Nobody is buying Ubisoft's Ghost Recon NFTs

Shawn Knight

Posts: 14,033   +150
Staff member
The big picture: Ubisoft earlier this month announced it was adding NFT-based cosmetic items to Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Breakpoint through a new platform called Ubisoft Quartz. The non-fungible tokens, known as Digits, feature unique serial numbers that allow players to track the current and past ownership of in-game cosmetic items like clothing and weapons. Ubisoft gave out thousands of free Digits to get the party started. The claim period for those freebies has already passed, but it seems as though very few people have any interest in actually paying for Ubisoft’s NFTs.

Following a lead from Liz Edwards, I took a quick look at the two third-party marketplaces selling Digits, Rarible and Objkt, and found that only 18 items have been sold as of this writing. Pricing varies wildly, with the most expensive item sold commanding 40 XTZ (about $166 based on the current value of Tezos) down to just a single XTZ, or about $4.17.

Anyone that has paid attention to headlines as of late is well aware that there is a market for NFTs. Adidas recently made more than $23 million in a single day with its first NFT drop and in November, someone paid more than $650,000 for a virtual yacht. Why the lack of interest in Ubisoft’s NFTs, then?

While Digits have unique serial numbers, they aren’t visually distinct from each other in any additional way. Perhaps there’s not enough uniqueness to prompt gamers to shell over money for them? Or maybe it’s just that hardcore gamers simply aren’t interested in NFTs. Stalker 2 developer GSC Game World recently walked back plans to add NFTs to its upcoming gaming following backlash from fans. Maybe Ghost Recon Breakpoint just isn't all that popular these days, thus there's a limited market to sell to?

Permalink to story.

 

Dimitriid

Posts: 2,077   +3,981
Well the thing is: JPEGs of monkeys are usually pretty damn reliable: it doesn't takes all that much to keep those servers up and they could have* put in place pretty robust backup and fall back systems to ensure those jpegs will be up and running for 10, 20 years no problem. Hell even with a single raspberry pi worth 40 bucks and a 20 bucks per month residential connection could potentially host, albeit extremely slowly, millions and millions of data of saved JPEG monkeys.

Whereas videogame companies well, they're infamous for taking down online service games and not just to save on costs but to drive users into newer titles. Why would anyone spend a lot of money on an NFT of a virtual item you know it will be inaccesible in maybe 4 or 5 years from today?

Not only does Ubisoft overestimated the value of their stupid Tom Clancy's franchise but they also thought gamers would forget about all of the times servers just go away prematurely. I always maintain than there's a certain barrier of entry for stupidity: people often turn off their brains and do things carelessly if the barrier of entry is basically a day of work: 60 bucks for even someone making 10 bucks per hour is honestly not a lot.

But once you want to actually substantially inflate the investment well guess what? Your Venn diagram of people that love Tom Clancy stuff, People who want NFTs directly cross not only with people with more money than sense but also people forgetting all of the years and even decades of live service games being retired. You just reduced your Venn diagram to a single dot.

(*Could have because it also wouldn't surprise me if they have no backups and fall backs at all and people end up owning NFT tokens of extinct jpeg monkeys, lucky for them they could just go grab one of the millions of free jpeg copies of it out there)
 
Last edited:

envirovore

Posts: 452   +834
TechSpot Elite
Well the thing is: JPEGs of monkeys are usually pretty damn reliable: it doesn't takes all that much to keep those servers up and they could have* put in place pretty robust backup and fall back systems to ensure those jpegs will be up and running for 10, 20 years no problem. Hell even with a single raspberry pi worth 40 bucks and a 20 bucks per month residential connection could potentially host, albeit extremely slowly, millions and millions of data of saved JPEG monkeys.

Whereas videogame companies well, they're infamous for taking down online service games and not just to save on costs but to drive users into newer titles. Why would anyone spend a lot of money on an NFT of a virtual item you know it will be inaccesible in maybe 4 or 5 years from today?

Not only does Ubisoft overestimated the value of their stupid Tom Clancy's franchise but they also thought gamers would forget about all of the times servers just go away prematurely. I always maintain than there's a certain barrier of entry for stupidity: people often turn of their brains and do things carelessly if the barrier of empty is basically a day of work: 60 bucks for even someone making 10 bucks per hour is honestly not a lot.

But once you want to actually substantially inflate the investment well guess what? Your Venn diagram of people that love Tom Clancy stuff, People who want NFTs directly cross not only with people with more money than sense but also people forgetting all of the years and even decades of live service games being retired. You just reduced your Venn diagram to a single dot.

(*Could have because it also wouldn't surprise me if they have no backups and fall backs at all and people end up owning NFT tokens of extinct jpeg monkeys, lucky for them they could just go grab one of the millions of free jpeg copies of it out there)

This is gold. Well done sir.
 

psycros

Posts: 4,073   +5,591
Well the thing is: JPEGs of monkeys are usually pretty damn reliable: it doesn't takes all that much to keep those servers up and they could have* put in place pretty robust backup and fall back systems to ensure those jpegs will be up and running for 10, 20 years no problem. Hell even with a single raspberry pi worth 40 bucks and a 20 bucks per month residential connection could potentially host, albeit extremely slowly, millions and millions of data of saved JPEG monkeys.

Whereas videogame companies well, they're infamous for taking down online service games and not just to save on costs but to drive users into newer titles. Why would anyone spend a lot of money on an NFT of a virtual item you know it will be inaccesible in maybe 4 or 5 years from today?

Not only does Ubisoft overestimated the value of their stupid Tom Clancy's franchise but they also thought gamers would forget about all of the times servers just go away prematurely. I always maintain than there's a certain barrier of entry for stupidity: people often turn of their brains and do things carelessly if the barrier of empty is basically a day of work: 60 bucks for even someone making 10 bucks per hour is honestly not a lot.

But once you want to actually substantially inflate the investment well guess what? Your Venn diagram of people that love Tom Clancy stuff, People who want NFTs directly cross not only with people with more money than sense but also people forgetting all of the years and even decades of live service games being retired. You just reduced your Venn diagram to a single dot.

(*Could have because it also wouldn't surprise me if they have no backups and fall backs at all and people end up owning NFT tokens of extinct jpeg monkeys, lucky for them they could just go grab one of the millions of free jpeg copies of it out there)

https://instantmonkeysonline.com/
 

Bl00dyMinded

Posts: 466   +691
I'm all for Cryptos... But NFT, no way. That's a ponzi scheme like someone on here always says. I still dont understand buying a picture you can copy and paste LMAO. But great way to laundry money in the black market.
 

captaincranky

Posts: 18,527   +7,366
NFT would make sense for adult content. Girls could sell unique adult photos that only their simps could have access to. Basically OnlyFans on sterioids.
I would suggest that, "a rose is a rose, is a rose", especially when you turn it upside down.

Although, "a rose", in this context, is better represented as any one of a number of orchid genera, Phalenopsis and Cattleya, being represented below:
1640146260851.jpeg
images
 
Last edited:

captaincranky

Posts: 18,527   +7,366
I have a "Cat" that's in bloom right now. I wonder... Nah. 🤣
That one on the bottom may be a laliocat, or multi generic. It's been a long time since I was heavily involved.. I'm not sure I remember that much yellow in a pure bred cat.

I used to grow then in my back bedroom under a 400 watt HPS and window light. Too hot in the big city, electric too expensive, and I let a scale infestation get out of control. So now I hear you thinking, how the hell could he get behind on a scale problem. Well, I'm that much of a procrastinator, even without the internet as a distraction.

Those were the good old days, when you could still buy Kelthane in 4 oz bottles at Home Depot.. Cygon, Chlordane, Malathion.

I just bought a LED grow light (**). It's supposedly the equivalent of a 1,000 watt HPS, but only draws 120 watts. Maybe I'll grab a few Phals, they like heat and warm nights.

It was half price ($40.00) and a "Shell Shocker", how could I refuse. Haven't fired it up yet. Keep your fingers crossed for me, will ya?
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 7,472   +6,252
That one on the bottom may be a laliocat, or multi generic. It's been a long time since I was heavily involved.. I'm not sure I remember that much yellow in a pure bred cat.

I used to grow then in my back bedroom under a 400 watt HPS and window light. Too hot in the big city, electric too expensive, and I let a scale infestation get out of control. So now I hear you thinking, how the hell could he get behind on a scale problem. Well, I'm that much of a procrastinator, even without the internet as a distraction.
Well, given that the "cat" in bloom was from a pair that I bought as "babies" from Lowes, and the other one of the pair had a scale infestation, I completely understand what you are talking about. I just dumped the other "cat".
These are last year's blooms from the same plant IMG_2710_reduced.jpg
There are even more blooms in this year's crop. Yeah, I know, its had too much sun. Any ideas about what to do to separate this into multiple pots? I've been contemplating posting to "Orchid Board" (for several years) about that, but it was only when this pot became so full did the cat ever start to bloom. I've also got a "Dendrobium Aggregatum" that is in similar need of replanting. I have just one "mini phal" after having to get rid of a bunch of plants due to a mealybug infestation that I suspect came from a phal bought at a local grocery store. :rolleyes:
Those were the good old days, when you could still buy Kelthane in 4 oz bottles at Home Depot.. Cygon, Chlordane, Malathion.

I just bought a LED grow light (**). It's supposedly the equivalent of a 1,000 watt HPS, but only draws 120 watts. Maybe I'll grab a few Phals, they like heat and warm nights.

It was half price ($40.00) and a "Shell Shocker", how could I refuse. Haven't fired it up yet. Keep your fingers crossed for me, will ya?
Good luck with the LED.
 
Last edited:

captaincranky

Posts: 18,527   +7,366
There are even more blooms in this year's crop. Yeah, I know, its had too much sun.
Unless you have a greenhouse, you have to give, "all the light short of burning". Lalia takes even a bit more. If you do have a greenhouse, then shade to 20 to 30% of full sun
Any ideas about what to do to separate this into multiple pots?
You need at least 3 or 4 "leads" (stalks) if you expect it to bloom next season. So, you count back 4 from the latest growth (1), cut it apart with a sterile knife, and dust the cut end with a fungicide. The best time to repot, is when the root tips are just beginning to show at the base of the stalk As soon as you see the little bulges at the base of the lead, do it..!

Listen, if you want to shoot the breeze a bit more, PM me. We're liable to kicked off here for "off topic"..
 

waclark

Posts: 312   +200
These will be the Beanie Baby, Barbie Doll, Tamagotchi of the millennial age. Useless collectables that won't have value except for a few rare instances. The rest will just be trash and trinkets relegated to an external hard drive in the attic.
 

terzaerian

Posts: 1,200   +1,685
Ah yes, as usual for the troglodyte gallery, the problem here is the crypto element and not the microtransaction element.

Ubisoft is a shitty company. I've boycotted them for years now, ever since there was some blow-up about their bullshit in r/PCMR and I joined in solidarity.

As far as I can tell they're glomming onto NFTs to chase a trend, not bringing anything new or innovative to either gaming or crypto. And it's telling that the NFTs are the most useful element in this story. Because we know exactly how many have been sold... while sales figures for the game itself are locked behind closed doors, spin doctors, buzzwords and corporate secrecy.

Long after Ubisoft implodes and their brand is consigned to the dustbin of shitty gaming companies, these NFTs will still be there, ET cartridges for the 21st century, preserved in perpetuity on Tezos blockchain.

And now I'm going to make a prediction: in the wake of all this bad press about the "failure" of their NFTs, investors are going to start buying these ironically, to collect a piece of this colossal failure. The price for the NFTs will be driven up and they'll become scarce, and overnight the narrative will shift from mockery of the scheme's failure to fury that innocent gamers are being squeezed out of the market for their own games, the constant being that the troglodytes will remain as odious and ignorant as they were before the narrative shifted.