Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Bitcoin Games

Ubisoft Becomes First Major Gaming Company To Launch In-Game NFTs (decrypt.co) 48

Posted by BeauHD from the just-the-beginning dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Decrypt: Today, the publisher behind Assassin's Creed and Just Dance revealed Ubisoft Quartz, a platform that lets players earn and purchase in-game items that are tokenized as NFTs on the Tezos blockchain. Quartz will launch first in the PC version of Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Breakpoint, the latest online game in the long-running tactical shooter series. Quartz will launch in beta on December 9 in the United States, Canada, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Belgium, Brazil, and Australia. Ghost Recon Breakpoint players who have reached XP level 5 in the game can access the NFT drops. Ubisoft's release says that players must be at least 18 years old to create a Tezos wallet for use with the game.

Ubisoft is referring to its NFT drops as "Digits" and plans to release free NFTs for early adopters on December 9, 12, and 15, with further drops planned for 2022. An infographic shows items such as weapon skins and unique armor and apparel, along with a message that teases future initiatives: "This is just the beginning" [...] Much of Ubisoft's announcement today highlights the difference in environmental impact between the proof-of-stake Tezos blockchain and the energy-intensive Bitcoin. Tezos claims that a single transaction on its network uses "more than 2 million times less energy" than Bitcoin, the leading cryptocurrency. It also suggests that a single Tezos transaction uses about as much energy as a 30-second streaming video, whereas a Bitcoin transaction is estimated to measure up to the environmental impact of a full, uninterrupted year of streaming video footage.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ubisoft Becomes First Major Gaming Company To Launch In-Game NFTs More

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

Comments Filter:

  • NO (Score:3)

    by Major_Disorder ( 5019363 ) on Tuesday December 07, 2021 @06:36PM (#62056911)
    That is all.

    • That is all.

      Almost. You forgot, "Why?"

    • Back in the 70s there was something called a Pet Rock. It was a smooth rock in a printed box. The fad lasted about six months then everyone moved on to the next "new" thing. NFTs seem to be the new Pet Rock. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      --
      Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to purchase a second one. -- Home Depot associate

      • Back in the 70s there was something called a Pet Rock. It was a smooth rock in a printed box. The fad lasted about six months then everyone moved on to the next "new" thing. NFTs seem to be the new Pet Rock. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

        -- Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to purchase a second one. -- Home Depot associate

        I remember the pet rock. (I may have even had one) They were better than NFTs, at least you got a rock.

  • .. are soon parted.

  • Please (Score:5, Insightful)

    by argStyopa ( 232550 ) on Tuesday December 07, 2021 @06:40PM (#62056925) Journal

    I'm asking the entire world: PLEASE, please stop buying these.

    This is fucking insane, that someone gives you a meaningless token claiming you uniquely 'own' this piece of digitalia which generally anyone can look at, you can't prove you are the only holder, and ultimately it's some quavering ones and zeros held in a memory bank somewhere.

    This is stupider than spending real dollars buying Star Citizen ships for a game that has eaten what, $300 million over 10+ years and will likely never launch.
    This is stupider than spending real dollars buying property in a virtual world where space is literally infinite and could vanish any moment.

    Every time you pay money for an NFT, you are doing perhaps the stupidest thing imaginable - not just wasting your money, you are incentivizing people to continue to sell this stupid shit.

    Look, it's your money, you can waste it however you like.

    But for the rest of us, I'd propose anyone spending $0.01+ on an NFT should be forever banned from ever receiving any amount of public $ assistance, ever.

    • I like your idea, but I suggest one small change.

      But for the rest of us, I'd propose anyone spending $0.01+ on an NFT should be immediately sterized for the sake of the gene pool.

    • This is fucking insane, that someone gives you a meaningless token claiming you uniquely 'own' this piece of digitalia which generally anyone can look at, you can't prove you are the only holder, and ultimately it's some quavering ones and zeros held in a memory bank somewhere.

      This is stupider than spending real dollars buying Star Citizen ships for a game that has eaten what, $300 million over 10+ years and will likely never launch. This is stupider than spending real dollars buying property in a virtual world where space is literally infinite and could vanish any moment.

      You do realize that kids spent billions of $$ on Fortnite skins, right? In-game items that provided no gameplay advantage what-so-ever and just looked "cool"... And none of those were NFTs.

      I know, I know... I'll get off your lawn now.

      • I would suggest that those skins have far more utility than NFTs. They improve the experience of the game for those people who are tickled by that sort of thing - and they are many. They bought tangible enjoyment.

        I guess the same argument could be said for NFTs... but that seems lonely to me.

    • You basically have to argue against any collectible that is printed on paper or made of plastic. Inherently, these items are worthless and also have deeper impacts on the environment. But NFTs, at least the ones like in this article, are basically digital baseball cards. So you'll need to argue against the entire collectible industry if you want anyone to take you seriously.

      But let me give you a good example. Take a game like World of Warcraft. You can put massive amounts of time into the game and find/buy

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Nonsense; collectibles that are printed on paper or made of plastic actually exist as unique finite objects in space and time and that finite nature in itself is what gives them value as a limited resource. Digital items can be replicated perfectly with no loss or limit on duplication and therefore hold no intrinsic value.

        NFTs are just a bunch of bytes that confer no meaning or value beyond saying "it makes you the owner of this thing", but the problem is it doesn't do anything to actually make you the owne

        • Nonsense; collectibles that are printed on paper or made of plastic actually exist as unique finite objects in space and time and that finite nature in itself is what gives them value as a limited resource. Digital items can be replicated perfectly with no loss or limit on duplication and therefore hold no intrinsic value.

          Except when you have that digital asset on a blockchain. Also, that paper or plastic really doesn't have any intrinsic value. You can admire them, collect them, trade them, buy or sell them...but they're basically bits of art. Just like these kinds of NFTs.

          NFTs are just a bunch of bytes that confer no meaning or value beyond saying "it makes you the owner of this thing", but the problem is it doesn't do anything to actually make you the owner of that thing. It's value only exists in the head of the person falling for the NFT scam.

          There's more to NFTs than just an image and a ledger, and if you think that's all an NFT can be, I'd really suggest you research NFTs a bit more. The article itself states that these are in-game items, so they'll have use in the game.

          Now, I don't know

      • "You basically have to argue against any collectible that is printed on paper or made of plastic. "
        Seriously, you have trouble comprehending the intrinsic difference between something tangible, and something not?

  • The money and run while people are giving it away. I live the folks that only live once it affords me and others life times of fun. Remember to fill my bank accounts with your cryptocurrency I cash out weekly.

  • I'm totally not surprised. There's money to be made from NFTs off of their p(l)ayers, so why not jump on the bandwagon, regardless of whether it has any longevity or whether it's 'ethical'.

    (Not that Ubisoft have ever given a flying fuck about ethics, obviously :)

  • So instead of spending money to buy virtual armor and weapon skins that exist only in the developer's database, are not transferable, and can be removed at any time on the developer's whim, you're buying virtual armor and weapon skins that exist on the Tezos blockchain, are transferable and cannot be removed at the developer's whim. Why is this a bad development?

    • Re:Lots of Luddites out today (Score:4, Informative)

      by Petersko ( 564140 ) on Wednesday December 08, 2021 @03:52AM (#62058121)

      What makes you think they can't be removed at the developer's whim? Their promise? Whether the armor and weapon exists in the ether or not, the game has to support it. And the skins probably have a life span as long as the game. And they're only usable as long as you subscribe to the game.

      • I can't see why it's in Ubisoft's interest to give up control but it could enable 3rd party game servers to validate unlockable content (skins, hats, guns etc). In theory it could let games live on past developer support.

  • First of all, don't worry, it's not NFTs. At least, in the whole "blockchain thingy" sort of way.

    A "game NFT" is really just a random configuration of a collectible in-game item. That's it. Nothing more, nothing special. And nothing that needs decentralized ledgers like blockchain to keep track of.

    Heck, I'm sure if you look at it, it's just some random configuration of an item stored in a server maintained online inventory of your stuff.

    In other words, games are using "NFT" to refer to "in game collectible"

    • First of all, don't worry, it's not NFTs. At least, in the whole "blockchain thingy" sort of way.

      It's relying on all the hype around NFTs to do stock and marketing things. It's not a real decentralized thing - you can't use it out of the game, you can't use it offline, etc. etc. etc. It's just a thing they can do to make their loot boxes look better.

      From the description, they sound very much like legitimate NFTs. On a real blockchain.

      And you should be able to do one very important thing with them outside of the game: you can trade them (for real money). So if you somehow manage to acquire the uber-rare red armor, and you don't want it, then you can sell it to someone else (presumably within their TOS). This is the way games like Axie Infinity and Gods Unchained are currently operating.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        From the description, they sound very much like legitimate NFTs. On a real blockchain.

        And you should be able to do one very important thing with them outside of the game: you can trade them (for real money). So if you somehow manage to acquire the uber-rare red armor, and you don't want it, then you can sell it to someone else (presumably within their TOS). This is the way games like Axie Infinity and Gods Unchained are currently operating.

        Ubisoft, forget it, it's not real. The "Blockchain" will just be th

    • "real NFTs".

      LOL.

    • Hmm, try again dude.
  • If this is going to become a thing, why not take it to its logical conclusion by developing and selling NFT derivatives? Hear me out: if people are going to pay good money for an NFT which represents a digital instance of a thing, people should be willing to pay for a derivative NFT of that NFT, and so forth. Yes, it's blockchain all the way down, and apparently no limit to how large the bubble can get.

  • ... of course the price of the Tezos token pumped, didn't it?
    40% up in 24 hours.

    As if it isn't bad enough for games to be effectively ruined by "in-game purchases", just the news of this, sends the price of something yet to actually deliver any real world benefits, soaring. Tezos has a 5 billion marketcap, FFS. For what, exactly?

    I must be getting old, I always thought that games were a fantastic source of escapism from "the real world", away from concerns, such as money.
    And now they bring money INTO the gam

  • A blockchain is a great instrument for keeping decentralized records, but it's useless overhead if you already have a (centralized) company that manages the game. Or worse, it's just a marketing gimmick to fan people's greed.

  • Well that's awesome (Score:3)

    by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Wednesday December 08, 2021 @06:51AM (#62058417)
    So now I can "own" stuff that only works in Ubisoft games and I can only trade or sell by the terms they set. And if they can the platform, then all my stuff dies with it. Oh wait, how the fuck is that any different than any prior game with a marketplace ever?
  • When I was a kid, we had pet rocks (not kidding, it was a real thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]).

    The 90s had Beanie Babies.

    This is just the digital version of that same old adage: a fool and his money are soon parted.

Slashdot Top Deals

Think of it! With VLSI we can pack 100 ENIACs in 1 sq. cm.!

Close