Reddit Posts
GrokAIOpenAIGeminiAI | AI Bot live on Telegram | Active Community | Huge Marketing Plans
Research Covering Guild of Guardians ($GOG). They’re building a solid platform that could reach millions of players. Worth keeping an eye on.
Guild of Guardians $GOG will be rising at next bull market. Get 1 $GOG for free by registration (End 5 October)
Is there room for a different type of stable coin not attached to fiat?
$GOG |And the goal of becoming the biggest blockchain mobile game RPG.
help me i get scammed dont know if i can get help here but at last read my text please
Pay-to-play games was already bad - pay to earn won't be any better
Mentions
Banano and some gaming tokens like GOG and GODS
They still have to pay for DRM, otherwise you can just bypass the part of the game that checks for ownership of the token. GOG seems to be working fine, also you’re literally advocating for DRM to be added where there currently isn’t any DRM, it’s a bit ironic that you then go ahead to say I don’t like ownership of my content. My copy of Stardew Valley I bought from GOG doesn’t require anything to run other than the installation files I downloaded, and it’ll continue to work even without an internet connection. To me that’s what “ownership” means.
But indie games already don’t usually have DRM. Go on like, GOG, buy a game, you can share it with all of your friends, it’ll work fine. They just work off of the good faith belief that you’ll buy a legitimate license if you like the game. If you care about supporting the devs, you pay the dev directly; if you just care about playing the game, you can already pirate it.
GOG if your into gaming. New mobile game from the team behind Gods unchained, set to release 2nd quarter of the year
That's what gets me about people who laugh at the idea of NFTs and then have steam accounts full of quite literally NFTs. You're paying steam to acknowledge your "ownership" of a game that I can copy and paste onto my computer. However, that ownership is enriched by the system that steam provides with friends, integration with other websites, ease of updates, streaming, etc. etc. the idea is that ownership of the digital goods has to mean *something*. That's why epic games/GOG/steam even compete in the first place when the base product is the exact same
Do you trust Doordash? Netflix? Dominos? Pizza hut? Activision-Blizzard? Clash of Clans? Steam? Epic Games? GOG? Humble Bundle? Microsoft? Google? Your information is already everywhere, and it's your own doing. If you're uncomfortable with that reality, maybe stop handing it out like candy.
All of this reminds me I have Under a Killing Moon in my backlog on GOG , will try to find the time to play it :)
Big fan. Have everything Zork related on GOG. My father told me he had the original Zork I discs (cassettes?) but unfortunately lost them at some point.
Trading 1x PC copy of Prey, code activates on GOG. DM me, highest bid in 5 hrs gets it
Ember sword essentially did the same thing as GOG (I have been following both). Some of the original land sold for 50-100k for a city. And that is only for one small section of the world, and they only just recently released their alpha demo. I am excited about it’s potential but also has cash grab worries. GOG is just sunk cost at this point feels like they do nothing but push back their timeline and then blow up their development team.
The most consumer friendly thing you can do is have a fantastic return process and a good looking responsive storefront, which Steam has. The user experience of GOG is complete shit by comparison. Very very few people actually care about DRM.
I disagree I think Steam has a soft monopoly in the PC space mainly cuz they got in first. I mean GOG is DRM free, which is the most pro consumer thing you can do, yet people don’t want to use it. EGS charges devs like 1/3 less than Steam does, which is the most pro dev thing you can do, yet people would rather use Steam cuz that’s where everyone already built their whole library.
you can already do this if you buy DRM free games through GOG
Customers having the option to support small platforms is reason enough. I mean, it's not that dissimilar to GOG's model. You get the game from them and you own it, and it directly takes away from Steam's walled garden model. The benefit to customer is that they could legally resell games they no longer wanted. That's not an incentive?
They could easily put the key/license to said game in the hash and that is generally how games are given to third party retailers. You'd still need a game store to redeem it and download it but the infrastructure to build an agnostic game redemption system is not an impossibility, that way customers could choose if they liked Steam, Epic, GOG, etc the most and if they decide they don't like those ones they can take their keys elsewhere.
No. NFTs do not gove you any more right to the things you buy. When you die, your children can just keep using your account, no problem. It doesn't matter if it was NFTs in there or just regular purchases. If the company shuts down, your stuff is gone. If they decide to ban you, your stuff is gone. All of those things are still stored on their servers, it doesn't matter if the ownership is tokenized or not. If you want true ownership use things like GOG that have zero DRM.
> EA lost the rights to Ubisoft and now I don't get to play the game I bought. That shouldn't be allowed and I'd hope you'd at least agree to that. But that's not a tech problem, that's a copyright problem. If you want EA and Ubi onboard with your NFT plans, they'll want to be able to do this anyways. Both users and developers will have to be under strict control - EA won't like it if someone sells a cracked version of CoD, and the buyer just gets to keep it. Conversely, you can already "really own" a game - all my GOG library is nicely backed up and will work even if GOG disappears tomorrow. EA and Ubi already could do that with their games too. They don't, and they won't unless the laws (copyright/consumer protection) change - at which point you won't need that NFT anyways.
ah yes for supposadly being a "monopoly" steam has competitors such as [itch.io](https://itch.io) GOG humble bundle etc.
> own your games and they can't be taken away by the platform Funny thing is, GOG already accomplishes this, without having to resort to fads no-one actually cares about.
WHY GOG WHY! Why did i buy enough coins to get a indigo card fml
You mean like selling games through Microsoft Store, Playstation Store, Steam, GOG, Epic, etc...? Yeagh, that'd be real weird if they sold through a third party... Unheard off really.
Bro just you wait until Gamestop launches its NFT marketplace. Imagine instead of buying a game on Steam or GOG that you don't even own, instead you buy an NFT that has a url to a google drive server or something that you can download the game from. That URL will be yours ***forever*** on the blockchain. GME and loopring to the moon!
It could be another avenue. Just like how some people value DRM-free purchases of games like on GOG while others value the steam ecosystem enough to buy in on there. OP only said it's a version of the game, giving people more choice and avenue for how they would like to purchase the game. I don't see anything wrong with that
Incoming!? Drax: "Mantis! Watch out!" In GOG Volume 2 springs to mind....
Patreon. Bandcamp. Kickstarter. Steam. GOG. There are also plenty of more independent solutions like artists doing individual commissions, for example.
This, absolutely this, was checking out a project that looked pretty interesting (basically sid meyer's pirates on blockchain). Entry price? 90$... ninety dollars to play a game that came out in 1987?! Fuck no! If i wanted to play a remake of that i'd head on over to GOG and grab a copy for three dollars.
i had a question regarding to gme marketplace what are they going to sell on it and why would people buy on it instead from their physical stores? isn't the marketplace highly dependent upon the relevance of nfts? speaking from a gamer's point ,they won't participate much due to complexities of setting up wallets etc.. and micro transactions is the last thing they want.. (myself being an avid gamer) so how they are going to convince gamers to buy from their marketplace whatever they are selling be it tokenized games, in-game skins.. if those games can be bought easily from Microsoft gamepass , PlayStation, steam, GOG, epic games.. which already has the ease of use and years of familiarity.. I'm not critical of lrc/gme or anything just thinking about what the marketplace is going to be .
Yes the big run could happen anytime soon though considering the rally back up that started couple of days ago at least that seems more like a reaffirmation for my bags, in preparing for the next run I have started looking up some quite good alts worth investing, GOG, MEX, TXA, RADAR seem interesting though.
Reselling digital-only games was a thing, before distributors stepped in to stop it. It's not that it wasn't possible before NFTs. It's that corporate world actively acts to prevent it. The reason for why reselling games via NFTs is exactly the same as the reason for why reselling games via Steam, GOG, PS Store or XBOX Marketplace will not be a thing.
It seems to me like they're going about it the wrong way. It appears like their games are tied to their store? I think what we really need is to separate out the ownership/licensing from the distribution/store. Imagine if you could own your game but play it on any existing game launcher (Epic, Steam, GOG, etc).
I don't really see the issue here. NFT platforms are already being used to sell music for example. It's still very much a proof of concept in my opinion, but there is no reason why a company wouldn't be able to sell through an NFT platform. They could even set up royalties to ensure they profit from people reselling the game. So yes, it'd kind of be a platform like Steam, or at least a system through which platforms like Steam handle ownership of the games they sell. In an ideal world this would also mean that you could easily move games to a different platform (like GOG or Epic). And a proper decentralised NFT platform can't take ownership away. I'm not sure about modifying NFT's. All I've heard is that owners of certain NFT's gained the possibility to modify an NFT, but I haven't heard of any being modified outside of the owner's will. So not entirely sure about that, it could also depend on the platform I suppose.
Do games do something similar? Sure. WOW had an auction house and roblox is pretty much a non-blockchain metaverse. The difference is that everything you sell is stuck in the ecosystem you paid into. NFT’s mean those items can be transferred w/ you as you move on to new games or even new gaming platforms IE moving from Steam to GOG.
> If anything NFTs should provide more consumer protection for digital game downloads than the present model of Microsoft being all like "trust me bra, we got this" until one day they just remove the game from the store and leave no public evidence that you ever owned it. or you know, how about actually respecting the consumer with a DRM-free model like on GOG where you get to download an offline-installer as you please, effectively "owning" the game. so no, NFTs are bad!
That exists already without blockchain. Go to the GOG store and buy your DRM free games, you'll own it forever.
This years best investment: $GOG Hopefully next years best investment: PlanetQuest