The biggest issue with the NFT/gaming platform crypto stuff is its purely driven from a VC point. If you're more interested in adding features and less interested in monetization, there are multiple ways to skin the cat that will provide a lasting product. Most of the stuff being build now is being built on a house of cards.
I'm kinda busy now, but if you're really interested, I can rant a bit about it when I have a bit more free time. Generally speaking, I think the 2 videos I shared previously in the thread as well as the Dan Olson one frequently shared cover quite a few general issues with crypto/blockchain/NFTs: There are others, but that's a good start. Skimming over things, I don't really see the point of this "blockchain" and "smart contract" stuff for the goal ESTN is claiming to accomplish. IMO, it sounds like they took something generally possible without all that (possibly already being done for all I know? Not really big into eSports), and they then slapped crypto buzzwords into it to make it sound unique and worth investing money into the platform. Lots of "could" claims and not "does" claims as well, which is another problem I see with lots of crypto scams. If it is the only/best avenue for securing funding to help create good gaming content, so be it, but I'd have to imagine there are much better options than this (especially since something like ~70% of developers seems strongly against crypto/NFT stuff like this according to recent surveys IIRC). Pretty sure you could get Ubisoft to support any project that pushes crypto/NFT ideas.
Real time rankings are actually pretty hard to accomplish inside games. I don't think esports necessarily needs crypto, but the big draw is the play to earn aspect. Outside of Eve Online, not many devs have figured out how to make a sustainable realistic economy, and I think Eve's successes come from them not having a direct way to monetize their economy with the real world's. Ofc, if they jump into the crypto space, I'll prob latch onto it given their experience. Axie's price drop has really affected the grinders in places like the Philippines who are trying to eek out a day's salary. Imagine the economy dropping by 2/5 and being forced to sell an 1k item just to pay rent. I don't know, it sounded cooler in sci fi novelas.
Sorry for the bump. Meant to reply yesterday, but didn't get a chance until today. Yeah, I think there are some interesting challenges at play. I'm not really big into eSports, so haven't really given it much thought myself, but I could see value in a platform that handles some of these things. Don't really like the idea of Play to Earn though, even though I'm sure the idea excites many. One of the videos I posted earlier touches on the issues with this kind of mechanic in general. I think you could probably implement P2E without blockchain/crypto stuff, but even if it was essential (or easier), I don't really think it is a good mechanic to push. Yeah, again something one of those videos touched on. Basically exposing your game economy to the economy of another game/system or the real world will ruin your game economy. Its it hard enough to get it right without those other factors, but it would be impossible to do so with those affecting your economy.
It will change it. There are real world examples of countries being globalized and how it affects the economy. Also there are video game examples going back to gold farming in WOW and other early MMOs. If this were in place from the start of a game, it would be transparent. Do you have some examples?
Even if it was transparent and there from the beginning, I just don't know how you could effectively design a game with factors you can't directly control. Unless you were just going for profit vs building a fun game. I'm not sure of any real examples of games that try to do this (and did well at least). Closest thing I could think of is maybe F2P games, though a lot of them get it wrong, and even then, I think it creates for a worse experience (but maybe one worth being free to play vs $60+ to play). This stuff is pretty fragile (real world or in game), and it is pretty hard to fix flaws in the economy when you give up central control. Don't know if that answers your question.
Honestly, with the way that vid explained it and how monetized subscription based games like Destiny or even Call of Duty has become, I don't like the idea either. Most freemium games punish f2p with The Grind, and that opened the door to make The Grind worth getting paid for. But with in-game inflation and how micro-transactions have become an ugly form of compulsive gambling in some games, the devs are like Centralized Planners deciding whether the max a grinder can earn is between 20-50 dollars a month (rate caps or energy points). Too much and it would cut in on the whales dumping 10k on game breaking gatcha type prizes. This is all already happening without an external crypto peg to reality. I guess the analog would be a side market for trading frequent flyer miles, but that isn't a perfect fit and is more a use case of how things might exist. I do think Twitch or LoL tourneys will have a steady growth rate for years to come, but the idea of spending 10k worth of EA coins (fiat price pending) to have a pro-level item in order to enter a Pro paywall league is sad and depressing for the future of gaming. As a viewer, I don't really care about the gear if it's bought from a rich kid or team to be handed down.
