Lot of people in this thread criticising NFTs and honestly I’d like to pile in. I don’t understand what Ubisoft is doing here.

The best case I can make for NFTs is securing ownership of digital assets. Let’s say I spend a few thousand on the Steam store. Then for some reason I charge back a transaction on my credit card. Valve will instantly ban me and I lose access to everything. Now if there was instead a system where my ownership was recorded on a token outside of valve’s control and that ownership entitled the holder of the token to access the game in perpetuity, that would be useful. Maybe.

But even I’m not convinced by this. Steam and other digital stores like Kindle are already hugely successful. It’s possible that people would spend more on digital goods if their ownership was irrevocable and transferable but I doubt it.