Written by: GameMine Alliance

Can Web3 games still be played? Is it the player’s understanding of the game, the amount of capital, the era's bonus, or the execution power of being one step ahead that allows players to earn money in blockchain games?

In this issue, the GMA interview invites an in-depth blockchain game player, Money-making Chicken, to share their journey from a traditional game merchant to a Web3 game player: having made money in Mobox, StepN, and Seraph, but also experiencing heavy losses and zero returns in some projects.

Compared to grand industry judgments, this issue feels more like a review from a real player: Why could early blockchain games make money? What do ordinary players easily misjudge? What are the real problems in Web3 games? And if the next wave of blockchain gaming opportunities arises, what might it look like?

【Space Quotations】

What attracts me the most about blockchain games is making money; studying the elements within them brings a great sense of achievement.

The project parties are mostly focused on maintaining relationships, letting our investment go to waste.

The biggest problem with blockchain games is that you must first be a very good game, and then use blockchain to solve some issues.

Calculating the break-even period during the peak of popularity can mislead your understanding of that break-even period.

The money you pursue may make you lose your freedom; what you keep is what really matters.

Q1: Do you define yourself as a player, investor, or content creator?

Money-making Chicken: I never really see myself as an investor because I think I'm not good at investing and I'm not a qualified investor. I prefer to define myself as a player, especially as a blockchain game player. I used to be called “Blockchain Chicken,” but after losing money consistently over the past year or two, I changed my name to “Money-making Chicken” as a form of encouragement. My content creation is more of an incidental side job, mainly sharing my experiences as a retail player over the years of playing blockchain games, making money, and losing money.

Q2: What first attracted you to blockchain games?

Money-making Chicken: What attracted me the most was definitely the potential to earn money, but it wasn’t just about that. There are many mechanisms in blockchain games to study, and understanding them brings a great sense of achievement. For example, when I was playing Mobox early on, I often created many spreadsheets to calculate card draw data, home upgrade data, and researched how to combine cards to maximize benefits. The process itself was very enjoyable. Later, when I played Seraph, I became particularly immersed in treasure hunting; it was the most enjoyable blockchain game I played. For me, what attracts me to blockchain games is that they are fun, can earn money, and provide a sense of research and exploration achievement.

Q3: You like competition, but is that competition more about competing with others?

Money-making Chicken: My competition in games is more about not competing directly with others. I’m not fond of zero-sum or negative-sum competitions among people; I didn't start out to earn money from other players. In projects like sneakers, Mobox, Seraph, Gas Hero, and Adventure Island, I approach it more from a personal gaming perspective, thinking about how to play hard, study mechanisms, and find my own strategies. In the end, I did earn money in many games, but my original intention was not to “compete with everyone,” and I feel this is worth clarifying.

Q4: How do you view the relationship between players, project parties, and big investors?

Money-making Chicken: So far, I feel that this competitive relationship is very apparent. For example, later on in Mobox, I felt the project parties were competing with us, the middle-upper players. In Gas Hero, the project parties are more about maintaining relationships, but ultimately let our investments go to waste. The project parties have their own interests; large investors think their investments will yield returns, but in the end, they may be the first to be taken advantage of. A truly good blockchain game should have players willing to buy in, allowing the ecosystem to have external lifeblood, but many blockchain games end up as a competition among project parties, major investors, and retail players.

Q5: When did you realize that there was a business to be made in games?

Money-making Chicken: This actually started with Adventure Island. When I played Adventure Island as a child, I realized that the traders in the game are a vital part of the game ecosystem. The game has gameplay, social elements, and trading; all are significant. I envied not the high-level players or those with good equipment but rather the traders in the market. Later, in college, with some money, I started to be a trader, selling equipment and flipping currency. At that time, I also met a very talented trader friend who would lend me items to sell; after selling, I would find a way to buy them back to return them, which was a huge help to me.

Q6: Did your experience as a traditional game merchant help you in playing Web3 games?

Money-making Chicken: It definitely helps, but it’s not a complete copy. In Web3 games, my attributes as a merchant are not that strong; I brought in the mindset of studying mechanisms and finding profit points from how I used to play games. For example, during Guild Wars, I thought this phase should focus on building my guild, so I created 81 guilds. Ignoring the subsequent decline in popularity that led to the game crashing, I believe that strategy was successful. Similarly, with Seraph, many people initially focused on farming and selling currency, but I chose to collect currency to invest in higher-level NFTs. These are thoughts formed while I was playing and studying game economics in the past.

Q7: What do you primarily consider when judging the value of a game asset?

Money-making Chicken: I mainly think like a player, not from a professional investment perspective. First, I look at whether I like the game and whether it can be engaging. If I find it engaging, I will study whether there are profit points and whether there are ways to make money while having fun. Then I will look at whether the game has the potential to gain popularity in the future. For example, at that time, I thought Mobox and Gas Hero had certain innovations in that environment, and there was a possibility for continued growth. As long as I judge the future interest to be greater than the present, I consider that value acceptable. But that judgment often goes wrong.

Q8: When did you first encounter Web3 games? Why did you enter at that time?

Money-making Chicken: I first encountered Web3 games with Mobox in 2021. At that time, I had never played a blockchain game before, but Mobox's quality truly caught my attention. After drawing cards, I was naturally drawn into researching: How do cards combine? What are the bonuses for upgrades? How can I mix them for higher yields? I think at that time, it was a very good web game and marked the beginning of my journey into blockchain gaming. It was also very friendly to newcomers; you could jump in without understanding anything and potentially get substantial returns.

Q9: Did concepts like NFT rights confirmation and player asset ownership impress you at that time?

Money-making Chicken: I was indeed very impressed by those concepts. I even discussed this concept with my company’s leadership. I would say that in traditional games, assets essentially belong to the game company; if the game shuts down one day, you lose your assets too. But blockchain games are different; NFTs are on-chain, and theoretically, another game in the future could empower the NFT. For example, if you have a Dragon Slayer sword, another game could design gameplay around that NFT if they wanted those players. As a player, I thought that was very eye-catching. However, looking back now, it feels a bit naive. In the subsequent years of blockchain game development, this concept has become less frequently mentioned.

Q10: What do you think is the essence of making money in blockchain games?

Money-making Chicken: The most important factor is the era, followed by mindset. The early days of blockchain gaming were profitable mainly because it had the advantage of timing. However, unlike many ordinary players, I don’t only think about pairing a character, calculating a break-even period, or mining and selling every day. I assess whether the game will grow in the future; if I believe it will, I will continuously expand my scale and reinvest to enjoy future growth and reinvestment returns. For example, when StepN launched on the BNB chain, I judged that it had potential, so instead of just pairing two pairs of shoes to earn daily income, I created a shoe factory and kept expanding. Of course, making a wrong judgment can also lead to disaster, so it’s crucial not to blindly do so these days.

Q11: What do ordinary players most easily misjudge in blockchain games?

Money-making Chicken: The most frequent misjudgment is calculating the break-even period during peak popularity. For example, with sneakers at one point, some people calculated a 20-day break-even, which later turned into 25 days, then 30 days, and finally could extend to 300 days. The problem is, the break-even period calculated at its peak can lead you to mistakenly believe that the investment is safe. However, assets and yields will continually depreciate, forming a downward spiral that ultimately makes it impossible to recoup your investment while standing at the peak. Therefore, I believe that during high popularity, one should not focus solely on the break-even period.

Q12: In Web3 games, which is more challenging: choosing a project, holding assets, or exiting?

Money-making Chicken: For many people, holding onto assets and exiting are both challenging. But for me, the harder part is selecting a genuinely good project. I’ve played many games where I ultimately couldn't even be bothered to manage my assets, which ended up going to zero, like Big Time and Matr1x. But that approach, if you hit a good game and hold onto it until the end, can yield significant returns. So the key really lies in vision. For ordinary players, when encountering a good game, it’s crucial to hold onto it and not constantly trade in and out. The same goes for trading coins; if you identify a good coin and correctly judge it but can’t hold it, you might earn 500 today and lose 300 tomorrow, ultimately leading to an overall loss.

Q13: After experiencing both earning and losing money, how has your perspective on “making money” changed?

Money-making Chicken: Over the past year, my perspective on making money has indeed changed. I used to always think about needing to earn a lot of money and what to do to achieve that. After losing money, perhaps because I had no other options, I gradually came to terms with it: earning two or three hundred dollars a day isn’t too shabby, right? Of course, this mindset could also be because I’m out of options and can no longer earn that much. But now, I’m more willing to lower my expectations and not overthink things; ironically, I might even make a small bit of money and at least not constantly lose.

Q14: What was your most fulfilling experience in a blockchain game?

Money-making Chicken: If we look purely from the angle of operation and exit, my most satisfying experience was with Seraph. I made a lot in the early days of Mobox, but then I reinvested a lot into homes and subsequent games and lost a considerable amount back. The money earned on StepN was also lost in Gas Hero, 2184, GMT staking, and others. I earned some from Big Time as well, but since I didn't sell later, I ultimately lost that too. Only with Seraph did I feel relatively satisfied with my exit ratio and timing. Although I feel a bit guilty in my heart because we fought together with much passion, the five hundred warriors had a lot of spirit, I had to think about exiting from a rational perspective due to the decline in popularity and the inability to enter the larger markets.

Q15: What do you think is the biggest problem in Web3 games?

Money-making Chicken: The biggest problem is that most Web3 games are not mature games in themselves. For a blockchain game to exist, you must first have a very good game, and then use blockchain to solve some problems. You also need to find a consumer group willing to buy into the game for the economic model to have a chance to operate. Many current blockchain games face the issue that they are populated solely by individuals wanting to make a profit, with no real players willing to pay. Adventure Island Universe actually possesses the early form of a mature blockchain game, and its content is mature, but it has not captured the right player demographics. Blockchain games should not create an economic system first and then look for gameplay; rather, good gameplay must come first, and then you can discuss the economic system.

Q16: Do you still believe in the Web3 gaming sector?

Money-making Chicken: I believe there will likely be explosive projects in the future of blockchain games, but they may not necessarily be mature blockchain games. There could suddenly be a strong investment that appears when people are not optimistic, driving up interest, and then everyone rushes back in. From this perspective, there is still an opportunity in blockchain games. However, I also think truly mature Web3 games may emerge in the future, though I have not seen any particularly definitive projects yet. They might come from traditional large companies, using established IPs and mature game content, along with NFT asset trading systems and wallet systems to bring both genuine gamers and blockchain players together. They may not be as extremely profitable as before but would be more normalized and vital.

Q17: If a newcomer asks you whether it’s still possible to play Web3 games now, how would you respond?

Money-making Chicken: If someone has never been involved in games at all, I would advise against playing. Playing Web3 games now is like searching for a golden dog among 100 ordinary dogs. Without experience, the process will be painful. Unless you are exceptionally lucky, but then what’s the difference with contract betting or gambling? For players still in this circle, I believe one important thing to remember is that during times of low expectations, when an asset is at a low point, if you judge that it has future potential and limited losses, it’s okay to bet boldly. But when everyone begins discussing it, regardless of the situation, you should at least pull out half of your investment. This is advice I also give myself.

Q18: If a successful Web3 game emerges in the next three years, what might it be like?

Money-making Chicken: I think it will likely be a mature game driven by traditional large companies. It won’t just be played by cryptocurrency blockchain gamers but will also attract many actual players. It will have a relatively mature NFT asset trading system and wallet system, allowing blockchain players to participate and earn some money. However, it won't be as extremely profitable as the past pure Ponzi blockchain games; that would be a normal and viable blockchain game. The previous model that was entirely dependent on incoming capital was never sustainable. If you can discover and intervene early in the future, there may still be good returns. Adventure Island Universe is actually a signal: large companies are beginning to try to combine their IP games with blockchain technology.

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。