31–34 of 34 posts
It's purely a PR. Epic needs to take users and mindshare from Steam. If Steam banned eating babies, Epic would announce opening a baby restaurant.
Less than one month ago: > We aren’t touching NFTs as the whole field is currently tangled up with an intractable mix of scams, interesting decentralized tech foundations, and scams. [1] https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/144251952287594906...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Wouldn't it help with the "publisher doesn't want to maintain a server for that old game anymore" situation? Why would as game publisher want to undercut its own planned obsolescence?
Disclaimer: I don't play a lot of games, and those I do play, I only play the single player campaigns, so I may be completely off and naïve here. But, from what I've seen, there is no fee for online games. Once you buy the game, you can either not play online or play online, for the same price. There is no "cover charge", so to speak, on top of the original game price. The publisher could try to unload the burden of…
Others sell loot boxes or cosmetic stuff, even games that cost you money both when buying the game and when renewing your monthly subscription.
A Blockchain wouldn't give them any benefit over what they already have. In fact they would lose control over some stuff while bot farms and criminals would make a lot of money with almost no oversight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "multiple unrelated games" part. You can have game studios/creators that don't know each other build upon an existing persistent shared world without opening their database/server to the other studios.
> You can have game studios/creators that don't know each other build upon an existing persistent shared world without opening their database/server to the other studios Why would any game developer want to create that opportunity for their competitors?
The article misquotes Steam’s rules. Here is what Steam says: > Applications built on blockchain technology that issue or allow exchange of cryptocurrencies or NFTs. And the article: > Games that use blockchain technology or let users exchange NFTs or cryptocurrencies won’t be allowed on Steam … The problem isn’t the blockchain, it’s blockchain-based cryptocurrencies and NFTs. Granted, I don’t know why you’d use a bl…
> it’s unfortunate that “blockchain” is apparently synonymous with proof of work cryptocurrencies and NFTs What else would it mean? Supposedly "trustless" consensus systems is what all the "blockchain" hype is about. (And those are only useful for censorship-resistant money. For literally everything else you don't need them and they don't even work.) If you were to just talk about merkle trees / hash chains or anythi…
Blockchains provide a cryptographic ordering of events, or cryptographically agreed upon state, which is a useful property. It's certainly not as world-changing as a lot of blockchain-enthusiast-cryptocurrency-bros think, but it's not "only useful for censorship-resistant money."
Which is why I think it's a shame that blockchain has become synonymous with proof of work cryptocurrency scams.