A hardcore blockchain gamer's inner monologue: How to balance entertainment and investment?
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
A hardcore blockchain gamer's inner monologue: How to balance entertainment and investment?
If playing games is about getting entertainment, you'd better play Web2 games.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsAuthor: Cathy Que
1. Since I'm playing blockchain games instead of Web2 games, the ownership of the in-game assets (NFTs and tokens) I purchase belongs to me. Unlike Web2 games, where the publisher can ban my account or rollback the game—making the weapons and gear I paid for vanish from my account overnight—no one except myself, not even the blockchain game project team, government agencies, or anyone else, should have control over the assets in my wallet. In the future, my in-game assets should remain secure and untouchable by others.
2. If I no longer want to play a blockchain game, as long as the game is still running, I should be able to sell my in-game assets anytime. Unlike Web2 games, where most weapons and equipment aren't tradable, and clearing them requires selling the entire account on platforms like Xianyu, 5173, or Jiaoyimao—which is difficult and risky due to scams—only a few Web2 publishers officially recognize secondary markets or allow direct player-to-player trading.
3. When I buy assets in a blockchain game, if I later sell them at a higher price, I profit; if I have to discount them to sell, I lose money; and if the project team rugs, my investment drops to zero. Playing blockchain games isn't about spending money for entertainment—it's an investment. The goal is to profit through buying low and selling high, or by earning in-game through "play-to-earn."
4. If someone plays games purely for entertainment and doesn’t intend to invest in game assets or profit alongside the project team, they should stick to Web2 games and avoid blockchain games altogether.
5. If a blockchain game is fun and enjoyable to play, then even if the value of purchased assets drops later and the investment loses money, it’s not a big deal—I can treat it like spending money in a Web2 game, turning investment into consumption without expecting returns. However, if continued grinding fails to generate any return and there's no chance of breaking even, I definitely won’t reinvest or buy more assets from that game.
6. Since playing blockchain games is an investment, I must evaluate the founding team, game quality, and tokenomics design. I need to read the whitepaper carefully to understand how profits can be made after investing capital to purchase assets.
7. When evaluating a blockchain game team, I avoid fully anonymous teams with no institutional backing. Even if an anonymous team behind a trending game lacks backing, I might make a small speculative purchase—as if betting on a meme coin. I also avoid teams launching tokens in non-compliant ways. If a project violates regulations in its home country, the entire team could be arrested and the project shut down immediately.
8. If I don’t fully understand the team or the tokenomics system, but trusted friends have invested in the game’s assets, I might follow them—but only with a small amount, just to avoid missing out.
9. If the game itself is well-made—excellent art, engaging gameplay, few bugs, stable servers and client—and can immerse new players enough that they’d enjoy playing even without investing, this indicates the team has heavily invested time and money, and possesses strong technical capabilities. Such a project is unlikely to rug immediately after launching assets, making it suitable for larger investments.
10. It’s best when founders with established reputations appear publicly and interact directly with players. Public appearances suggest regulatory compliance, and reputable individuals care about their image, making them less likely to rug. If only employees are sent to communicate, they’ll simply take the fall when issues arise. Projects represented solely by such proxies warrant caution when purchasing assets.
11. Even if a game is polished and stable, if its economic model is unclear, lacking robust Web2+Web3 operational plans and strategies to attract new players to invest and spend, early investors will likely never recoup their funds. If early players constantly complain in communities, deterring newcomers, the game will inevitably fail. Despite a promising appearance, such projects deserve only minimal, cautious investment.
12. If a blockchain game project promises guaranteed profits from buying assets, its economic design is flawed and will collapse quickly.
13. If a blockchain game, compared to similar titles, shows poor production quality, obvious technical instability, or feels clunky within the first minute of gameplay, it reflects an incompetent, indifferent team with minimal investment—likely to rug at any moment. Such games should be avoided entirely.
14. If a blockchain game allows free "play-to-earn" without requiring initial asset investment, it will be rapidly exploited by low-cost labor regions ("scientists"), leading to mass farming, dumping, and economic collapse. These games should be avoided outright.
15. Earning in-game rewards through PvP battles—gaining chips when winning and losing them when defeated—is a fair and healthy mechanic. Losing can be accepted as a result of inferior skill, tactical errors, or poor decision-making. Such competition can take the form of PVP or leaderboard rankings.
16. The reward mechanisms and chip distribution in PVP or leaderboards must be transparent and ideally verified via blockchain smart contracts—not controlled unilaterally by the project team. If the team holds absolute power, changing rules arbitrarily without consultation, the game should be abandoned immediately—even if it’s otherwise well-made.
17. Vote with your feet: at the first sign of trouble, immediately sell off game assets—even at a loss—to recover whatever value possible.
18. Players who buy blockchain game assets are theoretically minor shareholders in the project. If the team establishes a DAO-based community governance system, allowing stakeholders to vote using their assets on gameplay design and reward distribution, that would be ideal.
Finally, decentralization represents an aspirational vision of a self-governed world. Playing within such a decentralized, autonomous world is truly exciting. Decentralized game development, publishing, and operations still have a long road ahead, requiring continuous experimentation and iteration. While not yet realized, perhaps one day, through trial and error, a game will finally achieve it.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
@cathy_que
