Topic: Steam bans blockchain games (Read 599 times)

Steam is the largest gaming platform in the world that has quietly banned the use of blockchain games, the NFT company for vedio games has decided to raise a new question about it because blockchain technology games NFTs crypto currency are  can't allow for steam just because of a company that every game can seem to have real value in the county.

Yes, it's a standard procedure for Steam to restrict blockchain games because they risk damaging their reputation as a gaming platform that focuses on reviews of actual gameplay. Because p2e games may quickly destroy the standard of the game, and most reviews will likely center on how much it will earn rather than how excellent it is.

I'm also against it because I'm a gamer and, of course, I play p2e games, but if I want to play a good game, I'll look at how good it is, but when I'm looking for a p2e game that gives fast roi and profit, steam isn't the best platform; instead, create your own platform or app that will launch the game. Steam is purely for those games that are all about enjoyment.

Steam took this decision? Good for them.
If steam has banned blockchain games, it means they have opened doors for those games to market their projects themselves. It may be difficult, but it will be helpful for the growth of games that are p2e and token based. Steam wants games with real money trading experience but didn't understand the potential that these new small games hold inside them.

They would be definitely protect their reputation that they had built up for years that they had established and they are much pretty aware on how rampant

those scam projects or blockchain game by those shady devs.They dont like that they would be touched by those or in each other because they have something needs to protect.

It isnt really that surprising that they had made out such decision towards or against with those type of games.

That is a valid concern.

It is as simple as that, a centralized service like Steam has to protect their reputation and if some developers are acting in a way that could damage the reputation of their platform then they are within their rights to ban the game, and if a whole subsection of games are doing that then they can ban the whole genre of games that are doing it, and if to this we add those games are producing a lot of money and Steam is not getting any out of it then this is an even more powerful reason for them to ban those games.

This sounds like a valid reason also justify the steam's action of banning blockchain based games. How a platform will accept to keep on hosting "planned scams", if you ask me, any reputed services will take similar action in favour of their customers.

Steam's ban on blockchain games should not be left out like just another incident in crypto space. It is kind of alarming to this community like scams on crypto space is exceeding the tolerable levels. This way major service provider also may ban all kind of crypto activities when they find 90% of new projects are not keeping up their promises.

This is one of the reason why I can't blame steam on why they decide to do this knowing there are so many scam on crypto and they just avoid it so that their platform will not be used by scammers for their attempts. And maybe its a good action made by them since for sure if steam will let this addition happen for sure many will lose their money since they think all the blockchain games will be listed at them is legit and put a huge amount without thinking deeply about what they are doing.

Im seeing that option too to be relevant on which using up a big and known platform to advertise their blockchain based scam game will really be high likely plausible or having that main intent.

Steam isn't really blind on whats happening around when it comes to frauds and scams which it is understandable that they are really focusing more on this manner rather than

on minding on accepting blockchain based games just for the benefit or sake of adoption? They are still the ones who do make out such decision.

1. Most of the real money purchases are optional in traditional games, while in blockchain games they are affecting gameplay.

2. A lot of blockchain games are created purely for making speculative tokens for pump and dump schemes, so essentially they are just using Steam to advertise their investment scam.

you know you make a good point there. We seem to be throwing blockchain and everything to see what sticks, and honestly, this is where id doesn't seem to be sticking at all. Why are they still trying is beyond me. As for the Steam ban, isn't buying in-game cosmetics and loot boxes also 'real money trading for in-game items? I mean, it seems to be the same thing, so I don't see what issue has Steam with it.

Today Squid Game token - yet another blockchain play to earn project, has pulled the rug and crashed the price from $2,800 to zero. Steam made the right decision to kick all such projects off their platform, because they would only be helping scammers.


There is no abuse of centralized authority, it's their platform, they decide what to host and what not. It's not like they are going to break some people's doors and arrest those who make/play blockchain games.

Very bad news for those P2E projects who are planning to launch on steam. I heard CiFi was also trying to launch there so I think it could hurt them. But still I think P2E could still grow without steam on their sides. Lots of platform could fill this space in no time I think. Aside from that, I think mobile platform are the best way for these P2E.

I concur completely on this point. It is the case with the ICOs previously and currently in that they are purchasing them solely on the basis of hype and not conducting their own research. NFT is extremely good right now, and you should avoid generalising about all NFT games available, as not all are scams. I believe steam banned it because they believe it is an additional platform or genre that they are unable to control. However, as a player of NFT games, I believe this is a minor issue, as the majority of players do not rely solely on the Steam platform.

NFTs are probably here to stay for a while and it's more about ownership than what the system runs on. In practice, I don't think this has been realized at any meaningful scale yet.

And without a doubt you are right, it would not be easy to attempt to do something like that but that is what developers are for, a problem that can be solved easily is not really a problem at all, the problems that require innovation are the ones where we can truly see their talent, and since that is something the community needs right now due to the rising popularity of NFT games then I think this is something a few developers are already working on.

They should be adopting BTC back again now that it is widely.  Its a big mistake since the world is adopting but Steam is moving away.

There might be changes in the future I'm sure since Ubisoft seeks to create blockchain games. According to the article, Ubisoft is a validator node on the Tezos network which their CEO said and I quote.


To me, this sounds like they're also up to make a play-to-earn game.

Silberman, it sounds great, but I don't think that it would work without a huge financial resources, that you need to invest in such a project. And in that moment - it would definitely lose in it's potential decentralization. And of course, we should keep in mind, that every crypto game should be at least interesting, with different options to choose while you are going through all kind of levels. But of course, sometimes you may want to play something commonplace and easy, like wheel crypto game in which you should react only on the wheel and predict - the next steps, which would be taken in the gameplay.

Anything that having a centralized system wouldnt always be considered to be that good if you do tend to compare or making it similar to Steam platform itself which means that games will be offered or features wont really be similar on this one.

It is really just bad that steam do make out such decision considering that they had adopted or accepted bitcoin payment in the past
and now they do revert that decision and now they prohibit blockchained games?

Its their choice though but we know that we do prefer full adoption scale but its impossible.

This just means that we need a decentralized Steam platform, I do not know if it already exists but if it does not then that is a great area of opportunity and something that will be useful for a change, also we must understand that centralized platforms are often pressured to not accept cryptocurrencies and if they do to get rid of them at the first sign of trouble as governments are experts at dealing with centralized entities, so the creation of a decentralized alternative is more necessary than ever, even if I am not really a fan of those games.

I don’t even play blockchain games, and I have not even tried any of them at all. But from what I’ve learned, I thought that blockchain games were all about earning money? So if they were all about making money, I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that they are having to trade real money in the games.

Then another thing is that if a game is all about trading money then it is no longer just a game, it is now something else, so I wouldn’t say that it was bad for Steam to remove all of them from their platform. If it doesn’t fit in on their platform then they have the right to remove them. I’m not even a fan of those games ‘cause they’re not up to the standards of the kind of games I would like to play.

I agree with your opinion,but we have to distinguish play-to-win games with play-to-earn games.
In the first case,the players are buying items in order to win the game,in the second case the players are "investing" buying items with the hope of selling them later at a higher price or just earning some kind of dividend,which means that the players want to MAKE MONEY.They don't care about winning the game.
Valve corporation(which AFAIK owns the Steam platform) are against play-to-earn games,because most of them look like gambling or ponzi schemes.Valve has nothing against play-to-win games,because those games bring more revenue for the game developers and more revenue for Valve.

I cannot differ from you more.... Why do we have to "ban" something, if scammers are using this technology? This trend of large social media and entertainment companies calling all the shots, goes directly against what Bitcoin was developed for. (Abuse of centralized authority)

Crypto currencies are "money" and scammers will latch onto anything that has value and also every platform that can be used to exploit people. (Did Facebook ban Fiat currencies, when it was used for all the scams that are advertised on Facebook?)

I actually agree with this decision, blockchain games are just based completely on trading and getting real money for basically doing nothing, and some of these games have no gameplay so they are obviously trying to get on the trend and just scam people as they are easy to make and does not take that much effort to create, Steam is full of shitty games that are also made just for money grab, but but they are not bluntly built on RMT, and i don't want for the blockchain to be used like this or be associated with these scams, because it is supposed to be used for good causes and for technological advancement.

Are you telling this in general so that Steam won't add those games that allows p2e on their platform? AFAIK, there's no scam P2E that has been there on Steam ever since the NFT of games has popped with the P2E's feature. And those people that are becoming a victim of p2e scams, they're the same as the victim of ICOs. They've been buying through hype and doesn't do that much research. There's a lot of p2e and they're not the only scams out there in the market and it's always the investors discretion to research before investing as their entry to p2e projects.

Could you mention on what p2e on steam that becomes scam? I believe that theres no much games that is on steam as of this moment.They are really just aware on how these blockchain games

could be potentially a problem which would really make out such step which I don't see for it to be good considering on how big and popular Steam is then it would be much better if we do see the other

way around and would really be making up some noise on this gambling industry if ever they had reverted their decision.

It is obvious for anyone that uses their common sense that this is not about protecting their clients, this is about the fact they are not getting their fair share of the profits those games are generating and they do not like this one bit, and while I am not fan of those games it is obvious I do not like anything that delays the implementation of cryptocurrencies so I do not like what is happening here, but at the end of the day Steam can do whatever they want with their platform whether we like it or not.

As much people wants to see blockchain and crypto adoption, it is very important to prevent any means of exploitation of the naive people in the space, am sure the steam teams have carefully thought it over because taking such decisions, they probably knows many people will fall victims if they allowed it, the hype of play to earn games is so high that many people will easily get burnt, I think they made the right decision if viewed from the naive users point.

steam made a good decision so that there are no more victims of p2e scams


oh yeah axie infinity is a good game I have friends who make a lot of money from axie. It's really bad luck I didn't play when the capital needed was still low

I also noticed those games does not have quality graphics. Often their tokens are meant for staking in the game and then players get shitcoins from staking. Can't really complain as its what they promised to their investors.

The token has fiat value though.  It may be seen as shitcoin but the use of blockchain for games are innovative, its a game changer for gamers too since they now earn than jist wasting time. Overtime I think the games will improve since thess are encouraging the developers, maybe one day developers of EA, Ubisoft and Activision will release their own blockchain games with their shitcoin still.

Those people who play to earn real money are a minority, while it's the first group that is creating value for in-game items, so the game that is developed with primary focus can't be successful and popular. So when blockchain devs advertise their projects as the next big thing in gaming, they are just lying.

Second, these blockchain games get such high budgets from their crypto funding, yet they deliver completely bland product, way worse than what people on kickstarter do for a fraction of the budget. That's because these blockchain games are just like shitcoins - they deliver minimal working product to make people invest in their token, then they will bail once the cow has been fully milked.

I agree with what you've mentioned; Steam is a reputable gaming platform, and we all know that there's a rapid growth in NFT games, and of course, there's money involved, which could threaten the system and its conditions. I mean, reviews should be based on how amazing the game is, not how good the P2E is, and I understand why Steam would want to prevent this. They adamantly desire clean and balanced reviews for the game. Of course, this is just the start, and Steam may change it quickly after it has been evaluated, or have different protocols for P2E games.

For now, Epic Games is the platform where NFT games can be published.

Steam would simply be filled with various requests to publish nft games at that point imo, which is not what they want. They want quality games in their platform so as to help players be able to buy and enjoy games that they actually want. Still, I largely believe that it's mostly due to nft games being still somewhere in between when being judged as a game? Maybe if nft games were to continue developing, who knows, we may actually see them in there at some point.

NFT's are simply trying to build an economy, a REAL one that could be directly linked to the irl world instead of having their own economy inside the game. I actually want the concept of that economy since players would be forced to treasure each and every item, and game devs would be forced to think long and hard about the value of each item since they wouldn't be able to nonchalantly ignore its importance.

Steam has always avoided games that involve in-game transactions between players. and I think banning blockchain games or financial games on the steam platform is a good thing because if it was too easy nft gaming would get a good platform like steam . and I'm afraid that if there are nft games that end up being a scam or fail, it will affect Steam as well.

well , that a bad news , i was think about how big ALICE later when the game launch on steam, because i see on their roadmap , their game will available via steam. i guess Gaben just try to focus for the next TI .

I will take mmorpgs as example, because this is the kind of game which has the most complete economical system where the real world trading mechanism better works.

There are gamers and gamers, or as some may prefer to say: "farmers". Some people play online games for status, achievements, while others join to farm some income. That is what already happens in some mmorpgs. There are people playing those games only for money right now, although they have spent a long time of their childhood and adolescence on those games for fun. Things change within time and something that used to be a leisure activity may turn into a job.

I believe blockchain games are just legalizing something that is usually illegal in mainstream games. By the terms and conditions of online games you don't own your account, the game lends it to you instead, so everything you have in your inventory doesn't really belong to you. Blockchain games are fairer with players regards this subject, as you really own what you have acquired inside the game and can do whatever you want with those goods. I don't consider it a revolution, just a very welcome feature for players who can be finally rewarded for the time spent on those games (since repetitive grinding has always been a major part of such games).

Gamers are spending hundreds of dollars on their PCs or consoles and then hundreds of dollars on games every year, why would they need opportunities to earn some pennies? People play games to relax, not to earn money. When a game is turned into a job it stops being a game, it becomes a boring grind.

There are already enough markets for games that doesn't feature real-money trading directly, and the small minority of players that wants it uses them, so blockchain games aren't exactly revolutionizing anything. This is a typical case of blockchain devs having no idea what people want and need, and just trying to fit their "revolutionary technology" when no one asked for it.

Banning scams is definitely good but at what cost? If you are banning blockchain games overall, then you are banning the scams along with the fair ones. Like for example axie is not a scam and we know this already, it is a good place and a good game that people could earn money from. So, having axie listed on steam would not be a bad idea, I don't know if they have any talks between them so far but if that happens then it would basically be a launcher help.

I believe it should happen for sure, it would help steam get into blockhain world, and it will help axie to get in front of many people. What I do not get however is why ban all of it, or just have none of it, that doesn't make sense to me. Ban the ones that doesn't look good or just looks shady, do not even allow them to be there, but at least have a path for the good ones to take in order to be better.

May I ask what blockchain games do you know? And if you have played them?

You don't need to care about blockchain technology or any other keywords to play a game of that kind, just like you don't need to care about games' engines, development or any other technical informations or characteristics to play games in general.

Those who play blockchain games do this for different reasons: extra income is a big attractive, what doen't mean all of them are trying to get rich by speculating few assets at a high price, but there are also competitive players who spend lots of money to reach the top of a server's ranking and/or to oppress another players, exactly like in regular online games and in real life. Moreover, considering how miserable the world is, to get traction is just a matter of time, because there are millions of people looking for extra income and if it's possible to make it through a video-game they will go for it without any doubts.

Actually, "play to earn" isn't an exclusivity of blockchain games. You have people making money even from the most popular and famous online games, although it's illegal by the rules.

it's not about fun or making money. it's a smart move from steam and it's not because they want to, it is because they have to. money laundering through markets the size of those that operate through steam is a paradise for players who know how to maneuver in this space. steam is protecting their market, themselves and players on both sides.

Blockchain games will never get any traction, gamers don't care about blockchain technology, NFT and other buzzwords. The people who engage with them are just those who try to get rich quick on a speculative market.


No, the real money isn't the main issue, the issue is that those games are created just to make people participate in speculative investing on a highly rigged market. Steam wants nothing to do with that, it's a gaming platform, not a stock exchange.

While EA's lootboxes are highly problematic, they are not the same as some blockchain game NFT's that people buy to get rich quick.

Steam is in a comfort zone making a lot of money already without any competitors at their heels, so changes and innovative adoptions aren't considered a need for them. Maybe in some years when blockchain games start playing a bigger role on the gaming scene they will be forced to make some adjustments, but by there I don't expect anything to happen.

I just think they are a a bit selfish, because with blockchain games, earnings opportunities could be also disponible for players and not only for the Steam platform and developers, especially considering players invest a huge amount of time on videogames (if not their entire life), but Steam doesn't really care about it.

Banning scams is good, and ensuring that the money of people is safe is also good. However, this move seems a bit hypocritical. So the issue is that real money is spent for game stuff, right? Well, how about FIFA's loot boxes, then? People pay with real money to get better players, and in an addictive way. But this is no problem for Steam because it's not blockchain-based? I think they should focus on the issues themselves and formulate things accordingly. If the problem isn't blockchain, but real money involved, then they should only ban blockchain games. Correct me if I'm missing something here.

Lets put up some link in regards to that.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/6/16743220/valve-steam-bitcoin-game-store-payment-method-crypto-volatility
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-42264622
https://steamcommunity.com/games/593110/announcements/detail/1464096684955433613

This was on year 2017 and now that NFT or blockchain games are flourishing then they do really tries to wash off their hands.

True, as a business then you wouldnt really let anything that passes into them and wont able to make benefit while using up their platform.They cant really just allow on how things should go specially
we are talking about big revenue on here.

They had integrated bitcoin before in terms of payment but still end up on removing it because they dont like volatility and the fees.Then it does indicate that they are really
indicate that they arent really that positive in dealing with crypto.

Therefore it isnt surprising that they wont really be that positive towards other things connected to it.

Exactly, steam is a business so they are not going to put games on their platform that are not going through their channels to buy and sell what you can get in the game, however people should take this as an opportunity, the first to release a decentralized platform that acts like steam will make a lot of money, it is to be expected that there are probably a lot of people working on this as we speak, so it is just a matter of time until steam is not really necessary for those kind of games.

Many might hate them because of the move they've done but its their platform and they will do whatever they want to do.
We've seen some Blockchain games under Steam like Age of Rust, MIR4 and Mist in the future but they kicked out these blockchain games because they have their own economy. An economy that Steam's isn't involved so why are they putting it under their platform.

In the future, we might see a company that will act like Steam that is purely blockchain games. A platform that will benefit blockchain games. Who knows and besides, nobody expected that NFT games will be created under blockchain right .

Thinking of steam banning the blockchain games this can have both good and bad effects, this bad effect is completely temporary, and whenever you use the word of the ban on anything some people will think why even is world steam had to have blockchain games where people could enjoy playing the games for fun, but in the other hand good thing is steam was going to be full of shity games scamming people indirectly by playing these games. However, I'm not sure if they ban these games forever.

Oh wow, so it was like that. My understanding prior to reading your post was they only removed nfts and crypto related products from their platform. Turns out steam really made an all out ban for crypto related games. I am a dota1 and steam dota 2 player and I gotta say that having skins and items that are unique or jas only a few limited copies would be really appealing for me. Not that it affects the actual gaming experience but just for flaunting and bragging rights. Lol. 🤣🤣🤣

At the end of the day Steam is just another centralized platform that can do whatever they want with it, so if they do not like something or they think it is violating their policies they are within their rights to ban any activity they do not like, quite honestly taking a look at those games anyone could see this was coming, so if they want to continue to do business with Steam they will have to change their business model, or if they do not want to do that then they need to create their own decentralized Steam market.

First of all, I'm also pretty skeptical regarding blockchain games and I have no doubts Steam made a good move. However, as a lifelong nerd I still have a point to share.

Blockchain might be used to store characters in MMORPG. Sometimes servers are getting shut down and players loose their characters and progress that worth a lot of money and time. It turns that people are playing the game and character that literally does not belong to them. Imo, blockchain can help to fix that and I guess there might be some other ways of using it.

Unfortunately, such feature requires a decent game and economic outcome is not clear while blockchain devs are mainly attempting only to sell worthless pixels and create a kind of MLM scheme.

Blockchain still may be used in games. However, it should be a blockchain that improves a game and not a game that is made for the only purpose of shilling a token. So hopefully, we may still see a decent game with blockchain features.

What technology?
Seriously what technology?

I see a lot of poeple defending blockchain games, can any of you point where this blockchain technology is used in the games?
Of course, it's not video rendering, it's not the engine, it's not the gameplay, it's.....nothing!
Every single thing of those blockchain games could be done with the same old database.

Take axie infinity, they compare themselves with pokemon, how is pokemon being able to run without a blockchain, and what's the real difference between these games? Tell me one game that is using this "technology" and doesn't have a counterpart with no blockchain that is far more enjoyable and has more players in the world than it!


So as long are poeple are willing to spend money on it Amazon should sell hookers since prostitution is still legal in Spain.
But I like how all of you put more accent on the money aspect than on gaming, shows the real truth about this, it's not about playing blockchain games but about making money!

OH darn! I see it as news; Good for steamer bad for the crypto community. It’s really simple steam being the privileged gaming platform could attract thousands to millions gamers and push them little bit to buy crypto and pay for the in game purchases. Also the live hosts can get paid in similar manner and make some moves in crypto coins which are being used.

If they have already started to cut loose the blockchain then surely this will have little bit impact on those who wished they had it over steam.

Just like there is part of peeps who did not like steam-blockchain collaboration there is another part of peeps who were enjoying it pretty much.

This will probably be reversed at some point in the future after the technology is better understood by the gaming industry.

So,they do basically being afraid that there would be some industry switched up in terms of this gaming industry? I do see that its possibility and those reasoning about protecting players on possible

problems attached with blockchain games? I do understand that but that wont really be that a solid issue for them to throw on.Why they cant just simply tell about their motive or solid reason?

They can ban all they want but they couldnt able to stop nor get rid of this blockchain gaming industry.Yes, its risky but we know on what are the possible advantage.

Well… the first thing I’d like to point out is that blockchain games are not the only games where you will have to be paying real money, other games does that too, there is what is called – in-app purchase. Games do have stores where you scan purchase some things in the game such as player outfits or new weapons that can only be purchased, some of them have subscription where you subscribe for gems and things like that. So, it is nothing new.

But, I’m not saying this because I am in support of blockchain games or whatsoever, I have never played blockchain games before and I don’t know how it works or what it’s all about. But them saying that featuring real money trade is why they banned them, I don’t think that is enough reason, and moreover from what I have heard, people play blockchain games to earn money.

That idea could be insanely awesome. Think about a platform like steam, but it is to play games in the blockchain world. All those NFT play-to-earn type of stuff could get listed there, it could have greenlight situation going on that players could decide and so forth. That way you would both have workshop type of place where instead of selling the game itself, people could sell NFT's of the game.

You would have both a place to start any game, "buy" them or just download them since almost all of them are free, then you would have a market like opensea in it, and you could just use that to start the game by clicking on it, then close it, and move to next game and it would all be there in a library.

It saves you from both having multiple games in different folders and put them all in the same place, it helps you build a profile for yourself which goes beyond just one game, and it allows you to have a marketplace at the same time. That idea could be a billion dollar idea, I have zero investment possibility and not a coder so I can't do it, but anyone that can execute it perfectly could get rich beyond his wildest dreams, it is literally awesome idea.

I do not understand all this hate towards the blockchain games. I mean we are in a situation where we should be getting used to doing stuff like this already and steam should accept it as well. If we are in a situation if people are willing to spend money on stuff then it would mean that we are talking about something profitable for steam as well. What is wrong with Steam that they would be willing to say no towards something that would be profitable for them.

I do understand if there was something illegal, but they are doing even nudity including games as well like hentai type of games where there are naked people in the game and the theme of it is adult as well, it is not really a game. If they are willing to get something like that listed then it doesn't make sense that they would ban something like blockchain games because it looks quite a lot more legal if you ask me.

Just download it directly from the official website, forget about Steam. Players are having a lot of issues when using Steam as middleman to play MIR4. I've seen many issues with accounts being banned and purchased packages not arriving in the accounts when playing through Steam. Playing directly from the official launcher there isn't any issues.

However the game is infested with bots, hackers and the most toxic kinds of players you can expect from an online game. It's the most complete blockchain game so far though, and worth a try.

Speaking of that, I remember that Chainmonsters is about to launch their play-to-earn game on Steam. But since Steam announced the ban, looks like Chainmonsters are gonna stick to being a standalone game that doesn’t rely on any game engine (unless someone out there is building a Steam-like game engine that is exclusive only to blockchain games).

I’ve read a post somewhere on Facebook that “Steam is gonna regret their decision to ban blockchain and NFT games”. I also see that MIR4 is on Steam, so I don’t know what future holds for them. If they wanted to remain on Steam, they should remove their play to earn feature which lets us earn real money or else they get booted instantly.

There’s also a crypto game called “Crypto Against All Odds” which is similar to Plants vs Zombies tower defense game on Steam. However, this one is acceptable by Steam because you play for fun and not earning real money or NFTs here.

IMO, Blockchain games will be a significant problem for Steam if more blockchain games are adopted, because reviews for the game will be focused on how much they can earn on that p2e game rather than how wonderful it is. Steam is a respectable gaming platform, so if there are any more blockchain games that aren't truly designed for the sake of gaming, it's likely that they don't fit the quality of games on Steam. Some are now using steam to make it more intriguing and trustworthy because the word steam is included on their website, but there is still a potential that it may turn out to be a fraud, and steam will be held responsible for that scam.

So for me, it's really a good decision from steam.

Blockchain games focusing on creating an ecosystem brings together a community of content creators to develop strategies for using digital resources in their games and projects the vapor policy does not allow blockchain games to include their vapor. It is strictly forbidden blockchains typically provide cryptocurrency and digital asset developers with new ways to empower players with new levels of value creation and transfers by funding their games, adding economies to real value in games.

Yes, they can still make money from in game items if they want to and look elsewhere for its marketplace. But most of its players are for its draco and farming, I don't know the whole details of it and that's why on its Steam client, there will be lesser players.
Those players that are on it for the draco will just have to download and go through with the main client (not from Steam) so that they can still continue playing the game and be rewarded.

I guess what we gamers can only benefit from blockchain is the security itself. I don't think decentralized servers are really needed considering the fact that as OP said, centralized game servers work just as it was intended to albeit with some issues in latency at times. Then again nothing that is not really unfixable and detrimental to the experience of a gamer except for hacking and unauthorized access, which as I said we could integrate the same concept blockchain operates in to offer gamers who have put enormous amounts of time and sometimes money some peace of mind that nobody but them and their authorized users will be able to get their hands on their prized possessions. Too bad, just as I was about to play it because I was intrigued of the earning aspect of the game. Then again I think the game works well on its own even without the earning feature and as long as items are marketable, people could still make money from it by selling such items on the marketplace much like how DOTA 2 item sets work. That way even without the intervention of blockchain or cryptocurrency, there's still some money earning aspect the game has and its players could enjoy.

There's still a blockchain game in Steam, Mir4. But the twist is there's no more reward from playing it. So if somebody who looks for a play to earn game in Steam and finds Mir4. It's no longer the same as before and this update made them remove the reward system if you're launching the game through Steam. That's why they have a separate client and launching if you're going to play this game. I don't play this game, I've just read it in different forums when I've seen this update.

Because some of these blockchain games are akin to ICO scams - the devs are selling tokens that should be representing items in a finished game, but then the game is never released, or is released in a very raw state and a lot of the promised features are missing. Steam didn't just ban games that feature crypto payments, they banned games based around tokens, because these games are primarily used for speculative investing.

Since when "real" money is not being traded for all short of game items? Why is this different from, for example, paying a large sum for a "Black Lotus" in the game Magic, or buying Warhammer figurines? The fact that transactions take place in crypto and that the items out there are digital should not confused with scams. This comment should really be revised as it puts all crypto on the same sack.

The word "Blockchain" is used like a lure. Everyone has heard that blockchain technologies are innovative technologies and the future belongs to Blockchain. The problem that arises here is that average Joe doesn't check the statements and facts and when he kinds this kind of projects with the word Blockchain, he is happy and thinks that luckily he discovered something great. Along with the story of bitcoin, these people also think that someone at past believed in bitcoin and it bring enormous profit, let's risk and believe, put money in this project too and the story goes on...

I can't understand what will Blockchain technologies do in games like Assassin's Creed, Battlefield, FIFA, etc. How can this technology make gaming better?

Any gaming platform could do that.
Steam built their market place and even created their own wallet to support in-game currencies. However, If a game involves real money, I mean a lot of money, then i guess they have the right to remove it. P2E game doesn't usually focus on the game itself, It tends to focus more on money. Steam might've seen this as a disadvantage, thus decided not to get involved into those games.

If a game bypasses Steam's payments, then why should Steam even host it? Steam is not a charity, they have full right to kick game developers who try to avoid paying for their use of the platform.

As for real money, it's somewhat tolerable when it only happens with cosmetics, but these blockchain games tend to bring real money into gameplay items too, which significantly reduces player's experience and leads to frustration.

I thought Steam was a little more open to innovation then that, the problem here is steam is a closed off internal market where you cannot withdraw the cash back out.    You must use their marketplace to trade items, I had thought there must be other games that let you buy stuff separate to steam market but those will be very large publishers if thats the case and able to form special deals to operate seperate.

But the purpose of games is to have fun not to make money, I know that even with single player games people are making money when streaming their content and stuff like that but the main purpose of any game is to provide entertainment not a way of life and  a way to earn money, now in many games you can sell your gold and items for real money however when you cannot even play the game without tokens and everyone is there not to have fun but to sell whatever they get then this is not an ecosystem that can be maintained long term.

According to a Twitter post from "Age of Trust" game, Steam's point of view is that items have value and they don't allow items that can have real-world value on their platform. While I understand their point of view, doesn't CSGO and quite a few other games have similar in-game purchases?

Epic games stores is now claiming that it's going to accept such Blockchain games.

This is just sad!
Games are played for fun, when you do the same repetitive task for hours and hours for $ it's no longer playing, it's working.


And just like ICOs they will die down as everything there is based on a simple fact, work your ass every day and follow the market to trade stuff, once there is no more money to be done as the numbers of poeple putting more money in the game dies down so will the game.

You need to understand that if all the NFT in the game have 1 billion of value they can't be reclaimed for that amount unless new players put in 1 billion. For every sale you made there needs to be a buyer, for every player making 1 ETH somebody must invest one ETH, for one million poeple to earn 1000$ each month 1 billion must be invested in the game!
This is a closed circuit, you can't get more money out than it's being put in, and this will be the death of each game that is solely played for money.

Yes they did accept BTC and ETH I think it was in 2015. I have not used BTC to buy on Steam but it was posted I believe in this forum where they are accepting BTC.

They aren't supporting play-to-earn games in the blockchain is likely because they won't be earning from it any more of course developers will have their own tokens and will not even use the Steam platform anymore.

Just read it a couple of hours ago, I'm not against such move, since many of those games were a mere scam attempt anyway, it's a measure taken in defence of both Steam and cryptocurrencies themselves.

What I'm against though is that Steam isn't accepting Bitcoin payments. If I'm not mistaken, it used to accept but has now stopped, not sure why, haven't investigated it.

It would be nice to think that this was Steam taking a stand to protect their users and there is an element of that taking place, but let's face it - Steam is doing this because it moves transactions outside of their ability to charge a commission and that will be the primary motivation for stopping such activity. They do get to claim it is about a security issue however and there is a valid concern that many cryptocurrencies are being abused to target people who may not understand the underlying system. I find what you said about games introducing real money a bit unusual, because so many games on the steam platform allow this sort of activity (e.g. Team Fortress 2 with all it's paid weapons).

I never have problems with centralized game servers as well. I played games since the time I inherited my father's computer and then get on playing with the games he play as well.

While you can say it's not broken. It's the gamers that are getting broke which I guess blockchain games have become a source of funds to them. There may be scams but I'm sure this is just going to be the start. It's just like when ICO started, it will evolve. Sooner these gamers will also trade on exchanges.

That's steam kinda own decision, for me gaming on blockchain and making money out of it makes more sense that playing games on PlayStation 5 and earn nothing in return, there is a saying that time is money and if money can be made from fun then it's even better, screw steam I love axie infinity

Games denying players an open market to buy and sell goods. Seemed like a good practice. Until blockchain P2E (play to earn) gaming showed the potential for gamers to make money and profit from their online gaming experience.

The majority of blockchain P2E is filled with overpriced auto game scams, which makes the steam ban a good choice, for now.

There are a few games in the P2Everse that are legit, which players could conceivably earn enough money to make a frugal living on.

Some of the bigger account holders on splinterlands are earning $40 a day for 1 year through airdrops. If the format is sustainable over the long term, it could be a good model for future gaming.

One of the reasons on why some people do really wish off for some blockchain based games is the ability for them to make money aside on having fun and this is the sole reason on why there's so much interest in regards

on this one and basing off with this news then it turns out that Mir4 would be delisted or removed? since this one is in related with blockchain for you to able to farm some coins.I havent test out the game though

but its widely advertised thats why im bit aware of its existence and if Steam do make out such decision theres nothing we could do.

This is interesting news. Here I thought that I was going to experience playing blockchain games in Steam but this move is going to be healthier in Steam's ecosystem in the long-run given the current state of cryptocurrencies in different countries.

Assuming that Steam remained those games in their platform, this would eventually lead to their downfall once a cryptocurrency is declared prohibited or banned. Another thing, some of these blockchain games also avoid taxes on some countries- that is why having to prohibit such games will benefit Steam's reputation and image in the future.

This is a good move, although not really a surprise anymore since we all know Steam is not really welcoming when it comes to games that has an outside economy wherein they could not benefit anymore. A good preventive measure as well, since of course, a gaming platform such as Steam wouldn't want to be involved in some NFT games fiasco should it happen along the way since a lot of these games are just there for a few months before disappearing into obscurity. And because Steam offered the game on their platform, they are somewhat part of the blame.

I wonder how long before they remove these games completely?

Even if someone managed to create a blockchain game with fun gameplay, having real money involved would only hurt it. It would attract countless botters and hackers, and pay-to-win mechanics are generally very frowned upon among gamers. It's a really good example of how blockchain peddlers have zero understanding of the industries they are trying to improve with their wonderwful technology.

If at least they would be real games, in fact, they are just demanding you money in order to buy some worthless tokens that you can "invest" in stuff
Nothing different from any pay-to-win game where they give a few free actions a day and that's it, for the rest you need tokens, most of them are below zoo tycoon or quake when it comes to the actual gaming experience, every single of those games has a free-to-play counterpart that is at least 100 times more fun to play.
Once the hype dies down and nobody is able to sell his game assets with a  profit the games go down, with all the billions in the market cap the token has.


Yeah, lol.

https://twitter.com/SpacePirate_io/status/1448713803680473089

Steam decided to kick all blockchain games because they tend to feature real money trading for in-game items.

IMO this is a good decision, at the current state blockchain games are just another vehicle for speculative investments and even scams, and unsuspecting people shouldn't be lured into them.

And I can't agree that blockchain is the future for gaming, I'm a gamer myself and I never thought "Oh how I fish this game was running on blockchain". I never had any problems with centralized game servers, so why fix what is not broken? Especially since it's the blockchain that has problem like high fees, bugs in smart contracts, confirmation times. Not to mention that introducing real money into games tends to leading into very poor ecosystem.