Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Justin Kan: Web3 games don’t need to lure players with profit

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 180 posts

Re: Justin Kan: Web3 games don’t need to lure players with profit

#31

Post by upupandup »

vegcel wrote: post #26

The concept of a web3 Roblox is probably the best conceptualization of a web3 gaming platform. -There's a virtual marketplace of skins/clothes that can be used from game to game motivated by a creator economy (basically NFTs) -Game devs can make money from in-game purchases A pro of this system would be more ownership of the IP holders, wherein they aren't getting extremely unfavorable rates like in the case of young…

and theres no need for cryptocurrencies that are unstable and volatile. simply allow purchase of tokens directly so that its guaranteed to be pegged at 1:1 without an intermediate wash trading crypto exchange.

this whole web3/crypto craze is bizarre. just literally reinventing words for what we had since the beginning of the internet in hopes of raising funds by shoving buzzwords at VCs who are probably not going to make it by next year when interest rates shoot up

Re: Justin Kan: Web3 games don’t need to lure players with profit

#32

Post by drchopchop »

mark242 wrote: post #20

You look at the biggest games of the year: God of War, Elden Ring, Stray, etc. Shoehorning in NFT-style assets into these games is just a ridiculous proposal, especially ones with any kind of "marketplace" that you would have to support. All of the time and effort and maintenance and customer service, all of that would hit the bottom line of the game. The better studios -- that is, the ones who make game-of-the-year…

Not to mention the technical issues involved in having a truly cross-platform asset. What's the poly and texture count? How is scale represented? Collision volumes? How does it render properly? What file formats do we standardize on?

The whole thing is ridiculous. The cynical view would be that this is trying to quickly get retail gamers/"investors" to subsidize VC returns, before the crypto market fully tanks.

Re: Justin Kan: Web3 games don’t need to lure players with profit

#33

Post by swalsh »

In theory, I actually like the idea of games connected to the blockchain. The issue is, now your little funtime activity has serious tax implications.

Imagine this, there's a neat little space pirates game. You buy an NFT ship, you buy some space missles, some fuel, contract a crew, and you go out. Maybe the dollar cost of all this was $60. Cool. You go out, you blow up the first ship you found. You spent 3 missles at a cost of $10 each, but you got a whole ships worth of minerals worth $60, and some more missles. There's some capital gains! Now you keep going, and you blow up another ship (hey doing good buddy!) how do you calculate the cost basis for the missles you used? Your looted missles are mixed in with your purchased missles. You keep going, your ship is blown up, and now you need to write it off, fortunately you were able to recover some of your stuff because after your last battle you put some in storage.

You had a great time, but now it's January and you have literally all the same tax problems as a legimite space pirate business.

Re: Justin Kan: Web3 games don’t need to lure players with profit

#34

Post by djur »

eli wrote: post #9
kodah wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem is that in the short term gamers signal their approval by buying skins, which is what he goes on to talk about later in the article. A metaverse where these skins are transportable game to game. He's trying to analog these outfits to outfits you would buy at a store. Once gamers see how much they've dumped into things that will never produce anything of value, they're a bit ticked. Gamers who know…

> A metaverse where these skins are transportable game to game. I question how desirable that even is. So like some rich kid buys a golden suit and can wear it in a bunch of games...I mean, sure, ok? Not really groundbreaking stuff. Would you buy a game because it lets you do that? Assuming the total cost is the same, I'd just as soon buy different skins in each of my games...assuming I care about skins at all. And t…

If I'm running Fortnite, I could be convinced that there's a value in allowing Fornite skins/dances/etc. in other games. The much harder sell is that I should allow _unrestricted_ use in other games, rather than making deals with other developers to license my content, as companies already do. An even harder sell is that I should also allow unrestricted use of skins/etc. from other games. I have a strong incentive to prevent that in the same way a movie theater has a strong incentive to keep people from bringing their own snacks.

Re: Justin Kan: Web3 games don’t need to lure players with profit

#35

Post by hahaxdxd123 »

What does this look like in practice? Is everyone supposed to download 1TB worth of various skins to play a game? Who chooses which skins are eligible to be transferred into each game? Do I have to download and view other player's skins? idk if I want a Cyberpunk 2077 skin in Elden Ring pvp...

Re: Justin Kan: Web3 games don’t need to lure players with profit

#36

Post by eli »

djur wrote: post #34
eli wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A metaverse where these skins are transportable game to game. I question how desirable that even is. So like some rich kid buys a golden suit and can wear it in a bunch of games...I mean, sure, ok? Not really groundbreaking stuff. Would you buy a game because it lets you do that? Assuming the total cost is the same, I'd just as soon buy different skins in each of my games...assuming I care about skins at all. And t…

If I'm running Fortnite, I could be convinced that there's a value in allowing Fornite skins/dances/etc. in other games. The much harder sell is that I should allow _unrestricted_ use in other games, rather than making deals with other developers to license my content, as companies already do. An even harder sell is that I should also allow unrestricted use of skins/etc. from other games. I have a strong incentive to…

Why would other games want to allow Fortnite skins in their game? If their players are willing to spend money on skins wouldn't they be better off just selling skins?

Nevermind the technical and practical concerns. What does it even mean to apply a Fortnite skin to a battleship or a racecar?

Re: Justin Kan: Web3 games don’t need to lure players with profit

#37

Post by katmannthree »

swalsh wrote: post #33

In theory, I actually like the idea of games connected to the blockchain. The issue is, now your little funtime activity has serious tax implications. Imagine this, there's a neat little space pirates game. You buy an NFT ship, you buy some space missles, some fuel, contract a crew, and you go out. Maybe the dollar cost of all this was $60. Cool. You go out, you blow up the first ship you found. You spent 3 missles a…

Wow, bravo. That is by far the strongest argument against NFTing games I've heard yet. It feels like it should be obvious and yet I've never seen it before.

Re: Justin Kan: Web3 games don’t need to lure players with profit

#39

Post by edm0nd »

swalsh wrote: post #33

In theory, I actually like the idea of games connected to the blockchain. The issue is, now your little funtime activity has serious tax implications. Imagine this, there's a neat little space pirates game. You buy an NFT ship, you buy some space missles, some fuel, contract a crew, and you go out. Maybe the dollar cost of all this was $60. Cool. You go out, you blow up the first ship you found. You spent 3 missles a…

From my experience, these play-to-earn games (like Axie Infinity) are mostly played by people in poor 3rd-world countries like Vietnam[1] or Cambodia. Where if they can earn $5/day that's enough to live off of and replace any type of local job they could get. I highly doubt they care about nor pay taxes.

1 - https://fortune.com/2022/05/04/axie-infinity-sky-mavis-vietn...

Re: Justin Kan: Web3 games don’t need to lure players with profit

#40

Post by m00dy »

katmannthree wrote: post #37
swalsh wrote: post #33

In theory, I actually like the idea of games connected to the blockchain. The issue is, now your little funtime activity has serious tax implications. Imagine this, there's a neat little space pirates game. You buy an NFT ship, you buy some space missles, some fuel, contract a crew, and you go out. Maybe the dollar cost of all this was $60. Cool. You go out, you blow up the first ship you found. You spent 3 missles a…

Wow, bravo. That is by far the strongest argument against NFTing games I've heard yet. It feels like it should be obvious and yet I've never seen it before.

Imagination has no borders.
Post reply on HN