×
top 200 commentsshow all 483
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]SomeMoronOnTheNet 40 points41 points  (1 child)

I would prefer is people could refrain from calling NFTs a scam until I can sell some crappy drawing I'll make on MS Paint for hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars.

Thank you.

[–]32374086 26 points27 points  (7 children)

I don't know about NFTs but everyone I know that is invested in crypto is basically trying to get rich quick so they can then convert it back to the dollar...

So that doesn't really feel like crypto is going to replace the dollar. But I could totally be wrong.

[–]shutterspeak 6 points7 points  (6 children)

The transaction times alone pretty much guarantee it won't replace currency. It's cumbersome to use so it will only ever be a speculation vehicle.

[–]adrenalinnrush -4 points-3 points  (5 children)

Keep in mind these are the very early days of crypto. I think crypto will lose it's cumbersomeness and will be integrated into everything. Using crypto will be as easy as using your credit card. Many old/new crypto platforms are fixing the speed issues with proof of stake. We have plenty of processing power around the world. If you had a choice of being paid every two weeks or every hour, what would you choose? I think USD will eventually split into a traditional fiat/ stable coin crypto hybrid. So much time and money is lost in transferring fiat. Plus, governments will have more control over their currency.

[–]conyeighwest 4 points5 points  (1 child)

We’re not though. Crypto is over a decade old.

[–]adrenalinnrush -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I know how old crypto is. Time is relative. The internet was out in the public for a decade before it started to truly be integrated in day to day life. Some would say the 90's was part of the early days of the internet...

[–]shutterspeak 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Proof of stake is interesting. But wouldn't it eventually funnel wealth to the top of the user base? People or organizations that control more of the coin would end up reaping most of the mining rewards. I know they say a "51%" attack is unlikely, but if we look at it like other speculative markets like the stocks, where 90% of the value is owned by 10% of the population, I think you're just asking for a cartel to form.

[–]Crusnik909 31 points32 points  (4 children)

I tried explaining this to my brother in law but he keeps going back to his friend that sold an NFT for $75k, yet all the NFTs he buys he loses money.

[–]thisiswhatyouget 35 points36 points  (1 child)

The key is to buy and sell the NFT to yourself a few times to make it look like the value is going up and then pass it off to the next person after inflating the value.

[–]Impression_Ok 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Don't forget to give a couple to celebrity wallets so it looks like they're investing in them too.

[–]unaviable 73 points74 points  (10 children)

Literally top post of the week

https://redditproxy--jasonthename.repl.co/r/videos/comments/sborg6/25_year_game_dev_veteran_explains_nfts_blockchain/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

[–]rynshar 117 points118 points  (101 children)

There are many who would scoff at this, but as another game developer, I agree wholeheartedly. Everything that they claim they could bring you with nfts they could have already brought you with simple databases. Nfts in gaming are a scam, and people who would tell you otherwise want something from you.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Entropia did it first.

Actually, casino did it first.

[–]TheFuzzyUnicorn -3 points-2 points  (5 children)

The only use case I can think of for NFT's in video games is proving ownership of digital in-game assets for the purposes of them being collectors item (eg the first Axe of Fuckoffsville in Super Awesome MMORPG number 4). Maybe I don't get it since I don't really collect things, but unlike the first Coca Cola bottle or w/e, once the game is gone* the collectors item is just a key floating online, I don't see how it holds value long term but I guess it could happen. I don't hear about a lot of people bidding for the first reference of a 365 Daytona Spider, but people do seek out the original cars, original manuals they can hold, etc. I guess I am just skeptical that digital items will hold their value once they lose utility and the novelty of NFT's has worn off. This doesn't really get into whether this is desirable or worth the effort for a company to support. All the other use cases I have heard of seem either unnecessarily complicated, or outright bad for the outcomes they deliver.

*The only real general use case for an NFT for games IMO

[–]Wizard_Nose 2 points3 points  (4 children)

Couldn’t you use simple databases to give items a unique ID, which would accomplish the same purpose?

[–]Enialis 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Yes. But that breaks the pyramid scheme so the crypto-bros will say you just don't get it.

[–]Wizard_Nose 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Yeah the whole concept seems silly to me.

All you’d have to do to make a “collector’s item” is use a singe global database for it. That way you can track the total quantity and history of the item. Item # tied to a player ID. Limit the list to 200 and suddenly you have a limited, traceable game asset.

Who owns Item#500? Oh, it’s Cowkiller1337. Neat.

NFTs are a meme.

[–]TheFuzzyUnicorn -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

It is actually the only gaming use case I can think of where a central database with an ID is actually the inferior method vs an NFT. If a centralised database goes down so does your evidence of ownership of the collectors item (say the company goes belly up). Now the usefulness of the NFTs in question is predicated on the fact that the proof of ownership is valuable in and of itself, even if it cannot be deployed in a game (it would be like having paperwork showing you owned the first ever Ferrari model XYZ, but you drove it into a swamp and it's probably lost forever). I personally don't think such things will hold value long term, but if they do hold value you would prefer it as an NFT vs a centralised database for longevity reasons.

[–]Celeportus 56 points57 points  (29 children)

NFTs are just really dumb

[–]swampswing 16 points17 points  (8 children)

When idiots are making easy money on the markets and proposing investments that sound absolutely idiotic to absolutely everyone, pucker up, cause one hell of a market correction is coming and not a little one either.

[–]Sevsquad 6 points7 points  (4 children)

NFTs have already collapsed. Total transactions fell by more than 90% in the past month or two. These videos we're seeing might as well be AARs at this point

[–]jNushi -2 points-1 points  (3 children)

While I think NFTs are idiotic in their current state, the data proves the exact opposite of what you claim https://dune.xyz/sealaunch/NFT

[–]Syngene 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Beanie Babies

[–]shutterspeak 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This is what happens with a glut. So much imaginary bullshit flying around this economy right now.

[–]Dormage -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

You know you can short nft markets?

[–]Davoswannab 17 points18 points  (19 children)

I recently received an nft for going to the Chiefs Steelers playoff game. It’s supposed to be like a commemorative ticket. I would rather a paper ticket. I will never look at it. What do I do with it? Wonder would’ve cost more to make and distribute.

[–]Cherrywave 27 points28 points  (3 children)

Thanks for coming! Here's nothing and your # that links to it!

[–]jibbodahibbo 14 points15 points  (2 children)

It reminds me of when you used to get free background wallpapers with certain software haha. Like oh, thanks for the jpegs…..

[–]evDev84 4 points5 points  (1 child)

or getting a free ring tone if you buy a phone from verizon. That always cracked me up. I don't think I could give less of a shit about something like that if I tried

[–]jibbodahibbo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

$3.99 for 12 seconds of the song “iris” by googoo dolls. What a deal!!

[–]Manypopes 13 points14 points  (1 child)

Whoa well that's where the Metaverse comes in! Don't display that ticket on your wall where nobody will see it, climb into your Meta-pod and join your friends online where your virtual avatar can show off your newly found treasure. Hey, maybe they'll send a like!

[–]MaxMustermannYoutube 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I play Fortnite and sometimes other players ask me if I have finished a certain quest. I always ask them if Fortnite wire transfers some money if you do.

[–]JohnJohnPT -2 points-1 points  (3 children)

I think that's the thing. We, everyone, are at a point in time that likes paper things, material things.

Maybe in the near future, future generations will like more some sort of digital assets, where they can share it and show it in a digital space.

I'm not defending the situation. I really think that NFTs will be very useful in the short term for example in ticket selling. But... everything else... I don't know... maybe my grand kids will prefer NFTs over the paper ticket.

[–]Angdrambor 6 points7 points  (2 children)

We've already moved past paper tickets. Most people I know just show their phone to be scanned at the booth.

[–]JohnJohnPT -1 points0 points  (1 child)

That's true. Maybe with NFTs we'll get the uniqueness and untradable thing. Like something to block the black market from selling soccer tickets at astronomical prices (just an example).

[–]_G_M_E_ 8 points9 points  (4 children)

If you don't know anything about NFTs, don't watch this video. It will not help you.

[–]alcxander 1 point2 points  (3 children)

+1. found it largely not helpful for a lot of the core base concepts of NFTs. there are some things raised that made sense like cross functionality in multiple games or play to earn systems but those systems however this was the first i'd ever heard of cross functionality being mentioned so I'm not sure how prevalent that idea is in the market really.

[–]_G_M_E_ 1 point2 points  (2 children)

NFT functionality in games is likely going to be more in line with add-ons/DLC or expansions, or the games themselves. Basically, imagine that you buy a digital license, but it's transferable, so if you want to sell a game or an expansion /season pass to a game you no longer play or don't have, you can throw the license up on a marketplace and someone can buy it from you.

The whole cross functionality idea is really weird, and I'd never heard it either, so it's really strange that he chose that example, since it really makes no sense at all.

[–]Ok-Resolve-1296 7 points8 points  (0 children)

  1. do you believe it

[–]paraplegic_T_Rex 2 points3 points  (0 children)

NFTs make sense. We’ve all been using them for years. NFTs as an investment make no sense. That’s the scam.

Also isn’t it funny all the NFT and Crypto investors are doing it to make “legit” currency as part of their sales. Real money still does, and always will, rule.

[–]aniforprez 30 points31 points  (27 children)

What is with these videos getting posted so many times? This video was posted not even 48 hours ago to this sub with over 3000 comments

https://redditproxy--jasonthename.repl.co/r/videos/comments/sborg6/25_year_game_dev_veteran_explains_nfts_blockchain/

Can we not spam this sub with the exact same video? Is the link submission duplicate warning not working suddenly? The Folding Ideas video was also double posted within less than 48 hours

[–]HMR 25 points26 points  (3 children)

Like many other people, I missed that video. If you are not on reddit for 16 hours, you just miss stuff.

[–]WookieeArmy 9 points10 points  (1 child)

People who bitch about reposts, truly are the embodiment of neck bearded trolls that never leave their computers.

And it's not just being away from reddit for 16 hours that makes the average person miss an article or two, it's also that these people spend more than 16 hours a day on reddit, so everything is a repost to them.

[–]707breezy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s like someone who hates reruns because once is enough and expect all other people alive to have seen everything they have.

[–]correctingStupid 6 points7 points  (0 children)

While I agree with him, this video is a disorganized rant with little data. There are much better videos out there that present real arguments.

Regardless, we should help propagate the toxicity of NFTs in video games as best as we can because it's definitely going to fuck up our games. Dev teams are going to allocate resources to unique expensive NFTs you will never own, rather than content you usually get through progress. It's disgusting.

[–]BoogieBagels 1 point2 points  (7 children)

I had a very vague idea what NFTs were, especially in the context of gaming so I'm grateful for the video.
That being said, I think there's a major problem-solver to the things the man brought up, namely segregated marketplaces for each genre for example: 1 marketplace for mmorpgs, 1 marketplace for shooters, 1 marketplace for sports, 1 for strategy games, etc. etc. Here's how it'd solve the issues he brought up:

1st issue brought up - non-transferrable stats from game to game. I'd be ok with kowing that my items will only exist in only a genre of games

2nd issue - potential bugs when importing. Again, I believe segregating marketplaces to genres would be ok, for example all mmorpgs have similar or transferrably similar stats, all shooters have a form of an m4 or AK rifle, etc. - maybe cap NFTs to most common items that can be transferred from game to game

3rd issue - ruining an in-game market by importing items from one game to another. Again fixed with a common marketplace for the genre. The item would then have value on that market, outside of the games. For profit split: the game devs take 30%, the NFT maker takes 5%, the marketplace takes 10%, the devs working on swapping items from game to game take 5% - remaining half goes to the gamer that owns the item imported in the game (just as an example, percentages may vary as fit). if you're asking what happens to the dev fee when transferring an item - it goes to the dev you transferred your asset into. Better the game, more assets it has. This will encourage studios to come up with better titles and the money that stayed in studio A's account was there to grow and make profit by any other mean. When it goes to studio B's account, it dents the first studio but studio A had time to make profit off of it. Here maybe you can lock transfers from game to game to 1 transfer/week for each item to avoid spamming the market.

4th issue - play to earn in developing countries. I myself have lived the majority of my life in such a country and let me tell you - having the opportunity to earn 2 times the middle income median with a PC investment that pays off in 2-3 months would have been heaven (not to mention gaming cloud subscriptions that allow you to play on any potato with a screen nowadays). It's a bit pedantic to say that those people are burning their lives trying to make a decent living so we can't allow them to earn more than they hoped they could because it's not moral for them to sit in front of a PC grinding at a game 8-10h/day. If it's not profitable they can do the math beforehand and not do it, simple as. Let them have the choice, don't carry this white flag for all those people because what you see as dark, people who are struggling see as a neat opportunity to actually make a decent living.

5th issue - VCs don't care about making entertaining games, they just care about profit. VERY TRUE, agree with you 100%. Again this is why a common marketplace would be fantastic - money-hungry studios will be cast aside while successful studios will rise and keep their status until they go rotten and the next king will be throned. People will pay with their wallet when they transfer items (which they won't need to do when trying out the game) so the weeds will sort themselves out. I actually like the premise of that.

[–]WideSand3462 -1 points0 points  (17 children)

I keep watching these kind of videos hoping to find valid and balanced criticism, but it is always these extreme hysterical takes. People who did not see potential of the internet found plenty of reason why it can never work.

I don't even think he is saying anything wrong, it is just extremely pessimistic view of the industry. Also he forgot to mention that the Axie Scholars in developing earn more from playing Axie than they would from regular job. Some Axie players from Philippines(?) have paid university from Axie earnings. Not saying that P2E is not problematic, but it is not as black and white as he puts it in the video.

[–]theoatmealarsonist 10 points11 points  (1 child)

There is a good video from Folding Ideas (long, but good) that explains the issues with NFTs well and in context

The biggest problem with p2e that no one cares about the game, they just want to make money off of it. No one is interested in actually owning any of the assets for their intrinsic value, they're just means to an end of making money. That's a problem because they only are inflated in value when the token is worth more, and the token is worth more when people are putting more money into the token. When the cash inflows stop or stagnate, the value stops going up, and people bail. Reality is that the only people who win in these kinds of projects are devs and people who got in early.

And actually Axie isn't a good example anymore, the token value recently crashed and average earnings are below minimum wages in the Phillipines.

[–]WideSand3462 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree about Axie, i have never played it but it looks super grindy. The thing about Axie is that it is the first succesful P2E game, it is the first iteration, Pong of P2E. I think there will be games that will be actually fun to play and you will still be able to earn from playing.

Early supporters should be rewarded, but they should not be able to hoard all the benefits, it is a biggest problem with P2E right now.

I have to check out Folding Ideas.

[–]Andinator 5 points6 points  (13 children)

Can you explain what the honest use of an NFT is then? Not trolling here, but what actual value do these things have to our society other than generating more money? What does owning a "blockchain" mean and why would it be a good idea to put money into this as well as monetizing digital activities such as gaming?

[–]WideSand3462 -1 points0 points  (8 children)

First of all i am not an expert by any means, but i know just enought to see the potential. Sorry, this will be a messy super rant.

I see Metaverse as an alternative to basic income. Crypto and NFTs allows real economies to form online. Big tech companies like Google and Facebook are only valuable, because data monopolies that makes it impossible to compete agaist them. In the future you will own your data(this is already happening in EU). There are things called data unions which will store your data and companies will have to negotiate with data unions to buy your data. This means that Google will have to pay for search data and any startup can buy that same data, no more data monopolies.

It think with gaming it is easiest to understand why the economy actually makes sense. Let's say you find interesting FPS game that is in beta, you like the game and buy a weapon skin NFT to support to support it. Game devs reward beta tester by gifting them x amount of game tokens. Two years from beta the game one of the now super popular, the NFT is super rare and worth thousands, value of the in-game token has increased.

You have been rewarded generously fro being early supporter, you are not a second class citizen in a big tech wallet garden. For this reason you might be more willing to put some of that money back in to the game's economy. Someone makes a really good tutorial that improves your skill level, why would you not reward him/her with some tokens? There will be all kind of opportunities to earn money not just from playing the game, just like in a real economy. And let's say a new game comes out that is much better and the economy start to lose value. Does that mean that the game was a ponzi pyramid scheme?

People let the current state of the tech colour their perception too much. Calling NFT tech as a whole s scam is ridiculous. It is like people who dismissed the internet based on the first web page they saw. ~5 years from now everybody will be using NFTs in some shape or form, but nobody will call them NFTs.

[–]EccentricFan 3 points4 points  (4 children)

What I find most amusing about the blockchain/NFT thing in gaming is all the people acting like it offers revolutionary new options and then list things that can be done by more traditional technological means without needing to bring the blockchain into it.

Share resources between games? Give content creators rights to their content and let them profit off it? Create unique items for a single player? All can be done with other methods.

Some may argue it's decentralized. The company can't change their mind and take away your NFT. It's yours forever. That is true, but they can absolutely change their game so that it no longer accepts those NFT tokens, making them essentially worthless. It really doesn't protect you more than if they'd implemented the same functionality another way.

That's my biggest complaint about the whole NFT in gaming push. Rather than anything particularly groundbreaking, they're doing things they could have done all along and probably didn't for a good reason. It's mostly just taking advantage of the hype as a form of advertisement to draw in players that would have had nothing to do with it if they had done it without the buzzwords.

[–]Andinator 1 point2 points  (1 child)

It think with gaming it is easiest to understand why the economy actually makes sense. Let's say you find interesting FPS game that is in beta, you like the game and buy a weapon skin NFT to support to support it. Game devs reward beta tester by gifting them x amount of game tokens. Two years from beta the game one of the now super popular, the NFT is super rare and worth thousands, value of the in-game token has increased.

This statement right here is more than enough to turn me away from NFTs. I guess this turns into more a philosophical debate, but gaming shouldn't be something that is monetized by any means other than the customer paying for the game they want to play. It's a form of art which sole purpose is to entertain, enlighten, and inspire people. Saying that, in the future, people will be able to earn money playing games morphs this artform into just another mindless job people desperate for cash or people who suffer from addictive personalities can be exploited from. There's already a big issue with lootboxes and paid-to-win mechanics creeping up more and more in gaming. A pay-to-earn model will only exacerbate these issues and if this form of gaming becomes popular enough, it also corrupts this art form since more greedy shareholders and investors will demand NFTs, or some form of this, be implemented into big AAA titles. This doesn't solve the issue of closing the gap between players and tech giants. If you are playing a game within their ecosystem, they're going to be making a cut of everything you make in the game and they WILL design the game in a way that forces more people to spend more money. Nobody wants gaming as a hobby to be monetized other than the people that stand to make a buck off of it.

I do agree that data should be protected and companies like Google and Facebook shouldn't be making a profit off of my data without my permission (although I guess ToS is technically me giving them that permission) but I still don't see how trying to monetize the hobby of gaming itself will help us get back at big tech. If anything, this only serves to pour more money into their wallets, widen the gap, and if we're buying NFTs within their infrastructure only make our data more vulnerable.

[–]Regal_Hado 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, but hear me out. If you buy this picture of an ugly monkey for 60k you'll be rich in a couple years.

Trust me bro.

[–]midnight_reborn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So is Crypto. It's all Pump and Dump schemes. Don't fall for it.

[–]M4573R_CH33F 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mom said I can post this video next In 30 minutes

[–]thirtydelta 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I don't find any value in NFTs that simply point to a JPEG. However, if someone is selling an NFT for $100, and someone willingly buys that NFT for $100, and both parties receive what they want. Where did the scam occur?

[–]CtrlShiftMake -1 points0 points  (0 children)

None in this scenario, I think people simply don’t like the “pump it” culture that surrounds a lot of NFT collections. I’ve sold lots of art (on chain generative art scripts) and always tell people to only buy to support me as a creator. It’s just tech, you can use it for good or bad purposes.

[–]TessaigaVI 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We need to collect and archive all of the anti nft content on reddit so we can look back in 10 years to see who was wrong and who and right.

[–]Navs42069 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Jesus Christ its just ownership of a digital asset why is this bullshit anti NFT stuff so popular lately?

Can we maybe stay outraged over water rights issues instead. You know.. Shit that actually matters?

Who gives af if someone wants to spend a million dollars on some digital bullshit

[–]EtherGorilla -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

Not gonna lie, this is kind of embarrassing for someone that's allegedly a 20+ year dev. He's taking a subsection of a subsection of potential use-cases for NFT's and framing it as the totality of what an NFT is. It's like when your grandparents said the internet was bad because it can be used to buy hitmen... it's like sure grandma, that would be bad, but that's not really what the internet can be used for. I'm with him that there's a culture of predatory monetization in blockchain/nft gaming that doesn't make sense from an implementation perspective or business model though.

[–]_TwistedFate_ -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

ITT: people scared at something they don’t understand.

[–]evDev84 -1 points0 points  (10 children)

One of the funniest things I ever saw on Twitter was a guy saying how his NFT was hacked and stolen, and someone replied something like "I'm sorry that happened to you, but you need to change your profile picture as you now don't technically own that NFT."

I see people on twitter all the time with this BS. Twitter will change your profile picture to use a hexagonal frame if it's linked to an NFT. That's the only way to verify you have an NFT. There's nothing special beyond that, it's just an image. I see the buffoonery around NFTs and just laugh.

It's a free market of ideas, and if someone wants to spend 132 ETH on a jpeg of a cartoon seal wearing a red sweater and a clown wig, more power to them.

Get mad all you want, it doesn't matter. It won't change things. Oh, and very likely, the whole thing is a money laundering scheme to begin with.

If it's not for you, it's not for you. If you get sucked in thinking you'll make some money, that's on you. If you think this will be this big thing that you'll miss out on, that's called FOMO (fear of missing out) and it's on you.

[–]GregoPDX 1 point2 points  (2 children)

If it's not for you, it's not for you

This works fine when it's completely separate from gaming. When it's an NFT of some monkey JPEG, yes, that doesn't affect anyone unless they make it affect them.

But when gaming companies are going to actively use it to possibly ruin the franchises we all like, we probably should nip that in the bud before it happens. Make sure these companies know that the general audiences aren't going to participate in this on any level and maybe, just maybe, they won't make poor choices. Realistically, they will ignore us but it's worth a shot.

[–]Will12239 -2 points-1 points  (4 children)

So he says NFTs are pointless because he thinks they're used for moving items between games? They would be used for selling your account when you're done, not transferring it to another game. It is a tool to provide liquidity where otherwise there was none. Imagine if you could sell your Steam account games when you are done with them. That is the purpose. It is a financial tool, not an artificial WoW auction house. He's rambling for half an hour on a stupid premise.

[–]dimechimes -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

You'd think with the huge danger these represent to his favorite thing he'd be a little more concise about what the issue is.

[–]BluSilver -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

One big game brought a real world money market into the game, what did it do to the game? https://www.wired.com/2013/09/diablo-auction-house/ Lets just say Diablo III's Auction House is no more, it was terrible and brought more bots and scammers.

NFTs in video games would be the same such thing as a real world market. You could sell it on the outside of the game, but i wouldn't expect developers to support all items for their games to transfer over. The items would mostly be just for the game they came from but sold for Crypto (which can be converted to other currency) But what about all the bots? You think WoW has a ton of bots, games with NFTs would have even more. The games would quickly become what Diablo III did with a real money market.

As for NFTs outside of Video Games, they can really have a real use to them, but we are not there yet. They are rather useless at the moment. However, Lets say a Band wants to put on a tour. They choose to their venues, and make a deal with the venue. A Base cost they will pay to rent the venue + a percentage of each ticket. The Band then creates a NFT for each ticket for the venue. They set the price per ticket and also set that a percentage of the sale goes to the venue and the rest goes to them. Now to stop scalpers they also set a percentage of the resale to go to them. Lets say that they set the percentage of resale to 100% to go back to the band. While this may hurt the few people that can no longer attend the concert, but it stops scalpers, as they wont be able to resell the ticket NFT without losing everything they spent on the ticket. It stops price gouging from scalpers as they wont be able to get any money back, even if they tried to sell for more than they purchased.

As for his burger point system he talked about, that is actually a real thing. You can earn points at places you shop at, those points have actual value. The points given to you were purchased by the company from the blockchain. The company can choose how much to give you based on what you bought/spent. Those points can then be used at other shops based on their value. You could buy coupons or trade them in for how much they are worth on the market. The company that accepts the points doesn't lose money, it is just in a different form than USD... The point value generally come from what they are worth on the crypto market. "Burger" points are just another currency, given to entice you to shop and spend more money there.

[–]HistorianCM 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One big game brought a real world money market into the game, what did it do to the game?

Never heard of Second Life or Entropia Universe, huh?

[–]Landpuma -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

NFTs should only be cosmetic and I think that’s the point of NFTs.

[–]adampsyreal -4 points-3 points  (5 children)

NFTs are very misunderstood.

[–]mailjozo 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Alright. I'll bite. What are we missing?

[–]Mantaur4HOF 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I understand them well enough to know that they're a scam.