36 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2022
    1. Ev.io brought in over 1,300,000 visitors in April alone and has since dropped to ~815,000 users in June with the market downturn. According to these statistics, ev.io is one of the most popular blockchain games that you probably haven’t heard of. It is likely the most popular game in all of crypto, depending on the month.

      Might even be worth addressing the bot situation with other games and how that relates to the user count here as well. Especially if you think there are or aren't ev.io bots.

    1. There will be ways to earn heroes introduced in earlier seasons in future seasons, so everyone will have the opportunity to earn these heroes by playing: this applies to players who start playing in future seasons, and to players who didn’t level previous Battle Passes enough to unlock the hero. You will be able to earn heroes from past seasons through special new challenges, or you can directly acquire them in the shop with Overwatch Coins.

      Guess this could be really bad or good

    2. New heroes will typically come out every alternate season, except for Season One and Two, which will each feature a new hero.

      Does that mean every other battle pass will see a huge drop in purchases? Maybe it would be better to double the time a battle pass is available to allow everyone to earn the new hero for free. Although I guess they want the pressure on here and get people to buy it.

    3. respects the competitive nature of the game

      Is this "respecting the competitive nature of the game" by in theory allowing a few weeks to try and earn the new hero for free?

    4. This focus also means that when a new hero is introduced (beginning with Kiriko), we will delay introducing them into Competitive modes for a few weeks. This will allow us to tune their balance quickly if needed, as well as give players time to experiment with them.

      Boooo.

    5. While Overwatch 2 heroes will each have their own clear strengths and weaknesses, and some heroes will be more effective against others, we believe our game plays better and is more fun with fewer hard counters and a broader range of effective hero picks. A further benefit is having your personal favorite heroes be viable more often. That philosophy will be guiding us moving forward.

      Interesting pivot and I'm curious how this will be taken in the pro scene.

    6. Those of you who complete the season’s Battle Pass can continue to progress through Prestige tiers. Prestige rewards take longer to unlock, but, in Season One, they reward 8 total unique hero titles you can equip on your name cards. You’ll only be able to earn specific Prestige tier titles during the season they are available: for example, you cannot earn Season One titles during Season Two. 

      Interesting to make exclusive post-track rewards but these also seem really lame and easy to make.

    7. We’re especially excited about Mythic skins: an entirely new tier of skins in Overwatch 2. These skins go beyond our existing legendary skins.For our first ever Mythic skin, we've built Genji a highly-customizable Cyber Demon skin that features layers you can mix and match, each containing different color schemes and patterns. We’re planning to include a new Mythic skin in every season’s Battle Pass.

      Seems like they needed a higher priced item to compensate for lack of loot boxes and flat premium season pass cost.

    8. the shop will feature a ‘Just for You’ section with personalized offers based on what you prefer to play and equip in-game, as well as rotating bundles

      This actually sounds more like a way to target sales towards you in a reasonable way.

    9. Overwatch 2 is shifting to a seasonal model where we plan to deliver new content to the game every nine weeks.

      This is clearly how they are looking to generate recurring revenue instead of premium + loot boxes

  2. Aug 2022
  3. whitepaper.welcometonor.com whitepaper.welcometonor.com
    1. Sports are fully monetized while maintaining the “spirit of the game.” Even as the massive economies around professional sports continue to grow, play itself remains free.

      This is no more or less free than free 2 play games though.

    2. It also denies us fairness of play, where winning is determined solely by a player’s skill, not their spending.

      Play and skill are not truly synonymous though. We play as part of skill development but the act of play is not meant to be a skill TEST, its meant to be for skill DEVELOPMENT.

    3. The business of video games assures us a game is “competitive,” then gives any player the chance to cheat through purchase pathways: powerful weapons, stronger armor, better stats.

      Actual competitive games don't do this though...

    4. Modern games insist they are “free,” then flood us with microtransactions: paywalls, purchasable “bonus” content, loot boxes, subscriptions, extra lives.

      They still are free. We have become so entitled that we are upset that a game that they likely paid money to get us to install also has things to sell to people who want them? It's actually not the norm for a F2P game to force you to buy anything. They apply pressure sure but you are also free to just delete the game and know that you didn't have to pay anything, just the 30 seconds it took to download the game.

    1. he problem is that web3 advocates fail to understand what web2 gamers value. We believe the right path forward is to stop assuming, and instead, ask what web2 gamers value in video games.

      This sounds very similar to gamers arguing against F2P, DLC, IAP, etc which continues to this day.

    2. True digital ownership is important because it allows gamers sovereignty over durable, on-chain assets. A few of these ownership-enabled use cases include open economies, provenance, and interoperability.

      I think its important to acknowledge that NFTs aren't ever actually owned by players, they are owned by smart contracts and subject to any code in that smart contract. Players have the right to sign transactions in that smart contract involving NFTs marked as being assigned to their wallet address but its really only an illusion of ownership!

    3. We believe that the current outlook on digital ownership by web3 advocates is flawed. While we do believe there are several beneficial use cases for blockchain in video games, we disagree on how ownership-enabled use cases will play a role in attracting web2 gamers to web3-enabled games

      Keep in mind that your arguments for why its "flawed" also rest on your specific biases just as much as their counter arguments would. You have certain biases towards concepts like "immersion" that aren't truly universal.

    4. Outside of game publishers, web3 is different because there are pockets of standalone communities with NFT collections. These communities desire additional utility for their assets and gaming is a logical step in that direction. Adding NFT avatars within gameplay in a cosmetic manner (similar to Fortnite crossover IP) can work, but it’s not the reason why someone would play a blockchain game in the first place. We would argue this adds more value to the corresponding NFT community, rather than the game itself. 

      I think its worth acknowledging that the desire might be less from "games" and more from metaverse experiences. This is especially relevant when looking at the experiences as part of a community. Fortnite is a great example because it went from being a game to a social experience and psuedo-metaverse. It started having lots of outside world IP and even performers integrating in because the focus was on community and social engagement rather than for the sake of "game play".

    5. ID’s were neat when the community was getting started (e.g. blockchain gaming) but over time, no one cares. The same goes for web3 advocates who believe owning a 1/1 skin from a great esports moment is desired among the majority of players. Listen, if there are 1,000 blue gun skins in the store and one of those is used in a big esports moment, rarely is someone seeking out that 1/1000 skin.

      Mint # still has a pretty high value in NBA Top Shot and other collector communities.

    6. While we agree provenance is a useful feature offered by blockchain, provenance lacks demand from the web2 gaming side.

      Kinda surprised you don't bring up stattrak skins

    7. A common counterargument from web3 advocates is that Steam is a closed economy and restricts users from cashing out to USD. While true, we would argue that CS:GO users increasingly prefer trusted third-party sites like Dmarket and Skinport which not only enable open economies but removes the $1,800 item listing cap from Steam.4

      Also don't forget the other ways to barter such as trading for Steam game keys and Steam Crate Keys.

    8. The auction house directly affected gameplay and changed the psychology around handling assets.

      You also have to acknowledge that a big part of this was Blizzards greed. They purposely nerfed drop rates in the game to force people to use the auction house since they were taking a transaction fee on all trades. They made this very clear when they stripped out the AH and drastically changed drop rates back to more of a normal and people were happy again. So you have to wonder which part made people happier, the drop rate changes or the AH removal??

    9. Players would acquire assets and hold them without utilizing them in-game, defeating the purpose of the asset’s origination in the first place.

      Could you make this same argument about Stones of Jordan or Runes in Diablo 2 for players that collect them just to sell and not to use?

    10. We saw this play out already in Diablo III’s real money auction house. While the auction house seemed like a great idea for users to trade assets, players lost interest in completing content and focused on flipping items.

      The issue isn't so black and white as I personally know people who absolutely loved the ability to craft and flip items. In fact there's a whole growing genre of games around simulating virtual item shops and such. The idea of being an independent merchant, arbitrager or craftsman has a long history going back to BBS door games like Tradewars 2000 (imagine a text based EVE), Ultima Online, etc. Not to mention the fantasies people have about being a day trader.

    11. Muddying this existing mentality with avenues to earn money creates a user base of inauthentic gamers playing for the wrong reasons.

      This argument could also be made related to esports.

    12. What is it? By referencing open economies or liquidity, we are referring to games that enable secondary trading and the liquidation of assets in non-native tokens. This gives users access to free markets when managing their assets.

      Of course both tornado cash and OpenSea policies and other stuff that involves potential for blacklisting has proven that these markets are maybe not so...free.

    13. When assets are on-chain, users can trade the assets with anyone; users don’t have to play the corresponding game or even have it downloaded to take advantage of on-chain assets. If the game shuts down, the assets will remain in your wallet forever.

      This isn't new of course. I still have plenty of Artifact cards sitting around in my Steam wallet...sadness... :(

      What NFTs add to this is the idea that if someone makes a new Artifact game with a new name and not using any of the existing art or other IP infringements, then they could read my NFT wallet to see what cards I have and import those into the new game.

    14. Typically, in web2 games, users buy assets in a game and for the most part, can’t sell them back or trade them. An example of this is buying skins in Valorant because once purchased, you can’t trade those skins.

      CS:GO and TF2 are clearly an exception here which is ironic because Valorant is basically a CS:GO clone.

    15. True digital ownership refers to assets that can be bought, sold, and transferred freely without restriction on the blockchain.

      I'd argue that this is true "possession" to avoid confusing concepts of ownership in physical things that allow concepts like modification and other implicit rights that don't exist in digital "ownership".

    1. On-chain tournament crowdfunding.E.g., on-chain Dota 2 CompendiumE.g., sell an event battle pass which can be leveled with sweat equity and/or tokens -> assets earned from leveling up the battle pass have (i) a price ceiling during the event and (ii) scarcity created post-event

      There have already been some good examples of in-game content crowd funding that totally works just as well if those items are NFTs also. Could perhaps see even more revenue knowing that players would probably try and re-sell the NFT skins of the winning team for a profit!

    2. Interoperability can also break the immersion of games. I won’t go too deep into this, but my general belief is that immersion is driven by fidelity, a compelling narrative, and the ability to enter a flow state in gaming (further discussion here). However, if you transpose assets between games, you quickly unbundle the cohesive, spatial presence of the player such that they no longer feel like the character they are playing as, start losing interest in in-game choices, and ultimately become less emotionally attached to the experience as a whole. 

      This primarily applies to single-player games which honestly aren't the target of interoperability anyways. Generally immersion and fidelity are not primary to social or competitive experiences.

    3. This can take several forms (individually or in combination): replacing in-game assets to fit a new theme, adding new gameplay mechanics, an extension of the base game, etc.

      Don't forget simply modifying data/values such as old RTS games where you could open game files in a text editor and change the attributes of units!

    4. Esports has soared in popularity over the last 20 years.

      Competitive gaming has also basically ALWAYS been around. Esports is more of a marketing/business emergence based on tapping into audiences rather than some new kind of "thing".