Literally read my comment that you replied to.
> Scenario 5) Doesn't exist now - but I play an on-chain game and earn some NFT. This is then recognized in another on-chain game that gives added functionality. Everything is governed by DAO. Interop can be voted in
This is how Illuvium works right now.
This is not what I meant at all
Their videos which tease advanced game mechanics look like pure hype to raise money from the gullible. Their white paper says nothing about how this works and their repo has no code.
Here's what I want to know:
Player 1 shoots. Can player 2 see the trajectory of the shot before it hits them?
If yes- how do they avoid cheating?
If no- how is this on-chain?
Eagerly waiting an answer to that
There are many more problems for on-chain games (that are not just trading with pretty skins), but let's start here
(probable spoiler alert: they don't have an answer to that, they don't actually have any on-chain physics or game mechanics beyond trading crypto assets, they only made the demo video to dupe investors)
There’s gameplay demos on youtube dude. There are users beta testing the games.
> they don't actually have any on-chain physics
Again, on-chain physics is stupid. Illuvium is just an example where the assets you obtain in one game are also integrated in a different game (interoperability, because you brought it up as something cool that you didn’t think existed yet).
There no practical use case there, unless the other games are pretty much the same. Unless you mean cross-platform, in which case who gets to keep the money you spent?
> that gives added functionality. Everything is governed by DAO. Interop can be voted in
What I mean by functionality is _actual_ functionality. Like, I earn a shield in one game and now it lets me deflect hits with new animations in another, so the DAO would need to vote in code changes. This is what I meant by interop too.
Not being able to see JPGs that you import across games. Like I said, I built something like that as a weekend project and custom cw721 contracts and unity. It's not hard. It's also not interesting to me.
Yes, literally how Illuvium games work. Eg in the mobile city-building game you build factories that extract minerals, which are then available either to trade with other players or to use in the desktop MMORPG as materials to forge weapons.
Like for example if these materials let you build new kinds of structures in Fortnite, if Fortnite were controlled by a DAO, which also implies that the code is running on-chain, because who owns the keys to upload to the Microsoft store etc.
Rephrased, in a game that depends on proprietary centralized servers, what do I gain by having a public ledger that the game can query to say I own some asset? Or, alternatively, in a game that recognizes arbitrary decentralized permissions, what do I gain by having proprietary centralized servers? Let's avoid flowery language and deal with reality:
Scenario 1) I buy a sword from Joe on OpenSea. Epic games recognizes NFTs as a generic spec and lets me import it and use in the game. That's wonderful, but in this case I do not need to buy anything from Joe, I can just mint my own sword for free, since they'll recognize any spec-compliant contract.
Scenario 2) I buy a sword from Epic on OpenSea. Epic games only recognizes NFTs that they have the authority to mint. Yay. But now why didn't I just buy it from Epic directly, since I already depend on them fully for auth (they can just migrate the nft contract at will), what does having it on Ethereum add?
Scenario 3) Just like Scenario 2, but Epic recognizes a list of official partners that they trust but do not own. Meh. it's not that interesting. Might be a little more interesting if those partners are themselves DAO-controlled. Still, I think it's more in the category of "kinda neat" instead of "gamechanging"
Scenario 4) I earn a "high score" NFT by playing an Epic game, and they mint an NFT for me (I've gone through their login _and_ associated my wallet with their account). Other games recognize this specific NFT address as being owned by Epic and give special utility. Again, this is pointless, we've already placed all our trust in Epic's closed system, they might as well just expose an endpoint
Fully on-chain ecosystems with no leaks are a different beast imho. Decentralization is cool! It's just extremely crappy for game ux right now. I expect the tech here to catch up eventually. When it does, we can have:
Scenario 5) Doesn't exist now - but I play an on-chain game and earn some NFT. This is then recognized in another on-chain game that gives added functionality. Everything is governed by DAO. Interop can be voted in
This is cool. However, what's innovative about this is that it's basically open-source collaborative business. I do think that's pretty huge, in theory, if it took off. The hard part would be the actual programming and game design to make the interop interesting. The NFT part is still just an auth token, nothing more.