Are Web3 Games a False Proposition?

Author: Sleeping in the rain

When chatting with a friend about Web3 games, the friend mentioned that Web3 games are false propositions, including asset on-chain confirmation, decentralization and other market-expected application directions. The friend believes that the most important point of the game is fun.

Regarding my friend’s point of view, I partially agree and partially disagree. I haven’t talked about my personal views on Web3 games in detail before, so let’s take this opportunity to have a good chat.

Let’s start with the original question: how do Web3 gamers become losers?

We can regard most of the current encrypted games and some current DeFi protocols as a ponzi game, which attracts liquidity injection through token incentives. Moreover, in order to prolong the lifespan, they either create some application scenarios and destruction scenarios for the tokens, or lock the tokens to delay the release, but they still cannot solve the selling pressure caused by the release of tokens, and eventually die.

Ultimately, the early entrants and the smart ones make their money and leave, and the Web3 players who hoped to get to the game are the losers.

Therefore, this also leads to a question, what does P2E bring to Web3 games?

It brings economic rewards and brings a huge amount of attention to Web3 games. But P2E has also over-financed Web3 games, and it seems that the market's thinking has been fixed as X-to-Earn. But it turns out that X-to-Earn only brings ponzi, even if people mix sports and other elements in it. In essence, X-to-Earn only provides people with a function of asking for value from the entire economic system, and a vibrant economic system should be mutual, that is, people will actively exchange goods and services, provide value and obtain value .

So, are Web3 games a false proposition?

I actually don't agree with this point of view. In my vision, Web3 games should probably not be X-to-Earn, but Play-to-X.

**Although P2E is not the way out for Web3 games, Web3 still has the opportunity to lead games to the next level, as shown in the figure below. The current game industry is mature enough. What I am looking forward to is not the excessive financialization of the game economic system, but the introduction of a new game mechanism through Web3 technology, so as to bring a brand new experience to game players. Maybe this is the way of the future for Web3 games. **

For example, Web3 technology may change the existing business model of game manufacturers. It does not need to participate in Steam crowdfunding, and can obtain income during the game production process and provide financial support for subsequent game production. A smarter game economic system also makes the game itself open and transparent, without worrying about the unfair game environment caused by the centralized black box operation of the game publisher/producer. The other is the ownership of assets and achievement certificates. Asset ownership is more generalized. Although a game has a limited lifespan, game publishers can extend the game assets represented by some tokens to other games, or generate linkages, so as to expand similar to Games in the Marvel Universe. This also extends to another advantage that Web3 games represent: composability.

In addition to the above, if game manufacturers need to introduce other types of participants, such as keen collectors and speculators, they can completely introduce Web3 technology, so as to moderately financialize the game economy and fun.

These are all good aspects, aren't they? My expectation for Web3 games has never been to subvert the mature game industry in the past, it just provides a new dimension for games to meet players with different needs-maybe when most players realize that the ownership of their virtual assets needs to be protected At this time, more game manufacturers will realize the importance of Web3 technology.

Finally, my friend provided a lot of fun games when demonstrating his point of view, and he values playability very much. **But I personally see it this way. The output efficiency of Web2 games in the world is not low every year, but there are very few really fun games. This does not mean that Web3 games cannot make fun games, but that they are fun The game itself is valuable. As more people start to pay attention to this field, and with the entry of truly powerful game studios, there will always be playable Web3 games produced. What I pay more attention to is how they will bring the game to a higher dimension through Web3 technology. **