Why the Gaming Community Hates Web3

Cryptocurrency enthusiasts and gamers. Two groups of people that many outside observers would have considered a perfect match. Instead, they largely disagreed. At first glance it doesn’t make much sense: here are two native tech audiences, both proud of a hacker mentality and a penchant for being early adopters of new forms of technology, yet for the most part the purist gaming community has largely rejected. voice and sound the attempts of the web3 crypto community to make successful forays.

Gamers are, perhaps understandably, deeply suspicious of the web3 community’s motives. This is not without basis: the sheer number of bad actors and scams within web3 has made anyone outsiders, even people who would normally be sympathetic to technology that is still quite flawed, very skeptical. It only got worse when some of the gaming industry’s much-maligned eight-hundred-pound gorillas seemed to jump in Half-armed NFT market, perceiving an opportunity for profit generation without much in the way of caring or caring for itself would benefit the players themselves. Those players who are not wary of web3 are shocked by the naivety often displayed by the web3 community. Startups claiming that they will build the next big MMORPG in the next year with a few million dollars and a team of ten feel deaf, as if they never understood the huge investment required in terms of team, time and skills to build any game. , not to mention an MMO. This is when they are not just scams. Even less ambitious types of games, such as MOBAs and card games, can take years of development by teams numbering in the hundreds.

To be sure, there has always been tension between the player community and innovation. Traditionalists denigrate anything that can be seen simply as a way to make money off the back of the gaming community. Importantly, many outspoken voices mocked the introduction of live service games, booties And free games as money sinks, those “innovations” have become milestones in modern game development and, albeit grudgingly, accepted as part of today’s game state.

So why the more persistent resistance of players to anything that remotely smells like web3?

It feels like a pay-to-win

Nothing is more widely denounced than when a game introduces pay-to-win functionality. The biggest free-to-play games that have in-game purchases have largely and intelligently remained strictly in the field of selling items of an aesthetic nature. There are some notable exceptions, for example in most card games like Hearthstone how well a player is ultimately a function of the cards he has and whether he has more money to spend, he will in turn have better and more numerous cards. While you can conceivably acquire all the same cards simply by playing more, it will take many orders of magnitude more to do so. Web3 games, which almost always have significant NFT elements, are often accused of being a fairly strict form of pay-to-win. The fear is that in a world where you can sell your most powerful items or characters for real money, the winners in the end will always be the ones with the deepest paperbacks, not the ones who are the most talented or make the greatest investment of time and fatigue .

Building a successful gaming economy is really, really hard

The more ambitious games in development use multiple tokens and therefore need to be extremely alert to potential inflationary and deflationary pressures. In MMORPGs, which have lively economies but are considerably less complex than that offered by more ambitious web3 games, they are always wrong. New World, the recently launched Amazon MMO, had to do triage on their broken economy multiple times. And this was a game with a staff numbering in the thousands and founded by a team that had created multiple MMORPGs. All of this means that building a game economy is difficult for a large team in less complex circumstances. Web3 games are largely developed by smaller teams and have greater complexity. In short, the degree of difficulty is higher while the team running it is often much more limited in terms of both experience and bandwidth. As a result, the gaming community is often very skeptical when whitepapers are released announcing big ambitions about building vibrant economies declared by people with no experience in game design or advanced economics (yes, some game companies hire economists to help design their games).

In general, ambitious games are, in general, really difficult to build

Most whitepapers articulate big plans for their game. It is not uncommon to read something along the lines of: Will World of Warcraft meets Hearthstone meets League of Legends. Cracking three of the most successful games of the last twenty years and then articulating at a high level why they should work together and why NFT, token and web3 will make it also feels best for anyone experienced in the gaming industry or game design as the pinnacle of arrogance. And there are dozens of these whitepapers out there, full of confidence in their ability to build something shocking with far fewer resources and experience than anyone else who has come before.

Game loops are basically not fun

Perhaps the biggest problem of all is that most web3 games are first web3, then games. As any game developer will be quick to point out; if you don’t have a fun game loop, all the other bells and whistles – graphics, world building, storyline, soundtrack – can’t save the game. And so far the main game cycles of most web3 games have been what appear to be bootleg imitations of the most popular existing gaming properties. Problematically, most Axie Infinity players are playing to make money, not because they find the game fun. This is partly a symptom of the fact that many of the web3 games to date have been made by people who had more experience with web3 development than with game development.

The encouraging news is that everything listed above is not endemic to the web3, but rather a function of a huge number of inexperienced people rushing into an opportunity with a lot of ambition but with little experience and knowledge. Those people, more often than not, will shut down pretty fast. Unfortunately not a small amount of investor money will burn with them as web3 entrepreneurs have sometimes proved more adept at telling stories than creating products. However, there are reasons to be optimistic. There are some great entrepreneurs building web games3 who have raised huge sums of capital, hired seasoned veterans of the gaming industry, and managed expectations for at least a year. a bit realistic level. In fact, the more aware of these developers I have spoken to acknowledge these reservations and are in turn eager to show the gaming community that they understand. There will be a great web3 game and while there will certainly be resistance within the gaming community that will refuse to acknowledge it, the majority will be grateful to see the medium continue to evolve.

Leave a Comment