Despite Steams 'Ban' on NFT and Crypto Games, Some Blockchain MMO Titles Still Available | MMORPG.co

System

Despite Steams 'Ban' on NFT and Crypto Games, Some Blockchain MMO Titles Still Available | MMORPG.com

Back in October of 2021, Valve announced that it would ban games that have NFT's and Cryptocurrencies from their Steam platform. Still, despite a number of blockchain-based games being removed, several remain, and it begs the question, why?

Read the full story here

Phixion13

They are no longer games. Just hyper capitalized programs.

HJ-Navarre

NFT/Blockchain/Crypto == Games I will NEVER spend money on. I vote with my $$$.

viney123

There are tons of scam blockchain/crypto games out now. It's a serious problem. I think Steam pledged to get rid of them because of liability. Both legally and financially, Valve could be liable for a lot if *#(! hits the fan with those games. Some games are even blocked in certain countries such as Cryptoland. If they allowed blockchain games then the games market would turn into a virtual gold rush and we would have basically no good games to choose from and/or it would be super hard to dig through all the crap/scams.

bcbully

Steam is like a deer in headlights. It's shameful they were caught so far out of position on this one as the industry leader.

While they are stuck clueless you have Microsoft and Xbox, Gamestop, EPIC, along with every legacy and indy game company in full development.

Steam will do a complete 180 or become Blockbuster, AOL, Myspace.


edit - add Walmart to the list 
https://u.today/walmart-to-venture-into-crypto-and-nfts-report

bcbully

HJ-Navarre said:

NFT/Blockchain/Crypto == Games I will NEVER spend money on. I vote with my $$$.

Man you don't know what money is until you see someone grab 21 $2000+ Red Village Champions in 31 minutes. That's the type of money that's voting out there.

maskedweasel

viney123 said:

There are tons of scam blockchain/crypto games out now. It's a serious problem. I think Steam pledged to get rid of them because of liability. Both legally and financially, Valve could be liable for a lot if *#(! hits the fan with those games. Some games are even blocked in certain countries such as Cryptoland. If they allowed blockchain games then the games market would turn into a virtual gold rush and we would have basically no good games to choose from and/or it would be super hard to dig through all the crap/scams.

I don’t think it has anything to do with legal or financial reasons or else they would have been way more careful to remove the blockchain games still listed in the article. 

There's a lot of scam like blockchain games and some decent ones too. The ones on steam aren't stellar but there's plenty of worse ones on steam too. MIR4 isn't exactly inspired... pretty lackluster. I gave it a shot, graphics were awful... even for a mobile game. Everything else was just boring, felt like it could have been any rehashed cookie cutter MMO.  But still.. worse games out there. 

Dattelis

I dont like saying this but honestly Steam isn't really known for their vetting. Let us all not forget about their Greenlight program that was just a circus for mostly asset flips.

Scot

Sooner or later these games will get banned, Steam is slow to check games but once they realise whats going on they will ban them. I don't see what being F2P can have to do with this, it is just an oversight, but well worth pointing out.

Kyleran

bcbully said:

Steam is like a deer in headlights. It's shameful they were caught so far out of position on this one as the industry leader.

While they are stuck clueless you have Microsoft and Xbox, Gamestop, EPIC, along with every legacy and indy game company in full development.

Steam will do a complete 180 or become Blockbuster, AOL, Myspace.

Welcome back!  Totally agree, this was Valve's "Read my lips, no new taxes" moment and they'll definitely be walking back on this poorly thought out policy.

I think they just need time to properly figure out how to ensure proper controls are put in place (and they normally seem loath about doing such) and figure out a way to ensure they get their cut of the action.

If someone offered or figured out a way so they got a small % of all future sales / resales I'm sure they would go all in.

Kyleran

HJ-Navarre said:

NFT/Blockchain/Crypto == Games I will NEVER spend money on. I vote with my $$$.

Yeah yeah, many in the past claimed they would never play a FTP / cash shop game, including myself, yet here I am getting ready to play Lost Ark, (probably even buy a pre-order pack and monthly sub) having played POE, and several others previously. 

Trick is to only pay for what you find value in, ignoring all the rest which will be my approach on games which contain NFTs or crypto, assuming of course they are actually fun games and not just virtual market places to trade such items.

Odds are good that in the long run NFTs in particular will be included in almost all newer games or retrofitted into existing ones.  

Most developers today already provide the opportunity (take advantage of) gamers by utilizing multiple monitization models so it's a rare day to find an online game which is purely B2P, sub only or totally F2P, they almost always utilize at least a couple to maximize their earnings. 

kjempff

If you think about it, a crypto currency in gaming is just a currency that can be freely traded outside the game ie be converted to "real" money.
If they want to be consistent, they should ban all games that have an official way to convert any game asset or currency into "real" money (aka freely tradeable currency).

There is a reason that almost all games don't allow trading of goods or game currency for "real" money. There is also a reason Diablo3 rmt auction house was removed. One of the main reasons is that it will change how the game is played, leaving the game company having to compete and deal with that but with no benefits.

Crypto based games say let's capitalize on it; smart but it also bites then in the back. It is kinda like when game companies don't really do anything about cheaters because they bring in money, but on the other hand loose players because of those cheaters/hackers .. So they strike a balance, do the "x amount were banned" publicity stunt once in awhile, but make sure not to loose too many customers over it.

laserit

bcbully said:

Steam is like a deer in headlights. It's shameful they were caught so far out of position on this one as the industry leader.

While they are stuck clueless you have Microsoft and Xbox, Gamestop, EPIC, along with every legacy and indy game company in full development.

Steam will do a complete 180 or become Blockbuster, AOL, Myspace.

Steam might be wise in trying to be patient with the business model.

Nice things usually come to those who can wait.

Time will tell whether Steam has made some bad decisions. From what I can see, they have done a pretty good job in their decisions although that could change.

We’re only human after all.

laserit

Sharne said:

kjempff said:

If you think about it, a crypto currency in gaming is just a currency that can be freely traded outside the game ie be converted to "real" money.
If they want to be consistent, they should ban all games that have an official way to convert any game asset or currency into "real" money (aka freely tradeable currency).

There is a reason that almost all games don't allow trading of goods or game currency for "real" money. There is also a reason Diablo3 rmt auction house was removed. One of the main reasons is that it will change how the game is played, leaving the game company having to compete and deal with that but with no benefits.

Crypto based games say let's capitalize on it; smart but it also bites then in the back. It is kinda like when game companies don't really do anything about cheaters because they bring in money, but on the other hand loose players because of those cheaters/hackers .. So they strike a balance, do the "x amount were banned" publicity stunt once in awhile, but make sure not to loose too many customers over it.

Good points all, they don't in general practice, in reality games have allowed people paying cash to other players for goods/ characters for years. Two examples;

1) EQ I had a player in my guild who bought a high level monk account for cash, yes it was against the eula but he still did it ( saying that, I grouped with him a couple of times and he didn't have a clue how to play the character, because what he lacked was the experience)

2) Eve has had isk sellers for years, you can buy pretty much anything in game for isk.

No one is ever going to or in reality ever want to stop all of these practices as it also generates revenue for the games company by more subs or players playing that otherwise would just give up or get bored.

From a game companies point of view, it would make a lot of sense for them to formalise a framework using NFT's/ Crypto to legitimise the practices that have been going on for years and allow them to accrue a percentage of the profits from these sales as well as the revenue generated as a by product of the sales (subs etc)

There are people who have made a business out of walking old ladies across the street.

Humans will try to extract personal wealth from anything. It’s built into our genetic code.

We also are not very nice to each other, even with our own friends and neighbours.

We’ll end up fucking ourselves like we always do

Kyleran

Sharne said:

kjempff said:

If you think about it, a crypto currency in gaming is just a currency that can be freely traded outside the game ie be converted to "real" money.
If they want to be consistent, they should ban all games that have an official way to convert any game asset or currency into "real" money (aka freely tradeable currency).

There is a reason that almost all games don't allow trading of goods or game currency for "real" money. There is also a reason Diablo3 rmt auction house was removed. One of the main reasons is that it will change how the game is played, leaving the game company having to compete and deal with that but with no benefits.

Crypto based games say let's capitalize on it; smart but it also bites then in the back. It is kinda like when game companies don't really do anything about cheaters because they bring in money, but on the other hand loose players because of those cheaters/hackers .. So they strike a balance, do the "x amount were banned" publicity stunt once in awhile, but make sure not to loose too many customers over it.

Good points all, they don't in general practice, in reality games have allowed people paying cash to other players for goods/ characters for years. Two examples;

1) EQ I had a player in my guild who bought a high level monk account for cash, yes it was against the eula but he still did it ( saying that, I grouped with him a couple of times and he didn't have a clue how to play the character, because what he lacked was the experience)

2) Eve has had isk sellers for years, you can buy pretty much anything in game for isk.

No one is ever going to or in reality ever want to stop all of these practices as it also generates revenue for the games company by more subs or players playing that otherwise would just give up or get bored.

From a game companies point of view, it would make a lot of sense for them to formalise a framework using NFT's/ Crypto to legitimise the practices that have been going on for years and allow them to accrue a percentage of the profits from these sales as well as the revenue generated as a by product of the sales (subs etc)

Err, they already do, you are presenting the same arguments used to sell in game cash shops.

Take EVE, there's a developer approved method to transfer characters from one account to another for in game ISK which is tied into the PLEX buying and trading loop.

CCP has long integrated such transaction with the only limitation really being on account trading.

Which begs the question, for anyone who's played a newer block chain, crypto or NFT centric game do they permit account trading  and selling via their markets or is it more for the in game objects and NFTs themselves?

maskedweasel

Kyleran said:

Sharne said:

kjempff said:

If you think about it, a crypto currency in gaming is just a currency that can be freely traded outside the game ie be converted to "real" money.
If they want to be consistent, they should ban all games that have an official way to convert any game asset or currency into "real" money (aka freely tradeable currency).

There is a reason that almost all games don't allow trading of goods or game currency for "real" money. There is also a reason Diablo3 rmt auction house was removed. One of the main reasons is that it will change how the game is played, leaving the game company having to compete and deal with that but with no benefits.

Crypto based games say let's capitalize on it; smart but it also bites then in the back. It is kinda like when game companies don't really do anything about cheaters because they bring in money, but on the other hand loose players because of those cheaters/hackers .. So they strike a balance, do the "x amount were banned" publicity stunt once in awhile, but make sure not to loose too many customers over it.

Good points all, they don't in general practice, in reality games have allowed people paying cash to other players for goods/ characters for years. Two examples;

1) EQ I had a player in my guild who bought a high level monk account for cash, yes it was against the eula but he still did it ( saying that, I grouped with him a couple of times and he didn't have a clue how to play the character, because what he lacked was the experience)

2) Eve has had isk sellers for years, you can buy pretty much anything in game for isk.

No one is ever going to or in reality ever want to stop all of these practices as it also generates revenue for the games company by more subs or players playing that otherwise would just give up or get bored.

From a game companies point of view, it would make a lot of sense for them to formalise a framework using NFT's/ Crypto to legitimise the practices that have been going on for years and allow them to accrue a percentage of the profits from these sales as well as the revenue generated as a by product of the sales (subs etc)

Err, they already do, you are presenting the same arguments used to sell in game cash shops.

Take EVE, there's a developer approved method to transfer characters from one account to another for in game ISK which is tied into the PLEX buying and trading loop.

CCP has long integrated such transaction with the only limitation really being on account trading.

Which begs the question, for anyone who's played a newer block chain, crypto or NFT centric game do they permit account trading  and selling via their markets or is it more for the in game objects and NFTs themselves?

Depends on the game.  Most don't really advise sharing accounts because your wallet is attached,  which could house currencies and other assets. Trading your account doesn't really matter if the valuable items are all saved in wallets outside of the game. 

But the premise is also that players own their assets and not necessarily the accounts.  There are games you can sell assets and never even have an account or even play the game. 

So I guess it really just depends on the game. 

maskedweasel

Scot said:

Sooner or later these games will get banned, Steam is slow to check games but once they realise whats going on they will ban them. I don't see what being F2P can have to do with this, it is just an oversight, but well worth pointing out.

I'm not so sure it was simple oversight.  I honestly think that they just don't really care.  If it's this easy to miss a few games,  that are so obviously blockchain games,  I bet we'll see other games that eventually use blockchain to be forgotten as well.  

Even if steam pulls the games eventually,  simply listing them could detract from the impact of their whole "ban" statement.  

Tiller

bcbully said:

HJ-Navarre said:

NFT/Blockchain/Crypto == Games I will NEVER spend money on. I vote with my $$$.

Man you don't know what money is until you see someone grab 21 $2000+ Red Village Champions in 31 minutes. That's the type of money that's voting out there.

Says it's not about the money, but it's about the money. xD

kjempff

You could argue that it is ok for a game company to get a cut of a the trade that is already happening, regardless of it being against the TOS. And sure from that perspective adding crypto/nft is somewhat innocent.
The problem is that we all know the industry will not stay with that perspective. They will certainly do the same that happened with f2p .. They will start designing their games around crypto; not a huge jump once already designing around f2p, but still ... it does not create better games from a player perspective.

bcbully

Tiller said:

bcbully said:

HJ-Navarre said:

NFT/Blockchain/Crypto == Games I will NEVER spend money on. I vote with my $$$.

Man you don't know what money is until you see someone grab 21 $2000+ Red Village Champions in 31 minutes. That's the type of money that's voting out there.

Says it's not about the money, but it's about the money. xD

Never have I once said it's not about the money. It's about having fun playing games and earning money. 

When it comes to voting with $$$ yes, it's about the $$$. 

Astropuyo

You guys have been playing NFT and blockchain games forever..well not truly but allow me.


Remember those dudes selling castles and towers in UO? Well you do if you are old which given the metrics of this site I'm assuming you are too!

I used to sell like 50 of those a year across 12 servers or so.
Sometimes I would buy one from a dude for like 10 bucks and flip it for 500.

It's was a great time.

Like damn my ebay was fire for vanquishing swords in packs of 10-20 lol...
Need 10k of each reagent.. I got you covered..this small house is packed and it's yours for the low low price of 160 bucks!

It would take me like 6 days to save that many regs but it paid the rent.

Entropia? I sold a stupid ass helicopter with no gas for 70 bucks....like that's pure nft mentality.
I once sold a item that doubles "sweating" (the way free players make money) for the value of junker back in 012'


I see that like block chain games. Except now you don't need a safe account to do trades with...or a paypal. Just wire me my damn eth type of deal.

Which of course I'm gonna sell because I'm not stupid enough hold onto eth ....which it then goes up in value on and I curse the god of bitcoin for it.

Still every block chain game sucks for true. I'd rather farm out SP/ISK on a mobile eve game than play a blockchain game.

Scot

Astropuyo said:

You guys have been playing NFT and blockchain games forever..well not truly but allow me.


Remember those dudes selling castles and towers in UO? Well you do if you are old which given the metrics of this site I'm assuming you are too!

I used to sell like 50 of those a year across 12 servers or so.
Sometimes I would buy one from a dude for like 10 bucks and flip it for 500.

It's was a great time.

Like damn my ebay was fire for vanquishing swords in packs of 10-20 lol...
Need 10k of each reagent.. I got you covered..this small house is packed and it's yours for the low low price of 160 bucks!

It would take me like 6 days to save that many regs but it paid the rent.

Entropia? I sold a stupid ass helicopter with no gas for 70 bucks....like that's pure nft mentality.
I once sold a item that doubles "sweating" (the way free players make money) for the value of junker back in 012'


I see that like block chain games. Except now you don't need a safe account to do trades with...or a paypal. Just wire me my damn eth type of deal.

Which of course I'm gonna sell because I'm not stupid enough hold onto eth ....which it then goes up in value on and I curse the god of bitcoin for it.

Still every block chain game sucks for true. I'd rather farm out SP/ISK on a mobile eve game than play a blockchain game.

I never bought anything, used gold sellers or the like. You will find that's the experience of most players. But the fact someone like you questions blockchain is rather damming when it comes to how much you are supposed to be able to earn in P2E.

laserit

What the heck do we call prostitution?

Seems that P2E suits it much better than it does video games.

kilun

So, games based on earlier adopters into a very risky investment to make money. Most of these games you have to shell out multiple hundreds of dollars to the company just to have a shot at even playing or earning anything.

Does that make a bit of sense to you? I get to make money you have to earn money but this whole metaverse crap is being done by crap companies hoping to make a buck and big corporate buying into it like the majority of the people are going to do it. The majority of the people in the US aren't buying into this crap.

You have Boeing saying that want to build planes in the metaverse. Sure, but do you think they are going to let some other company run that to steal trade secrets? Heck no, they will get it built, placed on their own servers that only they have access to. The article though didn't go that far as to hype it up without acknowledging that any virtual workspace like that isn't going to be open to the general public. Heck it sounded like a place to where I can walk in show my credentials and apply (which maybe the case if a general type of metaverse is created, think RP1)

Now if Facebook made a metaverse to where you all got your little apartment/house/etc and you decorated it and stuff and paid to bling it out (like housing in MMOs) that would take off. Instead, it is these companies that are like umm it is 4k for these pixels of land come one come all, it's only going to be a select few.

bcbully

laserit said:

What the heck do we call prostitution?

Seems that P2E suits it much better than it does video games.

Getting f'd over working a job you hate.

laserit

bcbully said:

laserit said:

What the heck do we call prostitution?

Seems that P2E suits it much better than it does video games.

Getting f'd over working a job you hate.

Well…

just like NFT’s I guess it depends on what side of the fucked your on