It really looks like the years of hard work to create good PR has all gone to waste, maybe! SEGA Japan announced it was going to partner up with ‘double jump .tokyo’ to create NFT digital content and utilize blockchain technology this upcoming summer. This obviously caused a huge uproar, so much so that it sent SEGA to trending on the front page of Twitter. Oh boy.
For those not in the know and never heard of “NFT”, it stands for ‘Non Fungible Token’. So that doesn’t explain much, but what does it do and what does this have to do with ‘blockchains’ and Crypto? Basically NFT’s right now are a digital way of buying a painting or piece of artwork that only you own and will forever live on the blockchain. For example if SEGA puts an official Sonic piece of artwork, they can allow users to bid with Crypto to see who ‘owns it’. Right now the biggest NFT market is ‘Open Sea’, which lets you browse and explore how the whole thing works.
So why are people upset with SEGA Japan over entering this space? Well, right now there is a lot of negative publicity surrendering NFT and Crypto, mostly because of how much electricity it costs to run the whole thing. It’s easy to see why it outrages people considering that Bitcoin has had articles about how it consumes more electricity than Argentina. Personally, its a lot more complicated. The market has a lot of coins and its true that Bitcoin wastes a lot of energy, but the NFT’s double jump .tokyo used to run on Ethereum, which still wastes a lot of energy but the company is looking to move to a more energy efficient blockchain, called Flow Blockchain.
I feel like a lot of SEGA fans that are upset are more upset with how bad Bitcoin is with energy and the energy it takes to mine these coins, so they basically apply the energy costs of Bitcoin to any blockchain without actually doing research. Yes, blockchain costs energy. The technology is young still and there are plenty of blockchains working on “green coins”. I get it, Bitcoin uses scary amount of energy, but these NFTs aren’t running on Bitcoin.
I think the idea of NFT, Blockchains and Crypo is a lot more complicated since the market has a lot of different companies achieving different things. The space is a work in progress. Bitcoin is a 1st generation blockchain and I personally agree with a lot of people who have negative reactions to its energy use. In my opinion these users should be supporting companies that are trying to make NFTs and blockchain more energy efficient, instead of just being outraged when a company joins the space because you read a headline about Bitcoin because, sadly, if there is money to be made then companies will join in. Wouldn’t it be best to support a blockchain that isn’t using as much energy as a country for transactions?
I think blockchains and NFTs will be the future in some sort of way. Maybe not in the way we use them today, but they are here to stay and if you dislike high energy blockchains like I do, I suggest you guys support projects that are changing it.
This whole move is bad PR by SEGA, even if I support the projects because it just feels like they are jumping in on a trend to sell digital goods for high prices. I predict the company will just be quiet about the whole thing moving forward.
Of course this whole NFT and SEGA Japan thing is more complicated than “SEGA bad”, “Blockchains are bad” ordeal I have been seeing on Twitter. Personally don’t support NFT, just seems like a massive rip-off to the end user at the moment, especially in the age where blockchains are a dime-a-dozen.
Let us know what you think in the comments below.
Ad:Related posts:
SEGA launching Nail Sticker Print arcade machine in Japan
House of the Dead: Scarlet Dawn announced for arcades
SEGA teasing another arcade game announcement with countdown page
Super Monkey Ball coming back? SEGA Japan trademarks Tabegoro! Super Monkey Ball
SEGA Japan officially allows Japanese users to monetize videos on YouTube and Twitch
Even as a crypto enthusiast, I feel complete indifference about this whole situation.
I’m far from being excited about NFTs, anyways. But I guess only time will tell.
I dont understand the outrage Capcom started doing this 2 months ago.
Interesting article, good lecture for any, as me, little aware of Blockchains and Crypto, even more if related to games.
As an artist, I feel there’s a point you haven’t explained yet which is very important : it allows NFT services to generate cryptocurrency off of your very own art. People buy your art and make money from it, and you as an artost receive absolutely nothing since everything happens out of your control. We live in a world where it is now normal for content creators to have their work stolen and generating money for someone else and no one seems to realize it. THAT is the real problem here.
So let me get this straight, you put your art up for sale, person A buys art from you, you receive the full payment and person A walks off with art they paid you for. Person A then decides they want to sell the product they paid and person B buys it from person A.
And in your opinion this is theft. Why? Because you didn’t get a cut on the resale?
I’m not an artist but isn’t that sort of the free market? I can buy a LRG (Limited Run Games) game, when it goes out of print I can sell it for 500 dollars while LRG gets nothing?
Sorry boss, but you’re wrong. you set a price for your NFT and then set a royalty percentage to keep on getting currency from your piece once it is resold.
Please DYOR
Can money be made off of NFTs then? So if someone invests in an NFT like a stock or shareholder? If so how would they do that, through a broker? Maybe that’s why Sega is doing it then, as it’s even more additional revenue streams and Sega is doing what they used to do in staying ahead of the crowd.
NFTs run on a blockchain, so you would have to invest in the coin that runs the blockchain. NFTs as far as I know, are just a way of owning digital assets. As far as I know the idea is that you own this asset yourself and do what you want with it 100% outright. Of course people can copy it online and pirate said assets, but on the blockchain, the owner will be you and as long as the blockchain is active (if you believe blockchains are the future) you’ll be on there as the owner.
I feel like the NFT market is full of lazy people and companies. Recently Kevin Smith said he will be selling a film on NFT, meaning the owner of it will have 100% ownership of it (he can even shop it to distribute it).
NFT is a mixed bag, if SEGA offered unique, original art for fans to own digitally, I’d give them some respect but most companies thus far are just doing random assets.
Just what I wanted: Sega to act even more desperate than usual. Eugh, I feel dirty.
not dirty or desperate, it’s Sega being ahead of the crowd as they were, it can completely change the industry so jot a lot of other companies are happy with it as it could interrupt their current practice see > https://youtu.be/4ozLTBG83eE
Sounds the same as with fine art… a painter sells a painting, then others re-sell it over and over for more and more money subsequently, and the artist receives nothing for those sales. Same crappy system as ever
How does the artist receive nothing when they set and get the royalties each time a sale is made?
It’s telling that this, of all things Sega did recently, upset the “fans”, who instantly proceeded to post dramatic takes on the whole situation like the world is suddenly going to turn into some messed up China 2.0 dystopia and how Sega betrayed their trust. It wasn’t any of the recent screwups or giving out licenses to IPs to garbage studios like Forever Entertainment that upset them, no, it’s some partnership with a blockchain company which likely won’t affect them in any significant way
Yet another kneejerk reaction of twitter hivemind because a word they don’t like was detected in a tweet, just wait until Elon Musk or another blue checkmark guy approves of this and watch them all change their opinion in an instant
On these thoughts I totally agree.
The premise of this article is pure FUD… Indeed it is theorized that blockchains spend a TON of electricity due to the number of miners around, which is somewhat reduced in the ETH blockchain by staking currency instead of mining, but actually data centers consume much more electricity than miners.
It would be really interesting to see why people are against SEGA NFT… It is hella easy to mint, trade and own these little pieces of data and as artists it is a nice way to get your content out there and democratize the trade of said creations.
If the problem is that SEGA is gaining an additional revenue stream by dealing with their franchises in digital collectibles, well… why not?
Many still don’t understand Crypto at all nevermind NFT, the code guarantees scarcity in the Non-Fungible tapping into the psychy of humans, such as the contagion effect and the endowment effect, based on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Enjin as an example is an NFT issuance platform and ecosystem with a particular focus on this industry. As newer titles are always coming out, that traditionally leads to dwindling player bases overtime for existing titles, and with that a typical reduction in demand for certain items overtime, which means they depreciate in value, however if these titles had that item issued as Enjin NFTs, then those items can be carried over from one ecosystem system to another, which leads to an open eco-system, basically the opposite of the old ‘wall-garden’ system – where certain assets previously had no value beyond that wall, the system traditionally adopted by R&D companies. In short, Enjin provides companies with all the tools they need to build these systemised worlds with in-world NFT items stored as universal block chain assets. The technology can provide vast possibilities in future that were never previously possible in the industry.
Atari’s started to do this too, and their Stock Price seems to be improving. It makes them money as a Business and keeps them relevant.
SEGA doing the same isn’t so much of a problem as people not understanding Blockchain. It’s their own IPs so I don’t get the hate.
What’s the power required to maintain these currencies? Turn them off.
Lefties say.
@BetaP.Glasses,
What’s the power required to run the phones everyone is tweeting from? Turn them off.
I mean…phones actually serve a purpose.
Crypto serves a purpose equal or greater than phones.
Which is?
Decentralisation. Decentralised digital gold, decentralised networks, clouds, oracles, Internet, social media, etc – it’s the Internet on steroids. By the time Normies understand it’ll be too late to make gains.
Some might say you’ve said a lot without actually saying anything. Other than allowing miners and investors to make money, what purpose does it serve?
If chainlink disappeared overnight, what difference would “normies” see?
Smart contracts wouldn’t work on the Blockchain without LINK and crypto technology would be deemed useless.
The fact that decentralisation means nothing to you makes me very bullish. Imagine thinking the Internet was only for emails in the 90s – same thing.
Your speaking about crypto technology in general. That can still exist without cryptocurrencies that motivate people to waste energy in pursuit of financial gain.
What purpose do cryptocurrencies serve beyond making money for investors and miners?
You do understand that Proof of Stake is inexpensive yeah? PoW is under attack to keep haters out of the game. Technologies can exist, but Crypto makes them all better and decentralised. Censorship resistance, authenticity, privacy. How hard is it to understand?
You know what’s a massive waste of energy? Fiat currency and the wars that were financed by it. And it has kept the poor poor and the rich richer for a century. If you can’t see the benefit of this, sorry I can’t help you.
You’ve again listed examples of how crypto in general is beneficial. You haven’t listed the purpose of cryptocurrency beyond stating that they don’t waste as much energy as they used to.
Different Cryptos serve for different purposes, obviously.