• 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)

SJRB

Gold Member


If you need to release a fucking WALL of text to justify your actions, then maybe.. just maybe you fucked up.

But instead of backing off let's double down on this shit.
 
They deleted the Tweet but here's the image anyway (Please don't right-click and Save-As cuz NFT or something)

 

jshackles

Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the capability to make the world's first enhanced store. Steam will be that store. Better than it was before.

CitizenZ

Banned
LOL, I would assume it came down to pre sales were already low so they couldnt afforded an additional hit. I have said a dozen times this dev is shady AF but you do you. Like BF I will sit back knowing it too was going be a dumpster fire.
 

jshackles

Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the capability to make the world's first enhanced store. Steam will be that store. Better than it was before.
LOL, I would assume it came down to pre sales were already low so they couldnt afforded an additional hit. I have said a dozen times this dev is shady AF but you do you. Like BF I will sit back knowing it too was going be a dumpster fire.
I wonder if it also had to do with Steam's ban on games that contained NFTs.

Would have been a massive blow if the game got pulled from Steam, Microsoft money or not.
 

BennyBlanco

aka IMurRIVAL69
NFT is the dumbest shit ever.

Buying digital art NFTs of poorly drawn cartoons in some kind of weird money laundering scheme is the dumbest shit ever.

NFTs in general are just the same shit companies have been doing except now powered by the blockchain™. Stuff like CSGO items that sell for real money has been happening for years and years and is pretty similar in concept.
 

CitizenZ

Banned
I wonder if it also had to do with Steam's ban on games that contained NFTs.

Would have been a massive blow if the game got pulled from Steam, Microsoft money or not.

I posted a statement yesterday from the dev who said it did not conflict with Steam(or Epics) term of service in accordance to NFTs/ Blockchain. Could be anything.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
I am glad they cancelled it. Because especially with few twitter post back they said that the game isn't on blockchain, so I am guessing that NFTs are something like a fucking CS: GO store or Diable Store, where you have the central authority, which get fucked with that.
 

nemiroff

Gold Member
I guess it's fun pretending we have standards again after we've completely given in to horse armour DLC, on-disc DLC, paid for online, season passes, loot boxes, subscription services et al.

I'd say that's a distortion of the matter. It's pretty safe to say that "Pay-to-win" and "gambling" (with real money or in-game currency) has been one of the end goal wishes for "the Ubisofts and the EAs", and that has also been the goal of our "outrage" as customers: To stop it from happening / go too far. For most of us cosmetics are fine as long as they are pretty much useless and don't affect the core of the game so-to-speak. DLC/Season passes etc is also fine as long as the core experience gives value for money, not sure why that should be a problem. So why are we making a fuzz about NFT cosmetics you ask..? Well, smoke screens, slippery slopes and drawing lines in the sand.. - Just like we did back when horse armor happened: It was about defining what "a full game" is, and to ask the question "so now we have to buy the core experience in numerous tiny pieces?", and "what kind of shit can this lead to further down the line". And it worked in general we still don't have "pay-to-win".
 
Last edited:
Would anyone have batted an eye at them doing something like:

"We are giving STALKER Fans the chance to put their face or name into the game! So we will be hosting an auction where if you are interested, you can bid on the chance to get your face in the game or have an NPC named after you. All profits will go directly into the game development and costs of production."


I'd have been perfectly fine with that.


Frontier did it with Elite Dangerous. They had an auction where the highest bidder got the chance to name a station/planet in the game. If I recall correctly some of the proceeds went to charity as well. They also gave them some swag, signed poster and what not. GSC could have easily done that and it would have been a non issue.
 

Reallink

Member
NFT's are 100% free money, of course developers and publishers are looking for ways to dive in. They're literally printing digital Mickey Mantel rookie cards. Much like $70 games and microtransactions, fake outrage on forums and Twitter will mean nothing to the larger market in the long run, it's inevitable.
 
Last edited:

ANDS

Thought gaf was racist. Now knows better, honorary gaffer 2022
If they were worried about money, why not just toss it on to Steam Early Access. I imagine many would jump at a chance to play the game full price. Worked for Baldurs Gate 3 (they got me).
 

CitizenZ

Banned
If they were worried about money, why not just toss it on to Steam Early Access. I imagine many would jump at a chance to play the game full price. Worked for Baldurs Gate 3 (they got me).

they got $$$$ for being on Gamepass, no need. I GUARANTEE this game is no way in a complete state.
 

CitizenZ

Banned
the state of gaming holy shit man

Reminder after 12 month delay certain game held out one of the most essential, most important components of their game franchise for what reason? IDK, maybe millions would continue to pay $15 for 6 straight months? Nah, that cant be right.
 
If they were worried about money, why not just toss it on to Steam Early Access. I imagine many would jump at a chance to play the game full price. Worked for Baldurs Gate 3 (they got me).

I mean, was the gamepass & exclusivity money not enough? I don’t get it
 
This is just another case of being too early/far ahead of the curve. Like it or not this will be part of the future of gaming. I guess certain consumers will go kicking and screaming into it but I for one look forward to seeing what sort of creative implementations they come up with.
 

ANDS

Thought gaf was racist. Now knows better, honorary gaffer 2022
I mean, was the gamepass & exclusivity money not enough? I don’t get it

. . . did not know that. Well then this just screams cashing in then (I say this having little knowledge of NFTs and largely think it's another way for crooks to hide money from the feds).
 

FrozenFlame

Member
Buying digital art NFTs of poorly drawn cartoons in some kind of weird money laundering scheme is the dumbest shit ever.

NFTs in general are just the same shit companies have been doing except now powered by the blockchain™. Stuff like CSGO items that sell for real money has been happening for years and years and is pretty similar in concept.
 

Vae_Victis

Banned
The crazy thing is that absolutely nothing in the plans they (or any other developer) outlined for NFTs, need NFTs to be implemented, at all. Dozens of games already have entire marketplaces of player-to-player item trading. You can replace the whole NFTs side of things with a normal fucking server recording and managing transactions.

The most charitable we can be is saying these companies want a player-to-player economy in their games, but don't want to pay for the servers to keep track of it. Which in principle I could understand, if the alternative didn't basically offload the costs onto the users and wasn't also orders of magnitude more wasteful in terms of energy (and therefore also more expensive overall).

The sad truth, however, is that we all know these companies want to ride the crypto bubble while it lasts, and attract people to use their "game" as an unregulated back-alley equivalent of the stock market. With lootboxes they wanted to normalize grey-area unregulated gambling in random videogames where it never should have belonged, and this is just the next step in that direction, to anonymize the money circulating in the system. You can't do that to the same extent without NFTs, because if you have to manage transactions yourself accepting payments from banks and credit cards, there will be a traceable history of all the money being moved (both when users pay you for an item and when they pay each other), and that's a problem if that money comes from... disputable sources.

In other words, NFTs in games are companies announcing "All in-game transactions in our product will be 100% anonymous and untraceable, even to us. We get a 1%/2%/5% of every transaction and that's it. Please don't be naughty and abuse this system to launder millions of dollars through our game or something. *wink*"
 
Last edited:

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
The crazy thing is that absolutely nothing in the plans they (or any other developer) outlined for NFTs, need NFTs to be implemented, at all. Dozens of games already have entire marketplaces of player-to-player item trading. You can replace the whole NFTs side of things with a normal fucking server recording and managing transactions.

The most charitable we can be is saying these companies want a player-to-player economy in their games, but don't want to pay for the servers to keep track of it. Which in principle I could understand, if the alternative didn't basically uffload the costs onto the users and wasn't also orders of magnitude more wasteful in terms of energy (and therefore also more expensive overall).

The sad truth, however, is that we all know these companies want to ride the crypto bubble while it lasts, and attract people to use their "game" as an unregulated back-alley equivalent of the stock market. With lootboxes they wanted to normalize grey-area unregulated gambling in random videogames where it never should have belonged, and this is just the next step in that direction, to anonymize the money circulating in the system. You can't do that to the same extent without NFTs, because if you have to manage transactions yourself accepting payments from banks and credit cards, there will be a traceable history of all the money being moved (both when users pay you for an item and when they pay each other), and that's a problem if that money comes from... disputable sources.

In other words, NFTs in games are companies announcing "All in-game transactions in our product will be 100% anonymous and untraceable, even to us. We get a 1%/2%/5% of every transaction and that's it. Please don't be naughty and abuse this system to launder millions of dollars through our game or something. *wink*"
How you ensure that the character or something what they pitched would be completely unique, that no one else have. Technically you can do some online service, but you know when the Sony, MS, Valve all of them have different service, which in some cases cannot speak to themselves how to do that? Now if it would have some cutdown fork of some crypto coin, this solution is actually pretty neat...from a technical standpoint.

Sadly people think that NFT means some stupid monkeys for millions, it poisoned the well, I get it, but from technical standpoint, this would ease up the solution quite a lot. And for how would then devs make money, when there wouldn't be any middle man. Well every crypto in existence have the fees and portion of that is send to devs, id by the crypto address. If it really need to be with monetary value.
 
Top Bottom