How do we want our p2e games?

[HawkTrader]

There was a time when everyone thought, p2e was gonna be the future of crypto, driving adoption while leveraging the huge mobile gaming population (estimated to be over 2.8B in 2023). But there was one huge limitation - true ownership. Players do not have the prerogative of transferring their in-game assets to swap for cash or other things. It gives undue advantage to devs.

Recently, there's been some improvement detailed towards true ownership like Heroes of Mavia, Mocaverse etc. Besides that, I learnt, devs are also trying to integrate some kinda AI data sharing/ownership into p2e to enhance true ownership whilst still enjoying gameplay experience - something like GRASS AI data democratization used to propel p2e like what we have in CARV.

Overall, I think it's still early days to begin evaluating the performance of such synergy but might be the one to watch in the future!

[markm]

A big problem in the early days, which still might end up being a problem all over again once the dust begins to settle as it were, is that there are huge piles of rules and regulations around gambling dating back sometimes even to long before the internet.

Decades ago I looked into opening a videogame arcade in Halifax Nova Scotia for example and there was a coin operated machinery rule that classified any machine that could spit out for any individual user more coins than that individual had put in as a gambling machine.

A (over?)zealous SEC type department could presumably theoretically lump anything anyone once upon a time somewhere managed to sell one of for more than it cost them as an investment; I do not know whether the U.S. version's "Howey test" is typical or for all I know could be refreshingly nice compared to who knows what other, more draconian, definitions some other places might use.

(As I understand it, the U.S.'s "Howey test" admits motive (mens rea?) as a potential mitigator in the sense that maybe finding a magic sword in World of Warcraft identical to one someone once got $50 for on E-Bay might not necessarily classify such swords as "investments" but still it potentially could be a danger because if people are hunting them because they imagine they too might find someone who they can similarly sell one to then oops they might be "investing" their time into playing precisely because they intended to become a seller...)

Last bunch of years, ever since whatever game it was version IV I think it was opened a fiat market in game (with 30% or more fees!?) it has seemed like things have eased up but still, NFTs selling for millions of bucks, some bureaucrats somewhere must be salivating...

-MarkM-

[passwordnow]

There was a time when everyone thought, p2e was gonna be the future of crypto, driving adoption while leveraging the huge mobile gaming population (estimated to be over 2.8B in 2023). But there was one huge limitation - true ownership. Players do not have the prerogative of transferring their in-game assets to swap for cash or other things. It gives undue advantage to devs.

The community itself is the one that drives the markets like this so from in-game assets sold to real cash value. I think if these developers will make one for the games themselves, they'll also be abused and that's why it is not thriving at all. But if huge gaming companies will make one for themselves wherein we're all virtual people and plays the game for money and as if we're living there in actuality, it's possible to be into that virtual world and earn in game assets that's convertible into real cash. With that, they have to set all the measures and potential abuses because there's still future in gaming but not anymore with the play to earn concept.

Recently, there's been some improvement detailed towards true ownership like Heroes of Mavia, Mocaverse etc. Besides that, I learnt, devs are also trying to integrate some kinda AI data sharing/ownership into p2e to enhance true ownership whilst still enjoying gameplay experience - something like GRASS AI data democratization used to propel p2e like what we have in CARV.

Overall, I think it's still early days to begin evaluating the performance of such synergy but might be the one to watch in the future!

Yeah, we're still early on this thing. And developments and upgrades could come depending on how the developers of the current one will learn from the past mistakes of the other notable games that have became a huge hit globally.

[X-ray]

I still believe that the idea about P2E becoming the future of crypto is overly inflated due to the sentiment after covid lock down, now that everything has come back to normal, many people find P2E as just boring, time-killing activity much like a chore.
so far the advancement of P2E sector always trying to sell the economy aspect which is earn to play, instead focusing the on long term aspect of the game such as the gameplay and so on, the very reason why most of P2E project losing 90% market cap after TGE, i'm talking about pixfi, and other gaming project. just look at their mcap chart, almost all of them going down significantly after TGE.

therefore I don't think P2E will dominate in the future, maybe become another category that utilizes blockchain but not something that gonna be that big.

[FortuneFollower]

I still believe that the idea about P2E becoming the future of crypto is overly inflated due to the sentiment after covid lock down, now that everything has come back to normal, many people find P2E as just boring, time-killing activity much like a chore.
so far the advancement of P2E sector always trying to sell the economy aspect which is earn to play, instead focusing the on long term aspect of the game such as the gameplay and so on, the very reason why most of P2E project losing 90% market cap after TGE, i'm talking about pixfi, and other gaming project. just look at their mcap chart, almost all of them going down significantly after TGE.

therefore I don't think P2E will dominate in the future, maybe become another category that utilizes blockchain but not something that gonna be that big.

P2E on TON and overall became a haven for people to enter the crypto space, many young people got many ideas about it from them, though, it's only a grain of what's needed for them to get rolling and understand the market and the space better.
A big innovation push is needed for a P2E game to evolve from what you described into something long-term.

[uneng]

Cons:

• The items you own in a game can't be used in another games or for anything else;
• Expensive or redundant fees when exchanging your items;
• Games don't have clear long term goals. They surf the hype and after few months they are dead;
• Low efficiency fighting bots and cheaters;
• Most games are just copies of another games. They lack originality, innovation and interesting features which could trigger genuine desire from players for the game, going beyond the financial factor.

For me, MIR4 was an excellent game which had a lot of potential. But bots, cheaters and toxic players ruined the game. And the worst part is that developers did nothing to fix or improve players' experience with the game.

It was a pitty, because that game was the one which reached closest of a real P2E game experience.

[Solosanz]

P2E games can't survive really long because people playing it just to earn money, this attract abusers and cheaters to milk the games. The more people play the games, the lower the reward. The abusers and cheaters can still earn enough since they have many accounts, but other player who only play with one account will realize it's not profitable anymore. Then they either migrate to other games or looking for side gigs.

[hyudien]

I still believe that the idea about P2E becoming the future of crypto is overly inflated due to the sentiment after covid lock down, now that everything has come back to normal, many people find P2E as just boring, time-killing activity much like a chore.
so far the advancement of P2E sector always trying to sell the economy aspect which is earn to play, instead focusing the on long term aspect of the game such as the gameplay and so on, the very reason why most of P2E project losing 90% market cap after TGE, i'm talking about pixfi, and other gaming project. just look at their mcap chart, almost all of them going down significantly after TGE.

therefore I don't think P2E will dominate in the future, maybe become another category that utilizes blockchain but not something that gonna be that big.

P2E on TON and overall became a haven for people to enter the crypto space, many young people got many ideas about it from them, though, it's only a grain of what's needed for them to get rolling and understand the market and the space better.
A big innovation push is needed for a P2E game to evolve from what you described into something long-term.

You mean the game on telegram? These P2E come in season, as their initial cycle coincided with a post halving market saturation. The profit stream had to keep rolling and the gaming sector became the choice because it was able to attract a massive number of users from all walks of life. The adoption of P2E may fade again because developers will not continue to pour money continuously if the users are only chasing profits for free. So basically P2E games rarely last long and we have seen the same projects sink from the surface of the gaming and crypto industry.
So far of all the P2E game cycles that you can take advantage of, there are only 2. Firstly as early access and secondly, you become an early investor ready to sell in the public sale phase on the market.

[Iamcrypticguy]

There was a time when everyone thought, p2e was gonna be the future of crypto, driving adoption while leveraging the huge mobile gaming population (estimated to be over 2.8B in 2023). But there was one huge limitation - true ownership. Players do not have the prerogative of transferring their in-game assets to swap for cash or other things. It gives undue advantage to devs.

Recently, there's been some improvement detailed towards true ownership like Heroes of Mavia, Mocaverse etc. Besides that, I learnt, devs are also trying to integrate some kinda AI data sharing/ownership into p2e to enhance true ownership whilst still enjoying gameplay experience - something like GRASS AI data democratization used to propel p2e like what we have in CARV.

Overall, I think it's still early days to begin evaluating the performance of such synergy but might be the one to watch in the future!

I believe the play-to-earn (P2E) trend will need significant innovations to regain momentum. Could AI integration enhance gameplay and boost productivity? That’s a key question to consider. If you’re looking into Carv, their partnerships and user base suggest they’re building something promising on paper. But what about long-term sustainability? I think we’ll see things evolve over time. Regarding Carv, it seems their token isn’t trading yet, though there are rumors it will launch on major exchanges like Bitget, Binance, and Bybit. What’s your take, OP?

[MAAManda]

P2E games can't survive really long because people playing it just to earn money, this attract abusers and cheaters to milk the games. The more people play the games, the lower the reward. The abusers and cheaters can still earn enough since they have many accounts, but other player who only play with one account will realize it's not profitable anymore. Then they either migrate to other games or looking for side gigs.

The problem is clear where it lies, it's just that not many developers want to hurt the decentralized side of crypto itself by implementing KYC on each of those accounts. If all implement KYC, then another problem arises, namely distrust by the crypto public. Because this data could be misused by related projects. Therefore, everything around P2E is contradictory, we'll not be able to see the ideal project that is indeed a fun game to play and makes token rewards as an extra reward for our game section.

[MarvieJ]

There was a time when everyone thought, p2e was gonna be the future of crypto, driving adoption while leveraging the huge mobile gaming population (estimated to be over 2.8B in 2023). But there was one huge limitation - true ownership. Players do not have the prerogative of transferring their in-game assets to swap for cash or other things. It gives undue advantage to devs.

Recently, there's been some improvement detailed towards true ownership like Heroes of Mavia, Mocaverse etc. Besides that, I learnt, devs are also trying to integrate some kinda AI data sharing/ownership into p2e to enhance true ownership whilst still enjoying gameplay experience - something like GRASS AI data democratization used to propel p2e like what we have in CARV.

Overall, I think it's still early days to begin evaluating the performance of such synergy but might be the one to watch in the future!

That's a great take on the evolution of P2E! True ownership has definitely been the missing piece for a long time, and it's cool to see projects like Heroes of Mavia and Mocaverse stepping up. Integrating AI data sharing into P2E is a great idea imho and certainly I believe it could push the space to new levels of ownership and player control.

Speaking of projects pushing boundaries, CARV is definitely one to keep an eye on. It’s making waves with its AI-driven approach, and from what I hear, CARV will be getting listed on a few exchanges soon as I’ve equally been keeping tab on them . Although the date isn’t finalized yet.

[batang_bitcoin]

P2E games can't survive really long because people playing it just to earn money, this attract abusers and cheaters to milk the games. The more people play the games, the lower the reward. The abusers and cheaters can still earn enough since they have many accounts, but other player who only play with one account will realize it's not profitable anymore. Then they either migrate to other games or looking for side gigs.

I agree, it will take time that the developers should also be involved in its in-game economy. I cannot say if the huge gaming corporations are planning for an actual game like the GTA 6 where in-game currency is crypto or it is convertible to in game assets and real world assets or money. With that intervention, it requires huge backing up and not just billions of money will be involved. So, I hope that there's a real gaming company that has huge assets that can back up a real game where people interact and have virtual economy wherein we can transact as if we're in the real world dealing with livelihood, hustles, and other real life transactions. That's the ideal one and I hope that it's not just a utopia.

[Mr. Magkaisa]

P2E games can't survive really long because people playing it just to earn money, this attract abusers and cheaters to milk the games. The more people play the games, the lower the reward. The abusers and cheaters can still earn enough since they have many accounts, but other player who only play with one account will realize it's not profitable anymore. Then they either migrate to other games or looking for side gigs.

            -       this is one of the biggest problem of all game developers, THE CHEATER! in all games even it is not P2E. for the crypto world or P2E games, owner should think the way how the player will earn in hard way. or in a way which BOT cant earn. I also played MIR4, the game is good and the Idea is great, but still not enough. I am still looking for a unique game which people cant do BOTS.

Following this thread and i hope someone will share something really interesting and worth to play.

[Reatim]

therefore I don't think P2E will dominate in the future, maybe become another category that utilizes blockchain but not something that gonna be that big.

In my opinion, the reason for this is because not everyone wants to play games even if they are to earn something from it. A lot of crypto users are adults, some are even middle-aged so you do not exactly expect them to be interested in playing games as usage for their crypto. I think crypto has other uses that can cater to a more general audience. P2E games does not. It caters mostly to those who are already familiar with games, interested in it, or those who are willing to learn gaming just to earn which would not be everyone.

[fikrett]

therefore I don't think P2E will dominate in the future, maybe become another category that utilizes blockchain but not something that gonna be that big.

In my opinion, the reason for this is because not everyone wants to play games even if they are to earn something from it. A lot of crypto users are adults, some are even middle-aged so you do not exactly expect them to be interested in playing games as usage for their crypto. I think crypto has other uses that can cater to a more general audience. P2E games does not. It caters mostly to those who are already familiar with games, interested in it, or those who are willing to learn gaming just to earn which would not be everyone.

Games are that sink that can be used to gather users around it, it's much easier to cater to people by games than by something else - however, there are not that many great - games - in the crypto space, and they are not good in a gaming sense (at least for me).
So, if there won't be a gameplay-wise improvement for them (not only going into them because of the money and profit at hand) - they won't be that known.

[markm]

I allow bots, not just because cybermathematicologically humans are bots - we call them Organic Peripherals - but also because play to earn with bots allows non-player-character (NPC) development to be encouraged/rewarded just like any other characters.

Servers can thus out-source artificial intelligence by having their (and other peoples' corporations' entities' etc) "non-player" antagonists, monsters, etc run via the same interfaces (APIs, Appliation Program Interfaces, in the CoffeeMUD case a human-readable API) that other characters use.

Making a game interesting and enjoyable and even profitable is a burden that must rest upon the players as well as developers.

If your characters are bigoted or prejudiced against bots they can in-game treat it like any other "organised crime" problem, cannot a bunch of sensible citizens come up with any way to combat such problems? Remember by allowing bots we equally allow concerned citizens to deploy their own national defense forces or whatever of bots of their own, its not like only the "criminal element" gets such tools...

-MarkM-

[TastyChillySauce00]

P2E games can't survive really long because people playing it just to earn money, this attract abusers and cheaters to milk the games. The more people play the games, the lower the reward. The abusers and cheaters can still earn enough since they have many accounts, but other player who only play with one account will realize it's not profitable anymore. Then they either migrate to other games or looking for side gigs.

very true, moreover these P2E game aren't sustainable to begin with, it's as if, the entire game is created and have EOL date.
basically once the game is dominated by farmers, that's exactly when the economy will start crumble and everything will go to near zero.
P2E was never a good concept to begin with, don't know why some people are so fixated with the idea of P2E, for me, just waste of time really.
but I guess for some people who have leisure free time and have nothing to do, it's still worth it, but I won't spend all my energy just for pennies.

[markm]

Quite a few active threads here lately have been about "airdrops"...

Players responding in such threads seem often to be annoyed at how "airdrops" have been going lately.

Maybe it is time to look for some positive contributions from the players...

How many of them, I wonder, have put much thought into how they would or could conduct an "airdrop"?

For example if you did land a big one, got a bit of a "warchest" with which to start launching "airdrops" yourself?

For example I have just been chatting with someone who is apparently the "number one employee" of one of the Galactic Milieu's "Galactic Repo Corps".

It has been his "job", apparently for some years now, initially to use the "cash crop" of the seven planets his Corp "repossessed" to pay back the original operation's "startup loans" and then, having some time ago now accomplished that task, to continue operating his Corp's planets, continuing to deliver their "cash crop" of DEUterium to a General Mining Corp depot and piling up the loot GMC pays for such cargo.

( See the "Deuterium price per thousand units" link on the Digitalis Assets statistics page. )

Lately he has had his Corp delivering 140 deathstars full of DEUterium, which is 140 times one million units per deathstar minus the small amount of DEUterium that class of ships (having gravitics) burns as fuel for the journey.

Thus, almost 20k GMC scrip per such delivery lately.

Normally what almost all large scale players have been doing is basically "saving up" hoping to accumulate enough loot to be able to pay off the startup loans of a Repo Corp that is despairing of ever being able to "catch up" to the interest rate on the "startup loan(s)" they took over from the original operation that they "repossessed".

The idea being to take over another Repo Corp basically, by buying the debt it isn't looking like it is going to able to pay off by itself.

This chap though was curious as to whether his Corp could benefit from bringing in more players, basically as some kind of employees of his Corp.

Ah, thought I, maybe all those "airdrop" critics on BitCoinTalk can come up with good ways a player with a warchest to work with could benefit other players while also, and thereby, benefiting his own Corp... ?

-MarkM-

[itorai]

I still believe that the idea about P2E becoming the future of crypto is overly inflated due to the sentiment after covid lock down, now that everything has come back to normal, many people find P2E as just boring, time-killing activity much like a chore.
so far the advancement of P2E sector always trying to sell the economy aspect which is earn to play, instead focusing the on long term aspect of the game such as the gameplay and so on, the very reason why most of P2E project losing 90% market cap after TGE, i'm talking about pixfi, and other gaming project. just look at their mcap chart, almost all of them going down significantly after TGE.

therefore I don't think P2E will dominate in the future, maybe become another category that utilizes blockchain but not something that gonna be that big.

The gaming industry continues to progress with the presence of P2E, although it has started to decline again over time, but from what I see, attracting players in crypto may not be the place to gain their trust and that is something to think about, but not sure for the future depending on those who use it.

[goldkingcoiner]

The problem with P2E is that it never stays P2E. At some point when the game becomes way more popular than it was expected to become, the devs get greedy and turn the game into P2W with P2E being a smaller, insignificant part of it.