Focus on sales instead of game fun: NFTs will tighten the problem

It has always been a balance act. Games should especially have fun, clear. But games also need to feed their developers, pay bills and so on. And even if a studio wants to do everything that a game is doing as much fun as possible, there are other factors that can affect the quality of a game, such as the limits of hardware, team size, know-how or The existing budget.

If a developer out of the given possibilities then the maximum game fun out, but there is a few corners and edges, because, for example, small studio, no money left, etc., then that's absolutely fine in my view. Fine cut can be patched for need. The main thing is the basis and the core gameplay mechanics make mood!

The evil capitalism

However, it is not enough for a long time to pay the developers fair with the sale of games and at best even to finance the next project. Capitalism stands for profit maximization. The big publishers must keep their shareholders in a mood by increasing the most important key figures from the financial quarter to the financial quarter. Triple-A games with a clear focus on the single player story experience have rarely become. Source: PC Games Hardware With normal buy2play games (once buy, play once, in the worst case (from the point of view of the provider) resell), as it gave it earlier, that's not possible. Games-AS-A service is the new thing. And actually pretty old. (Online) games that players should bind in themselves in the long term, finally gives it a long time. And just as long as there are payment models designed to pull the players from their pockets again and again.

Money — instead of game design

I personally have no problem with it. This is problematic for me only, as soon as the payment model has a negative impact on the fun, and unfortunately the developers and publishers build more and more systems and possibilities for money, in which exactly that is the case.

Let's just take all the games with an In game shop. As soon as you can buy armor and weapon skins or mounts and companions for money, all rewards that have to be created will automatically be developed. That alone is already a heavy design error (from the point of view of the game fun police). Even worse, if the repayable armor, weapons and Co. are deliberately boring, while the designers for the shop fire a single creative firework — is not true, black desert? If you can buy yourself in a role-play the prettiest armor and weapons only in the shop, what's wrong. Source: Pearl Abyss The same applies if developers are artificially small to sell inventory to sell inventory extensions, or if the level phase is incredibly tough, you can buy in the shop, but XP boost for money can buy. These are just a few of many possible examples.

Almost worse, developers and publishers are always fastest, how far they can go, and not only in Free2Play games, but also in full price games. In 2017, I had already written his own column:

Loot boxes and microtransactions in full price games — a trend that makes worries

The topic Loot boxen became and is luckily not only fought by players. There's now the next potential source for profit maxims at the expense of players: Krypton Gaming!

Stupid buys well

Already now is clear: Most Big Players in the industry can not afford to leave the topic Krypto-Gaming left. This is too much money in the area. Already there are several young companies from the Games industry, which have reached the status Unicorn because they are worth more than a billion US dollar after a short time (source). Some probably somewhat a number rotor is dreaming about how much coal Activision, Ubisoft, EA and how they can generate all with their respective means as soon as the foundation is built.

And Ubisoft has not lost long and with Quartz published a crypto platform, which should allow for the first time to buy and resell In game items with NFT status from Triple-A games. And as at Free2Play, Loot boxen and Co., those responsible wishes to sell us players again with their PR languages ​​for stupid. Of independence and full ability to act is speech, from a great connection to the worlds we love, as it never gave. The new NFT platform Quartz from Ubisoft encourages much criticism. Source: Ubisoft If you look closely, it recognizes that Ubisoft — offers as expected only a crypto dog pack. In principle, you have only two things from the purchase of an Ubisoft digits: 1) The items are sold in limited numbers and on your subject is a unique serial number. In addition, your name is recorded as a buyer on the blockchain. 2) You can sell the item to other players through the Ubisoft platform.

But really belongs to the NFT, however, as the numerous restrictions show that Ubisoft throws the buyers in front of the feet. In addition, the publisher wants, as soon as the used blockchain technology Bezos (and thus the NFTs), does not know about liability and responsibility. Support In the case of errors or cultivated reverse reclosures of the sale, you should not expect.

We have it in hand

We all should tell us: that could be the beginning! When publishers and developers notice that there is a large market for these exclusive In game items, they will begin to design their products reinforced around NFTs. And as Activision, EA and Co. may also have no interest in that their In game content is actually involved in our possessions, stored decentralized and so on, we expect us only to make fungus packs.

However, we can defend ourselves that the Loot boxes have shown. By criticizing this development whenever possible, buy no NFTs from playing and games that offer NFTs, if possible, completely boycott.

The links marked are affiliate links. Affiliate links are no ads, as we are independent in the search and selection of the presented products. For product sales we receive a small commission, with which we partially finance the free content of the website.