Shuji Utsumi, Sega’s co-CEO, comments in a new statement that there is no point in implementing blockchain technology if it doesn’t make games ‘fun’.

  • audaxdreik@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s no reason, and there never, ever, ever will be. Ever.

    There’s a temptation for a lot of people to shrug their shoulders and admit to themselves that it’s a complicated topic outside of their reach, but it’s honestly not. Like any technology, there’s two sides to it: the implementation and the execution. The implementation is admittedly quite complicated and even honestly a little cool if you’re a techie, but the execution is very simple. We know it’s an append only database with a fully public history. That’s all it is. So ask yourself how you could ever make that an interesting part of a game that would entice players to … anything really. At best/worst it’ll be used to introduce artificial scarcity and value which most people who just want to have fun playing games aren’t clamoring for.

    But more to the point, anything stored in a database needs to be actionable by a governing body. In terms of videogames, this is the game itself. The game is the authority on what can and can’t be done with the data stored in the blockchain, you can’t change the rules of the game, they’re hard coded. So why bother having it publicly available on the blockchain at all? Sorry, not sure if I’m making my points clear enough, but does that follow? There’s zero benefit to the public blockchain vs. an internal database because the game is the final authority and going to action on it the same either way. Owning something on the blockchain is useless, anyone who knows anything about games at all always knew that line about transferring items between games is total BS.

    Any cryptobros already furiously typing out a response, don’t bother. I’ll argue any worthwhile points you might try to make, but I’ve heard most of the arguments before and they just don’t even bear responding to so ya know …

    • Deestan@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The only plausible use case I could come up with is if a game company earnestly and legitimately wants to allow but outsource a real-money marketplace. As a cost saving measure for their own benefit.

      If e.g. Diablo allowed legendaries to be owned based on an NFT, offered zero opinion on its legitimacy, said “whelp nothing we can do” to customers losing their items to scams or accidents, and didn’t add any smart contract taxation or other shenanigans, it could work.

      It wouldn’t improve the game for the players, but it would finally be a legitimate use case that improved something for someone without being a pixellated ponzi scheme.

      • audaxdreik@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        allow but outsource

        Yarp. And if that doesn’t get your hackles up, I don’t know what else more to say.

    • ConsciousCode@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What do you think about arguments for using it in cross-game “metaverse” type trading? It’s another buzzword but it would make centralization of the data hard to impossible.

      My intuition is we’re seeing the first wave of snake oil salesmen adopting Animal Magnetism Quantum Whatsits to Manifest your Holograms who poisoned the well and drove everyone away, then in 10-20 years someone will have a good idea using it at which point the scammers are no longer around to ruin it for everyone. What do you think of that idea?

      • 🐝🇭🇪🅻🅻🇪🇧🅴🆁🇹🐝@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There’s no value in cross-game sharing of assets, nether for the developer nor the players.

        When the game dies so does anything of value related to the assets themselves. The blockchain will probably die too. Someone one day resurrecting the game is a pretty flimsy reason at best to justify all of the negatives that come with blockchain in games, because 2 decades later it wouldn’t matter anyway.

        • ConsciousCode@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Could you detail what negatives come with blockchains in games? I’d like to better understand your perspective and position. I don’t know of any games that use blockchains and aren’t some kind of scam, but then again it’s not a hammer’s fault if it’s used to bludgeon someone to death. If a hypothetical good dev somehow put a blockchain in, what negatives are there due to that specific inclusion which aren’t the result of malicious intent?

          • Deestan@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            The negatives are similar to ordering a hamburger inside a restaurant, and having it be delivered via a car down at the nearest bus stop.

            It’s just a lot of waste and hassle for everyone involved.

      • audaxdreik@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s still an entirely implausible scenario. There’s too many hypotheticals here to even properly argue this as “cross-game metaverse trading” is kind of hand wavey in how it would be implemented at all, but getting back to the core issue of centralization just being a mask for trust and authority. If there’s truly no trust between the parties, which would be extremely odd of them to set up a giant cross-game metaverse in the first place, it would be better to have an agreed upon third party trustee host the data. Or each host their respective data with an API for others to access it when needed. And ultimately, the final authority lies with each game itself on how it implements that data. They can read whatever data they like off the blockchain, but how it’s implemented locally is their final say, the game can warp that data or ignore it in any way it wishes. To say nothing of what that data looks like. Does the blockchain contain the entirety of the model, texture, and stats for all games implementing that item? Does that lock the schema in place at inception? How do new games enter the metaverse then? What about bugs? What about balancing of stats and economy across multiple games, it’s hard enough in one. Are all the games similar in nature? How do you implement an AK-47 from a CoD-like game into a fantasy MMO?

        The whole premise is nonsense.

    • Pseu@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Unless the game was some decentralized open source game, but I’m having a hard time imagining a game like that also needing blockchain tech, outside of maybe having a record of games played for speedrunning purposes, but that’s extremely niche.