Ubisoft on NFTs: Gamers just 'don't get it'

[Kirby1]

Ubisoft is a stupid company. I don't see them being around in 5 years with this attitude. This has got to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard about them. We get NFTs, we just hate them in games and we hate Ubisoft now too.

 

[Kirby1]

He's completely right. The backlash I've gotten trying to explain certain NFT features says it all. If your rare MMO item can be sold on the open market for actual money, instead of being limited to just the in-game virtual non-existent market, that's a huge benefit for the gamers. But for some reason, gamers still don't see it.

Once again the phrase "the majority is always wrong" rings true.

We get it, we just don't want games turned into marketplaces. If you can't sell your wow sword because of it, small price to pay.

 

[JKnight]

Gamers are dealing with scalpers for hardware and now NFTs in games.

 

[tellmewhy]

Why to buy an NFT of a photo when you can save that photo (it's public on blockchain) and make by yourself an other NFT with the same photo with minimum cost? They are both NFTs of the same photo, there is no difference. I don’t get it.

If they want a market to trade offline gaming items, they do not need NFTs they need only just an auction site. Blizzard had tried it with Diablo a long time ago and they cancel it.

 

[Impudicus]

When real money gets involved people find ways to cheat the system. Especially if these items are earned in game, you will see a influx of cheaters, like RMT in some other games.

 

[RudyBob]

PT Barnum's Law has been proven yet again

 

[winjer]

He's completely right. The backlash I've gotten trying to explain certain NFT features says it all. If your rare MMO item can be sold on the open market for actual money, instead of being limited to just the in-game virtual non-existent market, that's a huge benefit for the gamers. But for some reason, gamers still don't see it.

Once again the phrase "the majority is always wrong" rings true.

That is just creating a problem where there wasn't any.
The big advantage of digital goods is that they can be reproduced, identically, indefinitely, without spending more resources and satisfying the needs of all consumers. It allows the sharing of art at an unprecedented level in human history.
NFTs create the problem of making one item scarce and only attainable by one person or a group of persons.
NFTs are a problem, not a solution. Unless you are a scammer, they NFTs are the solution.

 

[brucek]

He's completely right. The backlash I've gotten trying to explain certain NFT features says it all. If your rare MMO item can be sold on the open market for actual money, instead of being limited to just the in-game virtual non-existent market, that's a huge benefit for the gamers. But for some reason, gamers still don't see it.

Oh yeah, because I've always wanted my games to print out a IRS 1099-MISC form for me every time I get a rare drop.

Real money and games are two tastes that do not taste great together. Please keep the one far away from the other thank you.

 

[dangh]

He's completely right. The backlash I've gotten trying to explain certain NFT features says it all. If your rare MMO item can be sold on the open market for actual money, instead of being limited to just the in-game virtual non-existent market, that's a huge benefit for the gamers. But for some reason, gamers still don't see it.

Once again the phrase "the majority is always wrong" rings true.

Game is not a sweatshop factory. If we start treat them like one, then more become like one. If items will be linked to nft, how many copies can exist m how many game producer will try to leverage this for monetary gains? Btc was minned using hours of gpu. Nft top items will be mined using hours of gameplay. Diablo 3 was using this approach years ago, it didn't went well...

 

[MSIGamer]

Hey Yves! Games are not about making money! You just don't get it!

 

[OortCloud]

What a wonderful world the internet has produced...

 

[terzaerian]

Ubisoft doesn't get NFTs either.

NFTs are not just "jpgs that you pay for" even if the most visible and obnoxious examples on Twitter generally resemble this. Fundamentally an NFT is just a token on a blockchain, where holding the private keys confers ownership of that token. There are so many more, better, and invisible things it could be used for than cosmetic skins.

As someone posted here: re-selling games. In general blockchain would be a great way to denote ownership of a game over a central server or invasive DRM - the chance of an entire blockchain's network being overwhelmed by a game's launch is far smaller than that of a server being ran by a company.

Another example could be in-game currency. Games like Grant Theft Auto Online struggle with duped cash on the PC (and from legacy console accounts) all the time. A consensus mechanism (proof-of-play?) that segues with their existing P2P infrastructure could deal with the problem.

I don't think we're going to see really innovative and helpful uses of NFTs of crypto technology from AAA studios because they lack creativity, all they want to do is squeeze more blood from the stones. I believe that indie developers have far more potential in that regard.

 

[wiyosaya]

Proof that truly infinite growth is impossible, eventually you hit the brick wall and here we are, Ubisoft has hit the brick wall.

Is that what that brown stuff on the wall is??

 

[wiyosaya]

Yet another a$$ hat in the line of "You are holding it wrong" Some day, maybe these a$$ hats will take responsibility for their own actions.

 

[terzaerian]

That is just creating a problem where there wasn't any.
The big advantage of digital goods is that they can be reproduced, identically, indefinitely, without spending more resources and satisfying the needs of all consumers. It allows the sharing of art at an unprecedented level in human history.
NFTs create the problem of making one item scarce and only attainable by one person or a group of persons.
NFTs are a problem, not a solution. Unless you are a scammer, they NFTs are the solution.

If we lived in a world where games or movies or music were all free and torrented without fear of reprisal and money never changed hands over them and people didn't get banned from YouTube or Twitch for DMCA claims, no one on this planet would be more overjoyed than I am. I despise what copyright law and its abuse has done to gaming and culture in general.

Sadly, we do not. There will always be game developers and publishers that insist on being remunerated for their work.

What crypto and NFTs are all about is taking some power back from the copyright holders and financiers and giving it to creators and customers, of cutting out all the greasy, slimey layers of middlemen involved in the affair. No surprise that their loudest critics are typically the middlemen.

 

[GamerNerves]

Is NFT's true goal to just make people forget the fact that microtransactions are complete waste of money in general? First you accept one thing, then another, which always happens in any field of business practices, but I don't think there is any reason to debate this issue with customers. If Ubi wants NFTs in their games, they should put them in and let customers then vote with their wallet. It's like Ubi executive here tries to "ask" approval of customers to make this move, but the tone is accusatory instead of just explaining any possible benefits in an honest way. Ubisoft's management skills are starting to be legendary bad and that's really sad considering how much these guys get paid.

 

[NightAntilli]

We get it, we just don't want games turned into marketplaces. If you can't sell your wow sword because of it, small price to pay.

Games like WoW already have a market place. So it wouldn't be turned into a market place, because it already is. The difference is that nothing in there has real monetary value tied to it by default right now.

 

[winjer]

If we lived in a world where games or movies or music were all free and torrented without fear of reprisal and money never changed hands over them and people didn't get banned from YouTube or Twitch for DMCA claims, no one on this planet would be more overjoyed than I am. I despise what copyright law and its abuse has done to gaming and culture in general.

Sadly, we do not. There will always be game developers and publishers that insist on being remunerated for their work.

What crypto and NFTs are all about is taking some power back from the copyright holders and financiers and giving it to creators and customers, of cutting out all the greasy, slimey layers of middlemen involved in the affair. No surprise that their loudest critics are typically the middlemen.

No one is talking about piracy.
The ability to copy the same work, as many times as necessary and sell it is good for everyone.
NFTs don't solve piracy. So that's not an advantage.

 

[terzaerian]

No one is talking about piracy.
The ability to copy the same work, as many times as necessary and sell it is good for everyone.
NFTs don't solve piracy. So that's not an advantage.

There are ways that they could, that just haven't been explored yet. Saying they haven't solved piracy would be like being in 1910 and saying powered aircraft haven't solved overnight international shipping and never will.

 

[winjer]

There are ways that they could, that just haven't been explored yet. Saying they haven't solved piracy would be like being in 1910 and saying powered aircraft haven't solved overnight international shipping and never will.

You are being too optimistic. But even if NFTs manage to solve piracy.
That doesn't change the fact that in game NFTs are pointless and borderline scams.

If you look at the last couple of decades, you will find that the thing that came close to solving piracy was accessibility. Making it easier for the consumer to buy and access content. Not DRM, not restrictions, not lawsuits, etc.
NFTs, are at best, a step backwards into draconian DRM.

 

[terzaerian]

You are being too optimistic. But even if NFTs manage to solve piracy.
That doesn't change the fact that in game NFTs are pointless and borderline scams.

If you look at the last couple of decades, you will find that the thing that came close to solving piracy was accessibility. Making it easier for the consumer to buy and access content. Not DRM, not restrictions, not lawsuits, etc.
NFTs, are at best, a step backwards into draconian DRM.

I am by nature generally a pessimist. I was certainly extremely pessimistic about crypto for most of the last decade.

Like I said, I would be the happiest of all if we lived in a world without DRM, but sadly we do not. NFTs could potentially give us a pathway to a better compromise that serves both customers and creators.

Instead of relying on a first-party server that may get shut down in the future, or draconian software checks that may break in the future, checks for rights to ownership could involve checking to see if the owner's private keys are legitimate against a third-party trustless blockchain. The customer wouldn't have to worry about that verification server being shut down, and the creator wouldn't be burdened with running it.

I don't want games companies to put NFTs into games just for the sake of saying "we're into NFTs!" I want them to find ways to harness NFTs that are seamless, that augment and improve the experience of purchasing and playing a game without the user even necessarily knowing its there. We're not there yet, but I think that once the hype over the BAYC era of NFTs dies down, developers will find the way forward. In the mean time it's senseless to reject the technology any more than it would have been senseless to reject finding ways to use the internet to improve gaming.

 

[winjer]

I am by nature generally a pessimist. I was certainly extremely pessimistic about crypto for most of the last decade.

Like I said, I would be the happiest of all if we lived in a world without DRM, but sadly we do not. NFTs could potentially give us a pathway to a better compromise that serves both customers and creators.

Instead of relying on a first-party server that may get shut down in the future, or draconian software checks that may break in the future, checks for rights to ownership could involve checking to see if the owner's private keys are legitimate against a third-party trustless blockchain. The customer wouldn't have to worry about that verification server being shut down, and the creator wouldn't be burdened with running it.

I don't want games companies to put NFTs into games just for the sake of saying "we're into NFTs!" I want them to find ways to harness NFTs that are seamless, that augment and improve the experience of purchasing and playing a game without the user even necessarily knowing its there. We're not there yet, but I think that once the hype over the BAYC era of NFTs dies down, developers will find the way forward. In the mean time it's senseless to reject the technology any more than it would have been senseless to reject finding ways to use the internet to improve gaming.

It won´t. NFTs will serve only to increase control for studios and publishers.
Not to benefit the consumer.

 

[BigRedPDX]

Of course they are trying to push NFTs. They would have been better off figuring out a way to quietly get them into games. There is no benefit to an NFT or any virtual real estate for that matter. What use does an NFT offer? Some picture of a dancing donkey is going to benefit me in what way? I don't mind investing in crypto and doing all that fun stuff, but I would only want to be a creator of an NFT instead of a holder of one. NFTs are only there to be money makers for these companies and that's it. There is no personal gain from this whatsoever. Ubisoft needs to wake up to the fact that we know what's going on.

 

[axiomatic13]

Boy, that's a winning strategy Ubisoft? Calling your customers "dumb?"

 

[SamuelFNB]

If we lived in a world where games or movies or music were all free and torrented without fear of reprisal and money never changed hands over them and people didn't get banned from YouTube or Twitch for DMCA claims, no one on this planet would be more overjoyed than I am. I despise what copyright law and its abuse has done to gaming and culture in general.

Sadly, we do not. There will always be game developers and publishers that insist on being remunerated for their work.

What crypto and NFTs are all about is taking some power back from the copyright holders and financiers and giving it to creators and customers, of cutting out all the greasy, slimey layers of middlemen involved in the affair. No surprise that their loudest critics are typically the middlemen.

What kind of entitled BS is this? NFTs are the worst invention in 100 years at least, but you are asking artists, developers, actors and everyone else involved in said industries to work for free? Games dont magically get made in an hour, some take years of development. Imagine if there was no benefit to the developers who wrote the game other than good job? Same with Music and same with movies and art. I understand that NFTs are a money grab, but you are asking for free work from lots of people. Imagine how many games would get made if everyone that made them had to work a horrid 9 to 5 job and then come home in their "free time" and develop games for entitled pricks to play for free. How many artists would write and release quality songs? How many good movies would get made?