That is why play to earn concept is a massive failure

[Donald202]

All of the games are built on the same foundation, with the exception of skin colour and weapon design. High game entry fees and a high learning curve for new users are discouraging new users from joining the system. Because of the unique teams they have, only early adopters are making a lot of money. The number of unique users registering each day is decreasing, indicating that the hype is fading.

[1715231862]

1715231862

[1715231862]

1715231862

[1715231862]

1715231862

[1715231862]

1715231862

[5W-KILO]

Not really, it depends on the developers themselves, games only gets boring when it lacks the fun or better updates from time to time for example call of duty multiplayer devs makes millions if not billions already from this game because they are able to keep the fun alive for gamers, I know it's not backed by any token but it's a good one to make an example out of.

[yayayo]

All of the games are built on the same foundation, with the exception of skin colour and weapon design. High game entry fees and a high learning curve for new users are discouraging new users from joining the system. Because of the unique teams they have, only early adopters are making a lot of money. The number of unique users registering each day is decreasing, indicating that the hype is fading.

We shouldn't be surprised by that without actual use of the token and the increasing number of games and competitive in the industry it is not surprising to see a decline of users and players from these games but in my opinion I see them more useful than the NFT where all you have is an image and nothing you can do about it but I think if some games out there managed to have a good partnership with other project and make their tokens useful as possible I'm sure that there will be no decrease in players.

ya.ya.yo!

[joro-metaversa]

You can look at it from a different perspective. I think now is the time for low quality p2e games to be seeded out and leave space for the games that bring value to gamers, not investors

[sulis sudibyo]

All of the games are built on the same foundation, with the exception of skin colour and weapon design. High game entry fees and a high learning curve for new users are discouraging new users from joining the system. Because of the unique teams they have, only early adopters are making a lot of money. The number of unique users registering each day is decreasing, indicating that the hype is fading.

what is to be expected from all of that, isn't it from the start that games like that were made just for the sake of profit. so there are no long term plans to keep the game popular. when the hype fades, the early investors will start to leave it and there will be no new users wanting to play because the game already looks unprofitable.

all crypto games look the same. and what's even more bullshit is that they always use the "metaverse" to look innovative. even though their game looks boring. if from the start they wanted to focus on making good games, without the metaverse frills, there should be lots of concepts/genres they could choose from and develop.

[MarjorieZimmermanGinger]

All of the games are built on the same foundation, with the exception of skin colour and weapon design. High game entry fees and a high learning curve for new users are discouraging new users from joining the system. Because of the unique teams they have, only early adopters are making a lot of money. The number of unique users registering each day is decreasing, indicating that the hype is fading.

This means that the game contains referrals, because what I understand is that such a game model will only benefit those who are the first to register, but currently there are many forms of independent games, not depending on referrals that people share, maybe you can check out NFT games or other games, depending on how you like the game you want, because the availability of games is currently quite a lot and a variety of characters

[TravelMug]

All of the games are built on the same foundation, with the exception of skin colour and weapon design. High game entry fees and a high learning curve for new users are discouraging new users from joining the system. Because of the unique teams they have, only early adopters are making a lot of money. The number of unique users registering each day is decreasing, indicating that the hype is fading.

Oh well that is what we call hype in the market, so it's about timing, even bitcoin. So it's more of investors getting early, so you have a lot of advantage and that's what separate men for the boys. Wise investors knows when to get in, while majority just get onboard when the hype is very high and when the price is about to reach all time high which is not good. if the hype is fading then so be it, for sure there will be another one that will replace this play to earn concept.

[takngantuk]

oh wait where is the failure?
just because the hype faded and the number of new players dwindled, you concluded that the game was a flop?
isn't it too shallow to think like that?
a real example look at axie, although there are many games that look the same and slowly their hype has faded, but they are still holding on. and it's not a failure, I call it consistency. as long as the ecosystem is good, games that you think are all the same still have hope to thrive and survive. So don't think it's all a failure.

[danherbias07]

All of the games are built on the same foundation, with the exception of skin colour and weapon design. High game entry fees and a high learning curve for new users are discouraging new users from joining the system. Because of the unique teams they have, only early adopters are making a lot of money. The number of unique users registering each day is decreasing, indicating that the hype is fading.

Is it decreasing? Do you have the proof to back it up? Because most of the time I am in discord joined in different NFT games with play-to-earn features, and I can see people piling up and there are even request to join the channel but it is full.
Can you be more specific about what play-to-earn games you are supporting?
Sure, early adopters are the ones who will make the most out of it but that is because they have the courage to risk their first investment, unlike others who will just follow when there is an assurance from the risk-takers (early adopters) to join in.
Now imagine if no one took the first risk?

[asyakashi]

I'm not saying that the Play To earn concept is a flop but they haven't designed it perfectly.
There are many shortcomings that I encountered from this P2E concept.
Like, games are usually shown to get fun when playing but we are required to earn with certain missions.
In addition, if it is combined with cryptocurrencies that depend on the law of supply and demand, I think it is not very suitable.
If we play the game and we get tokens from it, the scarcity of the tokens will continue to grow so that the demand goes down and in the end only those who are the first get the profit.

[rat03gopoh]

It's not just the quality of the graphics or the price of the NFT that is reliable, the foundation of a strong game is the large number of communities and abundant players. A common selling strategy used by the P2E industry is whitelisting which limits the growth of their own ecosystem. This only gives new established players a chance (from other games). Many developers are not aware that they're not the only ones trying to develop in this industry and these players aren't aiming to stay, but always moving to more profitable places.

[CapGelatik]

All of the games are built on the same foundation, with the exception of skin colour and weapon design. High game entry fees and a high learning curve for new users are discouraging new users from joining the system. Because of the unique teams they have, only early adopters are making a lot of money. The number of unique users registering each day is decreasing, indicating that the hype is fading.

This means that the game contains referrals, because what I understand is that such a game model will only benefit those who are the first to register, but currently there are many forms of independent games, not depending on referrals that people share, maybe you can check out NFT games or other games, depending on how you like the game you want, because the availability of games is currently quite a lot and a variety of characters

I think anything that only depends on referrals is the same as a lie and the irony is that there are currently many like that,
it is a good thing with NFT games because we can make money playing games and without having to depend on referrals,
hope that in the future there will be new innovations

[Strongkored]

only early adopters are making a lot of money. The number of unique users registering each day is decreasing, indicating that the hype is fading.

All the hype will only be profitable for early investor it cannot be denied, so when you know something is a little late better do not get into it, but it cannot be denied also in the hype there will still be new projects that can long lasting and provide profit to investors only the indicators are difficult to guess so it is more to speculation.

[adzino]

They are all literally the same. You are right, just with different design but the same concept (except for few). Honestly, most people are not here for the game. They are here for the money. Like you said, early adopters if lucky are able to make some quick profit from it. Rest will have to invest a lot to make some profit which isn't guaranteed. Playing for free gives you almost peanuts. But I have read articles online where they say that those play to earn games have helped them during the pandemic to make some money. I guess at least those money is worth something in underdeveloped countries.

[mindrust]

All of the games are built on the same foundation, with the exception of skin colour and weapon design. High game entry fees and a high learning curve for new users are discouraging new users from joining the system. Because of the unique teams they have, only early adopters are making a lot of money. The number of unique users registering each day is decreasing, indicating that the hype is fading.

They are all ponzi schemes. They can only last as long as they can attract new players and sooner or later they always run out of suckers to scam. If you get in early you can make a lot of money but sometimes the scheme collapses way too early and the early adopters gets the d too. Ignoring them is the safest option.

[lobo13hf]

All of the games are built on the same foundation, with the exception of skin colour and weapon design.

To be honest you can find so many design but i rarely see the foundation that was creating their own game. Hmmmm... i don't even think people can still seeing this as an opportunity.

High game entry fees

I would like to call this as pay to earn rather than play to earn.

and a high learning curve for new users are discouraging new users from joining the system. Because of the unique teams they have, only early adopters are making a lot of money. The number of unique users registering each day is decreasing, indicating that the hype is fading.

Pretty much the same like ponzi. Axie infinity already proven it even the developers creating more and more tokens. The new account that registered probably owned by the same guy that already played the game.

[Beparanf]

All of the games are built on the same foundation, with the exception of skin colour and weapon design. High game entry fees and a high learning curve for new users are discouraging new users from joining the system. Because of the unique teams they have, only early adopters are making a lot of money. The number of unique users registering each day is decreasing, indicating that the hype is fading.

This is true and probably the main reason why NFT games started to become weak including solid play to earn games because investors is losing confidence on the P2E system. There's always a major flaw on this kind of payment structure in long term since the funds being distributed to all the players came from the treasury and the liquidity pool supporting it is just came from the new players money and not from the income of the team from outside game profit such as advertisement and promotion by other brand. Imagine a game that consistently distributing funds to all players while the team is just relying on the new comers to provide liquidity in the economy of the game. The game will obviously die when there's no new players enter and interested to invest in the game.

[joro-metaversa]

The p2e concept might be overhyped but it is too early to call it a failure as the field is still so early stage. Also, p2e is not the main value proposition of blockchain games, digital asset ownership is.

[fvb]

There are many interesting games that are built on simply playing and using this to receive bonuses. Then create your character and use attachments to improve its quality. Now there are many different games offered, as they say for every taste and there are plenty to choose from.

[TastyChillySauce00]

The developers didn't care about pooled reward system. They are only care for their users to grinding more and more tokens to be dumped to the market. I would not be surprised to see if majority of these tokens have been going to the hell. So many play to earn projects have very big inflation on its tokenomic. this is also driving the price to go down and the late joiners who have been paying to be able to play to game lose a lot. This system is not sustain for long term and so many things need to be adjusted. People are calling it as ponzi but i do agree with it until we didn't need pennies to play to game and i will stop call it as a ponzi.