| > The main benefit of using a blockchain is that you don't have to build a store and manage payment processing yourself Here by “you”, do you mean the player or the developer? If you mean the former, that’s solvable if implemented in the game (MTGO, diablo 3’s auction house, and how could I forget Artifact). If you mean the latter, I don’t see this as an advantage to me as a player at all. In fact I could argue that having to purchase eth would be an extra hassle to me. > Also, if the games servers died so would your collection of cards. If for whatever reason the devs killed Gods Unchained someone could build a fork and we'd be able to take our cards over there because the asset is decoupled from the game I don’t think I’m understanding this right. Is the game open source? What’s the asset that’s decoupled from the game? The ownership data on the blockchain? If the game logic is not fork-able as well, I don’t see the value in forking the chain. Your collection will be lost as cards in the sense of gaming cards. I edited my post because in the paragraph above I compared that to “the Hearthstone team releasing the card art to the players once they shut down the game”, but I’ve since realized that if the fork is about the ownership, the art would also be lost unless it was either released to the public or already public. In any case I can’t see the value in keeping original ownership information about (a copy or instance of) public digital art. I’m asking in good faith just to be clear. |
I meant the developer. I know this tech does exist but Diablo had to build their own auction house, integrate with Stripe, build a store, etc... I never saw MTGO, I just believed it could exist. Any ERC-721 compliant asset can be traded and stored on any NFT marketplace, so you get all of these things for free as long as you write a bit of code for the card. In my eyes the time it takes to get something up to become tradable on Ethereum is similar to getting a blog going on RoR - it can take only minutes. Also become Ethereum trades are atomic transactions it gives us more power than most game stores, for example I could trade my Shiny Pikachu for your Blue-Eyes White Dragon. Not for money, but for other games assets. As part of the same Transaction. Think about a Runescape trade where you have the items on your side and their side - you know if you click accept and they click accept you're going to get each others items. I think that's pretty neat compared to the norm of using third parties to manage the trade, or doing it purely on a trust basis.
> I don’t think I’m understanding this right. Is the game open source?
Parts are open source but not the majority of the game.
> What’s the asset that’s decoupled from the game? The ownership data on the blockchain?
Yeah that's right, the cards themselves.
> If the game logic is not fork-able as well, I don’t see the value in forking the chain. It would be the equivalent to the Hearthstone team releasing the card art to the players once they shut down the game. But your collection will be lost as cards in the sense of gaming cards.
So this is sort of what I meant about forking the game. Because the data for the cards are off of the game you could use the assets themselves to create another version and keep ownership from the original game. I know this is a bit of a crazy idea but it is a possibility due to the decoupling of game and state. This was more in response to someone else who said that this was a Ponzi scheme as if the game servers shut down you'd lose your cards (which I don't agree with anyway, because it's a game - not an investment strategy lol, but I was just thinking about that when I wrote this).