There's more of tangeable value from buying property in virtual game worlds in the sense people get to use those property or items when normally in the game they would not be able to.

For things like ship preorders on Star Citizen it's much more of a risk that the value will ever be delivered but it's still offers more than just a note of ownership of an abstract token on a blockchain sequence.

If someone decides to honor these tokens as proof of ownership of property/items in the real world/ a virtual world then they may offer some value but there's a very great risk that will never happen.

IMO, someone’s tangible value of putting an Ape as their avatar pic on social media might be greater than that of someone being able to use a ship purchased in Star Citizen.

It’s a little crazy to me how Twitter profiles with Apes are viewed as “influencers” and “pioneers” and get treated as such. Not my cup of tea per se, but there is tangible value for some people there.

Space ships and virtual property is virtual property, at least you got something. Something to look at maybe, something that distinguishes you in game?

NFTs give you NOTHING. They don't give you the right to anything. All you own is a (hopefully) unique cryptographic sequence.

If you think of Cryptopunks (or whatever) as a game then buying one gives you as much or more in the context of the game as buying a skin or a plot of land in the context of another game.

>Something to look at maybe, something that distinguishes you in game?

You pretty obviously get that here, too. I honestly don't see why you'd think it gives you less other than out of general dislike for NFTs.