SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[Raven]

Primates.

 

[Embattle]

"Someone" ate the Mrs chicken crisps
"Someone" then had to go to two petrol stations to replace them

Why does someone else's crisps always taste better ?

Generally toast made by someone else always tastes better as well.

 

[Gwadien]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Zed-g6dbZ8

 

[Scouse]

It’s not the police’s job to shut down political debate. They should stick to solving crime | Sonia Sodha

The appeals court has rightly upheld Harry Miller’s freedom to express his views

www.theguardian.com

A man gets a call from a police officer. He is told that, while he has done nothing criminal, his social media posts have offended someone, so the police have recorded them as a non-crime hate incident that may show up on criminal record checks

 

[Ormorof]

I thought of you as soon as i saw that, what a dumb move by the police would think they have better things to do

 

[Raven]

Square Enix Doesn’t Think Games Should Be Fun Anymore And That Should Scare Us

No fun allowed in 2022. Pack the videogames away and get to work.

www.thegamer.com

 

[Ormorof]

Square Enix Doesn’t Think Games Should Be Fun Anymore And That Should Scare Us

No fun allowed in 2022. Pack the videogames away and get to work.

www.thegamer.com

Christ what an asshat, how dare people try to have fun when they could be contributing instead to their shareholders enormous piles of money

 

[Scouse]

Christ what an asshat, how dare people try to have fun when they could be contributing instead to their shareholders enormous piles of money

The article is just rage-fulled idiocy born out of poor understanding tbh. I got as far as this:

Here’s the quote in full before I tear it a new one:

“I realize that some people who “play to have fun” and who currently form the majority of players have voiced their reservations toward these new trends, and understandably so. However, I believe that there will be a certain number of people whose motivation is to “play to contribute,” by which I mean to help make the game more exciting. Traditional gaming has offered no explicit incentive to this latter group of people, who were motivated strictly by such inconsistent personal feelings as goodwill and volunteer spirit.”

WHAT DOES THIS EVEN MEAN? Putting “play to have fun” in quotation marks like you’re trying to label the millions of people who buy your entertainment products to have fun as a strange barrier to your corporate interests is the most nefarious shit.

What it actually means is that some people play games to have fun. Some people enjoy creating stuff that makes the games better - modders etc. who do so purely on "goodwill" and "volunteer spirit".

NFTs provide a mechanism for these content-creators to get paid, if they want.


But hey ho. The author of the article says she "works in the game industry". When really what Jade King does is write articles, sat in her knickers, after playing games, a couple of years out from her degree in journalism. This twentysomething twat clearly understands the future of the technology landscape and isn't just emo-regurgitating anti-crypto tropes in rage-fuelled mob-posts.

 

[Ormorof]

So far ive seen zero evidence that NFTs are in any way a good thing for gaming

 

[Raven]

Funny how people get this sort of religious fervour over things. It seems to be amplified the more completely wrong they are about it.

I mean, mind boggled

What it actually means is that some people play games to have fun. Some people enjoy creating stuff that makes the games better - modders etc. who do so purely on "goodwill" and "volunteer spirit".

NFTs provide a mechanism for these content-creators to get paid, if they want

If only there was another, simpler, less ecologically destructive and not ultimately completely pointless (except for shooting money up the pyramid) way of people getting paid for things they had created.

 

[Scouse]

Funny how people get this sort of religious fervour over things. It seems to be amplified the more completely wrong they are about it.

Oh, I fully agree

 

[Gwadien]

Funny how people get this sort of religious fervour over things. It seems to be amplified the more completely wrong they are about it.

I mean, mind boggled



If only there was another, simpler, less ecologically destructive and not ultimately completely pointless (except for shooting money up the pyramid) way of people getting paid for things they had created.

It works both ways.

I don't understand the criticism of the 'waste' when there's far more things out there are just as wasteful.

Nobody understands why there's NFTs being brought to games, because nobody here plays mainstream games; look at the most popular games, they're all A. Free and B. Skins - Fortnite, COD, Counterstrike, Dota, LoL etc.

Interestingly the difference here for me is that people actually put value to skins (not me personally, I think it's weird) so I can see the actual 'faith' behind the 'market' whereas with standard 'art' NFTs, I don't get as much.

They're all just taking a leaf out of Valve's book (Where you can buy/sell skins) and taking it a step further; I'm intrigued to see how they'll work differently to skins as they currently are.

I think all the outrage is purely because it's a 'NFT' without actually understanding or caring what it actually involves.

 

[Raven]

"Just because he has one" is not a valid excuse any more I am afraid. The world is on its arse. We need to be coming up with technologies that do something, not new and interesting ways to exploit people, that also happen to be devastating to the environment.

 

[Tom]

I play TF2 with a chicken head and some cats on my shoulders. Part of my identity in that game (on the server I'm a regular on). I'm quite happy to pay for stuff like that because I think it looks funny.

 

[Scouse]

I play TF2 with a chicken head and some cats on my shoulders. Part of my identity in that game (on the server I'm a regular on). I'm quite happy to pay for stuff like that because I think it looks funny.

An NFT would allow a creator to sell that directly to you and you'd be able to retain it's complete uniqueness as you'd own the token.

Win-win - the creator owns the IP, can prove it by attaching it to an NFT. Blockchain transference is immutable - so you've got contract resolution and payment swap right there for the whole world to read.

 

[BloodOmen]

We need a AAA developer that doesn't open their company up to outside investing... this drive to constantly impress investors makes them cut corners and churn out halfbaked shit, only then will you see seeing better games. We get the odd gem here and there still but very little.

 

[Raven]

An NFT would allow a creator to sell that directly to you and you'd be able to retain it's complete uniqueness as you'd own the token.

Win-win - the creator owns the IP, can prove it by attaching it to an NFT. Blockchain transference is immutable - so you've got contract resolution and payment swap right there for the whole world to read.

No you don't, you own fuck all, you do not own the rights nor the "product" itself. Most of the NFT scam is pointless JPEGS or random shit, people have got on board, people much higher up the pyramid have made their money, lots of people are sat there with something that has absolutely no value whatsoever except for other investors marks to hold on to in the desperate hope that it jumps in value. Top tip. They won't.

 

[Raven]

We need a AAA developer that doesn't open their company up to outside investing... this drive to constantly impress investors makes them cut corners and churn out halfbaked shit, only then will you see seeing better games. We get the odd gem here and there still but very little.

I don't even bother looking at previews or pre-hype for games any more, doesn't seem a great deal of point. I don't think a single AAA title came out all last year that I actually bought, certainly not heavily discounted a couple of months later. I think the last was Cyberpunk, which was utter dross. ~£20 is pretty much my max now unless something reviews well.

Edit, remembered I bought Days Gone and did actually really enjoy it, but that kind of doesn't count as it was just a question of whether the port was done well (and it was) it wasn't really a new release.

Edit, edit, and by review I mean, actually proper reviews, not vomit that the complicit shysters that work in the games journalist industry keep spewing all over the place.

 

[Raven]

Soylent Green - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Might as well try it out...

 

[Scouse]

Soylent Green - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Might as well try it out...

1966 novel involving climate collapse due to greenhouse gasses

 

[Ormorof]

More NFT nonsense
View: https://twitter.com/chimeracoder/status/1477408542374117380?s=21

 

[Scouse]

More NFT nonsense

What's it to do with NFT's?

I like Paul's response. But to be clear - if you buy a stolen bike off ebay then you have to return that bike for free.

Should we ban ebay?

 

[Raven]

1966 novel involving climate collapse due to greenhouse gasses

Set in 2022

 

[DaGaffer]

An NFT would allow a creator to sell that directly to you and you'd be able to retain it's complete uniqueness as you'd own the token.

Win-win - the creator owns the IP, can prove it by attaching it to an NFT. Blockchain transference is immutable - so you've got contract resolution and payment swap right there for the whole world to read.

LOL if you think that will happen. The reason why companies like Square are interested is because they can see a marketplace model where they sit in the middle. Just because you own the NFT doesn't mean you'll have the means to licence it direct, even with blockchain there will be a payment intermediary. It does mean you maintain rights to your content, which is a good thing, but the ones who make all the money, as ever are the platform owners/distributors.

 

[Scouse]

LOL if you think that will happen. The reason why companies like Square are interested is because they can see a marketplace model where they sit in the middle. Just because you own the NFT doesn't mean you'll have the means to licence it direct, even with blockchain there will be a payment intermediary. It does mean you maintain rights to your content, which is a good thing, but the ones who make all the money, as ever are the platform owners/distributors.

Don't disagree. But it's a) like that now in the gaming world, and b) - due to the fact that you maintain rights to your content, an improvement.

An improvement that has use everywhere value transfers and contracts occur.

 

[Raven]

So, you agree, the patsy at the end of the trail, that buys the NFT, owns fuck all...because they are not buying the actual thing.

Meanwhile, away from the Kool-aid, in the "old world" you can quite simply buy a thing, and own it and any rights that might be attached to it, marketing, promotion, actual value and so on.

You can buy my house if you like. You won't own it and I don't even have to let you in, but please buy my house...or even better, this random thing that looks a bit funny that I found in my drawer, not the actual thing though, that would be preposterous, you can have a token though and I will still keep and enjoy the thing in my drawer.

 

[Gwadien]

You can buy my house if you like. You won't own it and I don't even have to let you in, but please buy my house.

This is already kinda a thing I think

 

[Raven]

This is already kinda a thing I think

Would really not surprise me tbh. The whole thing is hilarious to watch from the outside, people scrabbling about in the muck to make easy money but not realising they are being farmed...it's like history isn't a thing.

 

[Raven]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaHMHy8d6Wg&ab_channel=RichRebuilds

 

[Gwadien]

Would really not surprise me tbh. The whole thing is hilarious to watch from the outside, people scrabbling about in the muck to make easy money but not realising they are being farmed...it's like history isn't a thing.

How are people getting farmed? I didn't understand that joke when you posted that film, but I've seen it everywhere now...

I think history (especially 400~) years ago, history backs up what's going on, it's capitalism, people have 'faith' in a product so therefore it magically works against all rationality.

I don't understand it, so I don't want to get involved, but I know people that have made lots of money from it, they seem to be dealing with stuff made exclusively to be a NFT. So yeah, I'd wager that if there's any crime or immorality going on, it's probably in a very small minority.

I just think the hate is weird. Because all of the complaints I've seen against it already exist in a capitalist society.