Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gaming news too small for its own thread

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Ah thats a real shame, wonder why MS did that when they knew how appalling the jap sales would be, those would of been THEE games to import.

    Comment


      Originally posted by fishbowlhead View Post
      Ah thats a real shame, wonder why MS did that when they knew how appalling the jap sales would be, those would have been THEE games to import.
      Play-Asia used to maintain a list. As a generalisation, it used to be if the 360 title had the same global publisher or not.

      So if a game was by Ubisoft, it usually wasn't region-locked, because Ubisoft published it in all markets - but if it was, say, by Bandai in Japan then Sega in the US, they would lock it so they weren't treading on each others' toes.

      Fun fact, the PS3 supported region-locking too, it was just rarely used in practice. I believe the Persona Arena fighting game was the only notable one.

      Comment


        It could be COVID making you feel sick or maybe its...
        Legacy, the upcoming NFT-funded game from Fable creator Peter Molyneux, has already raked in around $53m (£40m). Hopefu…

        Comment


          No ****ing Thanks amirite guys

          Comment


            Originally posted by Neon Ignition View Post
            It could be COVID making you feel sick or maybe its...
            https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...dy-made-usd50m
            Snake oil, get your snake oil here boys and girls GENUINE SNAKE OIL!!!

            Comment


              I'm I right in thinking that NFTs are like owning a key to a glass box with a picture inside. Everyone can still see the picture and take photos, and the key holder doesn't actually own the picture; Just access to the picture, for no other reason than to say they can access the picture?

              Comment


                Originally posted by Cassius_Smoke View Post
                I'm I right in thinking that NFTs are like owning a key to a glass box with a picture inside. Everyone can still see the picture and take photos, and the key holder doesn't actually own the picture; Just access to the picture, for no other reason than to say they can access the picture?
                Not even that.

                It's more like... Let's say I make a Google Docs spreadsheet. On that spreadsheet, I put all of the world's major paintings, from art galleries, etc. and I tell people that they can pay money to have their name down as the 'owner' of a row in the sheet. So you could pay £500 and your name could go against the Mona Lisa, in the Louvre.

                So you pay me, and you "own" this row of the sheet. You could, maybe, sell it someone else, someone who wants to pay £700. I mean, that'd be weird, because why do they, or you, for that matter, care about whether your name is in my spreadsheet? Ultimately the value of it is just as much as you can convince other people.

                Let's say I convince you (and everyone else) that this spreadsheet is important, and art galleries will care about it in the future. People might want to buy rows for even obscure paintings.

                Then say I manage to get the art galleries of the world to put a little screen next to every painting which indexes my spreadsheet, so if you've bought the Mona Lisa row, visitors can see you've bought it. You still don't own the Mona Lisa, but you own the row, and that's displayed next to the painting, so people start to think it's important.

                But! Let's say @Brad starts up a competing spreadsheet. The whole idea would fall apart, because people would realise what they should've realised right at the start! That a row in my spreadsheet is worthless. Who the **** am I? I'm no-one of significance. Why do you care about a row in my spreadsheet? Why is that any better or worse than Brad's? In that scenario, it would probably end up that the spreadsheet made by some big art organisation would become the main sheet, and all others would be inferior.

                So, my business would be in crisis.

                To resolve this, I could make a system that could make my spreadsheet universal. So if you scan the Mona Lisa, perform some maths on it, it'll give you the info about a token, with indexes with your name. This is totally unique; no-one can really imitate it because it uses the actual painting as the unique "key" (a token which is non-fungible). In that scenario, once you own the row, no-one else can steal it from you, or copy it; they can only buy it.

                And you can see why this is much more worthwhile, I guess, than the spreadsheet idea - because no-one can just create their own. It's an agreed standard.

                They still don't own the painting. They never owned the painting. But they own the token, which in a very narrow sense means they own something a big group of people agree to be the "token" for the painting. It has value because people agree it does, just like paper money is just paper until you ascribe it value.

                From what I understand, the reason this is exploding is because a group of people have been sold NFTs with the understanding that their value will grow, and they really, REALLY, REALLY want to push that on everyone because as you can see above, the tokens only have value if people believe they do.

                A microcosm of this is that you might buy the NFT for the Mona Lisa for £1000 and sell it for £5000, then someone might buy it for £5000 and sell it for 50... Until 20 sales later, someone's about to buy it for £1,000,000 and they sit up and say "wait a tick, this is worthless!"

                ... and everyone's trying to not be the last person in the chain when that happens - because they've have spent a ton of money on worthless digital ****e.

                Comment


                  That's... Much worse.

                  So applying that to Fifa, your NFT will be utterly worthless the following year when the next Fifa comes out and no one gives a **** about your NFT anymore.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by Cassius_Smoke View Post
                    That's... Much worse.

                    So applying that to Fifa, your NFT will be utterly worthless the following year when the next Fifa comes out and no one gives a **** about your NFT anymore.
                    Yes.

                    It would be easy for FIFA to recognise the older tokens. It also means you should be able to sell them if you quit the game. That's one advantage; if done correctly, it means your ownership of the item can't be taken away; though in practice that means sod-all if the item is genuinely worthless.

                    There's a lot of crap online about a player being able to get, I dunno, an NFT for The Flaming Sword of Ra in one game, and use that in another game - but we've already seen that this doesn't work in things like Amiibos, where there are very few games that work with Amiibos outside their immediate franchise and for those that do, the functionality tends to be basic at best (like I think Mario Kart 8 Deluxe works with every Amiibo, but it just unlocks a Mii driver-suit of a colour-scheme that matches the character - you can't "be" Starwolf).

                    Comment


                      Yeah that 'use an item from one game in another' thing is never gonna happen, and I'm not even clear on why people would want it to happen, other than just crypto boosterism.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by wakka View Post
                        Yeah that 'use an item from one game in another' thing is never gonna happen, and I'm not even clear on why people would want it to happen, other than just crypto boosterism.
                        It's absolutely boosterism.

                        And it makes sense... Kinda. It's just the same as why retro videogames on eBay are a no-go area now for people like us who actually like/want to play them. They're all being bought up by people who have seen the prices rising, and believe that they can sell them for more than they bought them for.

                        Crypto items would largely lose their worth if you could "prove" them worthless, and a game closing down is a perfect way to do this. Then it's like owning a ten million Spanish Pesetas in 2021, now the Euro has replaced them - you might find someone who'll give you a paltry sum for them, but they're worth a fraction of their original value.

                        Comment


                          Yeah, and it's also just making up reasons for NFTs to be in games that have no basis in any reality. Like second hand digital games as NFTs, yeah, sure, it's possibly technologically. Doesn't mean it's going to happen, and there's zero evidence that it will.

                          Comment


                            New thread here:

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X