Coincidentally, as a private contractor for many major companies at that time, I can indeed provide some insights.

Back then, what major companies valued, including the big players, was the Game + DeFi capability of GameFi. It's not hard to imagine; it was proposed back in 2015 that if World of Warcraft could directly buy and sell gold (not through private OTC), but rather through a scheme similar to current mobile game top-ups for in-game currency, it would indeed be feasible. This could increase game revenue in the short term, but the trade-off would be a shortened lifespan of the game.

This concept was already well understood in the traditional Web2 gaming sector, and the biggest issue at that time was that in-game items and equipment could not be officially repurchased. It was similar to Japan's pachinko, where the sellers of balls and the ones who recycle prizes could not be the same entity.

However, this issue does not exist in the cryptocurrency industry. As long as liquidity is provided, repurchase can be perfectly achieved. Moreover, since it uses overseas shells and does not require game licenses or content review, it logically makes sense. At that time, most game developers' concept was to transfer a portion of their users to blockchain games as a trial.

The greatest significance of putting games on the blockchain is completing the economic closed loop, which is a solution many domestic game developers have been striving for. Theoretically, this is feasible, but in reality, both the project parties and players overlook a fundamental issue.

The project parties are there to make money, and the players on the blockchain are also there to make money, while the actual gamers can be disregarded. This is where the tragedy begins. A game that attracts players because it can make money is entirely different from one that attracts players because it is fun. World of Warcraft is popular because it is genuinely enjoyable, which creates a demand for gold among a large number of players. In contrast, the design of blockchain games is fundamentally aimed at making money.

In the traditional gaming industry, creating an outstanding game is not solely about money. Many independent games have done well, but apart from the products eliminated by major companies, the few truly developed blockchain games are mostly non-professional products created by non-professionals. The playability of such games is questionable, and the results are already evident.

While the games eliminated by major companies still have a core that can pass muster, the gap in users is too significant. In the Web2 sector, if the cost per effective user is $50, in Web3 it is probably over five times that. I’m talking about effective users; who can bear such costs? Even effective users are not real players but rather individuals making money through advertising, with profit being the primary goal.

What? You want me to play games? Sorry, I'm here to make money.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。