Content
@
0 reply
17 recasts
17 reactions
basil
@itsbasil
>blockchains only make sense for maybe 10% of games >no one cares or needs to know you’re building on one >introducing tokens will result in dead on arrival 99% of the time >if your onchain for cosmetics only, you shouldn’t be onchain at all >autonomous worlds & fully onchain games aren’t anywhere close
7 replies
1 recast
13 reactions
Deployer
@deployer
This is an interesting take. What makes the 10% eligible to be onchain? Having spent the last two or so years working on a dungeon crawling game that uses NFTs and onchain data (there's a token) here's what I've got 1. Dungeon maps are rendered using onchain dungeon data showcasing what onchain CC0 licensed open data can look like when used in a composable way 2. All characters are NFTs with base stats and equipment stored onchain. Game characters as NFTs just makes sense imo. 3. Equippable NFT item system. Premium items purchased with hard currency (token) less premium items purchased with in game currency. Something I need to think about more is earned resources as tokens. Ie resources to craft various items are composable and tradable by default.
2 replies
0 recast
5 reactions
basil
@itsbasil
re the 10%… i made it up ✨ but there are just not that many mainstream genres where blockchains add enough value to make sense imo like anima makes sense because it’s an idle time-based mmorpg, tcgs make sense too 1. yes, this is sick & great use case but its too deep for mainstream audience. the day shit like this has zero crypto friction + high fidelity engines will be holy tho 2&3. agree, and anima do this too i was tryna say that purely cosmetic functioning items as a games only onchain system is silly :)
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
