What is also interesting is how blockchain protocols enable composability. So like for example if everyone played game X and let's say 5000 sessions took place across 100 players potentially all could have spent $50-$300. This amount can be used in a yield farm to acquire some yield (for which can be used to buy a digital good that can be given out to a player of the game with the original amount used to play the game returned to the players) ==> This is a fun way of making use of valuable protocols to reward players of a game( This is one aspect of creating unique gaming experiences)
Viewing post in Blockchain and gaming can they co-exist?
If you go to a penny-arcade machine and play the game (you pay x cents to play an arcade) => The arcade might reward you with a high score if you play well and beat it (but it never rewards you in the real world for the amount you put in) => However with composability its possible to make it worthwhile playing the game (from a real-world value perspective also) In the example given the pennies put in so to speak are given back to the users with one of them receiving a digital good on top. I think it would be unfair to completely dismiss this capability especially if it can mean more value for players (I think this bit is important ("IF" and there are ways to make this possible)
I think this is a great point. And honestly have to say this is the crux of it all. Fundamentally games should be fun. If they are not fun then it simply doesn't matter. Having said that there are many arcade machines that are a tonne of fun. I think the arcade machine can be reinvented and reward players (because of composability which simply cannot exist with the protocols implemented in existing arcade machines).
Composability between protocols (exists on Solana for example) => This means any inputs can be combined together and worked on a different protocol in the solana network to earn yield. The yield can be instantly realised(after it has been collected) and the inputs returned back to the users = > With this a user who played can be picked at random (or it could be a high scorer) => They receive a digital good (realised from this yield (which can be harvested at any time). This composability is exists in this digital economy and it can be used to give more value to players
I don't understand what this means. Who is collecting these payments? If it's the developer, why would they charge players money and then give it back to them? What is a yield farm? Who decides what to buy with the money? If it's an in-game item, why does the developer need all these extra steps or even the blockchain at all to give it away? Couldn't they just randomly give stuff away for free every month? Is there really any difference from the player's perspective?
If its trustless then its the game program that will collect. It can also be the developer wallet for example but probably better if its the game program wallet. The developer has multiple options (they can charge on a per turn basis with micro payments and super low tx fees like $0.0001) in any case all payments from users can be pooled together and put into a yield farm(this is just one example) => This earns a yield on the existing pooled amount => After some time elapses the yield collected can be used to completely reward a user (or set of users) => A portion can be put aside for the continued development of the game also (users can vote on this for example) => Once yield is realised and digital good bought the principal pooled amount can be returned to the players (e.g. literally just a few steps from realising yield to buying digital good rewarding user with digital good to returning pooled capital to users
Eh... that sounds basically like playing the stock market on top of playing the game. Speaking for myself, I don't really want to do that.
At any rate, this kind of blockchain yielding or mining or whatever has priced me out of the GPU market for the past five years. Irrespective of what it means for game design, it's been a disaster for gaming.