Play-to-Earn games have already revolutionized the blockchain industry. GameFi and metaverse have become the new buzzwords and blockchain games are now a real competitor to mainstream ones. Yet, despite the industry overall having great prospects, most Web 3.0 gaming projects fail. So what Web 3.0 games developers are missing? Why are people interested in Web 3.0 games? Web 3.0 relies on three main pillars: Play-to-Earn mechanics, blockchain technologies and the metaverse concept. The attractiveness of Play-to-Earn is quite obvious: usually it is the player who has to pay, in Play-to-Earn games the situation is reversed: players gain monetary rewards for their in-game activities. “Have fun and get paid for that” is a perfect selling point, isn’t it? Blockchain allows Web 3.0 to become decentralized and, which is probably more important for gamers, blockchain can ensure true transparency while preserving anonymity, full player ownership over in-game assets, and even facilitates creation of user-generated content helping to protect content creator’s intellectual property. In addition, blockchain essentially enables Play-to-Earn mechanics by making transactions fast, cheap, and secure and allows games to use NFTs. And finally, the metaverse concept - a rather old idea that has been reviewed due to progress in blockchain, virtual and augmented reality technologies. Metaverse is a universe where physical and virtual realities merge. Essentially, it is the metaverse concept that caused a recent surge in GameFi popularity. After all, blockchain-based Play-to-Earn games are not a new thing - games like have been overloading the Ethereum blockchain since late 2017. Progress in VR and AR combined with metaverse and GameFi concepts made blockchain games actually enjoyable. CryptoKitties However, while some projects successfully leverage most or even all the aforementioned advantages, most Web 3.0 games spectacularly fail to do so. Problems of modern Play-to-Earn games The first and most obvious issue of the GameFi industry today is that a lot of teams don’t even try to deliver a product to their audience. They just start a marketing campaign, mint some NFT, sell them and vanish with the money. Essentially, the situation is similar to what happened with ICOs in 2017-2018 - the most booming segment of the market attracted a lot of scammers. So the best advice for players is to avoid spending any money on projects that can’t offer at least an early-access version of the game. But even if developers really try to deliver a decent product to players, they fail to deliver entertaining and engaging gameplay more often than not. It seems that a lot of teams think that if there is a financial incentive to play the game, there is no point in actually making it fun. In the worst cases, the “gameplay” consists of clicking one button to roll some virtual dice. Sub-par graphics, lackluster sound and mediocre arts are also often a part of the course. Thus, blockchain games disappoint most “traditional” gamers that don’t want to touch GameFi products ever again. Also, despite the heavy use of the metaverse in marketing, most GameFi products don’t actually leverage it. It is hard to call a virtual world “metaverse” if it consists of a single game and nothing else. As a result, “metaverse” is often interpreted as a made-up thing that has nothing behind it. And finally, despite decentralization being at the core of blockchain technology, the ability of players to actually influence the game besides financial matters is usually limited. For example, NFT assets are usually sold “as is” without the option to upgrade or customize them. The way to success Fortunately, there are Web 3.0 games that actually manage to fully leverage all their technological advantages and deliver some fun. One of the best examples is Shards. It offers entertaining gameplay, far from AAA-quality, but great by indie standards, nice visuals and sounds. In addition, the developers constantly grow the metaverse of the game - new NFT collections and new media are being added along with new ways for players to interact. Axie Infinity Shards is a good proof that fun is the most important foundation for a Web 3.0 game - it is the most successful Play-to-Earn game on the market today. Axie Infinity There are also other Web 3.0 game projects that rely on gameplay and leverage metaverse advantages even harder than Axie Infinity. Take, for example, The Sandbox. This Web 3.0 game ventured in an entirely different direction. Sandbox is focused primarily on user-created content. It is a metaverse with plenty of land plots that players can buy and build whatever they want there. While it may look simple. games are extremely popular in traditional gaming as well, so it is no wonder the idea worked in Web 3.0. Besides, blockchain helps with protecting users’ creations immensely. Sandbox Even more ambitious is the ecosystem: a set of games, NFT collections and anime series united in the Andrometa metaverse. MNNT “The majority of Play-to-Earn [games] are honestly boring, resembling a game that should be called, “Work-to-Earn”. Our approach is different because we’re skill-based. Players face off against each other and fight for real cash prizes – where skills and strategy are as important as equipment, just like your skills and nerves in poker are as important as the cards you’re dealt.” – , the CEO of MNNT, explained. Michael Christine Moreover, MNNT developed a unique protocol to ensure interoperability of all NFTs across the entire Andrometa universe. For example, NFT characters can be played as in Meta Smash Fighters - the ecosystem’s fighting game, and also play their role in the We are the Outkast anime series. The series is also directed by NFT holders themselves. Today, Web 3.0 gaming is not even close to overthrowing traditional gaming companies. However, projects like MNNT’s Andrometa changes the established paradigm of the Web 3.0 gaming industry by providing users with enhanced experience and proving that Play-to-Earn can actually be fun. So it is very possible that the gaming world will change sooner than later.
