• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 is getting NFTs (Update: NFTs cancelled due to outcry)

Draugoth

Gold Member



S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2: Heart of Chernobyl is one of the bigger releases of 2022, and for better or worse, it’s going to feature one of the biggest tech trends going into next year: non-fungible tokens (or NFTs).

GSC Game World, which is developing the game, has announced the “S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Metaverse,” which will “use blockchain technology to let the community own a piece of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2.” That includes the opportunity to become the “first-ever metahuman,” which GSC Game World appears to define as a non-player character rendered in very high detail. (Though a spokesperson confirmed a metahuman won’t be made with Epic Games’ MetaHuman Creator tool). GSC Game World is partnering with NFT platform DMarket on the new items.

To become a “metahuman,” players will be able to bid for an NFT offering that prize as part of an auction taking place in January 2022. Whoever “owns” the NFT to become an NPC in the game will be able to buy and sell it up until a specific claim date after the auction.
For whoever does end up with the NFT, here’s how the process of becoming an NPC in the game will work, GSC Game World CEO Evgeniy Grygorovych told me in an emailed statement:
 
Last edited:

THEAP99

Banned
This is great news as it allows the developers to pursue an avenue of revenue that does not conflict with gameplay.

But of course, weak-minded reactionary gamers who know little to nothing will automatically get angry.

Personally, I'm wondering if this will affect the GamePass release as Phil Spencer hasn't had favorable comments in the past:

 
Last edited:

kingfey

Banned
This is great news as it allows the developers to pursue an avenue of revenue that does not conflict with gameplay.

But of course, weak-minded reactionary gamers who know little to nothing will automatically get angry.

Personally, I'm wondering if this will affect the GamePass release as Phil Spencer hasn't had favorable comments in the past:

We will burn Phil then.

This shit shouldnt be allowed in gaming. We had enough of mtx. we don't need another garbage shit.
 

Punished Miku

Gold Member
Kickstarter already did stuff like this where you got something in the game like your name, picture, be an NPC, etc.

In other words, the NFT is literally nothing but a trendy buzzword to part fools from their money.

It's possibly one of the dumbest NFTs to bid on as well. If the whole point of an NFT is to sell it again later, then who wants to buy an NPC that looks like you? Probably nobody.

Also, how would this be meta-anything? You're buying your face on an NPC in a video game that doesn't carry over to anything else.
 
Last edited:

Robochobo

Member
Remember when fans could be put into the game through winning a free contest or doing something amazing in the community? Or how about when people who were huge fans and ended up passing away were added into various games in some shape or form as a gesture of appreciation and remembrance?

Yeah fuck that, pay us for the privilege. The only limit is how big your bank account is!
 

Synless

Member
Remember when fans could be put into the game through winning a free contest or doing something amazing in the community? Or how about when people who were huge fans and ended up passing away were added into various games in some shape or form as a gesture of appreciation and remembrance?

Yeah fuck that, pay us for the privilege. The only limit is how big your bank account is!
That’s not how this works. Those things still exist. Now however, the people who win those NFT’s or got them for doing something amazing can sell them to others if they so choose and validate their ownership of said item.
 
Last edited:

GHG

Member
I had a feeling a game like this could actually result in people defending this crap. And it looks like I was right.

I remember when DLC, microtransactions and loot boxes weren't going to interfere with gameplay or game design.

Good times.

I'm thinking about making an NFT thread, but 90% of the replies would be endless babyrage so idk if it's worth it :messenger_smirking:

Hope you sold your Tezos for profit when you had the chance.
 
Last edited:

AV

We ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space
This is great news as it allows the developers to pursue an avenue of revenue that does not conflict with gameplay.

But of course, weak-minded reactionary gamers who know little to nothing will automatically get angry.

They're literally just exploiting the latest snake oil trend, that's it. It's not inventive or clever, it's just an auction to be in the game, you can do this without NFTs.

It's not weak-minded to despise the concept of "owning a piece of the internet". It's fucking zoomer trash.
 
This is great news as it allows the developers to pursue an avenue of revenue that does not conflict with gameplay.

But of course, weak-minded reactionary gamers who know little to nothing will automatically get angry.

Personally, I'm wondering if this will affect the GamePass release as Phil Spencer hasn't had favorable comments in the past:

I thought these guys were getting bank rolled by Xbox though?
 

Stuart360

Member
Like CSGO knives but the ownership token is stored externally, not on Valve's server.
Yeah but why is that desirable?. Is it a situation where the 'owner' has like copyright on that knife, and only they can use it or something?.
I mean its cool i suppose, if you care about stuff like that.:pie_confused:
 

Robochobo

Member
That’s not how this works. Those things still exist. Now however, the people who win those NFT’s or got them for doing something amazing can sell them to others if they so choose and validate their ownership of said item.
Those things exist but it's pretty easy to see how the lure of easy money can make that change which has been proven multiple times in the history of this industry. Secondly, you need to bid on this, as in pay money. Lastly you proved my point by saying people can (and will) sell them, it's monetization in its most basic form.
 
Isn't all this crap the same as the Diablo 3 'Auction House' when the game launched in 2012? It was a massive failure but players could buy and sell unique items. It's so stupid.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
I'd likely never purchase a NFT myself, because I think the whole thing is basically a ponzi scheme, but more power to those that enjoy it. I'll just sit back and laugh after they've dropped 3 grand on that new rifle.

With that said, there will be some folks that earn some dollars off of these NFTs, because even the most obvious of ponzi grifts do get a return for those that make the right bets early (like those that invested in bitcoin at the very beginning).
 
Yeah but why is that desirable?. Is it a situation where the 'owner' has like copyright on that knife, and only they can use it or something?.
I mean its cool i suppose, if you care about stuff like that.:pie_confused:
The blockchain will make NFT integration in the metaverse easier. The goal is to take all these experiences and integrate them in one big virtual world, sort of like Snow Crash meets Ready Player One consumerism. Probably none of these current game NFTs will make the transition, but the Bored Ape avatars will.
 

Ulysses 31

Member
As someone who haven't been paying attention to this, can someone quickly explain why this is bad?
Not bad on its own but many people are under the impression they can sell the NFT with huge profit sometime in the future which likely won't be the case.
 

Synless

Member
Those things exist but it's pretty easy to see how the lure of easy money can make that change which has been proven multiple times in the history of this industry. Secondly, you need to bid on this, as in pay money. Lastly you proved my point by saying people can (and will) sell them, it's monetization in its most basic form.
No, you do not “have“ to pay for this. That is dependent of the developers. I have won and earned nfts at no cost to me other than playing the game. Not all NFT’s cost money, that’s my point. I am also saying people who earned those NFT’s can do whatever they want with them, easy money or not that’s just how supply and demand works.
 

AV

We ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space
As someone who haven't been paying attention to this, can someone quickly explain why this is bad?

Threefold.

1. Conceptual: Remember when the internet was about people having freedom? NFTs are the concept of "owning" chunks of the internet. Not like leasing a domain. You "own" a unique string of data that is part of the internet, if you can convince yourself that such a thing means anything. You "own" what is often a PNG file, except you don't, you own a string of data that represents that file, sort of. It's 100% artificial scarcity for people with money to flex to other people with money.
2. Moral: Like any good snake oil the primary purpose of NFTs is to convince idiots to empty their wallets. In this measure a lot of people get rich from NFTs and a LOT more people lose money.
3. Environment: NFTs are incredibly bad for the environment. The energy used to make these things possible is insane.

Shit just sucks, the only people defending this are the ones bankrupting other retards through trading. I sort of can't blame them for doing it, it's just the shittiest fad I've ever seen and it might not be a fad forever. Companies are trying to cash in on it and it's not working well for everyone because it's such a divisive topic.
 
Last edited:

Robochobo

Member
No, you do not “have“ to pay for this. That is dependent of the developers. I have won and earned nfts at no cost to me other than playing the game. Not all NFT’s cost money, that’s my point. I am also saying people who earned those NFT’s can do whatever they want with them, easy money or not that’s just how supply and demand works.
Read the OP once again.
"To become a “metahuman,” players will be able to bid for an NFT."
I'm not arguing whether or not you NEED to pay for it. It's that you HAVE to pay if you want it. Your example doesn't work nor matter because THIS ISN'T FREE!
 

Draugoth

Gold Member
This is great news as it allows the developers to pursue an avenue of revenue that does not conflict with gameplay.

But of course, weak-minded reactionary gamers who know little to nothing will automatically get angry.

Personally, I'm wondering if this will affect the GamePass release as Phil Spencer hasn't had favorable comments in the past:


'Great News' for blockchain lovers they mean.

Also stalker 2 isnt an xblox exclusive. So Phil statement still stands.
 
Threefold.

1. Conceptual: Remember when the internet was about people having freedom?
That kind of internet has been long, long dead. Acting like it's still there doesn't really serve anyone.
2. Moral:
Eh. I'd argue most people know what they're getting into.
3. Environment:
This is FUD from the Greta Thunberg types. Especially since the energy needed to run NFTs could be made from renewables. It's a complete non-issue.
 
Top Bottom