Reddit Posts
💰Good morning! #premarket #watchlist 06/1 $VTVT -Investment by and Entry into Collaboration and License Agreement, $TNXP -Issuance of U.S. Patent for TNX-801 Smallpox and Monkeypox Vaccine, $MTP -Fast Track Designation for MTX110 Development, $ENDP . Check it all in Realtime Stock Screener!
💰Good morning! #premarket #watchlist 06/1 $VTVT -Investment by and Entry into Collaboration and License Agreement, $TNXP -Issuance of U.S. Patent for TNX-801 Smallpox and Monkeypox Vaccine, $MTP -Fast Track Designation for MTX110 Development, $ENDP .
💰Good morning! #premarket #watchlist 06/1 $VTVT -Investment by and Entry into Collaboration and License Agreement, $TNXP -Issuance of U.S. Patent for TNX-801 Smallpox and Monkeypox Vaccine, $MTP -Fast Track Designation for MTX110 Development, $ENDP .
💰Good morning! #premarket #watchlist 06/1 $VTVT -Investment by and Entry into Collaboration and License Agreement, $TNXP -Issuance of U.S. Patent for TNX-801 Smallpox and Monkeypox Vaccine, $MTP -Fast Track Designation for MTX110 Development, $ENDP .
Really dumb suggestions (depend on how do you see it) to Netflix to turn things around
Mentions
I suppose at the early crossing from negative P/E to positive P/E that's likely the case but you correctly point out that it doesn't / shouldn't last long as investors will either sell when it becomes clear they won't reach their long term goals which will lower the P/E ratio or the company's earnings catch up to the share price. Amazon was only 657 6 years after IPO and the following year it was down to 31. Even TSLA's P/E high was only \~1600 though their P/E now is still rather obscene even among other tech companies. At 5000 something else is going on that doesn't really fit any current molds as far as I've been able to find in the US market. Could be that there are too many shares in public that's throwing off EPS while the company remains profitable. Looks like the current highest P/E is 3,747.73 by SHY which is a bond ETF. The rest on this over 1000 list I don't know much about other than MTX which shot up after it was announced the US government essentially owns them despite revenue outlays being delayed 4 or greater years. I probably wouldn't invest in anything that is at 5000 P/E because that is likely when it's market is at/near the top.
Can you expand on this? So you're referring to $MTX right? They use their propriety fluoro-sorb which studies have shown in 3-4 times more absorptive thatn GAC. Have you read anything different? Maybe GAC is a simpler/cheaper cleanup method...while $MTX offers premium cleanup services?
They are two different things - But disclaimer I know Nothing about BLGO. BLGO for whatever reason appears pumped all over the place I don't know why, perhaps bots. I go to a lot of water conference and never heard them mentioned. MTX has close to a $2b market cap BLGO is $60 million PFAS Destruction Oxidation System - I'm having a difficult time understanding the scalability of it beyond a few applications.
Why is MTX better that BLGO? Why do these pennies have a better chance that more established engineering firms?
NAK LAC TMC MTX are my picks this week anyone else?
I keep telling you guys NAK MTX TMC LAC
I got NAK MTX TMC primed and ready to go
METALEX INTERSECTS SULPHIDES WITH DRILLING AT B3 CLAIM BLOCK IN QUEBEC [https://money.tmx.com/en/quote/MTX/news/8971404963895326](https://money.tmx.com/en/quote/MTX/news/8971404963895326) # SULPHIDES INTERSECTED AT TARGET O We have sulphides at a shallow depth from surface (from 40m) with very nice looking core. Target O has a surface expression of 400 x 500 m. This is a large target. And there are more similar looking targets close by on the claim (B3). Go time.
stock just HALTED pending news during this drill program! [money.tmx.com/en/quote/MTX/...](https://stkt.co/aZRMo4cp) hold on to yer hats! $MTX.TSXV $MTX.V $MXTLF
MTX on the TSX-V in Canada MXTLF on OTC pink
What's the symbol? MTX here is $60
I’m long a tiny bit on WBD. They really need to cut debt and expenses more than they have been. They also need to rethink how they use their IP in an increasingly competitive video game industry and stop focusing on absurd MTX in an inflationary environment. MTX doesn’t work if the game goes offline (Multiversus….). They need to focus on user retention with quality and stop fucking around with mobile game MTX bullshit.
Bet they are having an all hands meeting right now trying to figure out how to inject more MTX into solo games. Godspeed ubi. I'll make sure to pour one out for my design think homies.
You saying this as a gamer. But look at this like a degenerate stock market gambler. Nintendo 1st party games are more often than not long term money printers for them. Botw, smash brothers, Pokémon etc. These all get hundreds of hours of playtime and are some of the best bang for your buck in terms of gaming you can get. Compare that to battlepasses which are just UI grinds and cheap garbage cosmetics. Nintendo games don’t go on sale often and never reach bargain bin. The quality factor cannot be ignored. You can wait 6 months to get the next assassin’s creed game for $20-$30 but most you can expect a Nintendo 1st party game to go on sale for is maybe a $10 discount after a year. Compare a standard fighting game to Smash Brothers. The last DBZ game was devoid of long term content but you can spend a year on smash and still be unlocking things in the base game before dlc. I don’t think Nintendo games need to get cheaper, I think prices should be tied to quality and depth. It makes no sense for a new street fighter and the next GTA to be within $40 of each other at release but that’s the state of the industry now. Really basic content like a fun grind is just gone now and replaced with MTX garbage grinds that are aiming for metrics that don’t place an importance on fun. Ubisoft designs a grind that rewards using real money to cut through the bullshit and charges full price at release. Nintendo designs a grind that is rewarding and isn’t asking for your credit card. I would gladly pay $80 for Cyberpunk, Zelda, GTA, Elder Scrolls etc but never for Assassin’s Creed. Hopefully, it means more incentive to make great games with fun depth so a higher price point can be justified and that creates a stronger $20-40 price point for MTX reliant games. We are getting to the point of majority of major IP having one game per console cycle. Games with depth need to make it up somewhere and I’d rather it’s a higher price point than more MTX garbage grinds
I forgot a few stocks (IDR, MTX, QQ.) last time I loaded up on European defense so now I’m buying the dip
It's not exactly a secret, I have commented elsewhere in the thread and most of them have been trumpeted about Reddit the last week or so: BAE Systems (LSE: BA.) Babcock International (LSE: BAB) Leonardo (BIT: LDO) QinetiQ (LSE: QQ.) Saab (STO: SAAB-B) Thales (EPA: HO) Chemring (LSE: CHG) Rheinmetall (ETR: RHM) Rolls-Royce (LSE: RR.) Airbus (EPA: AIR) Hensoldt (ETR: HAG) MTU Aero Engines (ETR: MTX) Safran (EPA: SAF) Those are what I bought on Friday and I'm up about 15% today.
* **BAE Systems** (LSE: BA.) * **Babcock International** (LSE: BAB) * **Leonardo** (BIT: LDO) * **QinetiQ** (LSE: QQ.) * **Saab** (STO: SAAB-B) * **Thales** (EPA: HO) * **Chemring** (LSE: CHG) * **Rheinmetall** (ETR: RHM) * **Rolls-Royce** (LSE: RR.) * **Airbus** (EPA: AIR) * **Hensoldt** (ETR: HAG) * **MTU Aero Engines** (ETR: MTX) * **Safran** (EPA: SAF) Some of these are small/speculative plays. The big names that have had huge runs are RR, BAE, Rheinmetall, Leonardo, and Thales.
**Contratistas de defensa europeos cotizados** * **BAE Systems (Reino Unido):** * Ticker: BA.L * **Thales (Francia):** * Ticker: [HO.PA](http://HO.PA) * **Leonardo (Italia):** * Ticker: LDO.MI * **Rheinmetall (Alemania):** * Ticker: [RHM.DE](http://RHM.DE) * **Safran (Francia):** * Ticker: [SAF.PA](http://SAF.PA) * **Airbus (Países Bajos/Francia/Alemania):** * Ticker: [AIR.PA](http://AIR.PA) * **Indra Sistemas (España):** * Ticker: [IDR.MC](http://IDR.MC) * **Dassault Aviation (Francia):** * Ticker: [AM.PA](http://AM.PA) * **MTU Aero Engines (Alemania):** * Ticker: [MTX.DE](http://MTX.DE)
P2w in Diablo is a wild take. Tell me how buying anything from an MTX in Diablo 4 gives you stat bonuses that equates to "pay 2 win" Being boosted isn't p2w. It's just being boosted....
Path of Exile has an even better f2p as the only things that are "p2w" are stash tabs - everything else is just a visual MTX. It is also now owned by Tencent by quite a percentage.
Not really. The sales are stagnated. The series has had the same sales, even lower, than previous iterations. Black Flag is the highest selling game in more than a decade, I think. The MTX revenue is insane though, pretty sure they cracked like 800m or something for valhalla. Absurd numbers.
Shit company that thinks jacking up the price with 6 different versions of every game alongside trash MTX will lead to long term profits. Almost all of their games are just the same framework with a different coat of paint. They will continue to plummet because their games are trash and they waste millions on astroturfing before launches, with the crummy games going on sale down to $20 within a couple months.
This. I didn’t buy it cause MTX in a single player $70 game is highly regarded. Also it runs terrible. Steam reviews are bad.
Yeah, i know that feeling all to good. Stuff like „its just cosmetics bro“ „battlepass are fine man, overwatch is good“ is such an insanity to me. I come from a time where i buy a game and own all that exists in it. I only pay for more actual content if its developed **after** an **feature complete** release for example. And this is all the more reason to shit abit (but not stopping) less on these MTX. I meant it literally, they are the most harmless we can even hope for in a world were executives love to stuff parasitic, manipulative and predatory MTX into every corner they can find. They realy are non manipulative if we ignore missing information, they have realy no impact on gameplay, they are useless and besides the explorer camp they arent even MTX exclusive and can *easily* be earned by just playing the game. We should burn to the ground the shit that EA, Ubisoft and the likes pulls and with this i dont mean us but government regulations. They literally try to pull as many children into gambling habits as possible so people like Bobby Kotick get an even fatter bonus and shareholders are happy. So my argument is that what capcom is pulling here (in DD2, not MHRise) is undoubly bad but is the lesser of two evils: one eats children and the other plays bad pranks. I hope the MTX here are just there so higher ups can tick off an „MTX“ box to keep an invalide 70y/o investor happy and nothing else because MTX are here to stay. Sadly we life in a world where you pay 100 bucks for a freaking flavor of the month „live service - FTX“ bubble that doesnt even work on launch, so i confess that i take capcoms bum stupid -only regards pay for that useless crap- MTX in an actual enjoyable game. If only to show that if anything, i only accept this instead FIFA, Skull and fail, Valhalla or whatever else AAAA comes up with. i freaking HATE MTX.
What i dont like about people is how they have no idea what they are talking about yet pretent that they do. First one is a comment on how predatory the MTX are, yours is about how the game is designed around them. These are literally the most useless MTX a game can even have as is capcom tradition (discounting the latest Monster Hunter). Stuff you earn within an hour of causal play even. For your information, the next patch will even add another 99 character edit vouchers to an ingame merchant for 500 gold each (an amount that can be earned with a single loot on a common bandit). So being able to pay real money for such a single use voucher for 2 bucks is regarded from multiple standpoints, yes. If you guys were actually having legit arguments without undermining yourself, it would be great. For example on how there was literally no information on the MTX on release, how its a single player game or capcom recently raising their title pricetags to 70 bucks so something like this shouldnt be justified.
Was looking forward in buying their latest game, Dragon's Dogma 2. But it has shit optimization and predatory micro transactions in a single player. So I didn't buy it. As a gamer I'm sick and tired of companies releasing broken games with predatory MTX. Multiply this thousands of times and you get that dip. Invertors taking profits as they can, mitigating future loss, and large amounts of puts because of a failed product launch.
It'll give more MTX opportunities. Think having an alligator pet, giving it accessories etc. they want to milk the shit out of this game.
As a consumer: I am kinda interested. As a seasoned gamer: the product will be bad with just enough MTX to make it anti-consumer As an invester with a small PP (personal portfolio): rockstar needs stuff cuts after release So I stay away and circle back few months after the release. PS If I sound pessimistic, it is because I am.
Most profitable because they are the most predatory with MTX
I don’t really like Unity but I don’t think many devs will have much to scream about when they actually read the fine print. People don’t use Unity out of the goodness of their heart. They use it to make MTX-laced mobile game cash cows. The ones that use Unity to make decent games have talent, make money and charge much more than .20 to play them. We see $20-$70 price tags on those nowadays. If someone has the money for Apple Vision Pro, they’re gonna spend a few bucks inside of each game they play. You don’t buy a $3500 piece of equipment and stop spending money after that… If that were the case, Steam would cease to exist. Any developer with 2 brain cells and that doesn’t hate money will figure this out by the end of the week. Also, I don’t buy this “we’re fighting corporate greed” bullshit at all.
>MTX Audio oh man I remember MTX back in the day!
It actually was for the best. If we were not forced to radically shift our business due to CC BK we may have slowly declined like most of our competitors. Because CC was 80% of our businesses the loss was swift and we were forced to reinvent ourselves. We still have MTX and it still sells $50 mill+ a year but the commercial side we shifted too (AtlasIED) is many times larger and way more profitable.
But they did change… they stopped paying commission on the sales floor. Lost all their educated / passionate sales people and almost took my company down with them. I own MTX Audio and was a Circuit City vendor for 30 years. We lost 80% of our sales in one day when CC went BK. We pivoted to Commercial AV and are now much larger and more successful company. Rough road but it taught us many lessons on being nimble and customer balance.
I've had very negative outlook on their business and don't see much prospect in them. * Their CEO is a dipshit who was in charge of EA for years, aka the most consistently voted worst companies in the industry. Said dipshit also called his customers "fucking idiots" for not including predatory MTX as part of their business model. Great leadership amirite. * Last I saw they shut down their help forums, which is very bad for onboarding new users. Not great for expanding revenue. * I've pretty consistently heard from others their product has been circling the drain for years with one pointless half finished feature after another. They're operating in the red to develop and then abandon features. * As for myself I find their engine to be cumbersome as hell to use and I vastly prefer Godot which has exploded in popularity over the last few years and is extremely nice to work in while also allowing devs to keep 100% of revenue. Unity is rapidly losing its niche as the go to engine for indies. There was actually a huge outflux of users from /r/unity and /r/gamedev to /r/godot as a result of the above to points last year. * VR/AR is a hilariously overrated niche that's hard to develop for and represents an exceedingly small amount of the industry's revenue. Every year for the last decade people have been saying it will take off and it never does. A $3k headset certainly isn't going to change that. Maybe in X years it finally will take off, who knows, but I doubt unity will be the one to invest in for that kind of revolution.
I’m not joking. Pokémon go is a garbage MTX phone game with the pokemon logo slapped on and is a disgrace to the franchise. I’d rather Nuzlocke start with magikarp over and over again till I beat the elite 4 than play pokemon go
Capcom rejected the trend of MTX and Games as a Service in favor of making actually good games and it paid off massively. Every single game they make is objectively good in at least some capacity. They're also one of the few publishers that will finish a game before they put it out. Im not a huge fan of RE: Village and RE: 3 Remake but literally everything else is a banger.
Lego Star wars is huge, Rock Raiders and Lego Racing games were huge back in the day. If they would fully pivot/license something with MTX they'd make a lot of bank.
we shall see. I say we see 15M units by EOY. 15M \* 70 = $1B of revenue without even touching MTX and BP
This is exactly something a non-gamer would say. You are clearly not even close to the world of gaming if you aren’t aware that gamers, en masse, hate NFTs and view them as little more than MTX.
It's hysterical that you can be so condescending while thinking that Sony doesn't generate revenue from Microsoft. It's as good an example as I've seen on Reddit of someone thinking they understand something when it's obvious they've never worked in business a day in their life. First, Sony doesn't just use Azure, [they're partnered with MS on the development of cloud gaming tech together](https://www.fiercevideo.com/tech/sony-microsoft-form-unlikely-cloud-gaming-partnership#:~:text=Sony%20and%20Microsoft%20this%20week,game%20and%20content%20streaming%20services). You think that's being done with Sony using MS/Azure as a simple Work For Hire vendor? Of course not - there are investments and revenue sharing in place. This is how business is conducted at this level for companies as large as Sony and Microsoft - they own pieces of each other, and while certain segments may compete, the companies as a whole are working in cooperation. Second, every sale of any game developed by MS or an MS owned studio which is available on PlayStation generates 30% of sale revenue for Sony. Same for all MTX on those games.
Nice write up OP. I’ve been paying attention to the drama and I also believe they’ll end up winning the war. Once D&D One comes out, the masses will swarm to play it. Especially after the movie comes out (if it’s good). They’re going to make it unbelievably easy for new players to pick up the game and they’ll dominate the space with this new system. No other TT company is going to be able to compete with a full fledged 3D table top game. Let alone one that allows players to customize their characters in unique ways via MTX’s and can buy campaigns that come with full fledge 3D maps. If the legal battles don’t bleed out the competitors, the number of players on D&D One vs other TT games will. Then they’ll claim their crown and change the OGL when the competitions all dead.
Unfortunately 30% is like the standard cut. Steam, Sony, Microsoft (Xbox) they all charge 30% to publish on their platforms. Not defending it (and I don'teven really like apple), just saying, that's the way the cookie crumbles... (Unsure about how MTX works with the others)
>You're an idiot if you think buying a bunch of MTX is going to make you rich. Everyone knows that the real money is in hedge funds.
Inb4 free to drive cars with cosmetic MTX’s
OldSchool is Just RS3 without EOC and massive MTX, not the same game filled with the same people that ruined RS3 and still ran by how Jagex is now, which is absolute trash.
OW is absolutely miniscule in ATVI, it could generate zero dollars and the company would be fine. MW2 is going to be accompanied by Warzone 2, a followup to it's most profitable console/pc game of all time. And it's live service, Warzone 2 will keep the company rolling in money while Treyarch works on 2024. The 2 year cycle is actually a good thing, for both gamers and the company. Most of their revenue now is from live service MTX.
The NFT Marketplace will at best become a (comparatively) minor revenue stream for a niche market, but arguably the leader in said market (NFT games). Personally I've never said "golly gee I sure wish games had even stronger MTX and FTP cancer in them" so I don't see the appeal at all, but there's certainly some sort of demand. Personally, I see expansion into tech and hardware as the big play. Amazon demolished NewEgg and Best Buy in the tech sector, and with its gradual decline, there's a vacuum to be snapped up. It'd be a smart move to establish Gamestop as the go-to one-stop-shop for everything gaming related, from GPUs to PC hardware to peripherals to collectibles to the games themselves. All through online ordering, top-notch delivery times, and solid customer service. That said, the time to do that was 3-4 years ago, and being the only big game in town to have 30x series cards, PS5's, and Switches during the pandemic would have catapulted the business. Now with supply meeting demand it's a long-term game of showing up Amazon as an overall better shopping experience.
Feel you bro, If you have a decent doc, do not get MTX (Methotrexate). That shit has a fuck ton of side effects, also on your mental health. But it's cheap. Biologicals are the way, IMHO, like Humira, but there is a variety of others. Wish you the best
And yet it happens and RWT is booming business, so much so that a lot of MMO's released their own ways to buy stuff with money. Be that MTX or membership through ingame gold. Giving gamers a legit way to sell their ingame items has plenty of potential. Know plenty of people who have thousands worth of items sitting in decade old MMO accounts.
No no no, this is MTX with extra steps, you got it all wrong
I think there’s a lot of room to improve it for the future but this assuming no cross game skins. Taking ownership of your skins in a game would be huge. You act like every game isn’t shoe horning skins and other MTX in every game.
Great thing GameStop develops MTX games!
I love how pretty much all gamers hate MTX, but here are some highly regarded people thinking that NFTs are going to change people's opinions somehow. Metaverse is also a big "if" and until VR is a lot cheaper, it's not going to be a big market.
The CEO said developers who don’t want to monetize their games with MTX are “fucking idiots”, developers are already talking about switching to UE and Ironsource has a track record of installing malware and isn’t secure.
You're misunderstanding. I didn't say that trading GME was stupid. I believed in the short squeeze play myself, and the volatility since has made theta gang insane amounts of money. I also believed that they absolutely could pivot into other forms of revenue. The most promising I saw was turning their physical locations into eSports centers, focusing on social gaming and selling eSports merch for popular teams much like many sports merch stores promote and sell merch for people's favorite sports teams. Hell, there's a business in Wisconsin called Packerland, they pretty much exclusively sell merch for the Green Bay Packers and they're profitable. I can see GameStop adjusting into building gaming communities and promoting gamer merch. However, I'm pointing out that the way they did pivot, into NFTs and their marketplace, is guaranteed failure. Instead of selling physical merch, they're selling valueless digital "merch". It's not merch. They can try to sell me an NFT desktop background all they want, but I don't give a fuck and I'll just grab the jpg and set it as my background anyways without paying. A picture of a ghost from Destiny is worthless to me. Literally anything that someone can sell there is worthless to me as a gamer, even if it's something that I do actually want. I don't have to pay for any of it. The things that you guys think will have value, however, aren't coming. We will not have digital video game licenses and MTX on the GameStop NFT marketplace for two major reasons. First, why the fuck would publishers sell their keys on this marketplace instead of selling them on their own and keeping *full* profits? Why the hell would they want to offer a portion of profits to GameStop? There's zero incentive to do that. Second, and more importantly, these publishers and developers don't want to let players sell their digital items to other players. Why would they? If you can make an infinite number of a digital item, you want to sell as many as possible for as much of a profit as possible. Why sell 1000 to people who then sell it cheaper to others, when you can instead sell 2000? They'd be allowing their consumers to take part of their market share. This simply isn't going to happen. It's a level of stupidity that only WSB can think would work. So spend your money however you want, don't feel pressured into making any kind of decision based on what I'm saying here. But I'm still going to give my input on this topic, because this is Reddit and that's *literally the entire point of Reddit*, to share thoughts, opinions, and insight with each other.
Finally i can get the most recent gaming experience on a car that comes with blinkers that nobody uses, if only they were dumb enough to MTX that nothing would have changed
Obviously I would want to, it's why 2 decades ago I bought used physical copies of games and sold them later. But the issue is that the publisher is financially incentivised to not allow this to happen to the digital market, which they have full 100% control over the decision to allow it. This means they won't allow it. It would be incredibly stupid. So the only games that would wind up on a marketplace like this would be games published by complete morons, which tend to be really shit or riddled with so much MTX that I will *never* want to touch them. Seriously, Halo infinite is free to play and I still refuse to touch that pile of shit, and the gameplay was actually kinda fun. They just shoved so much overpriced MTX in there with ridiculous restrictions on how players can use their overpriced MTX, and the core progression was tied directly to the monetization, it made an otherwise fun game feel like a corporate money grab and it just sapped the fun out of the experience. They couldn't *pay me* as a gamer to play their garbage. I could profit from it, even if they paid enough for me to cover my bills, and I would still say no because I *hate* shit like that, and I'm not about to spend my hobby time hating what I'm doing.
> Instead of quality games it’s about releasing as many titles packed with micro transactions and pay to win features and seeing if any shit sticks to the wall. Disney does this and super frustrating, MTX themed games - Mirrorverse just came out and it's the same garbage system as the rest. I just want one okay game that doesn't bombard me with pay systems within 5 minutes of starting the game
Suppose it were pitched as player retention - you'd know big corporate game developers are all about the numbers of players playing their games due to the MTX structure these days. If GameStop pitches their market for resale as a proven method of boosting player numbers on a given title, I see them commanding significant demand for some of the leading franchises. Never mind the free to play games like Fortnite - imagine if there were a 1% royalty on resale of Fortnite skins on the marketplace - would Epic say no to a brand new consistent revenue stream from past releases (limited or not) in addition to whatever vbux are already being bought? To me - I think yes but I acknowledge we will just have to wait and see. I know they've already got deals with MSFT
If people are already playing because it’s fun, why would game devs want to cut them into their MTX profits? The entire basis of this “earn while playing” idiocy has been that it will attract gamers, if they’re playing for the purpose of making money then it’s going to turn into a boring grind. Gold farming for money already exists, NFTs don’t inherently change anything about it, and we already know that by and large it means monotonous grinding. The only person here who doesn’t make any sense is you. First it’s gaming will make gamers money while playing, so gamers will want to play. Then it’s they’re already playing for fun, so why did you need to offer money to lure them in? Nothing about NFTs even inherently enables money making in games, blockchains aren’t even uniquely suited for this kind of thing. Having items be unique and bound to individuals and tradable, and even to enable this across multiple games, does not in any way require NFTs or blockchain tech. The reason it doesn’t happen is because game dev studios and/or gamers don’t want it to.
Wasn't Ubisofts version of it actually not that terrible, and just poorly executed though? I remember seeing it, and it was basically just exclusively streamer items, but the system they were using was basically just a copy paste of TF2's ID tracking for skins. But they MTX they used for it was atrocious.
>You're setting yourself up for disappointment if you're expecting Microsoft to announce NFT games or some shit. i mean. they were *literally* (reportedly) going to try that with Stalker 2 before the massive pushback forced them to pretend they never for a moment considered the idea. If by "NFT" games, you mean games that have MTX replaced by NFT's, then no. Thats not gonna happen. MTX is how they pinch pennies from the pockets of the poorer players/kids. NFT's will probably be the fuel for exclusive collectors editions in the future though.
Mobile games mainly target a broader version of 1) people who played solitaire on their desktop computer 15 years ago and 2) 3rd world countries where smartphones are far more common than consoles or PCs. NFT games are targeted mainly to people who already play on PC. That’s a market that’s large but very, very well served so it’s hard to break new tech in that doesn’t have a massive difference in what’s on offer, and NFTs aren’t radically different from any other form of MTX
>the majority of players dont even partake of micro transactions.. We going to pretend as if Fortnite doesn't exist? That game completely changed the way the gaming industry sold their games. MTX's are the only reason games like FIFA, MADDEN, NBA, and NHL even exist..... where do you think all the money from these games come from? lol. I'm throwing no "tantrum", I am simply arguing against your points. Want the straight up truth? GME's investor group is so dedicated that they have locked away almost 50% of the free float via DRS. When has that EVER happened before? Never. Regardless of your opinions towards Gaming, NFT's, MTX's, or anything along those lines, it is a FACT that what's being done with $GME's stock is something never done before in history. What happens when apes lock 100% of the free float via DRS? IDK, but we're going to find out and when we do I'm willing to bet it will be pretty cool. Here you are on WSB... a sub about BETS, and you're avoiding the easiest bet you'll ever make in your life and instead "shorting" it... yikes. Good luck man.
I read the articles and is it saying they are going to be doing MTX using crypto in some games?
I agree that corporations are greedy, but with the technology they would be able to have a small fee that goes to the company. If it becomes as big as it’s predicted to be, why wouldn’t they do that? You’re right that’s the reason they don’t do it now, but do you think if they had a way to guarantee extra profits from reselling MTX transactions they would do it right now?
Where were you when Reddit started supporting MTX? Also, your post, pure speculation.
Because gamers are happy to pay for cosmetic or gameplay enhancements but there isn't much evidence that they're interested in the play-to-earn and appreciating asset elements that make NFTs different from regular MTX. Actually, the instances where NFTs have been implemented in games have seen very little engagement, which was never the case for cosmetic MTX in the past. Publishers think they can monetize NFTs more aggressively than MTX because of the same hype shit that has plagued the NFT market but really most people don't give a shit about any of that. There's a difference between saying "hey give us $10 bucks and your character can look like spiderman" and "hey play 1,000 hours and you'll get this basic helmet that you can then sell for eth"
I don't like this idea, but I think this is how it's gonna play out: Let's call of duty released another crap fest. In that game there is an awesome weapon everyone will want but they'll limit it to say 50 versions. They are then made into NFTs but useable in game. They can be traded a number of time but everyone who trades it gets a % of each trade. Or FIFA 2030 Ronaldo junior is the best player in the game but there is only 100 of him to to around he's made into a playable NFT and players can buy and sell him. Or Gran Turismo moon racer has a limited number of a unicorn car that can traded amongst players. GameStop will be the platform that allows the trades and purchases of in game items as NFTs. I don't like it but it's just an evolution of MTX.
Well when devs get a cut of their “used” games being sold on the market, they might show interest. When games can become limited NFTs so there only exists 10,000 copies, they might change their minds. Especially if the game is of high quality like Elden Ring. Micro transactions are “great” for investors but are loathed by most gamers. When games are bloated with unfun, uninspired filler just to waste the players time so they will buy XP boosts (Assassins Creed Valhalla) people tend to get annoyed. Or time gated just to sell a Mtx solution. (Nearly any mobile game) Most MTX are targeted at kids or adults who have limited gaming time, or cosmetics. And guess what? Right now at this very moment there’s a skin being sold for around 1400 on Counter Stike: Global Operations on steam. You don’t think Steam would want a kick back on that trade? Hell at 1% kick back that’s a 14 profit. For a dev on something that could be traded and used for a long time. It might bomb it might not, but I wouldn’t be so sure until we see it in action.
You're missing out a few important points. 80% of the revenue comes from mobile. Most people don't buy consoles. Most people can't afford PCs. Blizzard has been a prime example. They tried capitalizing on the mobile market(read: Chinese) a few years ago by silencing any pro Hong Kong voices, had their nice year of extra profits the got completely fucked in the ass by the CCP when they decided to crack down on video games last year. You're a bit behind, this MTX business model has been the standard for at least 7 years. I just don't see how much more room it has to grow especially how the market is already pretty inflated because of covid.
Bro don’t stress. Amazon owns New World MMO. I’m telling you MTX will make up for all the losses I promise bro
I think videogame companies back then were investing shitload of money in garbage games. Which seems like it's happening again, but this time bog companies insist in MTX.
Gamestop. There are fundamental issues with the business model it is pivoting towards that have not been addressed. 1. Most publishers won't accept their digital product that experiences no wear and tear to be sold and resold, taking away primary sales and generating a fraction of the revenue for them through royalties. The have awaited the death of used physical media sales with great anticipation, why would they move backwards? 2. NFT is little more than a secure public ledger. It guarantees no compatibility of digital goods between platforms. More importantly, it's not required to make digital goods tradeable. If publishers want they can do it all internally at far, far cheaper transaction costs (look at Steam marketplace). 3. The big digital distributing companies/publishers have been running a private ledger for MTX with minimal security issues. Even if they want to use NFTs it's much easier for them to convert their platform to support NFTs than use Gamestop's platform which they will owe revenue to perpetually. 4. We have no idea where NFT values will be once the hype dies down. Just look at what happened to the guy who bought the first Tweet NFT. Having an unpredictable revenue stream will mean Gamestop's PE ratio will suffer. In short - not as innovative as its hyped to be; larger, earlier, more experienced movers already established; unpredictable chance of success.
Runescape has been inflating coins with their new MTX strategy of literally offering coins in the treasure hunter.
Just hold till a week before release. The hype for GTA6 will drive the stock from first trailer to getting close to release. It will probably have a hard sell the news on release and you wont have to worry about if flops or not. They have alot of new IP in the pipeline and these games could have some nice MTX: Unannounced NFL Game Lego Racing Tiger Woods Golf Marvel Midnight Suns Racing, football and Golf will sell MTX New Bioshock The Quarry Civ 7 With Zynga have to hope for a mobile GTA Online
I got into an argument with some dude on the Halo subreddit because they were arguing that because the multiplayer portion of the game is downloadable for free, the studio is essentially charging double for the story mode. Completely disregarding this model is only possible because they believe enough people will buy the campaign and enough people will spend $ on MTX in the multiplayer to make it financially viable to do so. I was then told I obviously don’t know how to value anything because am an active member of wallstreetbets.
Steam products can be sold outside of Steam but Steam don't want them to be sold outside of Steam, and you didn't give a reason *why* companies would want you to be able to step in and stop them receiving a sale of an MTX.
Your last point is. Japan is going ahead with a blockchain stock market. Unless you meant it's not possible to guard against manipulation and naked shorting. To your first point. I think it's inevitable. Well all bemoaned MTX yet here we are.
I think NFT Gaming will become either a niche profitable market, or the way games are developed going forward. Steam can ban NFT games but do you really think they'll ban the next Assassin's Creed, Call of Duty, or anything else? Gamers will come around if it's implemented properly. There are a lot of stupid scam games right now but hopefully Gamestops marketplace with IMX uses a uniform token instead of an Ubisoft Token, EA Token, and whatever else. And with more curated content we'll see some great things. Gamers hated DLC when that was originally offered through PSN and Xbox Live. They all said "why not release a real expansion pass, or a sequel, etc." Gamers hated MTX (still do), but that doesn't stop a lot of them from buying the latest skins in Fortnite or call of duty. NFTs are basically MTX where at least you own the damn item and it's not locked into your account.
Lots of games are messing around with things like this but to mixed results. I remember Diablo 3 releasing with a real money auction house, allowing players to sell found games items for real money. Sounded great. Quickly ruined the game as whales controlled the in game economy and crashed it to the point Blizzard removed it. Path of Exile is releasing a "sequel" but allowing all MTX and characters to transfer over. Fans rejoinced the decision and its seemed to help get the a lot of positive attention. It seems like items that can be resold as NFTs work best as skins or MTX. when a game opens its items up to the stock market - people can and almost always manipulate it. I dont know the point of my rant. But there it is.
Gamers have made their stance on NFTs very clear. No one is interested in that shit or more MTX in games in general, let alone making the entire game about MTX.
Puts on them for me, adding subscriptions and MTX is a death knell sort of cash grab.
still running 1st gen iPhone SE - but spending bazillions on MTX - I can confirm: Apple Ecosystem is strong and Microtransactions, subscriptions, paid apps are a ever increasing continuous income stream for Apple. And I think their RISC Chips for Macs are pretty nice ;D We might see Nvidia RISC Gaming CPUs in the future as well - and maybe a shift also for Intel and AMD - but I don't see that coming atm.
A big fan of its MTX at least.
Destiny has much higher cash flows since it’s a live service Game with MTX. Last year, I paid $105+ for Destiny 2 content, and I spent $80 preordering for the coming year. Not even factoring in player counts, D2 has close to 200K unique players on PC alone in the last month.
It's amazing how all a game needs to be successful, is an overflowing MTX store and some dedicated whales.
IDK, it's pretty consistently been a top 10 game on Steam, PlayStation, and probably Xbox for a few years now. Realistically it generates $80 in Revenue from most players, not counting MTX or other "One-off content" like we got in December. Wouldn't be surprised if yearly Revenue was around half a billion, which would be a Price/Rev ratio of 6.4, which seems pretty normal. The massive amount of Gaming (TMT) deals lately is crazy.
Why would any company want that? Literally the entire model is moving towards low cost of entry with MTX being the money maker.
I've seen some anecdotal comments over the years browsing around that the MTX heavy games need something like less than 10% of the player numbers to be multiples more profitable
and just worries me for the future of taketwo, they already make a lot of money from MTX, and now they bought a MTX company? is this all they plan on doing from here on out?
Compared to the tastes of regular games, keeping online poker "fresh" is a walk in the park. And over the next decade, gambling is going to get pretty legal across all of the US. We'll start seeing major momentum in a few years once "Daily Fantasy" becomes the norm. My bet is that it's going to be one of the biggest growth sectors in 2020-2030 as it gets fully legalized online. Once they combine standard gambling w/ modern day MTX and skinner box tactics, they'll be raking in a ton of money.
Gamers don't give a shit even if they cry online Im a gamer all my life. People meme, shit in pre-ordering or lootboxes for a decade and every year there are more pre-orders sold than ever before, more money made from MTX than ever before etc They don't care, they'll buy it because the companies know how to sell it to em even if people cry online and make thousands of posts. They are still the minority
Nobody cares what gamers want. It's what the companies want. Not like gamers want MTX lol
Maybe. Probably not though. Until more governments call MTX gambling, you're not gonna win big on this. FUT brings in like 1 billion in revenue for pretty much no effort. Even if FIFA can get a new developer to pick up simulation football and do well, it will take quite a while to erode EA market share. Idk bro. I like the idea bc it makes sense, but at the same time it doesn't appear sound.
Bungie is similar. They exited from Activision and kept the Destiny IP. Destiny 2 has gotten better on things like MTX and content since they parted ways.
it sounds really memey but I feel like NFT for e-gaming could work, sell 'used games' so to speak. Of course, that's assuming the entire model doesn't just go FTP/MTX/subscription, which I think is more likely
Roblox has been down for 36 hours and counting during their Halloween event with no end in sight while RBLX closed 1.53% Friday night and is 12% up for the month. Gonna try to short this Sunday at 5am premarket since they're missing out on all the MTX tendies and Theta sellers have an incentive to fuck with the call holders before earnings. Homeless or Lambo.
I think this will end up via consumer protection laws at some point. If you buy something there should be nothing preventing you from reselling it. Currently physical video games if even able to be resold, contain only shells of the available content upon initial purchase. NFT's fix both of these problems -- games would be able to resold freely, the game would be 'the full version' and developers would still be able to get their cut. The reason why developers are against reselling is because they want their cut. If they can get their cut, then I don't think anything would stop this, especially when the laws are shifting (especially in the EU) towards consumer rights. This is usually circumvented by saying something in the terms and conditions along the lines of "you're not buying this game, you're buying a non-transferable license to play the game" this could be challenged in the future but that's a big unknown and 99% of people don't care as long as the game plays when they hit play This is fair criticism but I think it can be done. -- Next is all personal conjecture, not any DD I've seen firsthand from Gamestop. But, based on personal experience, when a developer creates their own ecosystem the consumer suffers. I'm not just talking the big ones, Epic, Steam, etc. Every single game that wants to offer mtx has to either partner with a bigger developer, or create their own (usually shitty) storefront just for MTX. This point ties in with your next Game developers don't care all that much about the consumer experience. They just want it to be good enough that it doesn't actively drive you away. They have a monopoly on in-game items, if you want those items you have to buy it from them, they just need to make sure their store isn't so terrible it makes you stop playing the game. Trading cards is thinking way too small. When I think NFT's I think Picasso's not baseball cards or beanie babies. Imagine the estate that Picasso's ancestors would have if they had gotten a cut every single time a Picasso was resold. Now substitute Picasso with developer and I can already see the scrooge mcduck $$'s flashing in their eyes. The current system for MTX is -- "If we want X to be common, then we need to charge $X for it." "If we want Y to be super rare, then we need to charge 100 times $X for it." That rubs consumers the wrong way. They go into a storefront and see item for sale for hundreds of dollars they immediately get turned off. But compare a static one sided, developer sells to consumer model to -- what I consider a much better format -- the (STEAM) marketplace for Team Fortress 2 items. Person wants item, they can earn it in game, or buy from another player. That player makes money, and steam/valve gets their cut. Instead of having to price items in tiers, there could be a, "In our entire game, only 10 of this item exists in the entire ecosystem." Imagine if in World of Warcraft back in the day, you could have sold the hand of ragnaros skin to another player after buying from another player or earning it yourself -- all while Blizzard gets a cut. Blizzard isn't the bad guy, because THEY didn't artificially create the item to give to the player. The market is set by players themselves. I don't know how exactly it would play out, but I do see the potential. I also don't know how easily it would be for every single developer to also develop their own NFT system (eventual moat). But, all that being said -- with NFT's I think Gamestop could potentially position itself as the Sotheby's of the NFT world. Keeping track of validation through blockchain. Gamers being able to buy and sell at a physical location with their friends if they wanted, or a digital one. Again this is possible, but creating a new NFT system is about as easy as copy and pasting the E-the-re-um code. I don't see why they would auction items through Gamestop when they could just do it themselves especially considering they extremely tech savvy personnel. But even if they did auction through Gamestop, is that enough to make up for all the lost sales at physical locations that's coming in the next decade?
> I don't see any reason why game developers would allow digital copies of their games to be resold at all. They have fought tooth and nail against this in the past, and while they could get a cut of the resold game this way, they would just view it as a lost full sale no matter how you try to present it. I think this will end up via consumer protection laws at some point. If you buy something there should be nothing preventing you from reselling it. Currently physical video games if even able to be resold, contain only shells of the available content upon initial purchase. NFT's fix both of these problems -- games would be able to resold freely, the game would be 'the full version' and developers would still be able to get their cut. The reason why developers are against reselling is because they want their cut. If they can get their cut, then I don't think anything would stop this, especially when the laws are shifting (especially in the EU) towards consumer rights. So, imo it really doesn't just pertain only to digital games at all. The NFT can be tied to the -- equivalent of a serial number -- that every game has already, digital or physical. >In game items? sure I could see that happening, but again why would Gamestop get a cut instead of it going straight to the developer? This is fair criticism but I think it can be done. -- Next is all personal conjecture, not any DD I've seen firsthand from Gamestop. But, based on personal experience, when a developer creates their own ecosystem the consumer suffers. I'm not just talking the big ones, Epic, Steam, etc. Every single game that wants to offer mtx has to either partner with a bigger developer, or create their own (usually shitty) storefront just for MTX. This point ties in with your next question: >Something similar to Valve's steam trading cards? Yeah that could happen, but it happens now without NFTs and even if it's successful it's a relatively miniscule amount of revenue. Trading cards is thinking way too small. When I think NFT's I think Picasso's not baseball cards or beanie babies. Imagine the estate that Picasso's ancestors would have if they had gotten a cut every single time a Picasso was resold. Now substitute Picasso with developer and I can already see the scrooge mcduck $$'s flashing in their eyes. The current system for MTX is -- "If we want X to be common, then we need to charge $X for it." "If we want Y to be super rare, then we need to charge 100 times $X for it." That rubs consumers the wrong way. They go into a storefront and see item for sale for hundreds of dollars they immediately get turned off. But compare a static one sided, developer sells to consumer model to -- what I consider a much better format -- the (STEAM) marketplace for Team Fortress 2 items. Person wants item, they can earn it in game, or buy from another player. That player makes money, and steam/valve gets their cut. Instead of having to price items in tiers, there could be a, "In our entire game, only 10 of this item exists in the entire ecosystem." Imagine if in World of Warcraft back in the day, you could have sold the hand of ragnaros skin to another player after buying from another player or earning it yourself -- all while Blizzard gets a cut. Blizzard isn't the bad guy, because THEY didn't artificially create the item to give to the player. The market is set by players themselves. I don't know how exactly it would play out, but I do see the potential. I also don't know how easily it would be for every single developer to also develop their own NFT system (eventual moat). But, all that being said -- with NFT's I think Gamestop could potentially position itself as the Sotheby's of the NFT world. Keeping track of validation through blockchain. Gamers being able to buy and sell at a physical location with their friends if they wanted, or a digital one.