2 mostly makes sense to me--ownership can be managed independently of the game, and without a bespoke integration with that particular game. I do wonder a little how important being able to turn game assets into general-purpose instruments is (meaning, to the success of the game), but I can see how it expands the market and in particular how it makes it harder for the game company to manipulate that market, which makes the assets more reliable.
I'm not sure I understand 1 though. Don't the assets only have value in the context of the game's mechanics, which _are_ centralized? Like if the game decides your bag of holding no longer holds anything, or even to simply ignore its existence, does it matter that you have a token asserting your ownership of the bag? In theory, the token could have value as a token outside the context of the game, like a meme stock or, uh, the current price of Tesla, but that's true of anything tradable.