Web3's "Vampire Attack" on Gaming

TL;DR

• Item/character interoperability in Web3 gaming means devs can offer 'if you own (X) NFT, it will unlock (Y) in our game' promotions.

• If/when IP sharing is adopted by the 'big dogs,' it'll be because there's clear monetary incentive for them to do so.

Full Story

You know those moments in tech history where consumers/industries went:

"Pfffft, yeah right - like that's ever going to happen."

...and then that thing actually happened?

For example:

• Microsoft predicting there will one day be 'a computer in every home' (back when computers took up entire rooms).

• Apple telling the music industry that the days of selling $20 CDs was over, and that they should sell single tracks for $0.99 on iTunes.

• Amazon sharing its plans to launch Amazon Web Services, and become the backbone of the internet.

The idea that 'vampire attacks' will not only become common place, but embraced by the gaming industry as ​Web3​ gaming proliferates, may well end up on this list.

Here's what a 'vampire attack' is:

Web3 gaming's universal interoperability means you can take the items and characters you've collected from one game, to another.

And that's how the blood sucking starts...

Let's say you're an indie developer, building a game that is reminiscent of Mario Kart.

You could bring in a bunch of well-aligned players by advertising that anyone with a Mario Kart ​NFT​ in their ​wallet​ can unlock bonus levels, secret upgrades, or - hell, even play as Mario in your game!

Here's the mess it will cause:

Can you imagine Nintendo adopting a technology that would allow a third party to leverage and/or use its intellectual property for commercial gain, without permission?

Neither.

So the idea that major gaming brands will all of a sudden embed 3D files depicting their protected IP into interoperable NFTs, for anyone to use?

It ain't happening! That said...

Here's why IP owners might actually want to be 'vampire attacked':

Interoperable Web3 gaming isn't going to be adopted by legacy incumbents like Nintendo and Sony, 'just coz.'

If/when it's adopted by said 'big dogs,' it'll be because there's clear monetary incentive for them to do so. Here's how that might manifest itself:

• NFTs can be programmed to give royalties back to the creator every time they're sold on secondary markets.

• The more value that is attached to an NFT, the more recurring revenue the creator can make from royalties.

• And the more benefits given by an NFT, the more valuable it becomes.

It's the same reason Visa will partner with American Airlines to offer reward points, or why Amex will gift its Centurion Card holders free Equinox memberships.

The more they can bundle → the more customers they can attract → the more fees they can collect.

Plus, whether we're talking Web1/Web2/Web3 gaming:

All the same IP protections that exist today will be applicable. Just because Nintendo makes an NFT, doesn't mean its IP can be used freely.

Sure, third party developers will be able to coax users to their games with 'if you own (X) NFT, it will unlock (Y) in our game' promotions...

But if they want to use a company's IP, they'll still need to license it...which means even more money in the pockets of IP holders, like Nintendo.

Helluva concept!