TL; DR
-
Interoperability of items and characters in Web3 gaming means that developers will have ‘if you own (X) NFT, it unlocks (Y) in our game’ promotions.
-
If/when IP sharing is adopted by the ‘big dogs’, it will be because there is a clear financial incentive for them to do so.
Full story
You know those moments in technology history where consumers/industries went:
“Pfffft, yeah, like that’s ever going to happen.”
…and then that thing actually happened?
For example:
-
Microsoft predicts that one day there will be “a computer in every home” (back when computers took up entire rooms).
-
Apple told the music industry that the days of selling CDs for $20 were over, and that they should sell single songs for $0.99 on iTunes.
-
Amazon shares its plans to launch Amazon Web Services and become the backbone of the Internet.
The idea that “vampire attacks” will not only become commonplace, but also be embraced by the gaming industry as Web3 gaming expands, could well end up on this list.
This is what a ‘vampire attack’ is:
The universal interoperability of Web3 gaming means you can transfer the items and characters you’ve collected from one game to another.
And so the blood sucking begins…
Let’s say you’re an indie developer and you’re building a game reminiscent of Mario Kart.
You could bring in some well-matched players by advertising that anyone with a Mario Kart NFT in their wallet can unlock bonus levels, secret upgrades, or – heck, even – play as Mario in your game!
This is the mess it will cause:
Can you imagine if Nintendo adopted a technology that would allow a third party to exploit and/or use its intellectual property for commercial gain, without permission?
Neither.
So the idea that major gaming brands will suddenly embed 3D files representing their protected IP into interoperable NFTs for anyone to use?
It’s not happening! That being said…
Here’s why IP owners might want to being ‘vampire attacked’:
Interoperable Web3 gaming won’t be adopted by incumbents like Nintendo and Sony, ‘just coz.’
If/when it is adopted by the said ‘big dogs’, it will be because there is a clear financial incentive for them to do so. Here’s how that could manifest:
-
NFTs can be programmed to return royalties to the creator every time they are sold on secondary markets.
-
The more value placed on an NFT, the more recurring revenue the creator can make from royalties.
-
And the more benefits an NFT offers, the more valuable it becomes.
It’s the same reason why Visa will partner with American Airlines to offer rewards points, or why Amex will give its Centurion Cardholders free Equinox memberships.
The more they can bundle → the more customers they can attract → the more fees they can collect.
And whether we’re talking about Web1/Web2/Web3 gaming:
All the same IP protections that exist today will apply. Just because Nintendo creates an NFT doesn’t mean its IP can be used freely.
Sure, third-party developers can lure users to their games with “if you own (X) NFT, (Y) will be unlocked in our game” promotions…
But if they want to use a company’s intellectual property, they’ll still have to license it… which means even more money ends up in the pockets of IP holders like Nintendo.
Helluva concept!
