With the increasing popularity of GameFi tokens, more and more GameFi have appeared. GameFi with Play to earn as the main mode. If we participate, what design parts are worth looking forward to?
From the market perspective, GameFi is first of all Game, which is the game category created in the Internet era. If the economic model of the game is designed with financial economic model, these games may be called GameFi.
A game must be designed with an economic model at the beginning of its design. It can be as small as a piece of music that requires points, and it can be as large as buying a piece of land in the game and owning a city.
Why do we need economic models? Because the economic model is a must for liquidity, and liquidity shapes income.
However, because of regulatory issues, the props in traditional large games cannot be directly opened for trading, which means that the liquidity brought by the need for game fun, such as prop trading and account transactions in traditional games, should be placed on Outside the game or in a specific control area.
Having said that, we may have anticipated the problems GameFi may face in the future. Because of the existence of financial attributes, any market that manipulates risks needs to resort to supervision.
In this context, the GameFi fire is related to some projects and concepts.
The first is the contrast of the concept of NFT and meta-universe. NFT comes from the field of cryptocurrency, and the concept of meta-universe has a huge industrial scale in the game field. Industries related to the concept of meta-universe include virtual world games, AR, VR, MR, etc. Etc.
Therefore, GameFi, a comprehensive product in the field of cryptocurrency, has absorbed the potential of multiple industries.
That is, GameFi=Game+NFT+DeFi. We can see that most of the current GameFi mainly includes role-playing, virtual space, training and combat, and multiplayer construction. Compared with the previous simple and rude liquid mining model, the GameFi project has stronger interaction, experience and immersion with users, which means that it has some interesting games.
So in GameFi, DeFi is the financial model, NFT is the asset identifier, and the game is the form of presentation.
So I extended my idea to Play to Earn, the most attractive part of this so-called GameFi project. They made the "multi-directional transaction" part of the traditional game that cannot be opened in the form of encrypted currency.
Let's take Axie as an example to talk about GameFi mode and mode-based thinking.
Axie is a developmental combat game. Players develop Axie elf and then team up to participate in the battle to complete the task. Under normal circumstances, financial attractiveness is not considered. The immersiveness of the game for the development of combat games is not strong, there is not enough fun, and the depth of experience is not enough.
In terms of gameplay design, it represents a non-depth game. If you add depth to the development of combat games, you can increase the time the player stays in the game, the money spent, and the number of interactions.
For example, let's catch the monsters together and do social games based on LBS geographic information. This is a kind of in-depth experiment brought about by the fun experiment of the game.
The items generated by using the blockchain in Catch the Demon have also had small transactions in other trading channels. But it is only a short process.
If we design the transaction part of it as a financial model, it is the implementation logic of GameFi.
Axie is the GameFi of the cryptocurrency industry, which is naturally related to tokens. In order to give tokens value and use tokens to realize the circulation of tokens, liquidity must be implanted from the source of value and the end of value realization. Simply put, it means that there are funds entering, the funds entering will generate new funds, and the new funds can drive more funds, and then each fund will form a large enough fund pool, and the circulation of the fund pool can have a closed loop, which has maintained a stable positive direction. Growth pattern.
Just look at Axie.
Entering the world of Axie requires a cost. You need to use ETH to purchase 3 elf, as well as holding ETH, SLP to pay for gas, and game consumption.
So the entry barrier here is the source of funds and the first driving force.
Players use ETH to buy the elves. These elves constitute a market. After the earliest elves were released and sold, the elves breed new elves, and the new elves continue to enrich the number of transactions in the market.
New players also continue to buy new elves, which forms the elves market. The breeding of new elves and new players are the driving force of this liquid market.
In addition to the elf market, there is also an auxiliary token market, namely the potion SLP. The elf battle will generate SLP. If the elf is reproduced, it will also consume SLP, and SLP can be traded in DEX and exchanged for ETH.
In this SLP liquidity pool, elven fighting is the source and motivation.
We continue to divide liquidity. Divide the liquidity of the wizard market.
It includes a trading market for wizard trading, the AXS trading market. 20% of the transaction volume in the wizard trading market will become a transaction fee. The distribution of AXS is the distribution of equity in cryptocurrency projects. AXS is also a manifestation of the value of the Axie project, which will also attract players.
However, AXS and Wizard trading liquidity are strictly separate. But according to the logic of the cryptocurrency market, as long as the game develops well, the value and price of AXS will be favored by the market.
But for this game, the fluidity of the wizard and the fluidity of the SLP are very important.
The cost for players to enter is high, but each Axie can breed up to 7 times. Reproduction needs to consume SLP and ETH. For example, two Axies with 6 varieties will require 2,600 potions to reproduce.
These costs are hard to say to keep a player with a continuous demand to play. This demand includes revenue and game fun.
If the price of SLP falls, the return will fall quickly. This will also affect the liquidity of the wizard market, and the power of the two liquidity pools will be reduced. The market shrinks and finally affects AXS.
Fortunately, there will not be a lot of AXS selling pressure in the game, and the growth of the game will not bring negative effects.
Can Axie's GameFi logic continue? In the end, it depends on how the power of the liquidity pool is reduced? When does it get worse.
Is there a good GameFi mode?
First of all, our definition is that the financial logic of GameFi must be that players need real money. These inputs are the key driving force of GameFi logic.
But this is different from the general game logic. Just like we said that the glory of the king makes money, in the game, the demand for fun is the source of payment.
After the financial logic starts to operate, it is easy to grow too fast and difficult to control, and when the model does not run smoothly, the side effects of finance may also appear.
Payment in traditional games is to pay for the fun of the game, not to invest. If the money entered by GameFi represents the investment principal, GameFi’s Play loses the essence of the game. It's just a liquidity adjustment tool.
At this point, if you want to use liquidity to realize income in multiple liquidity boards, then the more gameplay should be what you expect. If you want to get game fun, then game innovation is the expectation design. If GameFi can match traditional large-scale games, it will naturally be able to attract users and create sustained vitality. If you want to have both, the temporary game may not meet your needs. A richer game world is needed to maintain fluidity and vitality.