And there's NFTs (and blockchains collectively if we're being honest) in a nutshell. NFTs aren't worth the paper they're not written on.
In short, it's a clear demonstration that NFTs are not anything like as future-proofed as their advocates claim, which has major implications for the perceived value of NFTs as a whole.
And there's NFTs (and blockchains collectively if we're being honest) in a nutshell.
NFTs aren't worth the paper they're not written on.
As for what's happened to all those precious NFTs, well, for all intents and purposes they no longer exist. It's worth noting the developers are attempting to compensate owners of those now-worthless NFTs with replacement tokens for one of the company's other blockchain-based racing games. Affected players can be compensated in various ways, including Replacement Cars, or a "Race Pass", or "Proxy Assets", which "will be used in the future to obtain NFTs to products across the REVV Motorsport ecosystem." In other words, you get a token for your token. A perfectly secure investment!
The issue is there needs to be one public blockchain, not subsets. The NFT should be owned by the person, and able to be sold without the game to have value without the game existing. This isn't...
The issue is there needs to be one public blockchain, not subsets. The NFT should be owned by the person, and able to be sold without the game to have value without the game existing.
This isn't even an issue like NFTs being digital beanie babies, this is a proprietary system built on an open framework that took everything it built with it when it collapsed. I also think it's a solid example for why conventional game concepts simply can't work on a blockchain: You can't lock the data it contains to the game, or it is useless, and valueless. A bit of a stretch here, but you could make the item tradable outside of the game, but that could effectively remove it from play, which a dev likely wouldn't want either.
EDIT: I'm not a fan of NFTs, and while I can't say I predicted this because, frankly, I don't spend that much time thinking about them until there are interesting problems like this, after observing what happened, this will likely happen quite a few more times.
And there's NFTs (and blockchains collectively if we're being honest) in a nutshell.
NFTs aren't worth the paper they're not written on.
The issue is there needs to be one public blockchain, not subsets. The NFT should be owned by the person, and able to be sold without the game to have value without the game existing.
This isn't even an issue like NFTs being digital beanie babies, this is a proprietary system built on an open framework that took everything it built with it when it collapsed. I also think it's a solid example for why conventional game concepts simply can't work on a blockchain: You can't lock the data it contains to the game, or it is useless, and valueless. A bit of a stretch here, but you could make the item tradable outside of the game, but that could effectively remove it from play, which a dev likely wouldn't want either.
EDIT: I'm not a fan of NFTs, and while I can't say I predicted this because, frankly, I don't spend that much time thinking about them until there are interesting problems like this, after observing what happened, this will likely happen quite a few more times.