this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
350 points (97.3% liked)
Games
16737 readers
787 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No he's suggesting the game would be so shit that buzzwords were the only way it could get any runway.
My point, albeit overly obtuse, was that the game is blockchain. He didn't patch on the idea just to get funding.
I would say, being even more pedantic, that the game uses a blockchain (which is just a different type of database) to record in game digital asset ownership. This game could have been made with a normal db taking that roll and would probably run no differently.
He is mentioning and using a blockchain over a normal db for no other reason that it probably helped to secure funding in 2017 as it was a massive tech buzzword at the time.
It could, sure, but I'm positive the only reason he's making it is because of blockchain. I seriously doubt Pete was rolling around a game idea for online real estate separately and just threw blockchain in as a way to get funding.
This game in particular, yes, but Molyneux certainly could make non-blockchain games.