Square Enix - Blockchain Technology in Games

Square Enix's president Yosuke Matsuda explains their interest in what he calls "blockchain games" and in particular, NFT, as a new incentive for their customers.

A New Year's Letter from the President

[…] Another term that gained quick currency in 2021 was "NFT" or "non-fungible token." The advent of NFTs using blockchain technology significantly increased the liquidity of digital goods, enabling the trading of a variety of such goods at high prices and sparking conversations the world over. I see 2021 not only as "Metaverse: Year One," but also as "NFTs: Year One" given that it was a year in which NFTs were met with a great deal of enthusiasm by a rapidly expanding user base. However, we do observe examples here and there of overheated trading in NFT-based digital goods with somewhat speculative overtones, regardless of the observed value of the content provided This, obviously, is not an ideal situation, but I expect to see an eventual right-sizing in digital goods deals as they become more commonplace among the general public, with the value of each available content corrected to their true estimated worth, and I look for them to become as familiar as dealings in physical goods.

To address these changes in our business environment, the medium-term business strategy that we unveiled in May 2020 identified AI, the cloud, and blockchain games as new domains on which we should focus our investments, and we have subsequently been aggressive in our R&D efforts and investments in those areas. […]

However, with advances in token economies, users will be provided with explicit incentives, thereby resulting not only in greater consistency in their motivation, but also creating a tangible upside to their creative efforts. I believe that this will lead to more people devoting themselves to such efforts and to greater possibilities of games growing in exciting ways. From having fun to earning to contributing, a wide variety of motivations will inspire people to engage with games and connect with one another. It is blockchain-based tokens that will enable this. By designing viable token economies into our games, we will enable self-sustaining game growth. […]

More information.

And now I'm just seeing this. Actually it's perfect, people who still want to play Square Enix's games will be able to do it with Samsung's devices. What a wonderful world we're living in.

Samsung's 2022 TVs will have built in Stadia, GeForce Now and NFTs
[some more nonsense]

EDIT. Back on topic and related to the news post:

Final Fantasy 14 Players Are Begging Square Enix To Cancel Its NFT Plans
After a concerning letter from the president of Square Enix, Final Fantasy 14 fans call for the company to reconsider its support of NFTs.

Only days into the new year, fans of the critically acclaimed Final Fantasy 14 are concerned for the future of the game, as Square Enix recently revealed worrying plans for the future of its properties. Even before any official announcements, fans are already pushing back against possible effects a recent statement from the Square Enix president could have on Final Fantasy 14. [. . .]

So the main push-back appears to be over environmental concerns arising from block-chain trading of NFTs? What if the NFTs were awarded but non-tradable?

Originally Posted by Philistine
So the main push-back appears to be over environmental concerns arising from block-chain trading of NFTs? What if the NFTs were awarded but non-tradable?

Because it would be like a coffee without the colour of the coffee, the taste or the caffeine? The point would be missed.

One of the main point of the NFT is each of those are limited in number, so they are scarce, and they are strictly owned. It introduces 'few' in the digital world which is a space where assets until now could be reproduced indefinitely.

Owned and scarce mean the value of some of those items will raise so speculation and trade are the natural consequence.

I have yet to see any explanation of NFTs that tell me how they are supposed to make the games themselves better in any way. It's always a bunch of vague techno-business speak about "adding value" that breaks down to creating revenue streams.

Originally Posted by Philistine
So the main push-back appears to be over environmental concerns arising from block-chain trading of NFTs? What if the NFTs were awarded but non-tradable?

The environmental concerns seem to be amplified by the pro-environmentalist values the game is apparently conveying.

Using NFT in a game (or even outside) is somewhat controversial too. People start trading worthless items at ridiculous prices, and it detracts from the purpose of the game, or give it a superficial and unhealthy enticement.

To be frank, I never understood the enthusiasm for trading items obtained through those games, like the cards we get in Steam (or items or whatever they call it) when doing specific actions in a game, and which can be sold for a virtual currency - which can be used as money in some cases too I believe.

I don't see what you mean by NFT that would be non-tradable. Sign your own identity in it? Just make a good hall-of-fame website, then

I just don't get it. Blockchain in games ??? WTF ???

They allow people or the vendor to create 'exclusive' assets for the games. People can buy them, own them and sell them. Those assets are limited in numbers so the value will go up with the time.

Obviously works better in a MP setting so people can drool about your very exclusive hat or whatever.
Those NFT use the same technology to store the information than Bitcoin and they are generally also bought using that 'money' which makes the whole package dubious in every way and quite bad for the environment. Exists since 2014 but the AAA publishers are starting to grasp the potential only now. Says a lot about how bad they are since it's a gold mine for people like them.

Very very lucrative, so those poor publishers cannot resist: they can create a thong for your toon and guarantee it will only be sold to 10 or 100 people. They can put any price they want, they will sell them.

EA and its yearly FIFA scam will look like a responsible company with a noble consumer vision compared to that. Until they put it in their games too, obviously.

I don't like it, and including these wanky NFT thingies will likely deter me from making any game purchases that offer this silly "feature".

I wonder how much work users' PCs might be be doing, as part of these blockchains. I'd love to see some more detail on how this stuff is going to work.

Originally Posted by Ripper
I wonder how much work users' PCs might be be doing, as part of these blockchains. I'd love to see some more detail on how this stuff is going to work.

Wait until Windows 12 makes it mandatory to have an accelerator to support their new blockchain-enabled OS

Perhaps that since Intel acquired Altera and AMD is supposedly acquiring Xilinx, they could make it available as soft IP in a programmable FPGA embedded in their blockchain-ready CPUs.

Originally Posted by Carnifex
I don't like it, and including these wanky NFT thingies will likely deter me from making any game purchases that offer this silly "feature".

Might grow hard to avoid, at least in AAA games. Personally, I won't skip an entire game I'm interested in because it has some "feature" I have no interest in. For years, you've been able to use real money to buy in game resources in various games (Ubisoft games, for example), but I just ignore it. Which is super easy to do, since it's only even visible from the main menu.

But all this talk about "improving the experience" is utter bullshit and that's maybe the part that annoys me the most.

I know that it's a losing battle, though. Never mind NFTs, I have never understood people's fascination with achievements or with the trinkets you can buy and collect on Steam. It's just another facet of that desire to collect virtual garbage (which quickly becomes the desire to find exploits so one can mine that garbage and sell it on to other garbage collectors)

I hope all of these attempts to maximize profits crash and burn, so that we can move on to their next attempt at maximing profits. This is so draining. And it will never end. It's been a long time now since making money isn't enough. They need to make all the money. And they also have the fucking audacity to say that these new income streams will make game development sustainable? After the biggest part of the profits are already taken by the heads of these companies, and the teams actually building the software get crumbs. Or get laid off. This system will never cease to amaze me.

Originally Posted by Kos
Because it would be like a coffee without the colour of the coffee, the taste or the caffeine? The point would be missed.

One of the main point of the NFT is each of those are limited in number, so they are scarce, and they are strictly owned. It introduces 'few' in the digital world which is a space where assets until now could be reproduced indefinitely.

Owned and scarce mean the value of some of those items will raise so speculation and trade are the natural consequence.

I thought the point of NFTs was ownership. I would be happy to own a unique piece of loot, or portrait, et. al. because it's exclusive to me. I wouldn't want to trade it. It's the trading that causes all the blockchain power usage, so just ban that.

And here I thought the fact that digital goods are infinitely reproducible at no cost was a tremendous advantage, scarcity being a main source of inequality all over the world.
Silly me.

Originally Posted by Kos
They allow people or the vendor to create 'exclusive' [..]
Those NFT use the same technology to store the information than Bitcoin and they are generally also bought using that 'money' which makes the whole package dubious in every way and quite bad for the environment. Exists since 2014 but the AAA publishers are starting to grasp the potential only now. Says a lot about how bad they are since it's a gold mine for people like them.

Bitcoin = Slavery for the future project. Okay, now I understand.

Originally Posted by Moorkh
And here I thought the fact that digital goods are infinitely reproducible at no cost was a tremendous advantage, scarcity being a main source of inequality all over the world.
Silly me.

Without scarcity there is no significant value in the market. No one wants to just make out evenly. They want to introduce scarcity into the digital world. And as always they want to suggest that everything will be improved if you introduce a profit margin. And they want to dupe the "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" into thinking this is a way they can get ahead in the capitalist rat race. Man, what a world we live in.

It's never a losing battle, save if you capitulate. I lump these NFG thingies in the same barrel with abominations like Ubijunk, Unorigin, and many others, if they violate a principle of mine, then they forfeit the right to be on my machine.