The blockchain gaming is one of those technologies that nobody is excited about except for a handful of startups … and perhaps the main writer of GamesBeat, Dean Takahashi. Blockchain, of course, is the innovation that powers cryptocurrencies like bitcoins. However, when it comes to games, some companies promise they will – well, I do not know. Mostly, it seems that people are trying to create new platforms to do a lot of things that Steam already manages, like the ownership of digital objects.
This is the reason why the blockchain gaming won the John McAfee Award for Destroying Time and Wealth. This is one of the awards we have distributed as part of The Bad Awards for our GamesBeat Rewind 2018
You can hear us discuss this award in the video above, or check as part of our entire Bad Awards category in the podcast below:
John McAfee managed the company that created McAfee antivirus software and now does not. Instead, he now spends his time like any bizarre billionaire: evading police interrogations on an alleged murder in Belize, running for president of the United States and investing in cryptocurrencies.
In December 2017, McAfee became frustrated by the fact that people doubted the long-term feasibility of cryptocurrencies.
"Bitcoin now at $ 16,600" he tweeted. "Those of you in the old school who believe that this is a bubble simply did not understand the new blockchain math, or you never cared enough to prove it.The bubbles are mathematically impossible in this new paradigm, so the corrections and all the I stay. "
Ignoring the fact that it would have been really bad for nothing if price corrections were impossible, that tweet did not age well. Since then, Bitcoin has lost 75 percent of its value. It is now trading at $ 4000.
Gaming blockchain is nothing
As someone who writes about games and gaming activities, I get many shots on the gaming blockchain. I started ignoring those e-mails months ago. And the reason is because technology is almost completely meaningless at this point. Many companies are trying to make it happen, and that's fine. But not even one of those startups has made a convincing argument for consumers, game developers or publishers.
This does not mean that these companies run out of hypothesis. Everyone has great ideas about the potential for the blockchain. It could decentralize the ownership of digital objects, and this is an interesting idea. Developers could also potentially use blockchain technology to run anti-tampering online worlds without requiring servers. Instead, the games would run on local machines, and then the blockchain would track any changes.
I think these ideas have potential. So, now, why are these startups not building products to prove that this is filling a need? I think it's likely because that need does not exist – at least not in a way that is consistent with the amount of noise that companies are trying to do about it.
So I will continue to ignore the blockchain games. I will start to pay attention again if someone will produce a product that people actually care about.