Comment by jallen_dot_dev

> You can buy your way into a prestigious school.

And is that something our society encourages? Are we rooting for prestigious schools to offer more pay-to-enter mechanisms like that, do we have a contingent of teachers arguing that this is the future of schooling? Or do a lot of people get really mad about those bribery scandals, and do those prestigious schools actually loose a small amount of social prestige in the public eye whenever a new scandal comes out?

People aren't happy with Harvard when they engage in nepotism, no one goes around calling that a bold new innovative model for college admissions.

Of course, paying money or hacking your way through an experience doesn't rob other people of the intrinsic personal achievement of doing something hard, and it doesn't mean their experience was less meaningful. But common shortcuts certainly make all of these achievements less valuable as a social signal, which is something that NFT-based games claim that they can provide.

In your earlier comment you write:

> it lets you show off to other players because they know how much time you had to spend

But no, it doesn't, because those other players don't know if you legitimately got the achievement/asset, they have no idea how much time you spent on it. If you personally find it rewarding to get that asset then great, but in a play-to-earn game or a game with tradable NFT assets, most of the achievements that are publicly displayed by players won't have been earned, so you're not really socially/publicly showing off anything to other players unless you're also adding a text box underneath them saying "don't worry, I did actually earn this."