Ubisoft to Continue Exploring NFTs - News
by William D'Angelo , posted on 03 April 2022 / 4,093 Views
Ubisoft earlier this month introduced a new NFT platform called Quartz and will start by adding NFTs to Ghost Recon Breakpoint that include unique in-game cosmetic items.
Ubisoft blockchain technical director Didier Genevois in an interview with Decrypt says they have eard positive and negative feedback about adding NFTs to games. The company plans to continue exploring adding NFTs to its games.
A life-long and avid gamer, William D'Angelo was first introduced to VGChartz in 2007. After years of supporting the site, he was brought on in 2010 as a junior analyst, working his way up to lead analyst in 2012. He has expanded his involvement in the gaming community by producing content on his own YouTube channel and Twitch channel dedicated to gaming Let's Plays and tutorials. You can contact the author at wdangelo@vgchartz.com or on Twitter @TrunksWD.
More Articles
Ubisoft continuing to go down hill.
Your loss. Assassins creed Valhalla is an incredible game.
Agree, Valhalla is even better due to graphics on ps5 and series X. And now all 3 have 60fps so its all great news to me. Updated for free. And people complain about Ubisoft why?
I still don't know what NFT is.
IGIDC.
I was just wondering what NFT is, No Future Trend?
It's stands for "Non-Fungible Token" AkimboCurly explained it pretty well
The blockchain basically is a network which is being used to define and confirm ownership. In crypto it is configured to work as a currency. For NFT's, it's configured to be a tradeable token which some creator has declared confers rights over some digital product to its new owner.
Most people who aren't crypto bros (myself included) see this "innovation" as largely wasteful and useless. The only benefit is that since the process is decentralized, it means that if creators supported it, you could use your token for say - a dance move - in multiple games or across multiple consoles. Anywhere in zuckerberg's metaverse, so he claims. The Meta Connect 2021 YouTube vid, if you skip 37:00 minutes in to the "commerce" section it provides a pretty good overview of what these people want to do.
None of this changes the fact that most NFT's thus far have been low-effort Ponzi schemes designed to make enormous profit from speculating collectors. And they do so at a very high computational and energy cost
Non-fungible token. I've already said that to you in another reply. It's very easy to google.
The death of this planet and everything in it over ugly pics od monkeys
Ubisoft continues to not get the point.
Glad I stopped bothering with them.
Boycott this madness people.
Fuck Ubisoft.
Ubisoft is going to the dogs.
NFTs are nothing more than multi-level marketing for men.
sigh. Next they’re going to have ads fronted by Victor Chaos to try and convince us its worthwhile buying this nonsense.
NFT's are their future bread and Butters.
Fuck these morons.
Behold, the digital POG.
I'm sorry, can someone explain what an NFT is? All of a sudden this word is being thrown everywhere and people seem to really despise them. I feel indifferent towards the situation because I have no clue what an NFT is.
It is nothing.
The blockchain basically is a network which is being used to define and confirm ownership. In crypto it is configured to work as a currency. For NFT's, it's configured to be a tradeable token which some creator has declared confers rights over some digital product to its new owner.
Most people who aren't crypto bros (myself included) see this "innovation" as largely wasteful and useless. The only benefit is that since the process is decentralised, it means that if creators supported it, you could use your token for say - a dance move - in multiple games or across multiple consoles. Anywhere in zuckerberg's metaverse, so he claims. The Meta Connect 2021 youtube vid, if you skip 37:00 minutes in to the "commerce" section it provides a pretty good overview of what these people want to do.
None of this changes the fact that most NFT's thus far have been low-effort Ponzi schemes designed to make enormous profit from speculating collectors. And they do so at a very high computational and energy cost
they must of watched the latest south park episode
Time to bring back the "stop the [...], it won't happen" meme
It seems like most gamers don't have a clue about blockchain and NFTs - these are still new technologies so that's not a slight, just a fact. I laugh when I see people talk about NFTs destroying the environment and stuff (same with when people say bitcoin destroys the environment), as saying that means the person doesn't have an understanding of how blockchains work but they're buying into all this anti-crypto propaganda. No, NFTs don't destroy the environment, they don't burn a bunch of fossil fuels and spew a bunch of carbon into the air, that's just the very naive takeaway that the average person, including the media, comes away with because they don't understand what they're talking about. I won't bother getting into it but suffice to say NFTs are not destroying the environment lol but you need to have some understanding of how blockchain works to get why (reading headlines or even whole articles doesn't count when the people writing those articles don't have a clue what they're talking about).
Anyway, NFTs will likely be HUGE in the gaming world in the future, so no reason to be negative on Ubisoft for starting to incorporate NFTs into their games. It'll all depend on how they are used. Right now the vast majority of NFT usage is pointless, crypto-rich people paying absurd amounts to own a jpeg that just points to a webpage with the image and probably isn't stored in a secure decentralized manner. But there will be many very powerful uses for NFTs eventually and gaming is probably the most obvious use case. But again, depends how Ubisoft plans on using them. If all they're gonna do is put in-game buyable items on the blockchain that's dumb. But if they create an ecosystem of in-game items that are cross compatible with different games or different games in a series and owning them gives some other benefits that starts getting interesting. Especially if they are licensed to be openly used by anyone, then people could create new games using NFTs from other games. Lot of possibilities and the creative minds in gaming and blockchain along with the market of gamers will decide what works and what doesn't. I don't know where NFTs will go in gaming but I'd be very surprised if NFTs don't become huge in the gaming world.
Ubisoft + NFTs could be lame if they just use it as a cheap gimmick to get in on a fad, or it could be awesome if they actually innovate in the NFT world. But regardless of what Ubisoft does, NFTs are coming to the gaming world so get used to it. NFTs are essentially DLC that you actually own plus a whole bunch of other benefits and features can be layered on top to take the DLC beyond just being in-game. No point fighting the future people. We are entering humanity's digital age and NFTs will be a crucial element of this new age.
What’s an nft? When did people get so lazy as to not write the words anymore? What if I said
PAGC. That’s my answer
Ever heard oft abbreviations? Nobody calls the non-fungible tokens like that. Everyone names them by their abbreviation and a google search tells you what they are. PAGC is according to google the Prince Albert Grand Council. Wft?
I have no problem with NFTs in and of themselves. So, when somebody figures out a good way to implement them in video games, I'll be interested. Therefore, I have no problem with Ubisoft continuing to work on that.
Now, whether Ubisoft is able to figure out a good way to work NFTs into video games is another matter.
Agreed. But, that doesn't mean they never will.
I mean, it seems unlikely that one of the big, public companies in gaming will be the ones to get it right. They're all chasing short term revenue and profit goals, which makes it tough for them to implement things that don't very quickly show positive results in the financial statements. But, somebody will eventually get it figured out.
pls dont go full retard haha,
ubisoft already half now dey going all in haha
I am so glad I do not play many modern titles. Feel sorry for people born outside of the 70's/80's, current and future gaming is going to the pits.
That's bullshit, man. I've been gaming since 1982, when I was 2 years old. There have been good and bad things about every era. But, I don't think there's any reasonable argument to be made that gaming has ever been better than it is right now.
That doesn't mean there's no stupid shit going on now. There's tons of it. But, there definitely is a wider variety of games, easier access to games, and just a lot more people playing them and companies making them then there ever have been before.
You can continue to play just the same way people did in the '80s if you want to. There are tons of developers making 8-bit and 16-bit style games. It is also very easy to access essentially all of the same games we played back then. So, if that's your thing, go for it.
The fact that that option exists for you, and modern AAA Blockbusters exist for me, and everyone can choose from anything in between is what makes this the greatest era of gaming. Also, what I see is a wider and wider variety of ways to access games, ways to experience games, types of games to play, and a much larger spectrum of the human population playing video games than ever before. So, I'd say that next year will be better than this one, and the one after that better still. Gaming is moving in a great direction.
Because if you were a kid or a teenager back then, you kept getting to play games and consoles that redefined the entire industry. They weren't just great games. They were games that left you awestruck because they were doing things you never even thought possible. Be it gameplay, graphics, AI... the quantum leaps that were taking place between the aforementioned periods (70's-early 00's) were just jaw dropping. You just don't see that anymore. So with regards to the innovation argument, I can see someone making a case for yesteryear being superior.
But outside of that? It's a lot harder to argue. Because there are great games now too. Sometimes I think a lot of the people who claim old games were better just say that because they like the STYLE of the games back then more, not because the actual games were inherently better, so to speak. They may not recognize that, but I think that's what drives it.
But if you follow your logic... The first time you played a truly innovative and/or genre-defining game back in the day (Utopia on the Intellivision, Mario Kart on the SNES, Halo on the Xbox, too many more to list), is that any different than a new gamer playing a game in that genre toady that is the first time for them?
What I'm hearing is that you're bored of the experiences you're having, because there are only so many ideas out there, and lots of iteration on existing ideas. But that doesn't mean someone can't experience a modern game in a genre for the first time and experience that same sense of wonder that you experienced back then.
And it doesn't mean someone can't come back to a genre today that they haven't played in a long time, and has evolved significantly since then, that maybe they haven't played for a long time, and experience an amazing sense of wonder/nostalgia. I watched a YouTube video just today of someone (Destin) trying Age of Empires 4 and experiencing that, having not played RTS games since the original StarCraft.
Yeah, if you had never experienced those things because you were too young, or not even born, then sure. Everything would be mind blowing.
But I wasn't really talking about a person's perception. I was talking about how, during the 70's to early 00's, there was so much invention and innovation going on that someone could make a legit argument for those times being better. Of course, that would hinge on how much weight a person puts on innovation. But it was definitely a more inventive and innovative era. After all, it was basically a clean slate back then. It's a lot harder to invent something totally new today because there's hardly anything left to do outside of VR stuff (which, once it matures enough, will probably the next big thing).
Oh, I knew you weren't talking about a person's perception. My point was when something is innovated is less important to a potential purchaser. Do I care if something is truly innovative, or do I care that it's the first time I've had the opportunity to have an experience like that? Do I care that an amazing view overlooking natural beauty may have been like that for thousands of years, or do I care that I am getting to experience that view for the first time.
I wasn't speaking to any objective measure of whether things were better/worse then/now. I was speaking to how it affects purchasing decisions, since this is a web site based around sales figures, you know?
I personally never experienced any game-breaking bugs in AAA games back in the day, but even if there were, it isn't like the games of today are MORE stable. In some cases, games of today are literally shipped in polished-alpha states, then we as gamers (and customers) are used as unpaid game testers until the thing runs halfway decent. And even THEN, the games remain riddled with bugs. Madden is one such offender. Cyberpunk is another.
You're right, games are shipped in generally worse states today. And yet, @VAMatt is also right that games usually get improved over time.
That's why I no longer buy games on Day 1 anymore, ever. Day 1 customers are fleeced. They pay the most, but get the least. Someone who comes along later and buys a "Game of the Year Edition" with a tonne of bug fixes and DLC will also usually pay only half the price!
I'm only interested in checking out Day 1 games via Game Pass (et al) now.
The bad stuff tends to overshadow the good stuff in the media. Doesn't mean the good stuff is going away.
I think there's a misconception about NFT's - NFT are definitely the future and they are great! Little known artist can offer their pieces of art to a worldwide audience instead of only 2 or 3 people that come to their local little atelier. Same is for little (homebrew-) game developers. Instead of just having an interesting and time consuming hobby, they can actually make money out of it, same with music. No greedy publisher that takes away most of the hard earned money! NFT and future technology democratizes your work. There will be less and less stupid 9-5 jobs in the future, more and more you will be able to actually do what you really want to do.
You know I've found a list of the NFTs that were sold for the highest prices. The people who bought them apparently think they own them. I beg to differ. I can download all of these images from google images right now. They were sold for several million dollars. That's how greatly NFTs work.
Why does money has any worth? It's just because we have decided it has a worth, therefore, if enough people give shit a worth it will be valuable.
