Ubisoft kills NFTs in Ghost Recon Breakpoint. Promises new ones in the future

Is this Nibel thread?

hahah you just dont understand, ubisoft is just gonna let me use these old nfts into their newer games :^) theyre going to appreciate into the MOOOON :^) you're ngmi if you arent an NFTchad like me :^^^^^^^)

Yeah pretty much and you can sell them to other retards. Sometimes you make a lot of money and sometimes you lose a lot of money.

Haven't read that article but didnt a bunch of people get arrested for doing this. Scamming investors basically

>Left your mark in history

Attached: 1618142272275.png (632x583, 267.51K)

>Ubisoft kills NFTs in Ghost Recon Breakpoint.
Goo-
>Promises new ones in the future.
wat

gamerant.com/ghost-recon-breakpoint-support-ending/
not only that, but since they can't milk this shitty game, they're going to stop supporting it
an online only game

can I sell this picture as nft?

biggest order can download it, after this I delete the message

Attached: 1642705911841.png (319x338, 167.62K)

While not really true in theory, in practice, NFTs are just Hot Potato with money
You buy an NFT with the only goal of selling it for more to an even bigger retard, before this retarded scheme comes tumbling down (which has already happened)

Just consider them digital trading cards that there's only one official printing of

Attached: Non Functioning Token.webm (640x360, 725.43K)

No NFTs are comparable to digital ownership licenses they are not inherently linked to art pieces
A lot of NFTs you come across are used to certify your ownership over a .jpg (or in many cases just the link to a .jpg) because pictures are easy to make, don't take up much space when uploading them in bulk and give the buyer a direct visual idea of what he's buying
But you could use NFTs just as well for different things like a concert ticket or a poem you wrote
Or use them to scam retards on the internet

sorry bro, i saved it and im not giving you shit
sue me

They are going to keep the servers online.

whoops to all the sucke...err...I mean loyal fans but it's gonna be a big ol' no refunds, I'm afraid

Attached: 1630829059759.gif (498x370, 3.12M)

Consider real world artwork. If someone made a perfect molecular copy of the Mona Lisa and sold it, it would be worth less than the original because people value to the original over the copy even if it’s identical. NFTs are scammers trying to take advantage of that human attachment to intangible history in order to fleece idiots.

Actually no. You pay for ownership of a URL, represented by the picture. You don't own the picture. You don't even own the right to distribute it. Infact, if our courts weren't pozzed, they would consider it false advertising to use the term "ownership" anywhere near an NFT.

It's the real life version of a weapon skin.
You're all responsible for this. All you CS:GO faggots and whatnot. Kill yourselves.

ubisoft are desperate, they haven't made a successful game in years and they don't have stuff like FIFA to milk gambling addicts

You are laughing at non-existent people
A grand total of 6 people bought NFTs months into this games lifespan

Literally nothing was lost

Based

wow really? thanks for keeping alive a game that they promo a couple of months ago and was literally on the first page of ubisoft's page
i know they're absolute scum, but even them, lack the testicles to shut down a game that sold thousands of copies just a few months ago

I bought kemono

Why would I buy an NFT when I can just right click and save it?

No, NFTs are not pictures. But lots of scammers have tricked people into thinking this is what a NFT is.

A NFT is just a token on a blockchain. If I were to try and show you a picture of a NFT, I couldn't because it's basically just proof you own something rather than something it's self.
A lot of people however have tried to link ownership of a NFT to ownership of something like art. Which is where the confusion comes from. In reality most of the time if you own a NFT it just points to a picture but does not confer any ownership of the picture.

Think of it this way. When you buy a house, you own the house.
When you buy a NFT house, you don't own the house, but a piece of paper with the houses address on it.

That is the difference between owning a NFT and owning something real.

With all that being said, I've still not seen a single legitimate use for NFTs. It's basically all scams and even fucking Ubisoft just scammed people. This literally happens all the damn time. People invent NFT out of thin air, maybe spend a bit of money to make it look flashy (or get a celebrity involved), sell lots of them with the promise they'll become worth even more with time. Then they immediately tank in value and the people who got all the money run away with it.
Many such cases. Not sure how people still fall for it.

They were supposed to essentially be art crypto, but they quickly turned into a part of the art scam (money laundering) and THEN turned as a desperate attempt for corporations to make their own separate crypto market that they would have full control of. It flopped and now the whole thing is being memory-holed

based filename poster

you buy a reciept that lets you say you own something. you don't own the thing the URL links to, you just get to say you do. Then you try to sell that reciept to someone else for more than you paid before it crashes.

>We will seek to scam people in the future when everything has died down
Or
>We are silently cancelling the project but we don't want to tell investors that

>Not sure how people still fall for it.
B-b-b-but my favorite celeb, eceleb or company said these ones are totally legit, this time for real

You're just paying to say you own a link to something. You don't own what's behind the link, you don't own the link, you just own the ability to say you bought something tied to something else. That's why people buying NFTs for art don't own the art nor can they do anything with said art because that would be illegal. It's the dumbest thing imaginable and an immense scam. Hell, the webost behind the URL can literally change the art behind the link and you can't do anything about it. That's what happened with that one NFT group that sold like 1000 different NFTs and then changed them all to the same grave.

Attached: 4442WTY.jpg (1080x941, 121.82K)

worse, you pay to have a receipt

no you pay to 'own' a random number attached to a drawing for example, you cant sell or do anything with the drawing you can just sell your number

Owning an NFT is like owning the paper that a deed to a house is printed on but the deed itself isn't in your name.

No. When you buy an NFT it's like buying a serial code. The picture is just a visual representation of that serial code you bought. You do not in any circumstances own the picture that represents your code.

Pretty much, but since you can potentially make money off of them legit, the entire gaming world get their panties in a twist, it's hilarious to watch.
Oh btw, once they are done hating on nft's, they go back to spending hundreds of dollars per month on skins and "battle packs"

enjoy holding that bag

>British government is making them legal and adopting crypto

>Game I bought a skin or cosmetic in dies
>issue a chargeback through my bank the game can't dispute anymore and receive all my money back in full

rare pepes if he real

You dont even own anything.
Its a hot potato on a global scale, you dont want to be the last owner of an NFT.
Which is exactly why they're a scam and anyone losing money to them is an absolute smoothbrain and deserves whatever happens to them.

Why not? Easiest money ever, even Molyneux made millions selling NFT plots of land for a game that doesn't exist.

Still not found a buyer for that $2000 star citizen jpeg?

BASED
The only way certain people will ever learn just what a scam NFTs are, if at they're even capable of learning, is by getting fucked over as hard as possible.

you're the one defending nft's schizo

it's the latest electronic bag holding musical chair game where you buy thing low and sell it higher to some idiot until the economy runs out of idiots and collapses

Less than 25% of the NFTs made for Breakpoint had any movement at all.
It's been a fucking failure.

Yes, that is exactly what everyone does

>Be a group of a few friends
>Create NFT
>Tell your bros to buy it from ourselves
>Totally legit transactions, traceable
>People can see the price increasing
>Its all good, the money doesnt leave our group of bros
>Suddenly, a greedy faggot lured by the seemingly unstoppable price increase of our nft decides to buy it
>money from outside enters our group
>we dont buy it back, we now can split the earned money between all of us
>repeat

Thats literally it.

I said it was hilarious to watch you getting your panties in a twist, your absolute seething when i compared it to your precious CSGO skins is exactly what I meant

Good morning sir, please do not redeem the bag

you forgot 1 tiny problem
>that greedy faggot sells out and takes 99% of the money

Selling this post for 1000 USD.
Reply or your mother dies in her sleep tonight

Attached: 1618750112325.gif (498x488, 401.8K)

ANTA BAKA

Attached: ok.gif (395x313, 1.99M)

Good for him.
Until
>more retarded faggots keep buying this unstoppable nft
>god, we surely found the best nft out there
>the massive giga faggot buys it for 200 eth
>YES I HAVE THE BEST NFT THERE IS IT WILL MAKE ME RICH
>people realize
>why the fuck would I care for that shitty png
>OKAY, IM SELLING THIS FOR 250ETH, ITS A BARGAIN!
>we dont care
>pls, 200eth so i can break even
>...

God i cant wait until people realize how utterly useless nfts are. The wailing will be heard outside our galaxy

Yeah, it's basically adults selling adoptables like diaperfurs on DA

N

It's basically gatcha model for any game, except he whales are practically all money laundering.

This is probably the most on-te-money take, but there’s some (currently) fringe circumstances that allow the bundled data (which is also privately owned) to contain images. The reason you don’t currently own any visual assets when you buy an art-based NFT is because you’re buying a hyperlink that points to AWS to pull said image. If someone came up with a way to pack and store binary data that compiles to an image (or some more manageable data compression methodology) you could probably give ownership of image data itself. Other can still, of course, copy that data and manipulate it though so it’s not actually a tool of exclusivity unless there’s other associated perks.

The exclusivity is also meaningless because it's a digital image to begin with where all copies are identical.

See Current NFTs are a misapplication of the technology. Nonfungible data containers have all sort of unique utilities that allow for lower costs for data ownership+privacy that’ll eventually get rolled into how games are designed. A marketplace of limited skins that can only be used in a single game is probably the WEAKEST example of that.

>you either buy this shit or that shit
>no other options
are you a literal bot?

It doesn’t JUST have to act as a container for an image? Let’s imagine a hypothetical where The Pokémon Company decides to make an NFT-based Pokémon game. Each Pokémon’s representative NFT exists in different frequencies with legendaries being one of a kind. These NFTs don’t just store representative images, but levels and stats like IV and EV that vary from one Pikachu NFT to the next. The NFT just holds data and confirms who the ownership of a given mon in. This hypothetical also serves as a way to prove Pokémon legitimacy at a competitive scale, because the data for the Pokémon in question is stored on chain.

You don't own the image, you don't even own that one particular jpg file. You own the link that allows you to take a look at that one jpg file.