You bought horse armor. You bought loot crates. You'll buy in-game NFTs.

They left out the part where they ask for money and grift millions from suckers.

Don’t F*cking Make Anything?

At this point, the die hard crypto bros have already lost all their money to other grifts. This is like selling a console that is being directly marketed to homeless people.

Yeah, the market for NFTs are dead. Has been since about the first week of March. Everything in the NFT marketplace right now is supply side. The demand pull is almost completely gone.

What an absolute idiot this guy is. There is one application where Blockchain could make sense: having cross-store ownership of games and dlcs. But of course they’d never use it for such a pro-consumer move. You can’t scam people with that.

Bravo! Great job Mr. Venturelli.

Bravo indeed.

This sure is something


Web 3.0 brain is thinking NFTs will magically create a demand for used copies of a digital game after it reaches market saturation. No one wants to buy a new copy of CoD, but somehow if the blockchain is involved the are now 24 million new people willing to spend $20 on it? So Gamestop can make $48M? Instead of just selling new copies for the same price and making three times that much at current market standard margins?

Well, forgoing all the NFT nonsense, it’s definitely true that there are people who are willing to pay $20 for a game but who aren’t willing to pay $60 for a game. That’s why the used game market exists.

But nobody needs NFTs to figure out how to make money on used game sales, especially Gamestop.

Well, also, if EA is suddenly going to decide to allow its customers to sell their used games for $20, why are they going to share that revenue with GameStop (or anyone else) by putting those licenses on a blockchain? EA already knows who owns their games, and could set up a used market if they wanted to, no blockchain required.

Sure, but the premise being presented that there are none of those people left. You can’t solve the problem of sales drying up by assuming more sales will happen for reasons.

Why share that revenue with the current owners, either? If someone is willing to pay $20 for one of their games, they can just sell it directly themselves.

Oh for sure. It’s just another situation where a Web3 bro describes some amazing new thing or way or operating that doesn’t actually require Web3 in any way. Web3 doesn’t even make it easier, cheaper, or faster. It’s just there to be there.

Crypto stands are just Tankies, and should be hunted for sport.

An excellent point. I was going to make some devil’s advocate argument about the possibility of selling the game used for $20 later makes it more likely people would pay $60 (or more) for it now, but I can’t even really do that with a straight face.

Sharing the revenue with the end user makes some sense, if you only give them Acti-bucks which can only be spent with you so you effectively keep their revenue, and when the user invariably decides they want to play COD again, you get another sale!