[fl0wenol]

All of this assumes that other games will "play by the rules", in the sense that they won't let you use an item that you don't own. If I can see the resource (and in all current models, the content of the signed media/document an NFT authorizes is public) then I can use myself if my client is so configured. Most games give value to loot by forced scarcity, NFTs don't implicitly enable this at all.

[joshmarlow]

I think that's right locally - you can of course make your local software ignore the ownership of nfts. But if the crypto/ledger doesn't line up, then other better behaved clients can (and arguably have an incentive to) just ignore what your client says. That could mean (in a gaming context) that the rest of the network just ignores your progress in the game (ie, new loot acquisitions).

It's the same thing with Bitcoin node software - any node could broadcast a transaction that contains more BTC than the address actually has. But the crypto/ledger won't add up, so the network just wouldn't accept it.

In fact, flooding the networks with forgeries would devalue the network (and the operator's investment in the project).

Games built on a public ledger benefit from playing by the rules - doing otherwise would devalue their investment in building on the ledger.