Jump to content

[Feature Request] Integrate blockchain technology to improve various aspects of game performace and monetization


ApprenticeNoob
 Share

Recommended Posts

Has there been any consideration or thought given on integrating blockchain technology to improve various aspects of game performance and monetization? Some examples might be improved host sychronization, AI processing, or monetizing certain aspects of the game.

Edited by ApprenticeNoob
Clarification of feature request
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, ApprenticeNoob said:

Has there been any consideration or thought given on integrating blockchain tokenization so players can actually own Platinum, Warframes and other in-game items as a digital asset?

This is a ludicrously bad idea for a ton of reasons.

For one, DE has now suddenly made exposed their game, and themselves, to massive amounts of government regulation and liability risk, because now everything they sell is considered player property. Imagine DE getting sued in a massive class action because they nerfed an overperforming weapon and now owners of a riven for that weapon are angry that their investment has tanked. This is what your suggestion would result in.

For two, DE has now exposed their players to massive amounts of liability risk. Imagine you being sued because your connection was bad and some guy would have gotten a rare drop had your connection not been bad and led to his disconnection. This is what your suggestion would result in.

For three, you'd need to have some way to reconvert Platinum and in-game items to real money. The legal fees for making sure they're compliant with every possible e-commerce and securities law that applies is absolutely absurd, and would easily run into the tens of millions of dollars or more.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, MJ12 said:

This is a ludicrously bad idea for a ton of reasons.

For one, DE has now suddenly made exposed their game, and themselves, to massive amounts of government regulation and liability risk, because now everything they sell is considered player property. Imagine DE getting sued in a massive class action because they nerfed an overperforming weapon and now owners of a riven for that weapon are angry that their investment has tanked. This is what your suggestion would result in.

For two, DE has now exposed their players to massive amounts of liability risk. Imagine you being sued because your connection was bad and some guy would have gotten a rare drop had your connection not been bad and led to his disconnection. This is what your suggestion would result in.

For three, you'd need to have some way to reconvert Platinum and in-game items to real money. The legal fees for making sure they're compliant with every possible e-commerce and securities law that applies is absolutely absurd, and would easily run into the tens of millions of dollars or more.

I see, and you're an expert in these matters, correct?

1. The fact is that you don't know what the legal ramifications are for whatever your preconceived ideas of how you think it could or should be implemented.

2. See #1. Furthermore, I purchase platinum and prime items to support the development of Warframe, but I don't actually own these items. Should DE go under for whatever reason (clearly they are no longer at high risk for this, but it could happen)...poof, everything I purchased is gone and I have nothing. Not even a T-shirt that says I was here to get my Warframe on.  At least back in the day when I bought a game, I owned the physical media and any collectible items it may have came with.

3. We aren't talking about cryptocurrency here... we are talking blockchain technology and the use of a token to create a digital object.  Regulatory roadblocks are less of an issue here and there are already games that exist on a blockchain where you own the virtual collectible object.

Whether you agree with it or not... it will be a part of gaming.  Its just a matter of time.

https://www.ccn.com/gaming-giant-ubisoft-explores-blockchain-technology/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ApprenticeNoob said:

I see, and you're an expert in these matters, correct?

1. The fact is that you don't know what the legal ramifications are for whatever your preconceived ideas of how you think it could or should be implemented.

2. See #1. Furthermore, I purchase platinum and prime items to support the development of Warframe, but I don't actually own these items. Should DE go under for whatever reason (clearly they are no longer at high risk for this, but it could happen)...poof, everything I purchased is gone and I have nothing. Not even a T-shirt that says I was here to get my Warframe on.  At least back in the day when I bought a game, I owned the physical media and any collectible items it may have came with.

3. We aren't talking about cryptocurrency here... we are talking blockchain technology and the use of a token to create a digital object.  Regulatory roadblocks are less of an issue here and there are already games that exist on a blockchain where you own the virtual collectible object.

Whether you agree with it or not... it will be a part of gaming.  Its just a matter of time.

https://www.ccn.com/gaming-giant-ubisoft-explores-blockchain-technology/

Actually, yes? I'm a lawyer. I have been a lawyer for years.

It has always been possible to create 'digital property' by giving players ownership rights of the things in a game account. The reason it hasn't been done isn't because of a lack of technology. It's because when you give players 'ownership' of their accounts and the things on their accounts, you give players property rights to those things, and that's just a massive legal mess that exposes you to litigation risk. This is why games make it absolutely clear that they have total control over your account and access, and things you buy for ingame currency have zero official resale value.

Because this way, you can't get sued. Whereas if they did it the way you think they should, they're exposing themselves to a ludicrous amount of liability risk. Suddenly every one of their balance patches, every addition of new content, every single change or tweak they make to the game, is a litigation risk and probably needs to be run through legal. This is probably not a good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MJ12 said:

Actually, yes? I'm a lawyer. I have been a lawyer for years.

It has always been possible to create 'digital property' by giving players ownership rights of the things in a game account. The reason it hasn't been done isn't because of a lack of technology. It's because when you give players 'ownership' of their accounts and the things on their accounts, you give players property rights to those things, and that's just a massive legal mess that exposes you to litigation risk. This is why games make it absolutely clear that they have total control over your account and access, and things you buy for ingame currency have zero official resale value.

Because this way, you can't get sued. Whereas if they did it the way you think they should, they're exposing themselves to a ludicrous amount of liability risk. Suddenly every one of their balance patches, every addition of new content, every single change or tweak they make to the game, is a litigation risk and probably needs to be run through legal. This is probably not a good idea.

Exactly, and as for the risks far outside of Warframe, I won't even go there!

Just because one game company is doing it doesn't make it a good idea. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you should do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MJ12 said:

Actually, yes? I'm a lawyer. I have been a lawyer for years.

It has always been possible to create 'digital property' by giving players ownership rights of the things in a game account. The reason it hasn't been done isn't because of a lack of technology. It's because when you give players 'ownership' of their accounts and the things on their accounts, you give players property rights to those things, and that's just a massive legal mess that exposes you to litigation risk. This is why games make it absolutely clear that they have total control over your account and access, and things you buy for ingame currency have zero official resale value.

Because this way, you can't get sued. Whereas if they did it the way you think they should, they're exposing themselves to a ludicrous amount of liability risk. Suddenly every one of their balance patches, every addition of new content, every single change or tweak they make to the game, is a litigation risk and probably needs to be run through legal. This is probably not a good idea.

giphy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, sustainingsquid said:

Exactly, and as for the risks far outside of Warframe, I won't even go there!

Just because one game company is doing it doesn't make it a good idea. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you should do it.

I read the article the OP linked-it said that Ubi had a bunch of guys whose sole role is bouncing crazy ideas off the wall and seeing what sticks looking at blockchain for reasons, and it implied those reasons were going 'beyond' creating digital tokens for real items. It's possible that what they're trying to do is reduce server load for MMOs by offloading things to P2P networks, allow for multiplayer save games by making it so that you can save a gamestate without worries that the game might be edited, or some other reason completely unrelated to digital property rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MJ12 said:

Actually, yes? I'm a lawyer. I have been a lawyer for years.

It has always been possible to create 'digital property' by giving players ownership rights of the things in a game account. The reason it hasn't been done isn't because of a lack of technology. It's because when you give players 'ownership' of their accounts and the things on their accounts, you give players property rights to those things, and that's just a massive legal mess that exposes you to litigation risk. This is why games make it absolutely clear that they have total control over your account and access, and things you buy for ingame currency have zero official resale value.

Because this way, you can't get sued. Whereas if they did it the way you think they should, they're exposing themselves to a ludicrous amount of liability risk. Suddenly every one of their balance patches, every addition of new content, every single change or tweak they make to the game, is a litigation risk and probably needs to be run through legal. This is probably not a good idea.

Being a lawyer doesn't necessarily make you an authority in the space of blockchain technology in gaming and the related regulatory & legal frameworks. You could be an ambulance chaser for all I know.

But all this irrelevant.  My original post is a feature request presented in the form of a question to DE, not a referendum on some new legislation. Its a feature request, for DE to take into consideration.  And if not in Warframe... then some other game DE may develop in the future. Clearly, the gaming industry has an interest in it as evidenced by the article I linked, so its not as ludicrous an idea as you make it out to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ApprenticeNoob said:

Being a lawyer doesn't necessarily make you an authority in the space of blockchain technology in gaming and the related regulatory & legal frameworks. You could be an ambulance chaser for all I know.

But all this irrelevant.  My original post is a feature request presented in the form of a question to DE, not a referendum on some new legislation. Its a feature request, for DE to take into consideration.  And if not in Warframe... then some other game DE may develop in the future. Clearly, the gaming industry has an interest in it as evidenced by the article I linked, so its not as ludicrous an idea as you make it out to be.

It does mean I have more of an understanding of common-law considerations than you do, and the common law creates enough problems already even before you factor in what giving people digital property rights might mean when you bring regulatory agencies into the question. You are asking DE to implement a feature with massive legal ramifications-if you want to do that, it behooves you, as the person suggesting the feature, to present a fair analysis of the risks and benefits of the feature before demanding it be put in, and you absolutely do not show any indication that you are willing, or even capable, of doing that.

And as to common law ramifications: Imagine DE implements your 'feature request' and then puts out Melee 3.0 or whatever. Unfortunately, because of certain balance decisions in Melee 3.0, melee weapons become weaker, and melee rivens therefore become cheaper. Suddenly people have lost millions of dollars in real value and Edelson is going around setting up a class action to sue DE for it, arguing that their balance patch was negligently implemented and therefore DE's negligence has destroyed millions of dollars worth of property. Even if DE wins that case, it's probably going to cost them millions of dollars to defend.

And this is again, ignoring regulatory issues, and just going on common law concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MJ12 said:

I read the article the OP linked-it said that Ubi had a bunch of guys whose sole role is bouncing crazy ideas off the wall and seeing what sticks looking at blockchain for reasons, and it implied those reasons were going 'beyond' creating digital tokens for real items. It's possible that what they're trying to do is reduce server load for MMOs by offloading things to P2P networks, allow for multiplayer save games by making it so that you can save a gamestate without worries that the game might be edited, or some other reason completely unrelated to digital property rights.

Well, there is already Crypto Kitties, but that is a ridiculous digital collectable game to compare to Warframe in this discussion.

However, you make a good point about what its use case might be.  Maybe I should edit my original post to be more broad of how blockchain technology might be used to improve the functionality or performance of the game and/or monetize it.  I searched the forums to see if anyone else had already submitted a similar FRQ, and found a post that suggested blockchain could be used to improve certain aspects of Warframe such as load times, synchronization, AI glitches, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MJ12 said:

It does mean I have more of an understanding of common-law considerations than you do, and the common law creates enough problems already even before you factor in what giving people digital property rights might mean when you bring regulatory agencies into the question. You are asking DE to implement a feature with massive legal ramifications-if you want to do that, it behooves you, as the person suggesting the feature, to present a fair analysis of the risks and benefits of the feature before demanding it be put in, and you absolutely do not show any indication that you are willing, or even capable, of doing that.

And as to common law ramifications: Imagine DE implements your 'feature request' and then puts out Melee 3.0 or whatever. Unfortunately, because of certain balance decisions in Melee 3.0, melee weapons become weaker, and melee rivens therefore become cheaper. Suddenly people have lost millions of dollars in real value and Edelson is going around setting up a class action to sue DE for it, arguing that their balance patch was negligently implemented and therefore DE's negligence has destroyed millions of dollars worth of property. Even if DE wins that case, it's probably going to cost them millions of dollars to defend.

And this is again, ignoring regulatory issues, and just going on common law concerns.

Where did I demand DE to do anything?  It was a feature request framed in the form of a question for consideration, and even left it open for discussion.

You're probably already reading my other response, where I already came to the conclusion of broadening the scope of the FRQ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MJ12 said:

It does mean I have more of an understanding of common-law considerations than you do, and the common law creates enough problems already even before you factor in what giving people digital property rights might mean when you bring regulatory agencies into the question. You are asking DE to implement a feature with massive legal ramifications-if you want to do that, it behooves you, as the person suggesting the feature, to present a fair analysis of the risks and benefits of the feature before demanding it be put in, and you absolutely do not show any indication that you are willing, or even capable, of doing that.

And as to common law ramifications: Imagine DE implements your 'feature request' and then puts out Melee 3.0 or whatever. Unfortunately, because of certain balance decisions in Melee 3.0, melee weapons become weaker, and melee rivens therefore become cheaper. Suddenly people have lost millions of dollars in real value and Edelson is going around setting up a class action to sue DE for it, arguing that their balance patch was negligently implemented and therefore DE's negligence has destroyed millions of dollars worth of property. Even if DE wins that case, it's probably going to cost them millions of dollars to defend.

And this is again, ignoring regulatory issues, and just going on common law concerns.

And for being a lawyer you sure do jump to conclusions awfully fast, and promote yourself to judge...lol.  You assumed I wasn't open.  I only responded to you in the same tone in which you opened with...argumentative.  Clearly the question in the original post should have given an indication my openness to consider different ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, COATTOQUALUNQUE said:

just dont do dumb S#&$ like the affinity exploit that recently happened and de will never ever touch anything you bought with money or earned playing is that simple

Who said anything about exploits??? I don't even know what you're talking about, and even if I did I am probably a victim of all kinds of exploits because I don't pay any attention to them, use them, counter them, consider them.... you get the point. Exploits are for sissy momma's boys who pretend to be god.  You sure do know a lot about them though....hummm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, sustainingsquid said:

In addition, locking down Warframes to whoever pays the most money would be really unsustainable for a player base. You really haven't thought this through, have you?

Where did I say lock it down? I am not suggesting to implement it in such a way as to change its core gameplay mechanics or free to play model, or anything else about it that I love every bit as much you or any other fan of the game.  I haven't dumped money into this game because it sucks,... even in the early days when it didn't have the polish that it has now. You misunderstand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, ApprenticeNoob said:

And for being a lawyer you sure do jump to conclusions awfully fast, and promote yourself to judge...lol.  You assumed I wasn't open.  I only responded to you in the same tone in which you opened with...argumentative.  Clearly the question in the original post should have given an indication my openness to consider different ideas.

Man what? You claim you are open to considering different ideas, yet when people go and tell you why your idea has major problems, your response has been to insult them both personally and professionally while showing condescension to everyone who has discussed the problems with your feature request.

That doesn't show any "openness to consider different ideas."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MJ12 said:

Man what? You claim you are open to considering different ideas, yet when people go and tell you why your idea has major problems, your response has been to insult them both personally and professionally while showing condescension to everyone who has discussed the problems with your feature request.

That doesn't show any "openness to consider different ideas."

Where did I do that? I responded in kind to the tone of the respondents.

MJ12 said 

This is a ludicrously bad idea

Definition
adjective
so foolish, unreasonable, or out of place as to be amusing; ridiculous.

So basically stupid is what you said.

COATTOQUALUNQUE said

"just dont do dumb S#&&#036"

MJ12 said 

before demanding it be put in, and you absolutely do not show any indication that you are willing, or even capable, of doing that.

Now that last one was all kinds of messed up as I was already considering your point.  You had already judged me, and it was completely false.  And I followed through anyway and edited my original post.

So tell me again where I insulted someone that didn't start with that verbiage to begin with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ApprenticeNoob said:

Where did I do that? I responded in kind to the tone of the respondents.

MJ12 said 

This is a ludicrously bad idea

Definition
adjective
so foolish, unreasonable, or out of place as to be amusing; ridiculous.

So basically stupid is what you said.

COATTOQUALUNQUE said

"just dont do dumb S#&&#036"

MJ12 said 

before demanding it be put in, and you absolutely do not show any indication that you are willing, or even capable, of doing that.

Now that last one was all kinds of messed up as I was already considering your point.  You had already judged me, and it was completely false.  And I followed through anyway and edited my original post.

So tell me again where I insulted someone that didn't start with that verbiage to begin with?

Inb4 lock for derailment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...