Why there's no future for NFTs in games

 Bury those bitcoins

Recently news dropped of a major game publisher we all know and have some varying strong emotion towards, Sega- the Sonic guys- and their thoughts on what is largely a dead and buried topic now: NFTs. Well, actually the topic was blockchain games specifically but it was the allure of constant revenue generating computer generated tokens that put NFTs in the radar of gaming and led the avaricious towards blockchain integration. We've seen Ubisoft fall for that promise, former-Lionhead director Peter Molyneux abandon his vague morals to writhe in it's filth and even Square Enix seems primed to head down into that swamp judging from how they've positioned themselves with their NFT game coming out. But then there's Sega throwing down the gauntlet and saying 'No, we won't do that. Because it sounds boring.'

And to be absolutely fair that is a perfectly valid reason to not pursue NFT and Blockchain integration because they're right- every single conceptualisation for how Blockchain integration could influence gaming has resulted in play experiences that sound indistinguishable from jobs. It's always games about resource collection and managing market places and dedicating hours to grinding every single day in the pursuit of some vague payout- not to actually achieve anything, progress a story, enjoy yourself- but to generate a revenue. And, of course, the game creator's get to seep some of that revenue for themselves because of transaction fees, platform fees, asset rental fees, and whatever other bull they can conjure up to justify leeching from the players. It sounds good in the addled minds of marketing executives but for anyone who has actually played, developed or considered the basic aspects of what makes interactive media enjoyable... well, we see things a little differently.

But doesn't that headline ring a little strange with you? 'Giant video game corporation totally refuses money making decision because it doesn't think users will enjoy it?' As though that's a deciding factor that typically buzzes around the head of executives when it comes to making decisions? Because I feel like most of us have reached a point wherein we're certain the only thoughts that such executives have is "How can I squeeze more of a profit out of fans." I mean, isn't it literally the fiduciary duty of a CEO to generate profit in whatever way they can? I think that by digging just a little bit deeper we can actually find a more sound reason as to why NFTs and Blockchain make for poor bedmates with games and it's actually because the two have no future together. Lootcrates? Battle passes? Sweet nectar to the tongues of executives. NFTs? Blockchain? Deadly Nightshade droplets, sour and lethal in high doses.

The entire premise of the 'Blockchain future' is based around the proposition that people would be willing to invest to own pieces of the game that they like under the belief that they will generate revenue by playing around in that game. This belief, however, is undercut by core logical fallacies that generate utterly incompatible profitability margins with what reality dictates is possible. NFT marketplaces simply wish to fill the place of existing marketplaces you can already find for a few games, but the revenue and profit they generate is deeply dependent on the popularity of the game and willingness of it's audience to engage. Counter Strike is one of the most popular games in the world, even today, and it's knife skins are part of an economy entirely separate of the main game itself enabled through grey markets and third parties. Would such parties be privy to having the game makers cut into such operations and taking their own 'developers' cut? The culture of gaming is deeply resistant to developer over-interference, that alone is a battleground of ideology just waiting to be sparked. 

NFTs are a failing market, collapsing like a dwarf star at the end of it's final sputter, once valuable icons are shrivelling up to tenths of their original buying price and no one is buying because anyone with a brain is trying to sell right now. In fact, there's decent evidence to believe there was no genuine value in this market to begin with and any illusion to such was purely due to wash trading within the community- which makes a lot of sense when you consider the sort of people constantly going on about these pointlessly wastes of commodities were the one's who saw the financial value of one-day flipping them. If there's no intrinsic value and the extrinsic value is strictly insular, where would the multmillion dollar valuations have spawned from? Of course, what most sane people realised in a matter of minutes took the rest of the industrial world several years to cotton onto.

Yet there's one big smoking-gun reason why the NFT future is totally dead in the water before it even started, you ready for this? Because no one knows what the bloody things are! That is, outside of those dedicated money hungry wash traders we just talked about, desperately buying up their own product in a sad attempt to catch a bigger, richer fish with their bait. The amount of effort it takes to actually own one, creating a wallet with the right crypto platform, walking through the complex set-up process, trusting your bank to not cancel that shady as heck transaction- it's all beyond the headspace of your average silly punter. Which is precisely the problem when that same clueless punter is meant to be the target victi- I mean audience.

Take a look at the most profitable venue of gaming as it currently exists today, mobile gaming; why is that so popular? Is it the quality and replay value of the games? Not in the slightest. It's because they're easily accessible to even the most brain-addled rube out there. Simply download the app and run through the brightly coloured game as it plays through levels for you- as simple as gaming can get. And it scores a lot of revenue. Even a dedicated RPG maker like Bethesda will boast how their most successful game is technically Fallout Shelter, for how little it takes to maintain (and probably to develop in the first place) for the insane level of revenue it generates. (You'd think that'd be enough to earn an update or two but no...) You want money, you go for the easier access points, not the more complicated.

Grifts that are only accessible to the tech-savvy investor type still holds some potential of scoring the kind of victim one can sleep pretty soundly at night after stealing from, but it's nowhere near the grounds to launch a new platform worthy of scams. Even SEGA, who were once very excitable about the idea, have seen through the smoke and mirrors to a trend destined to die long before it makes anyone a genuine profit. Clap all you want for the developer that stood up and said what we're all thinking, but deep down there's not a single one of us who doesn't know this is yet another cold-hard business decision made by those who just want to see the gaming world as one of the coin bricks from Super Mario World. Their objectives may align with us today, but our goals will always be in other castles... I mixed up my Nintendo metaphors with Sega again, didn't I? (Dammit!)

Wait, Ubisoft are still on that NFT stuff?

 I've just been in this time before.

Ah, it has been a while since I've had a taste of some of that succulent 'low hanging fruit', now hasn't it? That taste, a delicate yet seductive blend of predictability and prejudice, swirled into a vat of 'easy content'- oh, it just tickles the core of my senses to even picture! But then, it hasn't been so long... what could Ubisoft have possibly done this time to cement their ever flagging legacy as one of the most consistently out-of-touch developers on this fair planet? Oh wait, what a stupid question to ask, of course they've come out and reaffirmed their dedication to a grift so pathetic it's already done the late night talk show circuit and come back bruised and battered, NFTs. No, this isn't a re-run; and if you think you're caught in a time loop then we're all along for the ride as well. Ubisoft seriously can't read the neon painted writing slathered all over the wall.

To really hammer home the sort of world that the NFT trend inhabits these days; note the abundance of post-mortem articles documenting the passing of the fad as just desserts for a life badly lived. NFTs were synonymous with systemic wash trading, endemic overvaluation and horrific oversupply in the face of an extreme lack of demand. NFT pushers might as well be selling radioactive sandwiches on the street corner for how little they piqued the interest of literally anyone at all. It is somewhat warming to see how easily everyone saw through the grift of a 'trading ownership movement' that was dependent on a product that paid a constant commission to the publisher everytime it was traded. Yeah, they really forget to mention that bit whenever rambling about 'taking back your control' and 'owning your entertainment'. Which is to say nothing for the ecological impact, the impending economic implications of an NFT fuelled entertainment industry and the absolutely delusional break of society that so many defenders had as they tried to warp the foundations of reality in their mind to justify their dead-end subject.

And this was the state of the NFT world in March. There hasn't been some huge turn around, people haven't brushed off the ash and pined for the nostalgic days of NFT old- we've all moved onto the next tech boogie man, one with a lot more potential to change the face of the world, the abundance of AI generation algorithms. You'd have to be a real slack-jawed backwards hillbilly Neanderthal to be jumping abroad the NFT train now- and an even more primitive glob of primordial sludge to circle back around to NFTs at this point after experiencing the biting consequences of going down that path before. Which pretty much sums up how I saw the form of Ubisoft in the modern age because lo-and-behold: after smothering the ailing 'Ghost Recon: Breakpoint' to death with their first go at 'Ubisoft Quartz', those crazy Ubisoftians are back on their old bull again pushing the next dead end grift destined to ruin their meagre reputation even further.

Now that Tom Clancy is good and turning over in his grave, and Ubisoft already managed to kill their Watch_Dogs franchise with the quality of the games alone- they didn't even have to get out the NFT shaped gun- Ubisoft can finally move onto it's most profitable rotting horse: Assassin's Creed. Because as if planning to release 8 games for the series over the space of three years isn't asinine enough, Ubisoft have now taken it upon themselves to plan out a series of collectible digital assets mixed with real-world 3D printed models that look somewhat cool but probably aren't worth the hassle or investment to actually acquire. Okay, so maybe Ubisoft themselves aren't actually mounting this but rather just licensing out the property, but guess who's going to be getting the backlash anyway? That's right, the purse-string holders! 

Picture this, Ubisoft are taking advantage of the semi-sci-fi world of Assassin's Creed to sell the likenesses of their characters in the form of 3D printable models which are tied to the purchase of NFTs which are described as the 'digital soul' of these heroes. So if you want to print out a cool model of Ezio doing a pose, you need to purchase his 'digital soul' off the blockchain for those schematics. That is the actual terminology they use and if I was working at the marketing firm who came up with this I would have taken the time to slap every single person who okay-ed this in the mouth for several reasons. Chief of which being that these desperate attempts to monetise off gaming franchises, even though this one isn't tied to an ingame asset and so I'm less personally offended by it, are all played out and trashy at this point.

But it goes a little deeper than this. Bear in mind that Ubisoft's Quartz project was such a tremendous disaster that Ubisoft had to cancel it and then pretend they were only really pretending to be zealous cultists about the 'NFT future' for laughs. So they're on the back foot right now, the laughing stock for all their business related decisions. As such, they knew this new NFT announcement was going to draw some ire right off the bat and needed to ensure it was nailed down to the floor- with no potential gaff to ruin the reveal. And then it comes out that the name of the NFTS in questions are 'digital souls'. Now divorce for a moment the fact that literally sounds like your ripping the heart and essence out of these characters in a significantly symbolic sense; where have we heard the term 'digital soul' used before in popular media? Heck, in popular gaming media?

Oh, that's right: that is literally the mcguffin device in the anti-corporate hate letter game: Cyberpunk 2077. Re-cap: Cyberpunk 2077 proposes the concept of a digitisation of a person's mind into a data chip in the vain pursuit of some form of 'immortality'. Of course, this is used as an enslaving tool to keep the 'engram' of undesirables for the nefarious ends of the financially monolithic and abstractly avaricious Arasaka corporation. These engrams are the 'digital souls' of the victims, ripped from the fleshy body and trapped in a server farm prison forever more. To quote the Cyberpunk in-universe 'Rezodrone' song 'Resist and Disorder': 

"Behind the veil is the machine

It steals your soul, devouring all your dreams"

In essence, the conceptualisation of the word 'Digital Soul', as established by the Cyberpunk 2077 narrative, is a neoliberal-esque eradication of the person into their least human aspects, raw emotionless data, for the exploitation of shadowy capitalistic gods. If that isn't the be-all end-all of NFT smack downs, then I should just retire from writing altogether because it ain't getting colder than that.

So in one fell swoop Ubisoft have announced their newest foray into lunacy and roasted themselves in the same half-breath; mask-off describing the cynical and anti-consumerist nature of their latest grift. But then what else should we really expect from them? Ubisoft is desperate, they're losing respect in the industry, employees and fellow companies look on them as a joke, they're on the verge of oversaturating their last inexplicable money cow with a dozen Assassin's Creed projects at once, they have three games stuck in various states of development hell with a rumoured fourth eeking in that direction for good measure- (Beyond Good and Evil 2, Prince of Persia Remake, Skull and Bones and Splinter Cell Remake; respectively) they need to scrape the bottom of the barrel to remind themselves what it's like to feel money in their hands again. And as I did once love Ubisoft games and don't want to see them collapse any further, I should probably swallow my pride and at least wish them- nah, I can't do it... I hope they fail yet again. Screw NFTs.

Is the Blockchain the new mobile market?

 No

I've touched a lot on both mobile gaming and the concept of 'blockchain gaming' as it exists within the idealised dystopia that is the mind of your everyday crypto bro lunatic, and it only makes sense that I bring them together to ask such an important question about the evolution of our gaming industry. Afterall, the mobile industry has been brought up every now and then by Cryptoheads of a prime example of a gaming platform that started off in pathetic fashion but grew into the most popular in the world, isn't it possible that the same sort of thing could happen with the blockchain? Yes, this is actually something of a common refrain, and one just that tiny bit complicated enough to require an extended rebuttal. So consider this my extended pre-built answer because god knows I can't be compiling all this together on the fly every time someone wants to insult mine and their own intelligence by speaking nonsense.

Mobile gaming, in the days of the flip phone, was indeed only one degree above tiger handheld electronic for being the bottom of the barrel for those who wanted to play. Ugly and rudimentary platformers that typically only stood out for licence agreements made behind the scenes, they were heavily limited by the simplistic tech of the time. the improvement of the phone hardware over the years has been what has allowed mobile gaming to blossom into actually intelligentially designed pieces of complex software. On the absolute flipside, Blockchain gaming started on the computer. The rudimentary design elements are not due to hardware limitations, but with blockchain integration on the most conceptual level. In fact, no Cryptobro seems able to propose a use case for the tech that isn't aggressively, eye wateringly misinformed or easily doable without blockchain technology.

It genuinely hurts my soul to go over these talking points, but I do intend for this article to be a full rebuttal. First off, item ownership and unique unlockable items; they can easily be created and integrated into a game's ecosystem without blockchain integration. Server first rewards have been held in Runescape, sellable weapon skins in CS:GO, cash out opportunities are practically everywhere if you are a purveyor of the 'grey market'. As for cross-game item integration, believing in that requires such a fundamental lack of understanding when it comes to game design that it's almost insulting to respond to. Every asset in a video game needs to be created intentionally by the team to have a use case in their game in question. Assets go through processes of conceptualisation, artistic rendering and mechanical compositioning before they even make it into the Alpha build. It's a delicate process of balance and control. Now imagine if a medieval fantasy game like Elden Ring had to do this dance whilst also trying to figure out some way to throw in a hula-dress from a NFT game that released a year ago, a laser rifle from another one, and several items from every single NFT game ever released ever.

That isn't even taking into the account the fact that each of these games would belong to totally separate developers, which means that in this theoretical, FromSoft would be dedicated development manpower for the benefit of a studio they have no affiliation with, just to keep that separate company's NFT ecosystem afloat. From a player's standpoint it only really offers a base precursory glance of value for items that only have innate value in the games they were made for, in a market sense it is absolutely unrealistic for the thousands of games that are made and released every single day, and from a business standpoint it's literally a money waster- which should in itself be a wake-up call to these dreamers because money making is all they care about! And that these are literally the 'strongest' use case arguement these people can come up with, should be all you need to know about the kind of 'forward thinkers' we're working with here!

"But Mobile games are good now!" As the refrain goes. To which my answer can only be a condemnation. No, Mobile Games are not good- they're popular. The vast majority of mobile games are lightly animated waiting simulators wherein the chief most gameplay mechanic is the requirement to wait until meters fill themselves or the autobattle screen rolls by or the 'cooldown' expires. There are good games on the mobile platform, but those are either exceptional islands in a vast sea of mediocrity, which are usually soon ported to PC, or ports of real PC games made playable on the phone. No, Heartstone is not a mobile game. No more so than Grand Theft Auto:San Andreas is. Or Final Fantasy one through six. The mobile market hasn't suddenly grown standards in the past decade, it's just gotten better at money gouging.

Still, just because a game isn't good that doesn't discount the value of it's popularity. On this we do agree, and if Blockchain games can snatch the popularity of the mobile market then they'll became a staying power in the industry no matter what more traditional gamers think. But here's the rub, mobile games became popular because of how accessible they are for gamers, whilst the Blockchain is anything but. Mobile games are easy to find, easy to play, and typically free to start. Blockchain games are difficult to trackdown, a nightmare to get working and require stupidly expensive buy-ins that are typically made months before the game even starts development, because that's how these blockchain games make their money. It's pretty much night and day in that regard, Blockchain has something of an uphill struggle.

Of course, there's also the refrain about all the famous and storied developers who have turned their hand to the blockchain market. People who had a hand changing gaming history now feeling the direction that the market is trending pre-emptively. Except, are they? Where's Kojima's Blockchain game? Todd Howard's? Sid Meyer's? Shigeru Miyamoto's? Oh, we've got Peter Molyneux's crypto game? You mean Peter Molyneux: the guy renowed for promising more out of his games than his team were ever able to deliver, to the point where he verged on straight being a two-bit hustler before his crypto period? People like that are your burning symbol of righteous quality? Heck, you guys can go ahead and keep Molyneux; we don't want him anymore!

For the time being, I think we can pretty definitively say that the Blockchain market doesn't hold much of any sway over the world of gaming, and isn't set to shift that balance anytime within the next 10 or so years. Mobile gaming truly did turn the tables with what it was able to accomplish, but to compare the mobile market with blockchain gaming would be like trying to compare the rise of commercial trains to the ascent of the commercial blimp market. One is now ubiquitous, the other collapsed in a fiery ball that killed 36 people. The Mobile market is soaring, and the blockchain gaming market has crashed over and over again in a fiery explosion that hasn't directly killed anyone yet, but has at least contributed to virtual wage slavery of third world economies. So yeah, can't wait for that Crypto future; how about you?

Sewer Diving

 NFT = Bad

Are you tired of this? I mean deeply, in your actual tissue and sinew, wrapped against your very soul, don't you feel a deep exasperation whenever the topic of Non-Fungible Tokens rears it's way into the news cycle? In the day it used to be the hip and trendy new buzzword, with the sceptics simply being behind-the-times relics shouting at windmills and waving a mournful fist at the unstoppable wave that is the future. But what are we now? I guess we're the green blades of grass among the fields of millions who stare on in laconic amusement at the squabbling squirrels that make up the modern NFT market. It's a badly kept secret that the entire industry is held-up by wash-trading, around which every new 'renewal' project that is meant to spark the world back into loving the NFT trend shapes up to be much the same as the relighting of the First Flame with Dark Souls' famous Kiln. Each rebirth bursts less and less until the final dwindling splutter signals a flame prolonged too long, ready and far too eager to finally die.

But don't tell that to the holders of the famous Moneky NFTs. One of the first and most successful grifts, Yuga labs managed to ride along the frontal wave of this 'new tech' for far longer than they really should have, considering the alleged origins behind their motivation and ideas. Bored Ape Yatch Club (to misquote and bastardised Tennyson) am become a name, for always grifting with a greedy heart, Much have they seen and known, scams, rug-pulls and shockingly blatant racist dog whistles, themselves not least but honoured of them all. As such, one would have thought they would cool off on the rhetoric and noise and maybe make a quick exit out the back door with all the millions secured. But in a way I guess they've grown too big now, haven't they? The Yuga labs team is well known and out there, at this point running with the millions would be an even bigger hassle than just sticking around and sucking the life out of the stragglers until they all fizzle up.

As with everyone else with their brains stuck on a 2021 loop, Yuga are in production of their own Metaverse nowhere project, resplendent with low-quality pitch conceptuals and endless stumbling propositions for interconnected weaving games. I still remember their 'Otherside' MMO project which, of course, led itself with a 'landsale' for in-game plots before ever discussing the related game people were supposedly buying said-deeds for. (Because apparently no one has ever heard of ArcheAge or the genuine space shortage that games which sell land always come up against. Or heck, how about real life? We have that problem there too!) That grift ended in heart break and wallet break to the tune of supposed millions. So yeah, Yuga definitely seem like the kind of company competent enough to keep spending capital and time begging to, wouldn't you say?

Which brings us to their first 'new idea' of 2023. An actual gaming event tied to the Bored Ape Brand that would tie together the key marketing pillars of irreverence, blockchain integration and love of video games all up in one blow-out limited time 'competition' with monetary prizes! (Although that is blockchain money, so take that for what little it's worth.) Yuga labs devised for it's audience a small competition based around their ability to compete in an- endless runner? (Hey, I guess everyone's gotta start somewhere, right? At least this game was playable.) And, in an effort to keep explanations as simple as possible, those who ran through the game and ended up getting a high score (actually I think the rules dictate rewards for any score above 0- so I guess everyone is kind of a winner to some degree) would be awarded an NFT of comparative value which they could then sell to... well, themselves I guess; because the pool of NFT investors is so incestuous at this point the stakeholders are beginning to develop webbed toes.

Of course you have to give Yuga Labs money in order to make money is this Monkey Jpeg dominated future of ours; and as such you are only allowed to join in on this game if you have a Bored Ape already or purchase a second-hand ticket off an ape owner. Or a mutant Ape holder. Of course, having a doggo attached to that ape also increases the relative value of the invitational ticket, a ticket which provides a bonus on the score you earn in the game. If that made any remote sense to you whatsoever, please contact me so you can take over writing this blog because relaying that just made me want to curl up and cry. The point of all this was to drum up hype again about the money making potential of blockchain gaming, a concept that has been laughed at and mocked consistently by just about half the world at this point. If Yuga could pull one successful event where it's supporters made some serious, news worthy, gains; why, that would be the lion roar rally cry this prospective industry needed to get off that ground floor slump!

So of course they screwed it up. One might charitably ask what the team were thinking when they tied success in a simple endless runner game to actual potential real-world reward- especially given that their 'game' was being marketed exclusively to Monkey NFT holders; people who are already in this industry looking for get-rich-quick opportunities for the smallest amount of investment possible. And the truth is that they didn't think, or at least they believed themselves shrewd denough to be able to pick apart the bad apples from the bunch. But what do you do when it's not the crop which is rotten, nor the stem, nor the yield, but the entire decrepit vineyard? What do you do then: studio named after a miniscule side character from Zelda that no one remembers?

People cheated and they cheated hard. Services were chucked about for bot runners to get the highest possible score, straight-up high-score manipulation with the (as of yet unconfirmed) accusation of internal corruption, and cheaters impersonating other players in order to get their scores pulled from the leaderboard. And you know what? Despite all that the 'Sewer Pass' grift made Yuga over 10 million dollars; because we live in The Bad Place, everybody. You can expect this lazy mess of an event to go on and spark up a trend of like-wise fund raising for every two-bit mess of a 'crypto video game' in a desperate bid to suckle off the remnants of Yuga's success, because for a sub-industry that cries about how 'innovative' and 'forward thinking' it is; these projects don't half love to ape each other. (Oh, look at that: I said 'Ape'. I didn't even mean to do that!)

Dookie Dash, as the hilarious, so-funny, I'm crying laughing, game was called: is now over and done with, and in it's wake the Yuga team have the profits and encouragement to push more similar events in their diseased little cesspit they call a community. My only personal solace in this dire circumstance is that the affected probably deserve it. I know, 'what a horrible thought to have', but if I can't laugh at the people with too much money on their hands sinking their entire identities into some already-relic of a movement then I'm just going to cry about the state of the world. At the very least let us all agree to do everything in our collective powers to keep news of this event away from anyone who works at Ubisoft, else the fate of the next Tom Clancy entry will be irrevocably sealed.

Oooh, NFTs are coming back into fashion?

 How many times do we have to teach you this lesson old man?

There's a certain breed of people out there born and bred to be mocked by as many people as humanely possible. A breed that obtains actual living sustenance from their own disparagement and degradation, to the point they cannot live unless it's to be denigrated on the big stage with live reactions and brutal mockery accompanying it all. Most of these special breed of people have moved to the NFT space whereupon they regularly embarrass themselves trying to revive one the Internet's stupidest trends by praying anyone will take their worthless digital goods and imbue them with purely speculative worth. That's the dumbest part- like actual Ponzi-brain morons these NFTs are always fuelled by a innate dumb idea that value can self propagate as long as wealthy idiots keep flocking to their one idea and keep feeding it new money. There's only so many wealthy tech-savvy idiots however, and we already saw one crypto crash this year.

For any executive trying to justify their job position literal weeks before the quarterly report which is about to label them as an unnecessary asset, now is actually a decently good time to try and revive the NFT landscape. Afterall, with everything pretty much as low as it can go in terms of general value, the only place the market can go is up, right? And if ride that slow and steady wave to being somewhat valuable once again, you can turn around and claim your weekend project is single-handily injecting profitability back into this flagging market! Ain't that a fake notch to stick into your counterfeit belt? Which, I imagine, is the only reason why the Warner Bros. executive branch is currently in the process of flogging their Lord of the Rings NFTs, whilst HBO is dribbling out it's own Game of Thrones collection. (I guess Netflix better get on that Witcher collection right quick before that franchise goes belly up!)

The Game of Thrones collection is pretty much exactly what you think it is, randomly generated images; nothing worth writing home about, but the LoTR's collection has me curious. Not because it sounds like something actually interesting or valuable; but because it doesn't really sound like it needs to be an NFT at all. They are basically offering the full movie trilogy with all the DVD extras, with the only new thing added to the collection being the ability to attain different faux-DVD background stills in order to navigate around. So you're spending your volatile crypto currency for 'rare' DVD menu backgrounds, none of which appear to be actually made by hand considering how blurry they are, and some of which quite literally just look the DVD menus from back in the day. But there only appears to be three of four different backgrounds to pick from, and nothing else particularly unique about these film collections; so here's my question- what exactly is 'non-fungible' about a product that has been sold in replica? Doesn't it defeat the whole purpose of an NFT? Isn't this basically just a way to own these films on the blockchain, and the NFT label is entirely inappropriate? Someone needs to explain this to me, slowly.

Though it's absolute blasphemy to admit it out loud, I'd somewhat respect these companies more if they just spent all those frivolous marketing dollars in just funding some stupid Funko-pop collection, or maybe a figurine series; anything that has the potential to actually be valuable to some weird person thirty years from now. The problem is that these companies are all looking at NFTs as though they are the modern day equivalent of figurine collecting, totally missing the lack of cross-over on a conceptual level and the huge barrier of entry to actually trade crypto in the first place. Most people have literally no idea how to set up a wallet, when in order to buy a real life limited edition collectible all you need is a spare not. It's a damningly doomed grift which has limped it's way past it's own expiration date at this point, and is now just an exhumed zombified corpse of an idea desperately attempting to score some theoretic foothold in a theoretical future. Here's a tip for free; the public isn't going to become generally more attuned to the complicated tech, the tech is going to eventually demystify itself in order to reach a middle ground with people who can't be bothered to learn it's intricacies. That's when they'll be a wave to jump on!

Square Enix are also up in their stupidness again with this profitless trend on NFTs; although in their case I suppose it's desperation paving their route because as the world has come to realise; modern Square has absolutely no clue what it's doing. They've sold off half their studios, their live services have all, universally, fallen off and been shut down before they've hit sustainability; (Avenger's shutdown is coming, mark my words) and now they've taken a page out of Konami's book and totally lost touch with what it is that their consumer base wants. Which, though I don't really feel this needs to be said, is games. We want games, Square; that's all we've ever wanted out of you! But who are we in the face of stopping, ever approaching progress?

If that is, you consider progress to be their new NFT line they've introduced. Hidden in the name 'Symbiogenesis' with a deceptively evocative and pretty logo emblem, this latest project of theirs is not, as a naïve internet originally assumed, a revival of Parasite Eve. That franchise may very well have been inspired by the very process of Symbiogenesis; but apparently that is an absolute coincidence; this is a digital art project designed for 'Web3' fans. (Bold to assume that Web3 has actual 'fans' and not just a unending line of 'aspiring exploiters'.) Square are being almost mockingly secretive about what this new franchise of theirs actually is about, they provided the very bare basic premise of a typical final fantasy game as a blurb; but we know they'll be characters to collect and maybe even slowly distributed lore through NFT drops. Which, admittedly, isn't the least creative idea in the world, I have to give them that.

It's just a shame that burgeoning creativity has to take a back-seat to blatant money grubbing, because at this stage there literally is no two-ways about it; if you're pushing an NTF collection, it's for the complexity and ingenuity that Web3 provides. In fact, I'm convinced that most every one of these executives couldn't for the life of you explain the difference between Web2 infrastructure and Web3; let alone identify genuine benefits. Everytime this comes back to art becoming some sort of speculative asset that Square are crossing their fingers and praying becomes a type of hot-button ticket which people start fighting over for millions. (For which they'll receive a perpetual kick-back for every sale made.) It's just all a bit pathetic, really.

Perhaps this serves as a lesson to us all that even when they're not valuable or new, there's always going to be someone willing to revive the name of NFTs in order to fuel a dumb idea. Like that last ember of the first flame, cradled in the grasp of the Handmaiden and carried into the unknowable age of dark, knowing that one day, somehow, the flame would alight again. NFTs are that reality shaping vacuous hole that sucks in those plethoras of spotty, crypto bro, moths in it's dancing flames. And will it always fall on it's face? Maybe, maybe not. But I bet that it will, just about always, be fuelled by dumb people who can't even comprehend the utility at their finger-tips. Let that be a lesson to anyone who thinks they don't have what it takes to achieve; people like these still have jobs, so can you.

Dr D's Deadrop

 The prescription is here

It's a very common dream, for those that immerse themselves in the world of video games, to become a video game creator. It is, however, largely just a dream. Because the realities of making video games is that they're are arduous and painful works that take the combined talents of dozens of different skill sets in order to come together. Nowadays one would need a significant amount of capital, access to creatives, and a damn good idea to get a game together and most people just plain don't have that. A lot of the time you might hear about gaming content creators working on their very own video game only for the topic to dry up once sense drops and the actual scale of that investments comes to reality in their minds. Or the game does come out and it's terrible. One content creator, however, believes themselves not just an exception to that curse, but a worthy challenger to the ranks of AAA game development, as hugely laughable as that sounds. And if you know the scene, you probably know who I'm talking about. (Or you just read the title.)

Dr Disrespect is not a streamer I've ever really watched but I get the shtick. Roleplay as a sweaty, self absorbed, asshole 'gamer' stereotype and try to pretend that you're still 'in on the joke' five years later when you're still playing the same tunes. I get it, it's funny. Kind of. But there comes a time when all the false bravado starts to leak out of the protective container you keep it in and starts to rot the rest of the brain; and that's a proven fact. Actors talk about it all the time, Hugh Laurie gave himself an actual limp by pretending to have one for years filming 'House', Charlie Cox almost gave himself serious eye issues by purposefully unfocusing his vision whilst acting as Daredevil; these are the dangers of lying to yourself for prolonged periods; you start to make it come true. So when Dr D spends years playing the entitled idiot who overestimates his own abilities and worth just because he's good at a few video games... well, it ain't no surprise we're looking at a game like Deadrop.

All this is being developed by The Midnight Society; (as far as video game studio names go, I'll give that a 6/10. Lost points for obvious plagiarism.)  which is Dr D's own studio that's apparently using it's vast wealth to tap some actual industry talent into their confines. But the reason I'm still a pessimist even despite that fact, is because of their 'revolutionary idea' to 'turn the game development process on it's head'. Which essentially means that they sell you the game before they make it. So Kickstarter, then. Except wait... it's not like Kickstarter because, for One: Dr D promises you that there will be a game on the otherside of this (for what little the promise of an Internet influencer is worth) and for Two: you'll be buying into the game on the blockchain through the purchase of an NFT- oh godammit! Can I just go one full week without having to read about something connected to bloody crypto currencies in our video game space? What's next; is it a metaverse too? (Seriously, though; I bet he does that.)

Midnight Society is all about integrating NFTs and Blockchain integration into the ecosystem of their games in order to 'give ownership back in the hands of the players.' In an interview with Paul Tassi the head of the studio, of ex-COD fame, correctly identified the problem with the digital only future we're moving to and the licensing issues it brings up, but presents crypto as a sort of 'back door' solution rather than confronting it with meaningful policy changes and heck, maybe even litigation! But in the effort of being fair I guess you can put this as a 'I'll seek my solution you seek yours' sort of situation; and he was smart enough to put out that their games will not be NFT exclusive or blockchain exclusive. Although I find the idea of two versions of an online game, one off the blockchain and one on it, monumentally moronic. As if split player bases aren't already an issue: start literally cannibalising each platform.

The fruit of this little experiment was the annoyingly named 'Deadrop', which is not another fast food app or a mystery box delivery service; it's an FPS, baby! And it's an FPS that currently looks rougher than sandpaper for it's first snapshot. Oh but don't worry, that's all part of their 'full transparency philosophy' whereupon the team are devoted to putting out playable demos at each significant development milestone so that people can see what they're up to and provide feedback, the whole nine yards. Seems fair, I just wonder why they didn't bother making a really bang-up framework of a game first before going down the Early Access route. I'm just saying, Larian really laid the groundworks for how something like this should be handled. Because what Deadrop currently has going for it looks about 1 step above amateur.

The animations for movement are unrefined, gun handling animations look okay, the 'unique' gun design of that M16 that's doing the rounds looks laughably ugly- seriously, they look like how a 15 year old would redesign a firearm in order to make it look more 'cool'. The firing effect is... I think intentionally poor; because I can't conceive a team of ostensible industry vets slapping that in a game and calling it presentable. I can only think they were rushed to reveal and literally put a stock effect on the weapons, that's the only feasible explanation. Graphically it looks a fine but creatively dull; although that could be the very limited demo that is currently given that impression. Frankly it looks unambitious; which is ideal for a first project from a team that's just starting to get it's footing, but a bit disappointing from a project that the Doc is selling as the game changer industry disrupter which is going to make COD tremble in their boots.

Getting a demo to run alright with pretty reflections does not a make great game. In fact, I'm pretty sure there's vast contingents of gamers out there who will attest that graphical fidelity is literally the last aspect of a game that should be worked on just short of bugfixing and maybe VO work depending on how important narrative and performance is to your particular game. You want a game feeling good, playing well and maybe even sounding well early on, because if any of those elements is wanting you'll have enough time ahead of you to work on that before you bake in systems and engines that are incapable of being manipulated into whatever it is you're looking for. Deadrop is starting from the bottom and just crossing it's fingers praying that everything comes together by the flipside. I'm telling you that is a very difficult order to design in and it might end up dooming this project to be not as solid as it otherwise could have been, but then what did we really expect?

From the word 'jump' the good Doctor has been singing songs about how this will show screenshots that make Call of Duty weep; he's always been about the style of his upcoming shooter over the substance behind the controller. Which is galling when COD has a literal stranglehold on solid shooter controls that it has maintained for over a decade now. You cannot surpass COD on graphics alone and expect to siphon off it's audience, it doesn't matter how big and important you think that you are. Most other shooters bring in unique twists and mechanics to try and live alongside COD, but aside from the weak sci-fi blood running through this game's basic aesthetic, Deadrop has yet to prove it has any good ideas up it's sleeves ready to shake up the play space. So that's a pretty disappointing reveal for Crypto-gaming's alleged golden boy; let's see which way the wind blows come the next milestone. 

Minecraft slaps down NFT

 Mission failed: We'll get 'em next time

We're going to be hearing about NFTs slow and steady implosion for a very long time as more and more fools come to realise how piteously self defeating it all is. All except for Ubisoft, I guess, who have already murdered their own respectability and are in competition with themselves to see how far off the deep end they can drag themselves. (I have faith in them; I think they take it all the way to chapter 7 Bankruptcy!) This 'NFT movement' becoming one of those issues where no matter how little you think it matters about anything, you can be sure at some point you're going to learn what certain people think about them. Whether it's influencers, celebrities or even that sterile amalgam of an entity we call 'companies'. Not because this is the wave of the future, but because it's a normie plaything that serves as a fascinating litmus test for how much of an out-of-touch luddite your are. Proof that under the right dressing, MLM's and Ponzi-schemes can be pimped out by any famous mouthpiece, not just professional-moron Gwyneth Paltrow.

Yes, I wish this whole boat would just tip over and sink too, but even with pretty stern evidence that the single most successful NFT exchange is an elaborate, and wildly successful, prank run by 4Chan grifters; the ship of public opinion is a mile long. Turning from stern to bough is taking years at this point. Still in the belated interim, slightly more self aware pundits and commentators can use this whole movement as an easy way to score themselves some quick public relations win with the public by simply coming out and stating that they're not interested in engaging with this new buzz term. Which has to be one of the most ironically lazy ways to cement your moral values. "Hey, just so you know; we're not going to kidnap children so we sell their organs on the black market." "Thanks, Company X; I didn't even know you were considering it!"

Although even with that framework for moral mediocrity which this atmosphere breeds, I have to admit to a little bit of surprise when I heard that Minecraft, of all companies, were publicly moving away from NFTs. Given that they're now a subordinate of a mega conglomerate, you'd have thought that tired money schemes would be their catnip. Then again, it takes no great strength or moral upstanding to take a look at the many failed ventures of your peers and decide your efforts are best spent literally anywhere else. (They might as well spend funds in an alchemist to chemically distil liquid gold for them; it'd have a higher chance of success) If anything taking such a stance just proves you have some slight sense. Not like Gamestop, who are desperate to leverage all that unearned publicity the whole 'Gamestonk' incident earned them and waste it on a pitifully misguided NFT collection. No, I'm not kidding even though I so wish that I was. Now your hero has been fallen and their message corrupted; what do you stand for now, WSB?

In a statement that, from an outsider's perspective, dropped out of freakin' sky, Minecraft has come out to clear their up stance on this issue publicly, instead of the much more effective route of doing it litigiously. (Which is what I would have done in their shoes.) Apparently Minecraft considers the NFT movement to be outside the established scope of their mission statement to be inclusive to as many players as possible (which is- I'm not even going to lie they're 100 percent correct about. It's weird to agree with a corporate statement so totally with no caveats) and as such they're concerned about some individuals who are already implementing Minecraft world files and skins. They've outright banned blockchain integration into their game and sent a stern warning whilst doing so; although if they seriously think this is just going to stop anything they've got another thing coming. The NFT marketplace was built on theft, first of art then money; you ain't stopping no one from outside the court room. 

So what is it that they're talking about? Well I've actually seen a few of these offers pop up around the Internet and thought nothing of them, which probably matches the level of forethought that went into constructing these lacklustre schemes in the first place. Minecraft Servers that have access tied to NFT ownership so you can't get in without the blockchain's approval, and from there it get's even 'better' as these blocky landlords dictate the land you're allowed to exploit with the amount of NFT's you purchase. That's right, the exact same digital land ownership that everyone from Earth 2 to Peter Molyneux  are trying to take advantage of right now has been transplanted to the digital ownership space so we all can share in the hatred together; how utterly and unabashedly terrible! Of course, many big servers already play around with land plots for some sensible management reasons, but as always NFTs ruins that to greedy extremes.

There's also talk about 'skins' through NFTs which I've actually heard nothing about but am agog by the sheer audacity of. Are people selling Minecraft skins as non fungible speculative assets? I can't imagine such a grift considering that in the Java version at least the ability to freely create and use skins is exactly that... absolutely free. Any skin can be replicated easily using basic factory software, and if NFT owners lose their mind about screenshotting just wait till they learn about copy/paste! Bedrock Edition actually does have a framework to buy and sell skins because it's infrastructure isn't as open to mess around with, but even then I'm decently sure that every skin pack has to be sold directly through Minecraft's ingame store so there's no way for independent grifters to make millions off that without raising some eyebrows; nor is it really possible to instil any sense of exclusivity.

So not only is Mojang rejecting NFTs as a rank condemnation of their conceptualisation, but the Minecraft systems don't even really support such a world anyway. And I know what the idea is, these NFT heads wanted to interface with Minecraft and NFTs in very precursory little ways until such a time where they can force Mojang to rewrite the game to accommodate them due to the widespread mass-adoption their propositions have garnered. Except they hadn't garnered that adoption, and never would. Obviously. You can't just develop a scheme tailored to exclusively exploit the wealthy and then turn around and say this is the playground of the everyman, that's what we call: 'asinine'. Mojang aren't going to fall for that, Microsoft ain't going to fall for that, any company with more than 5 brain cells to share around their management board aren't going to fall for that. Which is probably why Ubisoft is still very much on the grind.

The lesson is clear; the whole idea of the WEB3 world being primed to overwrite the antiquated old way of the Web is a fabrication, one that not even the big potential profiteers are willing to buy into. Now as any monetarily minded organisation would, Minecraft did the leave the door open in their statement declaring they'd witness how things develop across the blockchain world, but all of that is mostly just lip service. Unless some real visionaries get behind this technology and sculpt it into something sublime and actually industry changing, they're not going to budge any more than us moralists on the topic are budging. Although just seeing that slightly jutted door is enough to convince these grifters to never give up as they consume themselves with the myth of success they've fuelled their very being with. Which is kind of respectable in a deeply embarrassingly sad way.

Polium One

 You're laughing stock of the month has arrived, sir.

WEB3 is the gift that keeps on grifting. Everyday and every night, tech nerds have been tripping over themselves to try and scam their way into the 'new money club' by way of brainless schemes that hold less water than a thimble, all the while expecting people to just stumble into their obvious bear traps like gullible morons. Unfortunately there seems to be a real disconnect between the people they're trying to con and the artistry, or lack thereof, behind the deception itself, whenever these tech bros come up against the games industry, maybe because it's members are just so darn passionate that we don't take no nonsense for nobody, or maybe because their attempts to wind blockchain implementation into the gaming landscape are just so darn universally laughable that these grifts couldn't fool a goldfish. Either way, we've recently come across the 'final boss', as it were', of video game blockchain machinations, the Polium One.

No, the Polium One isn't the exact type of ammo fired from an Alliance brand M-8 Avenger, it's actually the name of the universe's first blockchain built next-gen games console which is going to revolutionise the gaming world if it ever manages to be made after all the lawsuits that Nintendo and Apple are going slap it with. We're talking about a console that is being said to rival the very power of Sony and Microsoft's current top-of-the-line consoles, whilst offering exclusive WEB3 pay-to-earn games in their ecosystem which seems a little redundant since none of those games carry harder system requirements than your typical 2008 IPhone. It is said to be the bridge between the Blockchain markets and Crypto gaming that the world has been waiting for, and we can all enjoy these revolutionary services within a matter of; two years. Because the console doesn't exist yet, and the team haven't even got a prototype together. Yeah- this sounds real legit and totally realistic to me!

So it's quite redundant to say, as I'm pretty sure that everyone pretty much knows this already, but building an entire video game console from scratch is not exactly a simple task. It requires you to have significant mechanical expertise mixed with design expertise, industry connections, monetary investments, the works. As can be expected, Polium absolutely refuse to prove they have any of that, and instead have for us a really generic looking digital composite and a list of vague, and sometimes very questionable, specs that are supposed to portend a prototype they have yet to even begin developing. Oh, and they want to start drumming up pre-order interest before the floodgates are lifted the moment they've made their prototype, which is due for... anytime before the 2024 release of the full console. Of course, it doesn't take a genius to guess how this is going to go. The protoype will be delayed, 2024 is going to the date they drop their first working build in a totally lacklustre showcase, and shortly after that the company will then mass produce that exact first generation attempt at a console and sell it to meagre returns. A fitting reward considering this machine will just end up being an expensive emulation box. That's assuming this project doesn't just fizzle out into nothing like the vast majority of crypto projects do anyway. Hey, is anyone getting Deja Vu?

I certainly am. And that might be because we have lived through this entire song and dance before with the Ouya, only somehow that console seemed less doomed than this one did. At least the Ouya wanted to actually run games on it's piddling hardware, which is step-one to making a working games console. The Polium One is wanting to catering exclusively towards NFT 'games', of which the few that have actually come out are mostly just mind-numbingly boring jobs with a quietly digitised interface and, if you're extremely lucky, a tiny bit of interactivity; to convince you that you're actually having a gaming experience. Most NFT games base themselves around buying digital land and then exploiting that land for resources, only done more expensively and slower than your typical mobile game. (And with considerably less profit potential than real life fracking) Which the average potential for return, if you do everything right and pay the several hundreds dollars of start-up for minting and gas fees and everything, being about 250$ a year. And if that sounds really exciting and enticing to you, let me also add that most of these projects don't even last an entire year.

But let's put aside our spidey sense for a moment and pretend that this Polium One is actually a real prospect that has any actual chance of ever getting made; then what do we have to look forward to? Well there's the console which somehow looks even more boring than a Steam Link device; betraying that total like of design philosophy that seems almost emblematic of these sorts of indie console projects. And there's the controller which is the Playstation controller (with the parallel joysticks) only with Xbox face buttons and a finger print sensor. (I don't know what possible use a fingerprint scanner is going to serve beyond making it harder to do couch co-op and causing the manufacture-cost, and thus the consumer pricing, to skyrocket.) Oh, and there's the fact that Polium's logo is literally just the Gamecube Logo rotated on it's axis.

Seriously, just look it it. They turned the G into a P and have taken to Twitter to genuinely and vehemently defend this embarrassing copyright infringement as a coincidentally similarity hardly worthy of note. That is a Nintendo trademark; the very same company that will burn indie developers to the ground if they so much as sniff one of their franchises, and these clowns are just going to plagiarise their brand and try to brag it off? It's a good thing this company has no chance of making their console else they'd be sued right into the nether realm! And of course that's not the only blatant trademark infringement. As the Youtuber YongYea pointed out in his video on this topic, these numbskulls seem to believe that their fingerprint sensor on the controller is going to use TouchID tech in order to function, seemingly blissfully unaware that TouchID is a proprietary Apple trademark. Unless they somehow manage to strike a partnership deal with a company who, rather notoriously, does not do partnerships; these controller ain't never getting TouchID tech in it. (Mark down two potential incoming lawsuits. Wow, these guys are racking up the L's so far.)

They've also included a mock-up of their dashboard which features several current NFT games and a handy look at their pre-packaged wallet and marketplace features, which are of course staples for a venture so intrinsically linked to profit generation over actual enjoyment and fun. Also, I think it's a bit backwards for the mock-ups to tease so many pay-to-earn games, (Axie Infinity, Decentraland and Otherside) despite admitting themselves on their website that current Pay-to-Earn games mostly suck and that this is a console that is being built "For the future." They also claim to be in talks with several NFT game developers who they refuse to name, (they go to a different school) which is bad start-up code for "We emailed some of them but our correspondence was sent directly to their spam bin." Not that I'd expect them to actually be onto anything substantive if they had actually touched grass long-enough to meet other WEB3 game developers. "Oh hey, you know those bad games you make? Yeah, can you make one exclusively for our non-existent console?" Doesn't really sound like the most promising sales pitch, does it?

So the Polium One is here to be a monumental embarrassment for the world to point and laugh at until it shrivels up and dies, or lasts long enough to take pre-orders before vanishing away in a more traditional, grass-routes, version of your typical NFT/Crypto rugpull. WEB3 proponents are so dead set on proving to the world how unfit it's infrastructure is to become mainstream it's simply laughable, and if all of these alleged allegations towards the true nature of BAYC hold any water, and it sort of sounds like they do from what I've seen and read, then it's only a matter of time before the dam breaks and the public fully rejects NFTs, and therefore projects such as these, with the fullest extent of their ferocity. But sure, good luck to the Polium team for trucking along this far with all their red flags and unexploded lawsuit mines in their pack, I hope you guys stay unscathed long enough to realise how foolish this whole endeavour is and get out whilst you're still solvent.

The Seth Green Files

All my apes... gone...

I thought, hoped, dreamt, that I was done talking about the pan-flash known as NFTs back when it became abundantly clear that it's initial fame was overblown and that small notoriety was drying up like a splayed out crab lying on the Dust Bowl wastes of Death Valley. The rise of NFTs was an illusion, a fiction fed out by desperate and conniving organisations desperate to get their hands on the 'next big thing' before it ever made it to market. That is the great secret behind this major fad of the 2020's, it's not a key to the unlockable potential of humanity, but a pyramid scheme by another name which is quickly running out of new rungs to stick onto the other end. Remember the great conceit of 'you can have money make itself on your behalf', is only every true if it's being undeservedly squeezed out the pockets of someone who can't afford it below you; and ask yourself again if NFTs are the wave for the future that you're so eager to surf.

But no one can really be done forever with a fad like NFTs. Not until that Fad has been strung up and lashed bare, deceit and lies cut from it's bone, so that not even the most delusional can flock to it's bare naked ugliness any longer. And I'm going to stop this line of creative writing before I make myself sound anymore like a modern day Roman Emperor. To be more direct; just when the landscape of these online scam factories felt like they were going quiet, I had to learn that one of my favourite comedians Seth Green was trapped inside their vice-like grip. (I don't agree with e-stalking celebrities online in order to monitor their every errant thought and whim, but I may have to start just to know which fool has slipped down the rabbit hole next time something as dumb as NFTs rears it's head.) Oh, and the thing I'm about to talk about is related to gaming twofold. To a much lesser extent, Green is a figure of some importance in gaming having voiced Joker in Mass Effect; and to the larger argument, some prominent numbskulls believe that the gaming landscape needs our future intrinsically tied to that of NFTs, and every story like this is poison dripped on that narrative.

 When we look at the NFT landscape, there is one collection of packaged and sold generated assets that best encapsulates the entirety of the movement, and it's one of the progenitors of the craze: Bored Ape Yacht Club. A collection of ugly computer generated images stuck together from a selection of 'body part' images amassed at random on a 'rarity curve' and then sold on the blockchain for tens of millions. It is an embarrassingly grotesque collection that has made tech-bros rich and screwed up just about everyone else. And Seth Green tried to get in on the 'Techno Bro' side of that equation just recently. Yes, he was a big Ape head for his time, and he was on his way to become an ambassador for the Monkey JPEGs with the announcement that he was developing and acting in a show that would star his personal Bored Ape, because blurry concepts of 'ownership' and 'IP rights stamped on the blockchain' are intrinsic to the NFT craze and those who try to sell it.

But this turned out to be a prideful height that our poor Mr Green was all but destined to fall from. Because just as with most people who interact with the cursed landscape that is NFTs, Seth Green fell for a stupid phishing site that nabbed ownership of a bunch of his NFTs, one of which being the star of his proposed show. Those stolen assets went on to be bought by some NFT rando, and in a hilarious turn of events this simple act of screw-ups has left Seth Green's show on hold. Because as it is written in the terms of BAYC, one of the main draws of NFTs as a concept, IP rights for each ape are transferred along with ownership of the token tied to the origin of each image. Meaning he who owns the token NFT can make whatever they want with this monkey picture, and the second they pass on that token they pass the rights to be able to make any more. So yes, Seth Green currently has the bones of a show that he no longer owns the rights to distribute. What a crazy, twisted world we live in.

It must be a galling thing to realise, that the very aspect you've hailed to be the saviour of the modern financial world, has led to you being irreparably financially stiffed. Seth's online presence has switched from mind-numbingly brainless tirades into why multimillion dollar companies would be absolutely fine with cutting nobodies on the Blockchain into their earnings because they own a token of a character's likeness. (Even if the IP rights are sound, what studio isn't just going to focus content around the character you own instead of literally generating free income for you?) Now Seth is begging the man who bought his NFTs to come to the negotiating table, implying that his charm and their 'shared interests' will win over the assets, all the while he is trolled and mocked relentlessly by people who used to respect the funny man turned sad public clown. 

And as the News has turned on Seth to mock him, Green has come out to claim that he still has the right of law, and since the NFT was technically stolen the courts would side with him. Unfortunately Seth has either never been inside of a Court room before or is overdosing his few remaining working brain cells with copium because that is not how the American legal system is going to work for him. The stolen asset was sold to someone who, as far as we can tell, had no idea the asset was stolen and unless that can proven otherwise beyond a shadow of a doubt, he legally owns the NFT. And BAYC terms of service explicitly states that the owner of an NFT is the sole IP holder, so Seth has no legal legs to stand on right now. He may try to wave the stick of the courts whist offering the hand of friendship, but currently it looks as though both avenues are falling flat as long as neither come with a healthy payday.

The buyer, who I'm intentionally not naming because they aren't a public figure and thus I have no idea how wantonly litigious they may become when this is all said and done, has ignored Seth's Twitter pleas and instead spoken to news aggregators to act as his third party connect to the comedian. A frustrating, and probably fruitless, power move towards the comedian who just wants to get his show back on track. Without claiming to know any explicit motivations here, our buyer did acquire the Jpeg for around $200,000 in equivalent coin currency, so they probably are looking to make a profit from that sale. He's probably in the strongest position directly here for the time being, because even if Seth uses his time to change the assets of his show to use a different ape, the value of the 'Monkey that got away from Seth Green' is just going to shoot up for the story alone. Our funny man has no leverage here whatsoever.

As sad as it is that this is happening to a man I typically respect, this is a pretty clear lesson in the school of 'play stupid games win stupid prizes'. I can't imagine a man with as much industry knowledge as Seth Green really doesn't understand the true face of the industry he's promoting, which means he's actually trying to get some bag before the market topples and is likely just wantonly dismissing the harm his reckless influencing will have on fans who respect and trust him. I'm sorry but that attitude goes a long way to erasing the respect that shows like Family Guy and Robot Chicken had earnt him in my mind, which makes a karmic bitch slap like this nothing more than a well-deserved clap-back from this author's perspective. I bet the show would have been decent, but the culture behind it wouldn't have been worth the effort. I genuinely hope he doesn't get the Ape back and that this whole debacle forces the man to confront exactly what sort of industry he is wittingly trying to be the poster child for. Grow some self respect back, man.

Have I ever told you the tragedy of the Squareverse?

 Do you really wanna fake it?

I can't help it; the curious conundrum of a studio called Square is keeping me up at night and I have to talk about them. Not just about where they currently are in their mission to assassinate their own reputation, future and profitability with what has to be organised strikes, but the world around them and how it's slowly moving to leave them behind even before this pivot is completed. But to summarise my last few blogs up until now I'll just say this: Recently the legendary Publisher has failed to put out a profitable new release (Their last was FF7R or something two whole years ago) and instead of trying to change up their development styles and truck away to hit their stride once again, Matsuda, their CEO, decided to take the mid-life crisis option and throw away half of their best assets in order to better chase a get-rich-quick pipe-dream, high as a kite on divorced-dad energy. Now most of Sqaure's Western studios are sold off, at a drastically undervalued rate, and Square explicitly declared in their own words that the now-free liquidity would be funnelled into NFT projects. My man Matsuda is going to be buying a Ferrari soon, he's chasing his youth.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that the man has sold off Crystal Dynamics and Eidos Montreal in order to embezzle those funds into gambling on NFTs and investing in doomed Safe-Coin scam projects; (although he strikes me as the kind of guy who would do exactly that if he had a little less strict oversight) but rather that he's one of the self-hypnotised in the gaming community that has tricked himself into believing that the next big trend of the industry is a dead-end technology he doesn't understand. He's not alone in his belief, although thankfully recent events have made it so that he almost is. Yves Guillemot wheeled out his loyal lap dog from the Ubisoft 'Strategic Innovations lab', Nicholas Pouard to testify on the matter. (I imagine all the dust that must accumulate in a Ubisoft studio dedicated to 'innovation' must have flown up his nostrils and rotted his brain.) Nicky was adamant that it was the players that don't get it. NFTs are actually super beneficial to everyone and if players would just please invest in their NFTs and secure Ubisoft a recurrent revenue stream without any of the benefits of an actual investment; the gaming would be improved immeasurably! And of course the world mocked him for it. Wouldn't you? (Don't listen to them Nickster! The Mirror lies, the whole world's wrong but you!) 

And this disease of the brain has clearly set in on the Square CEO as well, because he's all aboard the speculative market train: choo choo! He is desperate to insist that the terms 'Metaverse' and 'NFT' are not fads like they are; and that there's a secret cabal of gamers that have gone famously underrepresented until now; those who play specifically to earn. Because that's the buzzword of this year isn't it? 'Play to Earn'. I think fellow Brit 'JoshStrifeHays' put it best when summarising this trend, and forgive as I bastardise his words: A game that you play to earn money in is a job. If it's fun then you're playing to have fun, if it's not then you're working to make money. If you are actively trying to make a game which players make an income from, then chances are you're shafting the elements of that game design process that would make the game a fun time investment, thus sacrificing the casual audience that would provide the income for the professionals to 'earn'.

Take Axie Infinity for example, I bet it's creators wish somebody would, with all the millions they lost from that hack! Even beyond the whole money messup, the core concept of the game was fuelled on an idea that seemed destined to dry up. Players were grinding and earning Axie NFTs that they squeak out a little bit of income from thorough gameplay and selling off assets. But the assets themselves had no actual value to them outside of a game which marketed itself almost exclusively as a platform to sell assets. So as people flocked to get these NFTs so that they could offload them, they found themselves wrapped up in an ecosystem full of other wannabe asset flippers, and no one on the otherend of this conga-line of speculation investors who just wanted that asset in order to play the game. That audience, who were only there to provide value to the game's economy and not earn from it, were actively discouraged from engaging, so the assets would never have their baseline value and the entire market would be destined to become a bubble. And those things tend to burst.

This is the sort of game that Matsuda sacrificed his entire western development branch in order to go to bat for; although he did also simp for the 'Metaverse' too; so how is that going? Well, did you know that Facebook (Yeah. I'll not calling them that other name.) already launched their version of the thing? Of course you didn't, nobody did. And that's because their embarrassing attempt to 'evolve' social media by expanding it into a real-world MMO without any of the fun, has been a catastrophe. Horizon Worlds, as it's called, averages such little engagement that Facebook can't even justify the usual Tech-startup routine of running at a loss until year 10 just to build up a captive audience. Mark and his Zuckers are swooping down asking for a 50% cut out of virtual assets sold; making it a better deal to become an indie game developer on Steam than to develop on the ground floor of Facebook's apparent 'upcoming front page of the Internet and WEB3!'

Matsuda is circling gutter fish, struggling to stay afloat, and admiring them for their vast successes. This isn't just being oblivious; this is being absolutely delusional. And it has come to the point where even loyal mainstayers of the Square Enix machine are voicing their confusion. Yes, I'm talking about Yoshi-P, the legendary game director who totally revamped the dying Final Fantasy XIV MMO and propelled it into becoming the biggest MMO in the world for a time (I think it just squeaked back ahead of Lost Ark recently, so it currently has the title.) He's also primed to produce the upcoming PS5 exclusive, Final Fantasy XVI; so this is a guy with a future in the company that he's not going to just piss away butting heads with management. But even a man in a position like that gets to the point where he has to call a spade a spade.

In a recent hubbub Yoshi-P was accidentally involved in wherein he was primed to do an interview where he could talk about NFTs (And use that as an excuse to promote FFXIV, because even at the top of his game this man is never off from the grind) and his fans freaked out over the impression this meant he was bringing NFTs to Final Fantasy. Yoshi-P came out to calm fears and ensure this wasn't the case, he was just curious about the potential of NFTs in the future. But the experience prompted him to speak a little further around the topic when he, largely unprompted, declared that the concept of the Metaverse was not entertainment; rather contrary to the cringe-ridden Christmas crumbs Matsuda left in his last state-of-the-company address. Even your visionaries can't envision the future in your nonsense, Matsuda; that hype train you're driving has failed to board a single passenger.

But if this man is anything like the Crypto Bros who jump from scam-to-scam, totally shocked to the core each time sizable chunks of their life savings are absconded with by the same techie ne'er-do-wells with their wardrobes of novelty moustaches, he'll learn nothing from the failings of others. Not even his own failings, when his NFT and Metaverse ideas are rejected by his customers and colleges, and his personal finances and job security start to suffer, nothing will shake him from this stupor. You think the curse of the Necronomicon is persistent, try the wrought-iron shackles of speculative investments on for size! Even as Crypto crashes, and NFTs fall further out of fashion, Matsuda and his yes-men will happily drag their careers down into the sinking abyss of failure all the while thinking that if they just whether the tempest for a nautical mile more, they'll reach the mythical land of the Squareverse. So I say leave them to their fanciful delusion, waltzing down their white-tile hospital wards with invisible partners, seeing a reality very different from ours. Close the door and leave them dancing with their blinkers on, throw that dog the invisible bone.

Fast times at Square Enix High

This is what it looks like to completely freefall

Sometime you'll see an old friend going through a tough time and spiralling into a pit entirely of their own creation, a piteous, upsetting sight as the person you once knew and respected is swallowed up completely leaving a torn doll of a person behind. A good friend might reach out to such a person, stand by them in their time of triumph or maybe just support them through whatever it is their going through in the knowledge that with the loving hand of another you might just ease their burdens. I am not a good friend. But then, Square Enix was never my friend anyway, so the entirely analogy is a bunch of moot hogwash. The point is that Square Enix have done lost their damn minds and I am utterly fascinated by it. You've probably heard the big thing, but I want to cover all of it as quickly as possible, how Square fell from a paragon of game development into a merry-go-round on fire.

Starting on this year, but acknowledge this obvious goes back further, things were definitely up when Square Enix made it abundantly clear that they wanted to take a look at developing for this whole NFT thing that the kids were talking about. I covered this. Matsuda declared in a holiday statement that the terms NFT and Metaverse were not fad-like buzzwords, destined to blow away with the wind, but ultimate paradigm shifts to the way that entertainment operates that he wanted to capitalize on. Now, despite evidence to the contrary, and the dissent of the public they rely on to make a living, Square Enix was set in this path towards doom; but I don't think anyone out there knew quite just how off the deep end Square was ready to dive, else all the gaming giants would've hosted a serious intervention within the week.

Then Square published their new live service money maker alongside their partners at Platinum Games, Babylon's Fall, which is sizing up to be a legendary AAA flop. But not to worry, they've got 'Final Fantasy Origins: Strangers ganging up on Paradise' to make up the difference! Oh, that's one of the worst selling Final Fantasy spin-offs in Japan. To quote a regional museum manger from a show about a mentally ill Egyptian avatar; "It's all been a bit of a struggle for you recently, eh?" What were their most recent titles? Chocobo GP? Yeah, that was a PR disaster, as I've talked about. Triangle Strategy? Wait, that's out already? Crap, I need to pick that up pronto... The 'Legend of Mana' Remake, that was a little underwhelming. Balan's Wonderland? Oh boy, one of the worst professional games of the decade. Marvel's Avengers? A flop. Guardian's of the Galaxy? Underperformed. Deus Ex? Hasn't been seen for over half a decade. Can Square make any good games anymore?

And circling back on that Balan's Wonderland thing for a moment here, can we talk about all the controversy surrounding that title for a moment? Yuji Naka, former lead programmer on the original Sonic the Hedgehog, ex-head of Sonic Team and director of Balan's Wonderland, came out to declare the state of the game was largely due to Square's machinations. They pulled him from the game a handful of months before launch and refused to allow for any internal course correction even when it was abundantly clear that this title was a steaming turd. Not for a smatter of bugs that made it hard to endure, but for a lack of core gameplay mechanics at all. It was a finished game with no interesting gameplay. An utter failure of an entertainment product. And Square Enix wanted to publish that thing! Plus, in doing so they may have forced Yuji Naka into early retirement, so no thanks for that one, Square.

But somehow all of that pales in comparison to the most recent news. You've probably already heard about it: Square Enix is selling off three of it's biggest western studios, with their IPs, for $300 million, a vast underestimation of their combined worth from the eye of the largely amateur public. That's Eidos Montreal, Crystal Dynamics and Square Montreal (but not DONTNOD for some reason) going to someone called Embracer Group who I've never even heard of before but they seem to be a decentralised agency of some sort, it seems like a very hands-off organisation in this field. And with the sales of these studios Square is losing Tomb Raider, Legacy of Kain (which they haven't made a game for in a decade) and Deus Ex. As well as the studios behind those two prospective Marvel titles that Square tried and failed to make a buck on.

And what is the reason behind this surprise sell? Well typically one can only speculate, but Square have very much outed themselves in the documents declaring the sale. They want to free themselves up from the Western market in order to focus on building their blockchain technology. Yes, ladies and gents: they're going full NFT. What we're witnessing is a full psychotic break from Square Enix's leadership. For the past few years Square has had no idea how to make money from Western games, which is why they've sold off for so cheap in the first place. And with this utter shift into downright ignominy, it's looking like Square are charging directly off the cliff and willing to end their whole dominance in the video game market altogether chasing a fruitless pipedream. 

Make no mistake, this is a sacrificing of their Western audience. Square can try and downplay the utmost disgust that the western world has treated NFTs and unwanted blockchain implementation for 'play to earn' but the numbers don't lie. Of the minuscule amount of the population that even engages in crypto currency, less than a percentage of that group also meddles with NFTs. And within that NFT perusing subset, much of the big money going around is just wash trading, so this is a blatantly futureless bubble just waiting to burst in devastating fashion. I'm no great analyst either, I'm just a hobbyist. This infomation is right out there for anyone to read and people do, or they have it read to them, and it fuels their distaste for this sort of practice making Western fans utterly, diametrically, opposed to Square's new direction. But I can only speak of Western markets given my familiarity, what about the East? 

Again I don't know personally, but my limited understanding always seems to assert that Eastern gamers were largely fans of Mobile games that are free-to-play and feature freemium elements. Titles that bleed your wallet with tiny microtransactions here and there, which build up into huge expenditures overtime, but languish as cheap time savers in the moment. NFTs are not microtransactions. They are expensive investment sinks costing anyway from hundreds to thousands of dollars and technological knowhow to even engage with them in the first place. You need to know what the Blockchain is, how to operate a wallet, what gas fees are. Casuals aren't going to be tuned into this world unless it takes over the niche world enough to become mainstream, and the niche world are too clued up on what NFTs really are to except it. The dumb people are too dumb to operate NFTs and the smart people are too smart to fall for it; so who exactly are Square's new target audience?

What we're witnessing could very well be the beginning of the end for Square's leading position in the gaming industry as they chase that White Rabbit all the way down the hole into obscurity. I only pray that some angel investor swoops Final Fantasy and Kingdom Hearts from their grasp in case they go truly insane and actually sink the company. (Let them keep 'Dragon Quest'; I never could figure out the appeal of that series) Trailblazers and trendsetters can all to often confuse their delusion for pretentions of grandeur and those too timid to stand up and offer genuine logical criticism are doomed to sink and suffer with them. There are plenty of dreamers, but only a handful of revolutionaries in the world, someone needs to teach that lesson to these NFT dreamers so that one day they may finally be able to look at a metal digging instrument with a wooden handle and successfully identify a spade

Crytpoland has left the building

 My heart weeps.

It is with the most heavy of hearts that I inform you all that the single greatest self-insulting addendum to the NFT crypto ascendency seems to have come to a crashing, and premature, conclusion. What might have once lasted several brilliant months full of that special breed of mockery that's wont to bring an entire community together, has instead capsized in a sudden, seizing, start. We've lost a real one tonight, lads. And with it dies one of the most high-profile face plants that we've seen out of Crypto since, well, the last time some idiot cryptobro tried to seek a mass appeal market. Oh, and the link to gaming is... well I like to think of all NFT negative news as a helpful hand to the gaming market as we all use these disasters as fuel to the flames we erect outside the doors of every two-bit scum-huffing executive who insists on tying our games market up with speculation markets and NFTs. 

If you are unfortunate enough not to remember what I mean when I say 'Cryptoland', it can only be because you haven't been blessed enough to see its big announcement video. Because everyone who has watched that animation can never forget it on account of the fact that Connie comes to visit them in their dreams each and every night, asking them why they haven't bought one of the empty land plots yet. So I'm just going to say 'find a reupload of the video' because I cannot do it justice here. But even then you might be a bit clueless as to what this actually is, so here's a crash course. Cryptoland was a scheme to buy an island in Fiji that would have been converted into an IRL resort paradise for like-minded Crypto-enthusiasts to descend into the utter depths of their hobby like true psychotic masochists until they emerged a mindless husk of catch-phrase spewing 'speculation'. It was also going to be a chance for the lodgings to be sold as NFTs. Literally no reason on earth explains why they needed to be NFTs, but that's pretty much the running gag with all this useless 'innovation', now isn't it?

Cryptoland in particular was utterly doomed to fail. It was obvious from the animated introduction they put together which was just competent enough to where we could it judge as not the work of an actual child (Red Ape Family Episode 1 doesn't even earn that distinction) but plenty bad enough to utterly undermine every single point that Cryptoland was trying to make. Of course, that's implying that the Cryptoland concept wasn't utterly flawed at even a fundamental level, and let me tell you plain how much that isn't true. Even just beneath the skin-crawlingly cringey jokes and the callback memes from 2005, Crytpoland was always a chunk of flotsam steadily and unknowingly drifting towards the rapids of a waterfall from it's inception.

Perhaps the end began before it even began, before they embarrassed themselves in front of the world with the animation seen across the stars. Maybe it was around about the time they spoke about the idea on their white paper (basically a document declaring intent and process so that investments can be made with sound research, as if anyone in the NFT space could be bothered to actually read them) and they outlined the idea of buying an island without disclosing where the several millions needed to do so would come from. The plots of land that they wanted to sell wasn't on their property, and the white paper claimed that the NFT sales wouldn't go towards purchasing the island, so what was their idea? Turns out their idea was 'impress the hell out of everyone with our animation and then angel investors will swoop in to fund all the management stuff.; Which is optimistic to say the least.

Then you have the proposition of the island itself, which the animated advertisement seemed to imply would feature a casino of sorts. It was a pretty significant chunk of the trailer; showcasing a gaudy pyramid with a golden statue of the Bitconncet guy and playing Crazy Frog in the background. (Which showed how the atrocious reference humour was up-to-date enough to note the Crazy Frog NFT trend, but not in-touch enough to remember the subsequent backlash.) And you can probably guess the issue here; gambling is illegal under the jurisdiction that the island would have resided within. Unless these Cryptoland devs were planning to declare the island a sovereign state shorty after purchasing like actual insane people. (I wouldn't put 'anything' out there as 'too crazy' for this team.)

And even after they left their comfortable little echo chamber and faced the mocking masses of the real world, the team slipped further into this shared psychosis with a conspiracy-theory inspired 'investigation' into the real cause of all this sudden backlash. They made a long and ranting post pondering on the nature of those who laughed at them, and pointing out how the people who saw their project seemed to like it before the animation went viral, and after that all they received was mockery and condemnation. 'Coincidence?' they asked, pointing out how several otherwise unrelated internet content creators launched themselves onto the bandwagon despite having little to no contact with the project beforehand. And they're right, none of it was a coincidence. It's more of a 'cause and effect' situation. The video was trash, the idea was laughable, and people like laughing at the misfortune of others so the story spread outside of its usual channels. It's a grim way to look at it, I suppose, but most of comedy is based on laughing at others, the cruelty comes in whether or not the target of the laughs is in on the joke. And Cryptoland was most certainly not in on a single joke.

By the reporting of KiraTV, a content creator who has taken a recent professional interest in the world of Non-fungible scams, the project appears to be in a decline, or at least has entered some sort of hibernation. Their Twitter has been inactive since their attempted exposé, the cryptoland website has disconnected itself from all blockchain activity (which is, you know, kind of fundamental to an idea like this) and the only sale they made was to themselves, which was since refunded. People rushed to defend the strength of this project after they publicly missed their window to buy the island in early January, and now that they have so little credibility that they can't secure investors and no-one, not even the shills of the project, has put up their own money to fund the thing, it seems that Cryptoland is totally dead in the water. Unless...

What if the silence isn't an admittance of defeat, but a commitment to bringing their noses down to the grindstone and putting together all their chips in one last effort? What if, unbeknownst to us all, the cryptoland devs are hard at work on a fool-proof strategy to prove all the haters wrong and switch public opinion back around on their side with the only gambit that can work at this point? What if they're making another animated video? Something so flush with outdated memes, so packed with alien-just-visiting-earth-for-the-first-time tier voice performances, and so stacked with copyrighted songs and covers that they absolutely did not pay rights for, that the community of the internet just has to put their hands together for the sheer gall of it all? What if the Cryptoland people have one last bang to go out on? Why then, if that were the case: I'd say it's all been worth it. Because at the end of the day what is more valuable, than a village clown to entertain the world? Thank you for your sarifice, Cryptoland.