Playtron are quietly building up their Linux-based PlaytronOS behind the scenes, and not only have they released their first Alpha but they've pulled in another investor too.
SuiPlay0X1 runs Playtron’s device-agnostic gaming operating system, enabling gamers to play both Web3 and Web2 games across PC and mobile.
GamesBeat have some more details, noting it will have "native Sui blockchain integration via zkLogin and Sui Kiosk SDKs, enabling asset ownership directly connected to a device’s account system for the first time in the gaming industry
What is a web3 game? Something that allows you to grind for NFTs?
In theory it makes it possible for other games to use the same items to make stuff in their games (I doubt this in practice)
I’ve heard this before, but there’s literally nothing preventing games from setting up some shared items on their own without NFTs. Nobody does it because companies want to keep their IP, and worrying about external items would be a nightmare to balance.
NFTs solve like 1% of the problem of sharing items. So much more goes into making them actually work. For example: NFT id 5551337 is owned by the player: now what? How do you figure out what 3d model to render? What actions can you perform? How does it integrate with other systems? All of that is going to have to be custom for every game involved on a per-item basis.
There was an abstract conceptual theory of system agnostic game add-ons. It isn’t… completely inconceivable.
You could work with a relatively prolific engine, like Unreal, and set up a standard character model dummy with designated hard points for attaching accessories and certain default movements. Then any accessory could simply scale to the environment - Master Chef could swing a keyblade while the Elden Ring guy gets to wear Iron Man armor, because these are all “human” models with well-defined structures that could map to the associated equipment. The blockchain becomes a universal registry for these assets that a platform can read from to render the art.
The problem is that nobody ever actually implemented this universal protocol. They all just ran off making jpegs of weird animals and running fake auctions to create the illusion of a secondary market. You had zetabytes of data being processed so some Baked Alaskahole could claim his Kumming Koala was worth $40M.
I don’t even strictly begrudge “the blockchain” as an idea for licensing and data storage (just please don’t ask me to think about who is generating the licenses or storing the data). But it was all vaporware. None of it was anywhere close to being created, much less delivered. People were throwing billions with a b of dollars at entirely empty promises.
Thing is, none of those advantages are real either, compared to a public database and API. Steam’s inventory API already maintains items beyond the lifetime of games, AND you can use items across other games. You can’t manipulate the Inventory of other games but I bet if there was demand (there isn’t) this could be implemented easily.
Web 3 games are simply ponzi schemes hidden behind a super grindy game. As far as I know, none of these games actually produce anything of value from the labor put into them, so the payouts must come from new money entering the scheme.
Yep, they literally cannot work any other way than as a ponzi scheme. Because the people “earning” want to take more money out of the system than they put in, and the company is taking money out as well just to keep the game running and the employees paid, as well as to make a profit. So you need substantially more suckers buying into the system than the money that is being paid out.
Eventually, somebody is gonna be left holding an empty bag.
The big thing I’ve seen for gaming is the idea that you can have tokens not tied to a specific game. Like maybe an achievement gotten in resident evil unlocks a cool skin dead by daylight.
Or you could implement something like Sword Art Onlines’s item/skills system where they attached to a user and not a server, and servers can choose which ones to implement in their version of the game.
Of course its also possible it could be sold second hand, so maybe you think the Christmas skin of a popular character is stupid and will never wear it, but someone else just missed the event. You could sell/gift it to them, because the entitlement is yours to do whatever you want with it. Maybe you just hate the hell out it so much you offer a ton of cash just lock them all up. Idk this part of it just not my jam tbh
But why honor other companies tokens? Hell why honor your old tokens? You make the effort to create assets in your new game, are you going to just give it to a limited number of players who play both game for free, or resell it to all players? If you buy an nft for a game that then gets ignored, was it any different then a DLC, or using the steam market place to trade the item? After all i have read i don’t see where this helps players at all, and for companies, the only benefit i can see is if they pump and dump their players.
Maybe you see your game as spiritual successor to a previous game and want to honor player previous progress or achievements in the previous game.
Maybe you accept third party assets and need some market for those assets, and NFTs can represent a legally binding proof of ownership of that asset.
Maybe you want keep your live service relevent by having your assets transferable among a larger ecosystem of games.
It is very much like the steam market place but unlike steam items you do actually own it, steam can’t legally shut down your account or block you from transferring that ownership after the fact.
But yeah its just a tool no idea what all game makers will want to do with it.
What is a game that brands itself as a web3 game (not a game that just uses blockchain tech but specifically calls itself web3) that isn’t also play to earn.
What is a web3 game? Something that allows you to grind for NFTs?
TF2 hats but on a block chain instead of an inventory system.
Pros:
Cons:
I’ve heard this before, but there’s literally nothing preventing games from setting up some shared items on their own without NFTs. Nobody does it because companies want to keep their IP, and worrying about external items would be a nightmare to balance.
NFTs solve like 1% of the problem of sharing items. So much more goes into making them actually work. For example: NFT id 5551337 is owned by the player: now what? How do you figure out what 3d model to render? What actions can you perform? How does it integrate with other systems? All of that is going to have to be custom for every game involved on a per-item basis.
Yes, like all things block chains do there are obviously alternatives to accomplish the same thing.
Ah but you see, you need the blockchain version in order to be, uh… [checks notes] computationally intensive and bad for the environment…?
There was an abstract conceptual theory of system agnostic game add-ons. It isn’t… completely inconceivable.
You could work with a relatively prolific engine, like Unreal, and set up a standard character model dummy with designated hard points for attaching accessories and certain default movements. Then any accessory could simply scale to the environment - Master Chef could swing a keyblade while the Elden Ring guy gets to wear Iron Man armor, because these are all “human” models with well-defined structures that could map to the associated equipment. The blockchain becomes a universal registry for these assets that a platform can read from to render the art.
The problem is that nobody ever actually implemented this universal protocol. They all just ran off making jpegs of weird animals and running fake auctions to create the illusion of a secondary market. You had zetabytes of data being processed so some Baked Alaskahole could claim his Kumming Koala was worth $40M.
I don’t even strictly begrudge “the blockchain” as an idea for licensing and data storage (just please don’t ask me to think about who is generating the licenses or storing the data). But it was all vaporware. None of it was anywhere close to being created, much less delivered. People were throwing billions with a b of dollars at entirely empty promises.
Collectibles are non-fungible tokens by definition, and blockchain is just a data structure.
I don’t care about collectibles / NFTs, but this is nothing new in the gaming world.
Thing is, none of those advantages are real either, compared to a public database and API. Steam’s inventory API already maintains items beyond the lifetime of games, AND you can use items across other games. You can’t manipulate the Inventory of other games but I bet if there was demand (there isn’t) this could be implemented easily.
Web 3 games are simply ponzi schemes hidden behind a super grindy game. As far as I know, none of these games actually produce anything of value from the labor put into them, so the payouts must come from new money entering the scheme.
Yep, they literally cannot work any other way than as a ponzi scheme. Because the people “earning” want to take more money out of the system than they put in, and the company is taking money out as well just to keep the game running and the employees paid, as well as to make a profit. So you need substantially more suckers buying into the system than the money that is being paid out.
Eventually, somebody is gonna be left holding an empty bag.
To me, the term “Web3 games” sounds like they’re trying to make a knockoff of Cookie Clicker with NFTs.
They are
yes
The big thing I’ve seen for gaming is the idea that you can have tokens not tied to a specific game. Like maybe an achievement gotten in resident evil unlocks a cool skin dead by daylight.
Or you could implement something like Sword Art Onlines’s item/skills system where they attached to a user and not a server, and servers can choose which ones to implement in their version of the game.
Of course its also possible it could be sold second hand, so maybe you think the Christmas skin of a popular character is stupid and will never wear it, but someone else just missed the event. You could sell/gift it to them, because the entitlement is yours to do whatever you want with it. Maybe you just hate the hell out it so much you offer a ton of cash just lock them all up. Idk this part of it just not my jam tbh
But why honor other companies tokens? Hell why honor your old tokens? You make the effort to create assets in your new game, are you going to just give it to a limited number of players who play both game for free, or resell it to all players? If you buy an nft for a game that then gets ignored, was it any different then a DLC, or using the steam market place to trade the item? After all i have read i don’t see where this helps players at all, and for companies, the only benefit i can see is if they pump and dump their players.
Maybe you see your game as spiritual successor to a previous game and want to honor player previous progress or achievements in the previous game.
Maybe you accept third party assets and need some market for those assets, and NFTs can represent a legally binding proof of ownership of that asset.
Maybe you want keep your live service relevent by having your assets transferable among a larger ecosystem of games.
It is very much like the steam market place but unlike steam items you do actually own it, steam can’t legally shut down your account or block you from transferring that ownership after the fact.
But yeah its just a tool no idea what all game makers will want to do with it.
It’s all too common when anti-crypto people don’t understand crypto101.
Then please, enlighten us!
What is a game that brands itself as a web3 game (not a game that just uses blockchain tech but specifically calls itself web3) that isn’t also play to earn.
It’s all too common when anti-phrenology people don’t understand phreno101.