PC Gaming

8357 readers

726 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

Be Respectful.
No Spam or Porn.
No Advertising.
No Memes.
No Tech Support.
No questions about buying/building computers.
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Valve: "We don't know enough about NFTs to weigh in on that conversation" (web.archive.org)

submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 16 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 44 points 11 months ago

Good, don't bother

[–] [email protected] 13 points 11 months ago

Stupid article, here's a tl:dr:

Valve ensured CS:GO items (weapon skins, sprays,...) are compatible in CS2 because they're the source of revenue for CS
some people compared to this NFTs, Valve responded they don't know enough about NFTs to evaluate this comparison
that's it

Also, Valve has banned NFT games since 2021

[–] 9point6 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Interesting this links to the internet archive for something posted yesterday

[–] echo64 7 points 11 months ago

The actual link because ia can fuck up mobile and it isn't needed at all https://www.eurogamer.net/valve-we-dont-know-enough-about-nfts-to-weigh-in-on-that-conversation

[–] ddonuts4 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Valve would never sell fake digital goods. Hats? Gun paint jobs? Nahhhh that's beneath them. I mean worse still, NFTs can be traded on the secondary market, which would be completely ridiculous for a company to allow for cosmetics in a video game of all things.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Yeah, I don’t think there’s a difference but they can’t admit it because they banned NFTs

[–] GeneralEmergency 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

In other words, "we are waiting to see if it'll make us money"

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

they banned it since 2021

[+] [email protected] -7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

Lol of course Valve has a neutral opinion about it. It’s probably Gaben’s libertarian centrist stance.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This feels more like a politely negative one than a neutral one to me. It's an expression of disinterest from the devs

[–] Heavybell 7 points 11 months ago

"We don't give enough of a shit to directly speak ill of this technology, and neither should you." :P

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago

Neutral is surprising for a trust less technology from a company that's a sourof trust.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'd say Gabe don't want to spent Valve's good guy points in anything controversial.

The reason why big publishers like Capcom and Square Enix, freely publish on Steam (without need for bribe money like Sony, Microsoft and Epic do) is due to the attraction of the "good guy reliability".

For example, during Bethesda+Valve pay mod fiasco Valve was quick to share half of the guilt with Bethesda and shut down everything... while of course, Bethesda show they were (and are) all the way in with the concept.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Valve is in a position where they don't have to do anything and can still earn several billions per year. $7.6B USD last year, I believe.