|
|
|
|
|
|
by noetic_techy
1688 days ago
|
|
|
I dont think you need to support multiple games, but a dev with a similar game could say that some other NFT from some other competitor game will unlock equivalent items in my game, so come on over and jump ship! Competition of eyeballs. Expecially if those NFT are not in some walled garden and built on a common platform. You could then trade NFT's from one game for NFT's in another. I'll trade you my zucker-verse penthouse for a unique ship in Eve Online! Yes, a dev could screw with interpretation, but that would likely create a lot or angry people and kill your cash cow as they move on. Zuck makes your pentouse smaller you are going to be pissed. |
|
|
And what the hell are you going to do about it?
How is this any different to the arguments against centralisation that they could ban you/remove your belongings at any time?
This is just centralisation again!
> a dev with a similar game could say that some other NFT from some other competitor game will unlock equivalent items in my game
Firstly, gamers absolutely do not want to constantly have to jump ship between clients -- that is a horrific inconvenience and you completely underestimate the network effect.
Secondly, why would any developer ever implement NFTs if the benefit of them is that another developer could pluck your customers?