Good question and one I've grappled with myself.
One possibility is indie games. Blockchain is an always on database that an indie developer doesn't have to do anything to maintain, they just have to hook into it. For a team of one or two, that can be a big deal. Especially something like the loom network.
Just speculating, I'm not a game developer.
You are assuming it's a public blockchain. Since when can public block chain scale for real time trading? If you want to say ok its yours under the condition you might lose it in 1 minute then ya......
If I'm interpreting what's going on correctly it actually ends breaking open some interesting markets to people who otherwise wouldn't participate. For example, I have no interest in playing CS:GO but with something like what's being offered here built into the game, I could participate in the already surprisingly robust market without even installing the game by buying gun skins using ETH. Might have interesting ramifications for gaming.
Maybe a use case could be another game company builds a game that can import items/whatever from other games etc... Would be pretty cool if lets say I play dota 2 and love a particular weapon. Well maybe in WoW I could use the same weapon, who knows what people will think of.
The actual ingame asset is not being transfered though, It's just the right to use it in that game. Same story as cryptokitties once the (centrally) hosted servers where the assets are hosted are down then all you have left is an ID on the blockchain.
Not all NFTs have to be built like crypto kitties. They can be built with decentralized storage for image files, and other descriptors as well. Certain initiatives, like Enjins push to store all the permissions for these items in a centralized contract. that contract would still be governed on chain. So long as the contract is secure (similar risks for directly owning), it would be a secure form of ownership.
A lot of it comes down to what can actually be economic. At the moment it's not really viable in gas fees to issue a contract for each item, but that may change in the future. For now many alternative methods are used to reach an end of use today, with the tools available now. The benefits of this are spreading familiarity with the toolset so that when better methods of distribution are worked out upgrades can approach seamless.
So while good to keep in mind for now, that such level of ownership is common today, when viewing the future it allows, its good to remember the end game.
The interesting thing for me with gaming NFTs is that the same item can be used for different objects in different games. So if you earn a high level sword in a medieval game, that same game company may make a futuristic shooter in which you could use that same NFT as a high level plasma gun. Or even combining items from different games to create a stronger item in a game. The fact that they have tradable value makes them even more awesome. In the future I believe all game items will be NFTs rather than held by the game developers who can create their own markets to benefit only themselves.
> the same item can be used for different objects in different games
It can also be used for different objects in the same game as the actual game servers (and your client software) are under control of the game developer
> So if you earn a high level sword in a medieval game, that same game company may make a futuristic shooter in which you could use that same NFT as a high level plasma gun. Or even combining items from different games to create a stronger item in a game.
Same can be achieved right now with normal databases, of the top of my head examples such as special weapons in TF2 for owning other games, having certain achievements (in other games) etc. come to mind
> The fact that they have tradable value makes them even more awesome.
CSGO, Dota 2, TF2 all have tradable items (which ironically in the context of blockchain have all been used for money laundering and underage gambling schemes)
> In the future I believe all game items will be NFTs rather than held by the game developers who can create their own markets to benefit only themselves.
Loot boxes and the marketisation of games has been a big misfortune to endusers, you really think more capitalistic adventures are what users want? Yea ok...
>It can also be used for different objects in the same game as the actual game servers (and your client software) are under control of the game developer
Yep. It can be anything it wants. My point is that is that because it is on the blockchain, it can be used by anyone for anything.
>Same can be achieved right now with normal databases
Again. The benefit here is that the item has a history tied to it and in the example I used it has an effort attributed to it. If the game developer also puts this effort on the blockchain linked to the i.d of this item, then opens up a whole new world of possibilities that are not available on a central private database. You say the same can be achieved with a normal database but that's not really true.. nothing would be transferred to the player.. in this example a transfer would mean a deletion from one database and re-inputted into another and remember, if these databases go offline. That's the end of your item. Not so on blockchain.
>CSGO, Dota 2, TF2 all have tradable items
Centralised databases in which players don't actually own their items in addresses they have full control themselves is not the same. And more importantly, you can't create a marketplace outside of those games to trade your items..because it's a central database. Not a public blockchain where the NFT is 100% owned and controlled by you.
>Loot boxes and the marketisation of games has been a big misfortune to endusers, you really think more capitalistic adventures are what users want?
Huh? How is that at all comparable? I don't understand how you're making a comparison to loot boxes here.
It seems that all the points you are trying to make are akin to someone making a comparison to fiat over cryptocurrency, in that fiat is better. There is a vast benefit to create more P2P and open markets, where value can be derived from the users than a middle man who's only aim is to create the perfect balance to give them the most money.
All that aside, it's odd to me that these subreddits are getting more and more people championing centralised systems and generally fudding the prospects of what cryptocurrency is offering us.. this negativity all seemingly tied to the market price of crypto. In the meantime, development is getting stronger, the scams are subsiding and the technology is improving.
Yes i agree. I believe all (almost) blockchain projects is good for adoption.
I guess the point is that a lot of people do not see or think they could coexist togheter in this sphere, as they "steal" users from another, which further is determined by valuation of the coins.
The camp thing is just a halfserious comment towars the hatred EOS gets from everyone, primarly ETHs. Its disstatefull and i should not have brought it up.