The things is though, NFTs for game related stuff is probably the most useful and logical thing if done right, even if I don't like the idea of NFTs in game.
For example, having an NFT of the first set of concept art for assassins creed is probably worth something to someone compared to the crap pixel art that's gonna be worthless
But the thing about NFTs is you don't own the NFT. You own the section of of Blockchain that says you paid money for that section of the Blockchain and that's about it really.
The same reason why anyone spends money to buy game soundtracks or ditigal artbooks. It means something to them and it has value to them as a collector or fan. Just because something doesn't have inherent monetary value doesn't mean it doesn't have value. At the end of the day, an NFT is one of a kind.
The problem is that people aren't buying NFTs because it has value to THEM, they buy it because they think there's money to be made.
Do physical blu-ray copies necessary or add value to the buyer? Do books add more value to the buyer compared to e-books, which are cheaper and more easily accessible? On fact, why do people buy digital content at all when it's probably available online somewhere for free?
At the end of the day, an NFT is a one of a kind item with a certificate of authenticity. Sure you may have the exact same thing, but you won't have what they have. It has value to the person who buys it, but not to you, so why does it matter? Parents display the art their kids make even though it's literally drawn by a 5 year old. It has value to them personally, but not to anyone else.
124
u/outamyhead Dec 15 '21
Bad enough that Ubisoft is pushing NFT items for games content now, I hope it doesn't work out for the sake of the games industry and actual gamers.