we do, I'd argue that we never needed Ethereum as the backend to begin with. Most likely the items on the Ethereum blockchain will still be completely meaningless and without significant value without a huge frontend built by some large corporation. And then that corporation might as well have used a centralised ledger to track those items. I.e. something we could do 10 years ago, and would have been done 10 years ago if there was interest for it. Enthusiasts could build open-source replacements, yes, but by the time they get there the items will probably have lost most of their value, the fad will have passed.

Creating collectible/tradable cards and items is hard. It takes physical work. You need convince shops to get it out in the market etc. That's what provides a lot of the rarity of those things. When Ethereum makes it easy to create new collectibles, you'll flood the market continuously. Fads will come and go much faster. It'll be harder for the items to have staying value. Ethereum might ruin the very thing it's trying to facilitate.

Or I could be completely wrong. We'll see in a decade or so I guess.

Re:The collapse of cryptokitties, the first big blockchain game by yesimahuman on Thursday September 15, 2022 @06:43PM (#32859399)
I think the argument that Ethereum/etc provide useful off-the-shelf APIs/services for implementing something like this might be the one point in their favor