Due to the sensitivity of keywords, this text will not discuss NFT too much, everyone is interested in searching on the Internet, below, I would like to talk about my views on digital collections.
If we regard the metaverse as a "parallel world" to some extent, then everything that logically exists in the real world can also exist in the metaverse, so that the real world has the concept of collectibles, so can there also be a place for digital collections in the metaverse space-time?
First, I endorse the concept of digital collections. This is not to say that I can accept new things very efficiently, but that I, and even everyone who has saved photos on mobile phones, computers, and storage devices, is actually engaged in a kind of "digital collection", and those photos are digital collections. I like to read, and the e-books purchased online are also a kind of digital collection in my opinion. To put it more broadly, I like football, and I collect a lot of pictures, videos, I like the team, the stars... these are all within the scope of the digital collection.
Second, I don't think digital collections necessarily have a price. As mentioned above, my own photographs are not collectible to anyone other than me, so even if I put these digital photos for sale online, because no one will buy them, there will be no price. In reality, this is also true, and not every collector's collection will have a price when it is put on the market.
Third, digital collections should not be "digitized by so-and-so." Some ancient ruins are recorded in modern technology, produced in some kind of virtual reality, augmented reality and preserved on the Internet - I think the existence of this digitalization can be counted as a digital collection, but it is also not necessarily priced - because collectors can fully believe that in the near future, there will be better measurements, shooting... Technology presents better digital performance, so will the previous collection be "devalued" due to lack of fineness?
Fourth, a digital collection with a price should be an "independent digital existence." For example, a painting by a contemporary master, processed with digital technology and then put on the Internet, and then used blockchain technology to ensure "unique correspondence", can such a painting be counted as a "digital collection with a price"? Yes, but it is not a separate number, in other words, will the famous artist burn his paintings? Would he promise not to paint the same paintings again? The most demanding condition is, is his painting done with digital technology? In reality, there is a price of collectibles, the reason for the existence of the price is not only the material, the production process (the digital system is also a kind of craft), but more importantly, whether it is the work of a famous artist! For example, it's not 100 percent appropriate – the source code for a classic single-player game should perhaps be a very good representation of a "digital collection.".
Fifth, the concept of digital collections should be derived from the collective perception of digital collectors, not from commercial hype. In reality, there may be some collectibles in the circle is very small, such as playing with gourds, such as strange stones, etc., perhaps in the eyes of people outside the circle, these niche collections have no value, but within the circle, there is a generally close to the average cognition of the collection. The digital collection has not formed this atmosphere at present, the main reason is that the "digital collector" has not yet formed an atmosphere, the current digital collection is called "collection", but it has not yet departed from the essence of virtual currency.
Sixth, the metacosm is not a concept that exists independently of the universe, without the concept of the universe, there will be no metacosm, and the metacosm is directly called the universe. The same is true of digital collections, commonality determines the existence of the market, personality determines the survival of enterprises and products, digital collections want to become a concept with their own meaning, they should also grasp the relationship between commonality and personality, what is the commonality of collections? It is not who the launching unit is, it is not a one-to-one correspondence, but it can be recognized by the circle of collectors, and on this basis, we can explore the personality of the digital collection. The current digital collection will rely on the platform because of the blockchain attributes, what if the publishing platform is closed? The real collection, as long as it can gain recognition from collector circles, does not depend on its publishing platform.
Seventh, the digital collections that currently sell well in the future reflect a certain degree of "application environment". For example, skins can exist in the game to use, for example, tickets can become the access permission of scenic spots..., the important point is that we can not "picture" the digital collection, because the picture of the digital collection can still ensure the uniqueness of the collector, but it can not guarantee that the picture is not "pirated by non-commercial applications". In the case of game skins, many people may be able to use a picture of a collection skin to make their social avatars, but there are only a few people who can have collection skins in the game. The question is, what if the game is closed? How do these digital collection skins manifest their presence?
Finally, the possibility of commodification of digital collections exists, and in my understanding, if digital collections want to have prices, the most important point is to associate with offline. Although the logic of the metacosm has always been parallel to reality, you must ensure that you always see reality in order to remain parallel, right? Otherwise, an oversight, will it "intersect"? Digital collections are likely to need 020 to be the best interpretation, and it is also the best application for the 020 environment.