From my perspective, a role-playing game (and in particular a role-playing game) should probably have things like story elements, setting design, and to a certain level gameplay as the central design elements that need to be in place before you can decide what kind of database management you're using to store and manipulate objects/loot in the game. After all, in a real sense – there is no game other than the setting, the characters, and the gameplay.

As a reviewer, seeing stuff like that makes me really nervous. If you craft story and gameplay around a particular mechanic you have a lot of problems compared to when you craft mechanics around your stories and gameplay.

Now, maybe they intend to make the fact that their auction house/object persistence database is decentralized a notable and significant part of the story. That is to say, it will affect the player experience in a way that the "blockchain" has a real story impetus. But if that were the case, you would think that be really proud about coming up with a clever integration like that and they would be pushing it really hard upfront.

I'm curious what direction they want to go in for a number of reasons, but I'm simultaneously more than a little cautious because of the way it seems to be getting developed.

It's that way for a lot of cryptocommodity integrations with gaming, frankly. I haven't seen a really good when yet, at least from the perspective of a gamer. Well, nothing outside of betting pools or games which are specifically about interacting with a blockchain itself. Part of that is because the developers all tend to be seriously on board the cryptocultist bandwagon and are just looking for a horse, any kind of horse, to hook up in front of it and drag it down the road.

I'd like to see something like this work. I'll try to keep an eye on it, myself.