Ubisoft Becomes First Major Gaming Company to Launch In-Game NFTs

[milewilda]

Ubisoft removed their NFT announcement video from Youtube.

The response from gamers was so overwhelmingly negative that Ubisoft decided to "unnanounce" their NFTs. It could mean that they will even abandon this feature altogether, or will disable it shortly after it launched, when they will seen that no one uses it.

The reason hasnt been known on why they had removed it which i dont see any negatives on airing it already on the public but instead they have done the opposite.
We know on how big Ubisoft is and they could make out adoption or consideration on things which they do seem to be beneficial.
If the reason of such change is having no interest then its too early to say imho yet they havent just started yet.lol

[andulolika]

NFT and P2E is something that nobody asked for,

Speak for yourself.

Ubisoft removed their NFT announcement video from Youtube.

The response from gamers was so overwhelmingly negative that Ubisoft decided to "unnanounce" their NFTs. It could mean that they will even abandon this feature altogether, or will disable it shortly after it launched, when they will seen that no one uses it.

The reason hasnt been known on why they had removed it which i dont see any negatives on airing it already on the public but instead they have done the opposite.
We know on how big Ubisoft is and they could make out adoption or consideration on things which they do seem to be beneficial.
If the reason of such change is having no interest then its too early to say imho yet they havent just started yet.lol

The reason was announced and it was because only 4% of the votes were positive, and this only happens because all the FUD nfts are going thru, sheeples claiming we destroying the planet with nfts.

[el kaka22]

I am assuming that all this does is allowing micro-transactions to be done in NFT form and nothing else. In other places NFT actually means something, it is the whole backbone of the game and the ecosystem revolves around it, but with this method we are seeing from Ubisoft, it is basically just a way to get more for their microtransactions. This is why I do not see them doing any better at all, they are very hated in the gaming industry as well and they will keep being hated no matter if they put NFT or not. It is just not something that we would want to see in a company like that.

If this was CD Projekt doing something like this and a brandnew game revolving around it, we would all be going crazy about it, but since this is not the case and Ubisoft is just adding it to their already planned future game releases then I am sure it will be underwhelming.

[paxmao]

Glad to know that this company is taking it seriously. The most clear case of legit and economic use of NFTs is to prove digital assets ownership and to trustlessly transact these on a chain. The in-game items clearly fit on this description and Ubisoft is taking a great step in ensuring that their uses receive and added value that other will have to follow soon to keep competing. In my view, it has already taken more than enough time to get to this, as the tech was ready years ago but probably the craziness of 2018 did not help much instil confidence in crypto.

[magneto]

I really don't get the point of having centralized utility NFTs.

These games are obviously hosted by Ubisoft so it doesn't really matter whether or not their in game items are NFTs on a blockchain or just hosted on the servers of Ubisoft - because if the game goes down, everything is worthless anyway.

That's what I don't get about this hype. It's not that NFTs are useless, it's that people hype up not-so-great usage cases as if it's the second coming of Jesus.

[andulolika]

I really don't get the point of having centralized utility NFTs.

These games are obviously hosted by Ubisoft so it doesn't really matter whether or not their in game items are NFTs on a blockchain or just hosted on the servers of Ubisoft - because if the game goes down, everything is worthless anyway.

That's what I don't get about this hype. It's not that NFTs are useless, it's that people hype up not-so-great usage cases as if it's the second coming of Jesus.

Fun part is when a multi-verse comes in and you can use the same NFT on different games, now, all i hope, is that they aren't making unlimited supply stuff.

If there wasn't so much copyright bullshit and unfriendliness between ... stuff you could have gimli's axe as example in a non LOTR game.

[Daltonik]

For example, here is a fresh example of the reaction of players to NFT in games. The GSC Game World studio did not have time to announce the launch of the metaverse and NFT by S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 as the players who remained very dissatisfied with this decision of the studio and now in the steam community are massively demanding to remove the game from sale from Steam due to violation of the agreement banning NFT in games on the platform, without hesitating in expressions.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1643320/discussions/0/3202620277336976577/

[hatshepsut93]

For example, here is a fresh example of the reaction of players to NFT in games. The GSC Game World studio did not have time to announce the launch of the metaverse and NFT by S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 as the players who remained very dissatisfied with this decision of the studio and now in the steam community are massively demanding to remove the game from sale from Steam due to violation of the agreement banning NFT in games on the platform, without hesitating in expressions.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1643320/discussions/0/3202620277336976577/

https://twitter.com/stalker_thegame/status/1471620399997886472


S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 NFT is officially cancelled. I was right when I was telling on this forum for quite a while now that gamers don't want NFT, but it even surprises me just how much backlash these NFT announcements are receiving. NfT really does have a very negative reputation outside of crypto space, because people see it for what it is - a useless speculative fad and a vehicle for scams.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Just because AAA company does it, doesn't mean it will be successful.

True, but if one of them succeeds with the idea you better believe it'll catch on across the long list of video game publishers (and probably other industries as well). 

Though I basically think NFTs are silly based on people's current inflated perceptions of them, in this particular case I think the concept serves a useful purpose (though AFAIK there have been ultra-rare in-game items that didn't need to be tokenized in order to ensure their scarcity).  One of the problems I see happening is that the NFTs turn out to be highly collectible and end up turning kids into gamblers, speculating in the NFT market.  I'm not a gamer so I don't have a sense of how great the risk is, but I do know that loot boxes turned out to be not-so-popular for the same reason.

Should be interesting to see what happens when these things become available.

[hatshepsut93]

Though I basically think NFTs are silly based on people's current inflated perceptions of them, in this particular case I think the concept serves a useful purpose (though AFAIK there have been ultra-rare in-game items that didn't need to be tokenized in order to ensure their scarcity). 

Against what exactly do the scarcity of gameplay or cosmetic items needs to be ensured?

I'm not a gamer so I don't have a sense of how great the risk is, but I do know that loot boxes turned out to be not-so-popular for the same reason.

Lootboxes are popular, and that's a problem because of how predatory they are. NFT has a chance to become another kind of this cancer, especially when combined with lootboxes and other similar practices - people and especially kids will end up spending more money on junk content.

[Daltonik]

A rather interesting study by Huobi Research has come out, which concerns the influence of GameFi on the growing interest of users in blockchain games, about the use of NFT, DeFi in the framework of adopting the concept of play to earn and before securing property rights through NFT, you can read here: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/huobi-research-institute-releases-report-on-gamefi-and-its-impact-on-traditional-gaming-models-301451149.html

[Daltonik]

Or here is the strange attitude of South Korea to games based on the P2E model, where the authorities, represented by the ministry of culture, sports and tourism, demanded that Google and Apple block any games using P2E in mobile marketplaces and this happens after they released the series The Colmar Game.
https://n.news.naver.com/article/015/0004645498

[davis196]

This could be a good stride towards legitimizing P2E and reducing the high number of scam games which have emerged.

I don't get it.How can NFT P2E adoption by Ubisoft can reduce the amount of scam P2E games?
There's no direct connection between the two.
Ubisoft simply wants to ride the wave and get more money from this growing trend,but I don't think that the regulators would let them enter the NFT play-to-earn market.
The entire play-to-earn NFT business model looks like a ponzi scheme to me,because these games need a constant amount of new players paying more money,in order for the value of the NFTs to grow,so the earlier players on these games can make a profit.Sounds definitely like a ponzi scheme to me.
We don't want the kids to get hooked by this ponzi shit,do we?
  

[Daltonik]

We don't want the kids to get hooked by this ponzi shit,do we?

Yes, you are right, of course, if we are talking about some specific game that is caught in proven fraud, but they are talking about all games using the p2e mechanism, so far only in the mobile application segment, on the principle of why figure it out, let's just ban everything, of course there is a lot of shit, but you can't talk about everything at once.

[Daltonik]

Not only Ubisoft is working towards tokenization of games, for example, Play It Forward DAO has already collected $6 million from private investors just six months after launch, to finance initial development and expansion of the training, as well as support for infrastructure projects related to p2e.
https://pif-dao.medium.com/play-it-forward-dao-raises-us-6m-to-drive-growth-in-play-to-earn-gaming-119ba36ecec2

[TheNineClub]

If Ubisoft is entering the crypto ecosystem, especially with NFTs, then there is no reason to be happy about it. Whatever Ubisoft touches, turns into crap. And them getting into NFT's actually makes sense, because that's the most exploitive part of crypto so far. Ubisoft has a solid track record of getting deep into microtransactions, so them hopping on the next easy buck bandwagon does not surprise me at all. If they only took half the effort they took into searching for different money-making avenues, into game R&D, people wouldn't bitch about them that much. Not saying other major publishers are exonerated, but Ubisoft specifically rubs me the wrong way.

For example, here is a fresh example of the reaction of players to NFT in games. The GSC Game World studio did not have time to announce the launch of the metaverse and NFT by S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 as the players who remained very dissatisfied with this decision of the studio and now in the steam community are massively demanding to remove the game from sale from Steam due to violation of the agreement banning NFT in games on the platform, without hesitating in expressions.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1643320/discussions/0/3202620277336976577/

https://twitter.com/stalker_thegame/status/1471620399997886472


S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 NFT is officially cancelled. I was right when I was telling on this forum for quite a while now that gamers don't want NFT, but it even surprises me just how much backlash these NFT announcements are receiving. NfT really does have a very negative reputation outside of crypto space, because people see it for what it is - a useless speculative fad and a vehicle for scams.

I'd say it has a negative vibe even in the crypto community because it's been jammed into our throats as the next important (not big, important) thing, and they throw it at anything.

[hatshepsut93]

In case anyone is wondering how the "crypto revolution in gaming" is working out, Ubisoft's NFT has resulted in whopping $377.57 total trading volume as of recently. That's how interested gamers are in "truly owning their in-game items".

[stompix]

In case anyone is wondering how the "crypto revolution in gaming" is working out, Ubisoft's NFT has resulted in whopping $377.57 total trading volume as of recently. That's how interested gamers are in "truly owning their in-game items".

What a bunch of surprises...not.
One, that a gaming company again fails to understand why poeple are paying money for their games and why they are playing it in the first place, but Ubisoft is one of those that never, never learn!
The second one, that things that appeal in theory to so-called NFT collectors are of zero interest to gamers, and of course, NFT collectors have close to zero interest in gaming. Who could have seen this, just who? 

I keep wondering how those companies don't go bankrupt far more often when it's clear they don't realize why people spend money on their products and why they won't spend a dime or others. Probably in this time, gamers have paid already 300 thousand on games but they did so for their own fun, a thing that again..surprisingly is not understood completely even here in this thread.

[oHnK]

NFT has a very close relationship for artists and works, one of which is games.  The current game company should cooperate with NFT in creating items that are traded in the games.  In the world of games, there is no such thing as cheats or plagiarization.  So that NFT is a win win solution for players and developers.  If using NFT, developers can be guaranteed from plagiarism and users can sell NFT purchased in the game.  Not only playing games, as long as NFT becomes hype then it can also be our investment.

[Daltonik]

In case anyone is wondering how the "crypto revolution in gaming" is working out, Ubisoft's NFT has resulted in whopping $377.57 total trading volume as of recently. That's how interested gamers are in "truly owning their in-game items".

Well, this is quite expected, you just need to take it as an experiment, the player has already paid for the purchase of the game, and then the developer offers him to purchase something else in general, and the content he needs with questionable value, this causes some dissatisfaction and the players vote with their money.