I’m working with NFTs on the NEAR blockchain and need to include some additional metadata fields beyond the standard ones. My main concern is whether adding these custom fields will break NEP 171 compatibility.
I’ve been thinking about a few approaches:
Adding the fields directly to the main metadata object
Using the extra field to store a JSON object with my custom data
Creating a completely separate metadata structure
What’s the recommended approach here? I want to make sure my NFTs remain compatible with wallets and marketplaces that expect NEP 171 standard. Has anyone dealt with this before?
For example, if I want to add game-specific attributes like power_level, rarity_tier, or special_abilities, where should these go in the metadata structure?
Any guidance on best practices would be really helpful.
i would def recommend using option 2. the extra field is super convenient for your custom data. i’ve been doing it for a while now and never faced issues. just ensure your json is properly structured. good luck!
I’ve done this for several NFT projects on NEAR - extending the main metadata object works great as long as you keep all the required NEP 171 fields. The standard’s pretty flexible about extra properties. For game stuff like power_level and rarity_tier, just add them at the same level as title and description. Most wallets and marketplaces ignore fields they don’t recognize instead of breaking. This keeps your metadata cleaner and way more accessible than stuffing everything in extra. Just test against a few major NEAR marketplaces while you’re building. Never had compatibility issues this way, and it makes querying attributes for your game logic much simpler.
Hey! Really interesting question - I’ve been curious about this too. Working on something similar but more art-focused than gaming.
Have you tested how different wallets handle the extra field? Some wallets ignore it completely, others display it weird. Any patterns you’ve noticed with specific wallets or marketplaces?
For game-specific attributes like power_level - planning to make these updatable? That could change which approach works best. If attributes change during gameplay, storing them in main metadata vs extra field might behave differently for indexing and queries.
Also curious about token size and storage costs. More fields = more storage, but wondering if there’s a sweet spot where one approach beats the others cost-wise.
What kind of game are you building? Sounds cool with the power levels and special abilities!