4

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 will no longer have NFTs after fan outcry

 3 years ago
source link: https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/16/22840488/stalker-2-nft-metahuman-gsc-web3-canceled
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
neoserver,ios ssh client

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 will no longer have NFTs after fan outcry

The NFT plans came under heavy criticism

By Jay Peters@jaypeters Dec 16, 2021, 6:33pm EST

ss_3b56a4aea69f1d49d4871eeb1913f460f067a138.0.jpeg

GSC Game World has scrapped its plans for NFTs in S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2. Image: GSC Game World

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2: Heart of Chernobyl will no longer include NFTs, developer GSC Game World announced Thursday. The news arrives after a heavily criticized announcement Wednesday and after the studio posted and then deleted an explanation on Thursday that initially tried to explain it would, in fact, still have NFTs.

“Based on the feedback we received, we’ve made a decision to cancel anything NFT-related in S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2,” the new statement says. “The interests of our fans and players are the top priority for the team. We’re making this game for you to enjoy — whatever the cost is. If you care, we care too.”

GSC Game World had announced Wednesday that it would be partnering with NFT platform DMarket on digital items for the game. One of the NFTs it had planned to offer would have allowed the owner to become a “metahuman,” which actually meant they’d be turned into an NPC in the game.

Now, those plans are scrapped. I guess this explains why the studio deleted its earlier tweet.

Sign up for the newsletter Verge Deals

Subscribe to get the best Verge-approved tech deals of the week.

Email (required)
By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Notice and European users agree to the data transfer policy.

There are 18 comments.

Corporate PR is such insufferably melodramatic jargon these days, a company backtracking on their money-grabbing scheme gets signed "with love".

Posted  on Dec 16, 2021 | 6:39 PM

I don’t see why they have to have NFT’s. They can allow people to buy items without having to server farm burn a barrel of oil each time

Posted  on Dec 16, 2021 | 6:43 PM

Seems like people are quite foreign on what exactly is NFT.

NFT is a technology that came from cryptocurrency. It is a unique authentication system base on blockchain to identify digital goods. You do not need to involve cryptocurrency with your NFT if you don’t want to. That is how Adobe is using NFT, as an authenticator for artist’s original work.

STALKER 2 is using NFT as a form of authentication to be part of the STALKER 2’s digital world. They are trading NFT as if you own part of the STALKER 2 digital world.

So.. no you do not need a server farm or burn a barrel of oil to buy NFT in videogame. At least not how STALKER 2 is using it.

Posted  on Dec 16, 2021 | 7:39 PM

True, they’re still exploitative and naff

Posted  on Dec 16, 2021 | 8:03 PM

Interesting. Can you explain how I can mint an NFT without cryptocurrency being involved?

People aren’t that foreign, they just realise BS when it’s being sold to them.

This is so incorrect that it hurts.
1) "It is a unique authentication system base on blockchain to identify digital goods." INCORRECT. A NFT is more like a tradeable hyperlink with an inferred claim that someone (some trading platform) will claim that you ‘own’ or ‘have some special relation’ to the target of the hyperlink.
2) "So.. no you do not need a server farm or burn a barrel of oil to buy NFT in videogame" True in a literal sense, but false in terms of what you’re implying. An NFT is ‘mined’ on a blockchain. Although theoretically you could ‘mine’ this on a self controlled blockchain which could cost less than a cent of electricity, realistically most NFTs are mined on ethereum, where we’re talking about around (back of the envelope calculation) 1000 kWh. So yeah, that’s definitely not a ‘server farm’ or ‘barrel of oil’, but it’s still a serious amount of wasted energy.

Posted  on Dec 17, 2021 | 3:14 AM

And to #1 – that link to the asset in question doesn’t carry intellectual rights! You literally just "own" a link that says you paid to be on record as the person who… paid to be record. That’s it.

1) An NFT doesn’t even have to include a link. ERC-721, the "standard" for NFTs on Etherum, simply allows for the use of a URI/URL in the metadata.
2) NFTs are not mined. They are said to be "minted". On Ethereum this takes the form of a smart contract, which requires some amount of ether (which was mined) to "execute" (e.g. submit to the blockchain). On other blockchains an NFT can be created (e.g. minted) simply through a single transaction.

Posted  on Dec 17, 2021 | 4:36 PM

What is true is that blockchain doesn’t necessarily mean cryptocurrency. That’s it. Otherwise, blockchain is either Proof of Work (burn a barrel of oil etc) or Proof of Stake, which has a bunch of its own problems. Even if STALKER was going to use PoS, there’s really no advantage to a blockchain-signed asset in a game over just being a row in the company’s database.

Posted  on Dec 17, 2021 | 5:09 AM

An NFT literally is cryptocurrency. It’s just a token that isn’t divisible with (or without) some metadata attached to it. That’s it. That’s all it is.

If smallest non-zero amount that a blockchain supports is 0.0000001, then a token created with a supply of 0.0000001 is an NFT by definition. It is a non-fungible token.

Posted  on Dec 17, 2021 | 1:33 PM

unfortunately this could have been very cool but the masses are still ignorant to nft’s and where the future is heading for gaming and the metaverse

Posted  on Dec 16, 2021 | 8:42 PM

I’m not the least bit ignorant about NFTs.

I know them well.

And I despise them.

Posted  on Dec 16, 2021 | 9:39 PM

There’s no reason a contractual agreement (eg buying an ingame skin) for a single video game manufacturer requires a decentralised authentication system.

They hold all the power and the ownership. Putting these into a crypto enabled solution is purely for marketing and significantly wasteful of resources.

Calling everyone ignorant is childish at best.

This exactly. I am very negative about NFTs and somewhat negative about cryptocurrencies, but there are definitely specific super valuable use cases where both could make absolute sense. Being able to understand technically what a blockchain is and what actually advantages the underlying concepts give us (and at what disadvantages and costs) should be a prerequisite for evangelizing about them. So thank you for clearly showing an understanding of the core of what all this is about: maximum decentralization at the cost of efficiency.

Posted  on Dec 17, 2021 | 3:19 AM

100% agree with bokonon and DavidMulder. "Maximum decentralization at the cost of efficiency." Precisely put. Blockchain is a database going backward via very expensive tradeoffs (database = a node of 1, blockchain = nodes of >1 + roundtrip each) to gain decentralization. Dismiss decentralization, then what’s the point?

Posted  on Dec 17, 2021 | 7:40 AM

"The masses"… I mean, who are you? Why are you so knowledgeable when the rest of us are just a bunch of slackjawed idiots? Who are you speaking for?

Posted  on Dec 17, 2021 | 1:08 AM

He made an account just to post that. It’s a shill or a shill-bot.

Something to say?
or

report

Recommend

About Joyk


Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK