What Is the Risk of NFTs in Gaming?

With the popularity of NFTs expected to rise in 2021, gaming companies are all too keen to join into the blockchain technology pool. Ubisoft Quartz, the company's proprietary NFT system, was introduced. Yosuke Matsuda, the CEO of Square Enix, released an open letter stating his complete support for NFT technology in games. Konami, who already fleeces customers with its pachinko machines, has announced that Castlevania-themed NFTs would be sold to commemorate the franchise's 35th anniversary. It's not just the publishers that are to blame. Peter Molyneux, a con artist posing as a game creator, has plans for NFTs in his games as well.

So, what exactly is the problem? What's so horrible about this?

Because, despite the fact that NFTs were created to assist tiny artists (for additional information, check The Atlantic article), they're just another way for publishers to pinch and dime their customers.

To help create a clearer image, I'll use a fictional setting based on a game that millions of people enjoy: Minecraft.

Let's pretend that Minecraft has NFTs in it. What would it be like if it were to happen? Imagine being greeted with a present when you log in: a personalised, one-of-a-kind block design that you and no one else has. The brown and light green checkered pattern on this block is a touch unsightly. Because the design was chosen at random, and not all blocks are created equal, this is normal. However, because it has a one-of-a-kind serial number, you can be certain that no one else has it, or at least one that is identical to it.

You still don't like the brown and light-green checkered block pattern. So you make the decision to sell it. You go to the game's in-game auction house and sell your block. Nobody believes you since everyone thinks your block is really unattractive. You go to check what everyone is bidding on, disheartened. The most popular item is a block design that is an exact reproduction of Nyan Cat. You have a peek at the most recent offer. Four thousand dollars?! For the sake of a block design?! On a game that might be phased out in the next ten years?!

This hypothetical scenario is only a sloppy illustration of how NFTs in gaming might harm the business, but hopefully you get the concept. You may expect to see in-game economies in every game you buy if NFTs in gaming become more widespread. You could expect to spend $69.99 for it, only to discover that individuals are selling in-game stuff for thousands of dollars in real money (or bitcoin, depending on whatever makes you sicker). Thousands of players don't even play the game; instead, they spend their days buying, flipping, and selling in-game stuff for cash, flooding the servers with bot accounts to guarantee they win all-out bidding wars over the top items. 

You can't even join in to the game due of the bot accounts, so you'll be stuck waiting for hours as you try in vain to play. What about the game? It's not even excellent; it's just a clumsy, bare-bones Skinner Box grindfest that acts as a launching pad for the in-game market. That is the true purpose of the game's release: to allow the publisher to profit from every sale and resale of their worthless digital goods. When they determine that the earnings no longer equal the cost of maintaining servers, they simply shut down the game, and every dollar spent by gamers on their valuable in-game things evaporates into thin fucking air.

Yes, this is the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario game I can imagine. However, this is what the industry's worst want to put out. With the least amount of work, you can make the most money possible.

Fortunately, for the time being, the gaming community as a whole appears to be hostile to NFTs in games. The YouTube video announcing Ubisoft Quartz was so poorly received that it was quickly removed off the site. When Ghost Recon: Breakpoint declared that players would receive an NFT in exchange for an in-game helmet with a unique serial number, the decision was quickly changed. However, this new monetization frontier continues to alarm me. This is a conflict waged in millimetres, the war for fair gaming consumption.

Although there is currently a strong pushback, publishers are astute and deceptive. They are aware of when to strike and when to retreat. They'll push NFTs again, but in a more subdued manner, and I'm afraid that gamers will ultimately fall in, one by one, until this nightmarish vision becomes a reality. Microtransactions were originally reviled by gamers, but they've now become the norm. How long will players fight before allowing NFTs to be used in their games?