Ubisoft Says More of Its Games Will Be Getting NFTs, Despite the Initial Backlash

Ubisoft has promised that more of its games will feature NFTs in the future, despite the overall negativity its Quartz platform has been getting so far. From a report: Billed by Ubisoft as "the first platform for playable and energy-efficient NFTs in AAA games," Quartz was originally revealed in December 2021 and was quickly met with overwhelming backlash by players. Despite this, a statement on the Ubisoft Quartz website tells players that the publisher will continue to add 'Digits' -- its equivalent of NFTs -- to future games. Ghost Recon Breakpoint was the first game to get Digits, and the statement claims that even though it won't be getting any more, there will be more games in the future that support them.

Ubisoft management steps

[thegarbz]

Step 1: Propose idea to get indication of customer feedback.
Step 2: Receive overwhelmingly negative feedback.
Step 3: Laugh and proceed to roll out anyway.
Step 4: Somehow still fucking profit despite shitting on customers.

Re:

[suss]

Sounds like they belong in politics.

That's because everything is political

[rsilvergun]

it's an unpleasant but true thought. Everything is politics. Everything is using systems to gain and advantage or shift society. When you realize that the world makes a lot more sense.

But we're taught politics is "dirty" and beneath us. That's on purpose. It's to keep us from participating so guys like this can make the rules.

It's because of mentally ill Whales

[rsilvergun]

There's lots of people out there suffering from depression and looking for a little hit of endorphins. Buying something, especially something perceived as rare and unique, triggers that center of the brain for some of them and they'll spend thousands.

This is basically taking advantage of people with mental illness. The mobile game industry does the same thing. In a sane society it would be illegal. There was briefly talk of reigning in this kind of predatory behavior but as usual that talk was silenced by corporate media.

You'll note that the same companies that own stock in ubisoft and EA also own a big chunk of CNN and Fox News... This is what happens when you allow out of control market consolidation.

Re:

[nasch]

Rein in.

Re:

[pacinpm]

I think games with micropayments should be automatically rated 18+.

Re:

[sarren1901]

Before MMOs, we had largely single player RPGs. Those are fine and dandy. I still go back to my all time favorites. MMOs brought us a very different kind of game.

EQ was mostly a grind fest with a very sandbox feel for the quests. The quests didn't really drive the game so much as leveling up (that was it's own accomplishment in 00'), getting gear and working with a group of people to take down really large targets and hard dungeons.

Wow was a very quest oriented, practically on rails experience. It was a lot

Of course they will.

[splutty]

Ubisoft has always been a company to suck their payers as dry as sawdust.

Minimal effort on things like PC games (they're pretty much the record holder on horrible console ports), maximum effort to make sure the payers keep paying.

So?

[quall]

How is this different than monetization? It's the same thing except unique to the purchaser? Ok.

Re:

[wakeboarder]

You get the baseball card effect of scarcity

It's predatory

[rsilvergun]

the reason this is so appealing is it creates FOMO (Fear of Missing Out). That's a common tactic used to get vulnerable and mentally ill people to part with large amounts of cash they can't really afford to spend. Doing things like running up credit card debt to buy virtual donkeys.

Those stories were all over during the start of the mobile game era. They didn't go away, the news media just stopped reporting on them because their parent companies own stock in game companies.

Re:

[anonymouscoward52236]

McRib is back for a limited time! (Proceeds to bring it back and send it away, nearly every year.)

There's a finite amount of McRibs

[rsilvergun]

you can buy and eat. They're also not collectable. They're for eating. Your argument is pure whataboutism, and not even very good whataboutism.

Also, McRib isn't about FOMO, it comes and goes with the price of pork. There's so much wrong with your world view and your understanding of the economy... Please do better.

Re:

[rgbscan]

Actually, they do this whenever beef prices skyrocket and pork prices fall at the same time. It lets them offset costs.

Screw you too ubisoft

[wakeboarder]

It's obvious that ubisoft wants to extract every cent from their customers instead of make fun games.

Re:

[blahplusplus]

It's obvious that ubisoft wants to extract every cent from their customers instead of make fun games.

Why would they do that when you've gave them control of the games by buying fraudulently coded software for the past 23+ years? Steam/mmo's/uplay/battle.net drm are signs if idiocracy. There's no reason for companies to control the games, once they had control all these abusive practices became invevitable. So we have generation mmo/steam to thank for all of this by giving up game ownership.

Then I won't be playing Ubisoft games

[S_Stout]

There are so many games to play, I can ignore the NFT ones rather easily. Especially Ubisoft games that remake the same games over and over and over...

First rule of business

[newslash.formatblows]

Give the people what they don't want.

NFTs have awesome potential here

[DeplorableCodeMonkey]

NFT != token that points to an image. That's just the POC use case. The gaming market is a natural fit for NFTs because with protocols like Loopring you can mint NFTs for under $1 and sell them to gamers and have them tie into the actual games. For example, Ubisoft would let you hook your Ethereum wallet into a 1st person shooter and spend $5 of LRC to buy some features. Then instead of being held on their server, those tokens are held in your wallet. Hate the game? Get your buddy to shoot you $5 of LRC to

Re:

[Fallon]

So how does NFTs make this any better than what goes on now that permit in game trading? They usse a back end database tied to the game as you trade or sell your virtual items. NFTs provide 0 value over a traditional database in this case (as with almost every case), along with the standard problems with "crypto". How can you "open up new markets" when everything is tied to a single game & the whims of a developer? The NFTs or items have 0 value outside of the game. "Crypto" means power wasting overhead

Re:

[Bahbus]

Hey NFT shill retard, shut the fuck up.

The gaming market is a natural fit for NFTs because with protocols like Loopring you can mint NFTs for under $1 and sell them to gamers and have them tie into the actual games. For example, Ubisoft would let you hook your Ethereum wallet into a 1st person shooter and spend $5 of LRC to buy some features. Then instead of being held on their server, those tokens are held in your wallet.

How about instead, they make a game that is good and fun, and then I give them cash, and I get the game? Wait. That's right, Ubisoft hasn't made a good or fun game in over a decade. Your NFTs are absolutely meaningless, useless, and have no place in any video games ever.

Fuck you. Fuck NFTs.

Re:

[JaredOfEuropa]

NFTs do have potential uses (especially once there is an actual practical API for verifying them without relying on external services like OpenSea). But I can guarantee you that they will not be used as tokens that can be used to unlock common features in a game. They do not want second hand sales of DLC and the like, and they’ll certainly won’t facilitate that. I think it’ll be used for stupid “rare” and meaningless collectibles, or for certain cross-game or cross-platform fea

Re:

[Bahbus]

They do not have any practical uses - with or without an API. All practical use cases can be implemented without NFTs to the exact same standard - which makes NFTs useless. NFTs are for money launderers and complete morons.

Re:

[UnknownSoldier]

> Ubisoft would let you hook your Ethereum wallet into a 1st person shooter and spend $5 of LRC to buy some features.

Ah, more Pay-to-Win bullshit. No Fucking Thanks.

> Hate the game? Get your buddy to shoot you $5

1. If I hated the game I wouldn't be playing it in the first place.

2. I already paid for a game. I don't need to be nickeled and dimed over Macro Transactions.

3. Gamers don't need nor want even MORE excessive monetization in games. If you can't respect my wallet or time why should I respect

Re:

[Z80a]

They don't actually make games any better.
Infinite distractions from the goal of actually exploring more the potential of the interactive media we have here basically locked the gameplay to the PS2 era, if not worse.
And you're cheering for yet another one.

Re:

[bloodhawk]

What a load of bullshit. NFT's add absolutely nothing to a game and provide nothing that can't already be done. It is just an attempt to hype artificial scarcity to part gamers with more money, it adds nothing to game play and no actual benefit to gamers.

Re:

[noodler]

For example, Ubisoft would let you hook your Ethereum wallet into a 1st person shooter and spend $5 of LRC to buy some features. Then instead of being held on their server, those tokens are held in your wallet. Hate the game? Get your buddy to shoot you $5 of LRC to cover the cost of sending them to his wallet and they instantly activate in his copy of the game.

So you're proposing that we should all pay extra for the shit that should have come with the game?
You're a dumb fuck.

People who piss on NFTs have no idea what this tech can do to open up new markets

Let me redirect my pissing towards your face. How the fuck do you reckon people actually want these markets in their games? Didn't you read the fucking article where it is explained that players don't want those NFTs?

especially in places like securities where NFTs would be an absolute God-send for regulators to use as representatives of shares (would make naked shorting basically impossible to do without getting a trip in the FBI's party van).

So, what you're basically saying is that NFTs won't get implemented in these markets. For exactly the reasons you give here.

Fixed that for you...

[Archangel_Azazel]

"Ubisoft joins the ranks of Nintendo, Sony, and John Deere by telling it's customers it couldn't give a fuck less about them."

That seems to be a bit closer to the truth, don't you think?

Underpants Gnomes

[kyoko21]

Step 1: Steal underpants (mint NFTs)
Step 2:
Step 3: Profit.

Re:

[UnknownSoldier]

2. Shill them out to dumb customers who don't know NFT is a position in a queue hoping they are not the last buyer.

Sorry, not sorry, but

[warp_kez]

NFTs make the Nigerian Prince scam sound legit.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion