真人玩家在 Bot 遍地的链游中还能保持竞争力吗?

深潮2024-07-26 tarihinde yayınlandı2024-07-26 tarihinde güncellendi

链上游戏必须接受机器人作为用户群的一部分。

撰文:WMP, Bankless

编译:Felix, PANews

链上游戏吸引了一类极其高效的玩家:机器人。当机器人参与其中,真人玩家还能保持竞争力吗?

完全链上游戏将一切(包括资产、逻辑、规则和状态)直接放在底层区块链上。在这个新的游戏领域,每个举动最终都被记录在链上。

这种功能提供了各种好处,例如透明度和围绕新颖游戏经济的可能性。然而,这也吸引了一类极其高效的玩家类型:机器人。

真人在链上游戏有竞争力吗?

最近,风投公司 Nascent 联合创始人 Dan Elitzer 在 X 上问道,「是否有可能制作出一款完全链上的游戏,让没有辅助的真人也能在其中竞争?」

Elitzer 在 plotchy 的推文中提出了这个问题。plotchy 是 Nascent Security 的安全研究员,plotchy 已在游戏 Kamigotchi 的排行榜上占据了主导地位(Kamigotchi 是一款全新的完全链上 RPG 类游戏)。

尽管 Kamigotchi 早期的测试网智能合约未经验证且是闭源的,但 plotchy 还是设法对游戏架构进行了逆向工程,并创建了一个索引器来解析其数据。

通过访问详细的游戏信息,包括 Kami 宠物的位置和健康状况,plotchy 随后编写了一个机器人来追捕其他 Kami,并开始迅速登上游戏排行榜。

鉴于这种操作,plotchy 一直在与 Kamigotchi 团队进行讨论,后者一直在不断进行迭代。玩家也在调整游戏风格以更好的生存。团队为此引入了一项新任务,引导玩家协作对抗 plotchy 的宠物军队。

尽管如此,链上游戏中的机器人仍然存在。

Kamigotchi 的开发者之一 lethe 在推文中指出,链上游戏必须接受机器人作为用户群的一部分,因为游戏具有开放性,而团队的挑战在于对游戏设计进行调整,以平衡这种状况。

也就是说,团队的最终目标是创建一个游戏环境,让真人玩家和机器人玩家能够共存,既有趣又不会让真人玩家感到难以忍受。那么,在实现这种平衡方面,链上游戏的未来会是什么样子呢?

至于如何减少那些部署了许多机器人并通过自动账户群操纵游戏的用户,反女巫措施可能会越来越多地被采用。

可以肯定的是,女巫攻击仍然是加密领域的一个悬而未决的问题,没有完美的解决方案。然而,一些个人身份证明技术的组合,如通过社交媒体注册、社区报告计划和 AI 分析,可能会在抑制链上游戏中的机器人群方面卓有成效。

另一方面,对抗机器人的另一种策略是正面对抗。正如作者以前的同事 FaultProofBen 最近所说,「在链上游戏中对抗机器人的最佳方法是加入公会。」

FaultProofBen 也知道这一点,他是 WASD 的创始人,这是加密领域最大的链上游戏公会。当你拥有一大群紧密合作的真人玩家时,你就拥有了一支可以与机器人玩家抗衡甚至更好的战斗力量。

当然,如果无法打败他们,那就加入他们吧。FaultProofBen 还预测,「机器人的使用将变得民主化,非技术玩家也可以使用。」想想游戏插件或服务之类的东西,它们让所有玩家都可以轻松优化游戏玩法。至少,这种方法有助于创造公平的竞争环境。

链上游戏仍处于发展初期,因此该领域现在正在努力应对机器人也就不足为奇了。当作者在玩《Fall Guys》或《Overwatch》等主流游戏时会遇到机器人,这些游戏在更封闭的轨道上运行,机器人只是游戏中的一个范例(无足轻重)。

然而,作者不认为因 Bot 的存在,而永远将链上游戏定位为小众游戏。随着这个领域的成熟,进步和创新将有助于削弱机器人玩家的主导地位,以便真人玩家仍然能够蓬勃发展。未来还有很多挑战,个人对未来持乐观态度。

İlgili Okumalar

Wash's Jackson Hole Debut: Bidding Farewell to 'Forward Guidance', Reshaping Fed Discipline Amidst the Squeeze Between AI and Inflation

In his first Jackson Hole speech, new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh signaled a significant shift in monetary policy communication. He declared that "forward guidance," a tool heavily used since the financial crisis, has outlived its usefulness in normal times and should be retired. He cautioned that over-reliance on it can distort market signals and constrain the Fed's flexibility. Instead, Warsh emphasized a return to data-dependence and decision-making discipline. Warsh outlined seven key principles to guide policy: anchoring the 2% inflation target, pursuing the employment mandate, using short-term rates as the primary tool, acknowledging the importance of money, and maintaining purposeful, restrained communication. He stressed that policy should focus on trends, not single data points. On the current economic outlook, Warsh noted that the labor market is consistent with full employment but inflation remains "far above" the Fed's target. He highlighted that over half of the PCE basket's components are still rising above 3% annually. While acknowledging AI's transformative potential for productivity and capital allocation, he admitted its full economic impact remains uncertain and is not a factor in current policy decisions. His core message was a commitment to policy discipline rather than pre-set decisions. Warsh stated the Fed's primary focus must be on restoring price stability, vowing, "We still have work to do," until there is clear evidence inflation is moving decisively toward 2%. He concluded by framing effective monetary policy as crucial for economic prosperity and U.S. global leadership.

Odaily星球日报16 dk önce

Wash's Jackson Hole Debut: Bidding Farewell to 'Forward Guidance', Reshaping Fed Discipline Amidst the Squeeze Between AI and Inflation

Odaily星球日报16 dk önce

A Major Bitcoin Developer Presents a Quantum Defense Scheme. What's the Essence

Blockstream, a major Bitcoin solutions developer, has introduced a draft proposal for a new quantum-resistant digital signature scheme called SHRINCS. The scheme aims to protect Bitcoin transactions from potential attacks by quantum computers while aiming to maintain network throughput. This marks the second technical proposal for Bitcoin quantum defense in recent days, following a similar initiative from StarkWare. A quantum attack on blockchain typically involves deriving a private key from a public one. Currently considered computationally infeasible, quantum algorithms could potentially solve this problem far more efficiently. This threat presents two primary scenarios: an attacker could target addresses where the public key is already exposed, or intercept a transaction before it is confirmed, extract the public key, derive the private key, and replace the transaction. Blockstream's SHRINCS is designed to counter the latter, "in-flight" attack scenario. The SHRINCS signature is built upon the SHA-256 hash function, the same one already used in Bitcoin mining, allowing developers to leverage well-tested, familiar mechanisms. A key design goal was to preserve network capacity. Blockstream estimates Bitcoin could process about three transactions per second using SHRINCS, compared to the current rate of roughly seven, noting that some alternative quantum-resistant schemes could reduce throughput to as low as 0.36 transactions per second. Currently, the security proof for SHRINCS is pending, and the software has not been audited or deemed ready for production. However, Blockstream conducted tests with such transactions on its Liquid sidechain in March. Over the past year, Bitcoin developers have been actively exploring paths to migrate to post-quantum cryptography, a priority across the broader crypto market, underscored by significant investments into securing the leading cryptocurrency.

cryptonews.ru1 saat önce

A Major Bitcoin Developer Presents a Quantum Defense Scheme. What's the Essence

cryptonews.ru1 saat önce

Who is legally liable when an AI agent goes rogue?

When autonomous AI agents behave unpredictably and cause harm, determining legal liability is complex. Currently, there is no specific federal AI agent liability law, so existing legal frameworks are applied. The AI agent itself cannot be held liable, as it is not a legal entity. Liability typically falls on the "developer" (the maker of the AI) or the "deployer" (the user), depending on the facts and circumstances. A negligence analysis under standard tort law may apply. For instance, if a deployer gives a reckless instruction, such as demanding quick money without safety parameters, they could face significant liability, including potential criminal charges under statutes like the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. The situation is complicated by open-source models, where licenses often disclaim liability, and by the unclear division of responsibility between developers and deployers. An analogy is drawn to self-driving car accidents, where both the manufacturer and the human operator can share fault. In cases of severe harm, such as using AI to create bioweapons, liability for developers depends on jurisdiction; the EU's AI Act imposes responsibilities, while U.S. law offers less clear grounds, similar to platforms being shielded for user-generated content under Section 230. Even if Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) is achieved, the expert argues against making AGI itself a legally liable entity, as it lacks personhood, assets, or a meaningful way to provide remedy for harm. Instead, accountability should rest with the responsible human or corporate entities behind the technology.

cointelegraph1 saat önce

Who is legally liable when an AI agent goes rogue?

cointelegraph1 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
活动图片