These days, it seems as though you can't go even a day without seeing some sort of article or news release where the topic is about how cryptocurrencies are the next big thing for gaming. Is that really the case though?

You see tons of news talking about NFTs, WEB3 this, or crypto that. The question is: How do these new technologies benefit anybody? Well, the group that obviously benefits the most in these sorts of applications are the publishers of the crypto and NFT infused gaming experiences. These are the biggest winners in all of this as they tend to take a certain percentage cut of every single transaction made for their game and assets.

There is one way in which cryptocurrencies can benefit the players though. They give players an alternative way to pay to play the game, like those games find at this Bitcoin casino list. Some places, like with games found online, allow you to use cryptocurrencies to access your favorite games. Games like Plinko, the classic game from TV game shows like The Price is Right. Speaking of which, check out where you can play and learn more about Plinko games with bitcoin, which should show you that there are real cryptocurrency benefits for all sorts of players out there.

Beyond these smaller benefits for the player, what else is there? Big publishers of video games may suggest that the inclusion of NFTs and crypto are an even bigger benefit for players. They say that creators can earn a decent chunk of change from the sale of unique NFT-like items. While this may be true in some very rare circumstances, it's not true for a vast majority of wannabe millionaires out in the real world.

The idea of NFTs is more akin to that of a pyramid scheme. The benefits trickle upwards to those at the very top, which are often the publishers of the game itself or the original "owner" of the virtual object. However, they only way that these people make money is if the NFT in question is being bought and sold in the first place. If there isn't a market or a want for an NFT or any NFT from a game, nobody wins out.

The idea of spending money on virtually owning, and we use the term "owning" loosely here, a virtual item is just downright laughable to most people in the world. A NFT is just some digital piece of paper signed by someone of no importance that says you now own a jpg image or some other virtual item. The market itself is also quite volatile for those choosing to engage in this system. There was already one major crash happening in April 2021. Another NFT bubble burst is either happening right now or will happen very soon according to some reports.

Finally, there is the idea from many big publishers are trying to push that NFTs don't have much of an impact on the environment. The reality of the matter is that every single transaction between buyers and sellers requires more and more energy, especially as the number of transactions increases. Studies have already shown that an Ethereum transaction leaves a carbon footprint of 33.4kg of CO2, while estimates place transactions of NFTs at a much higher rate of 48kg CO2.

To put it into another perspective, a transaction of an NFT, which is nothing more than a digital piece of paper saying that you own a JPG, leaves a carbon footprint that is over 14 times that of simply mailing a nice piece of physical printed art. While publishers are trying to argue that they are making efforts to lower the required energy on NFT transactions, the reality tells a very different story.