Scummy Square Enix president knows people who 'play to have fun' dislike NFTs, but he wants them anyway

[Mr Jt (Gog is king)]

President Yosuke Matsuda acknowledges skeptics, but hopes that blockchain tokens can "decentralize" gaming….
They are doing this because they know that there are enough low standard people which just *consume product and get excited for next product*Indie devs are our only hope lads
https://www.pcgamer.com/amp/square-enix-president-knows-people-who-play-to-have-fun-dislike-nfts-but-he-wants-them-anyway/

[Morkonan]

引用自 Ailes：

引用自 Morkonan：

What happens when the storefronts are literally "games" themselves and the primary distribution point for game development? They are the "engines" on which these things run.. [...]

*Irony on* Imagine if we already had a storefront that dominated the market so much that developers felt forced to publish on it and that took tiny nibbles from all the purchases made! And - wow, get a hold of this - one that also included a secondary market with meaningless digital trash items creating tiny itsy bits of money too? Thank god we are still like SO many steps away from that! *Irony off*

And, mods are hosted for "free" that we can use whenever we want? Maybe it doesn't cost us .0001 Koinz to post a thread? We can play offline?

I get the "irony" but the possibilities with that other scheme make Steam look like a toddler. I mean that in a very bad way - One could end up with everything tied to it and not just 24/7/365 monetization, but monetization by the "seconds on a clock."

"Sorry, but your Koinz Wallet is empty. Please insert another .004 Koinz to continue using the wonderful mod created by JeryTehPoontslayer - "Open World DwarfWrangling" for "Banderlodz- The Gaem."

That's a real possibility. And, your machine? Cloud-computing would make you a captive audience member very quickly. What then, when everyone has such a Storefront Game with "CryptoKoinz" and all powered by the Cloud via 6g? Your "gaming rig" is only powerful enough to connect you to the monetization devices that will plague you for the rest of your gaming life...

/dystopicfuturismpossible :)

[Paratech2008]

Maybe Steam is the best service? I like Steam, but buy games on GOG. I've even spent more time playing games on GOG than Steam lately.

[crunchyfrog]

引用自 Ailes：

引用自 Morkonan：

What happens when the storefronts are literally "games" themselves and the primary distribution point for game development? They are the "engines" on which these things run.. [...]

*Irony on* Imagine if we already had a storefront that dominated the market so much that developers felt forced to publish on it and that took tiny nibbles from all the purchases made! And - wow, get a hold of this - one that also included a secondary market with meaningless digital trash items creating tiny itsy bits of money too? Thank god we are still like SO many steps away from that! *Irony off*

Well that's not exactly fair comparison because what Valve offer here is strictly unlike NFTs and other cash grab scams.

Sure, there's parallels between digital trading cards, but the point is thre they can be free or as cheap as you wish.

NFTs are absolute ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. Not only are they nothing of value, but speaking as a someone who's been involved in collecting in various markets for around 40 years now, collections and markets do not work like they do,.

Prices go up organically. When something either comes to light or is released, and it's rare, either nobody knows about it (which is why it's rare because it didn't sell) or it was somehow limited. Even then the price does not markedly move much, but takes years to gradually increase.

NFTs have jumped staraight to an "end" price which is a massive red flag showing this is a cash grab.

I've been involved in records, books, ephemera, and games. All share the same sort of traits.

[Paratech2008]

NFTs don't enhance games. They exist to make publishers money.

At least DLC, unless we're talking Paradox, gets finished and gamers can buy a complete edition with all DLC.

Trading cards are free to a point and you can sell, trade, or give them away if they don't interest you.

What positive thing do NFTs offer?

[crunchyfrog]

引用自 Paratech2008：

NFTs don't enhance games. They exist to make publishers money.

At least DLC, unless we're talking Paradox, gets finished and gamers can buy a complete edition with all DLC.

Trading cards are free to a point and you can sell, trade, or give them away if they don't interest you.

What positive thing do NFTs offer?

Exactly - as I said, a solution in search of a problem, and a bloody cash grab.

[Ailes]

引用自 Paratech2008：

[...] What positive thing do NFTs offer?

Making items tradable across games/in a supposed Metaverse. But that requires developers and publishers to actually allow content to be used across the initial game they were made for, and everyone to agree to take part in one single Metaverse. This will never happen. Game development is already enough of a mixed basket of things - just look at all the engines being used. Unifying these systems would make the publishers lose money in the long run, because they couldn't milk their playerbase any longer by making the same game ten times and creating and selling the same stupid skins/cosmetics ten times as well. As if EA, Ubisoft and whoever will suddenly agree to join Zuckerbergs grand idea of a Metaverse and create all their games and content within one unified framework. Joke of the century.

And you can presumably track ownership over these meaningless items better. But why the hell would I want to do that?

[Gus the Crocodile]

引用自 Paratech2008：

What positive thing do NFTs offer?

At a stretch: some redistribution of wealth from rich idiots to awesome game developers.

Unfortunately that also comes with side dishes of planetary destruction, enriching corporate arseholes, and the advent of weird almost-slave-labour game-farming communities like the gold farmers of old.

[Fumo Bnnuy n Frends]

引用自 The Knight：

Let’s face it, we’ve lost the battle. Bowser kept Princess Peach and is now charging us to see Yoshi, Luigi, and Toad. Microtransactions are so prevalent in today’s video games that we sometimes don’t even notice them. But, are microtransactions ruining video games?

Microtransactions, loot boxes, and season passes are slowly but surely ruining video games and there’s no end in sight. What was free content 10 years ago is now hidden behind a paywall and taunting you as a 9-year old kid taunts you when you’re on the floor dying.

Why Do Gamers Hate Microtransactions?

It’s easy to see why gamers would hate microtransactions. Oftentimes, you’ll get a basic free-to-play game that will charge you for literally everything else in the game.

Then there’s the case when you pay $60 upfront for a game only to realize that features or characters are missing, which is okay if you can naturally unlock them. But what these game developers do is, they’ll make you grind for countless hours until you basically give up and just pay for it.

You probably fall into one of two camps – you’re never paying for any additional features in any game out of principle, or you gave up a long time ago and you’re spending more money than ever before on video games. Who knows, maybe you’re even a so-called whale, and you’re paying for studio executives’ trips to Hawaii or their kid’s college tuition.

At least the Las Vegas whales get a free room and complimentary champagne or something. Video game whales don’t get anything in in real life, except looong credit card statements.

What Games Were Ruined By Microtransactions?

There are so many examples of games being ruined by microtransactions, from mobile games like Candy Crush Saga to AAA titles like Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. What started as a simple $2.50 horse shield add-on by Bethesda in 2006 in their mega-popular Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, continues to this day.

War Thunder
This free-to-play MMO war game has players grinding an indefinite number of hours to get a nice plane. Or you can fork out $10, $60, or even much more for a single airplane or another type of vehicle. A Reddit user calculated that it would cost around $9,500 to buy every premium vehicle in the game.

I understand that the game is free-to-play, but would you rather pay $60 upfront or spend hundreds of dollars over the years for new premium vehicles? I think we all know the answer, but the ship has sailed and there’s no putting the toothpaste back into the tube.

Star Wars Battlefront 2
This game came out and, well, things hit the fan. Star Wars Battlefront 2 came out in November 2017, but already a few days prior to release, people started noticing things that were way off. Since then, the game became a poster boy for microtransactions and loot boxes. But what exactly happened?

Many players that had EA’s Early Access Program quickly figured out that the main protagonists were hidden behind paywalls and that you’d have to play for 40 hours to unlock a single character. And it would take around incredible 5,000 hours to unlock and upgrade all of them.

So, how much money are we talking about here to unlock all the content? $200? $500? $1,000? You’d have to give EA $2,100 of your (or your parents’) hard-earned money!

The two-times most hated company in the world, EA, decided to budge and remove the use of real money after players started boycotting their game.

p much


sadly once something hits mainstream normies and casuals ruin it. video games got too big and companies took the reigns rather than artists and developers.

Ironically though with video games are the opposite of irl stuff. Where stuff is cheaper people buy en mass. But in video games having filled to the brim with Mt's DLC's and lootboxes.



The only holdout is voting with money and eventually letting the companies that keep pandering to the lowest common denominators fail miserably whenever they make a couple of bad games. Then they lose the majority of the new people but also their older loyal fans.

[Fumo Bnnuy n Frends]

引用自 Paratech2008：

NFTs don't enhance games. They exist to make publishers money.

At least DLC, unless we're talking Paradox, gets finished and gamers can buy a complete edition with all DLC.

Trading cards are free to a point and you can sell, trade, or give them away if they don't interest you.

What positive thing do NFTs offer?

it's embezzling money that's what.


i'd actually bet money that in the next couple of months or years governments won't get enough $$$$ from companies and say hey wtf ♥♥♥♥ you and your money laundering block chaining scheme this is gonna stop.

either severely limiting them or severely regulating them.

[Morkonan]

引用自 Rupika：

..
I'm not sure which article he read cause the one I read said none of that stuff. But you are right, shareholders are bad for videogames. But the good thing about games is the market is so heavily saturated, you don't have to deal with them or their crap. You don't have to buy every product on the shelf in the supermarket. And I don't wanna hear any of that 'It's a disease that spreads, soon everyone will do it' crap. Cause that is just BS.

I read his direct statements.

Then, I interpreted what he said with what I could glean from the intent that likely fueled what he said. I "actively listened" to what he said. I didn't just soak it up. ("Read" really. :))

This was not an address to "gamers." It contained gamer-directed statements, but that's just an excuse. (I wouldn't surprise me if he was also fishing for investment bumps, too.)

I thought on it a bit and it became very clear what it was that he was saying. If not specifically, like I prognosticated, then very similar to that.

BTW - This whole Metaverse thing is a boiling pot on the stove of a lot of companies eager to gain leverage in it. I actually spoke with related professional this eve who was firmly in the camp of "you wouldn't believe how nuts companies are going for this whole Metaverse thing right now. Crypto with it, too." In his words, competition is going to explode. But, who cares about competition when the pickings are so very rich? Anecdotal testimony, to be sure. But, after I made my posts I did want to get their take on it. I also saw it as a framework to built that would be able to quickly embrace the Cloud. The Big Three are already working hard on that, but as we all know, performance isn't there yet. He was dubious on that point, I'm a bit more bullish for the near future on it.

[Morkonan]

引用自 Rupika：

Well I would call that 'putting words in their mouth'. I'm still not buying all this sensationalism, I think it is all blown way out of proportion.

Why did he make the announcement and why did he say what he did with "great enthusiasm?" Was it just a lark? That must be it, right?

This guy isn't Ol' Musky.

And, he's talking about future corporate development strategy involving monetization efforts going forward starting this year. He's directly addressing Crypto-topics, Cloud, a vision of a front-end architecture totally controlled by Squeenix, monetizing creator content and holding that monetization through decentralized means (a mystery, but sounds like a front-end)

This is a company with a six-billion monies market cap and that received nearly five billion USD in revenue last year.

I don't think he's going to risk that by opening his mouth, yammering nonsense.

But, you could be right! It could happen. He could be fishing or covering up some losses that are about to hit with a "expenses from the development of the new money-train we're building that I just talked about last month" sort of thing, too. I doubt it, but... /shrug

I could be totally borked up. Sure. I'm nobody. We'll see how it all plays out, right? If I'm totally wrong, no problem. And, if I'm right, mostly right, or had the right idea? No problem, there, either. I'm not a sore winner... :)

What's important is that gamers and even crypto-nuts "protect themselves" from being exploited. Forewarned is forearmed.

[Ganger]

From SEGA, for those who don't want to click the link, I have posted the full article.

Sega to Avoid NFTs If It is Perceived as a Money-Making Sceme - News

https://www.vgchartz.com/article/452174/sega-to-avoid-nfts-if-it-is-perceived-as-a-money-making-sceme/

Sega last year said it was interested in experimenting with NFTs. However, Sega CEO Haruki Satomi in a management meeting, transcribed by Tweak Town, admitted there is negativity with regarding NFTs.

Satomi said there are no concrete plans with NFTs, blockchain, or play-to-earn and said if NFTs are perceived as a "money-making" scheme he would be willing to not create NFTs.

"In terms of NFT, we would like to try out various experiments and we have already started many different studies and considerations but nothing is decided at this point regarding P2E.

"There have been many announcement about this already including at overseas but there are users who shows negative reactions at this point.

"We need to carefully assess many things such as how we can mitigate the negative elements, how much we can introduce this within the Japanese regulation, what will be accepted and what will not be by the users.

"Then, we will consider this further if this leads to our mission 'Constantly Creating, Forever Captivating,' but if it is perceived as simple money-making, I would like to make a decision not to proceed."

Take it as you will, to me, it just seems Sega are doing some damage control at this stage.

[the vampire of time and memory]

very sad

[Morkonan]

引用自 Ganger：

..

Take it as you will, to me, it just seems Sega are doing some damage control at this stage.

That looks promising.

But, it also looks hesitant and cautious. The "perceived as money-making" thing is strange. How else does one perceive it? No real-world currency value at all? I hope that's ultimately true.

There have been some efforts sort of like that. For instance, look at your Award thingies and the like. These have no real-world value... unless listed. :) But, the point there is a sort of "Collector's Incentive" to keep interacting with the products.

SEGA could do an NFT as a sort of fully transportable "Official Badge." By that, I mean let's say your buy some software, sometimes even a game, and inside it is an "Official Owner of the Thing" icon. The idea there is you can pair it with a forum NIC or something and make yourself look cool... I guess.

If that was an NFT, you could take it anywhere and do the same thing and it could never be "exactly the same as everyone else." You "own" that link as it could be verified.

One NFT-Freak was rambling about that in some vid/twit/post somewhere. He likened it to an "Avatar" for forums. He was very excited about that.

Well, it could be an Avatar for the MetaVerse, too. You "own" it. Nobody else can use it. The MetaVerse verifies it through magical blockchain tech and you are singled out as being uber-cool-hipster guy with a glowy border around your NFT-Certified Avatar.

Kind of like a "Second-Life: Reloaded" except you're the only one who officially owns that skin combo.

[Mr Jt (Gog is king)]

引用自 Rupika：

引用自 crunchyfrog：

Morkoran nails it as per usual.

It's not so much the soundbite of what he says, but the context and when and where he said it.

Scummy shareholder meetings are always where you see the gold. As Jim Streling puts it it's the time you're liable to hear what they REALLY think.

It's just all kinds of tone deaf, arrogant and plain stupid.

I don't get the point that he made though about "NFTs are going to become commonplace" for the simple reason there's yet no reason for them to ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ exists in the first place.

They're a solution trying to find a problem.

I'm not sure which article he read cause the one I read said none of that stuff. But you are right, shareholders are bad for videogames. But the good thing about games is the market is so heavily saturated, you don't have to deal with them or their crap. You don't have to buy every product on the shelf in the supermarket. And I don't wanna hear any of that 'It's a disease that spreads, soon everyone will do it' crap. Cause that is just BS.

Everyone will do it?Talk for yourself