Got No Game

40 comments

tarazkp1.4 K9 days agoPeakD4 min read

If you want to ruin a game for players, it is pretty easy, incentivise multiple account creation and automated play. Sure, it boosts numbers and can get some early funding into the pocket, but ultimately, it becomes a problem that drives real players away, and leaves whatever game it was, a shell of what it could have been. While there might be reasons to have a couple accounts, ultimately, there should be a net loss on any kind of multi-account farming activity.

A loss, not just less gain.

If there is just less gain, it just means more bots are needed. There needs to be disincentive, not only a lower incentive. A punishment. But the problem with all of these blockchain games, is that the value proposition is to earn, and the most effective way for most isn't to actually play the game, it is to farm accounts. That is just stupid, isn't it? Why have a game at all - It could just be an interface with resource allocations, groups of accounts, scripts running - set and forget.

Similarly, one of my complaints about Splinterlands is that the Leader board is not actually a leaderboard. I don't know all the numbers, but the majority of the top 50 accounts that win DEC are played by scholars, who are playing multiple accounts. So, who is the winner each season? Where is the fanfare directed, what does the podium look like?

Pathetic.

I get it that the owner of the horse isn't likely to be the jockey riding the horse, but a jockey can still only ride one horse at a time in a race. There can't be a trifecta with three different horses and a single jockey. Again, it just makes it another mining operation, not a game. At least for me, it take the fun out of playing games, when playing against bots or people who don't actually care about playing.

I think that especially in the current world of artificial intelligence sweeping through and doing everything for everyone, better than they can do for themselves, you'd think gaming would be for humans. But this is the problem with incentivizing multi-account and repetitive behaviours for financial gain, because that is what people will do. It might seem like a good way to bad the stats, but ultimately, this behaviour leads to the destruction of the game.

Maybe the creators don't care?

They are just in it for some profit. I guess that is okay, but perhaps they should just be upfront about it and say, this is just like nearly every other crypto project, meaningless. And no, I don't think the games themselves have meaning, but I do think there is value for people to build communities around games and interact based on strategy and development. But, that is not what it is about anymore, is it? Do the non-playing leader board owners even know what is happening in the game, can they use their sets, do they have any skills, or have they outsourced it all to the scholar?

Remember when people used to LAN game?

Imagine a LAN gaming session with the top 20 Splinterlands accounts on the leader board, and there are only five people there. Maybe, there should be a limit in the terms and conditions about how many accounts scholars can play, and the scholars have to be registered.

It is a pity.

Maybe it is a reflection on culture these days, where people are looking to win, but they will try to avoid actually playing the game. It happens in many domains too, where people seem more open to cheating to get what they want these days. Or people want to have the benefits of a loving relationship, but aren't actually willing to do what it takes to build one. There is no commitment, just desire.