This analysis explains how NFT Issuance Affects Game Retention through the source's decisions, evidence and operating constraints.
Read the evidence below as a decision trail: what changed, why it matters, which trade-offs shaped the result, and where the conclusion still depends on context.
Blockchain games are attracting increasing attention from players, but some require purchasing NFTs in advance to enter the game. What impact will this approach have on game operations?
In blockchain games, some games require you to purchase NFTs in advance to enter. Have you ever heard of this kind of gameplay? The answer is yes! And up to now, most of it has been just before last year's bear market. NFTs were among the hottest topics at the time, with many services rushing to ride the wave. From the perspective of blockchain games, during that peak period, blockchain games were divided into two types
- The first type is: selling NFTs first, then planning to develop blockchain games after selling them
- The second type is selling NFTs by leveraging the "play-to-earn" gimmick of blockchain games
The common thread of these two types is selling NFTs first. Regardless of whether blockchain games have truly been developed, from the perspective of game operations, selling NFTs before the game launches will affect game operations
The impact of selling NFTs first on game operations
First, looking at the nature of players, those who have read the previous post know that those who care more about whether they can make a profit are called 'value extractors,' while regular paying players are called 'value creators.'When the number of value extractors outnumbers the value creators, the game will either fail to operate or have a very short lifecycle
For example, in the past, when playing online games, people would go to digital trading sites to buy virtual items off-site. Those who profited from selling virtual items were so-called value extractors. This can be compared to the 'studios' of online games in the past, where players who bought virtual items through game mechanics were value creators. When a game is filled with studios rather than players who truly provide value, can the game still generate revenue for the company?Without revenue, you can't sustain the game, and it shortens the game's lifecycle
Looking back, selling NFTs first before entering the game can give studios quick financing opportunities and accumulate funds early on for the project, but conversely,Most players who come to buy NFTs are there for profit, meaning the majority are value extractors, so when the game actually begins, the game's lifespan will be quickly consumed, and the funds the company has earned in the early stages will also be quickly depleted. If you launch 'staking' to try to retain players, it will enter a vicious cycle, because the purpose of staking is also for profit. The purpose of playing remains unchanged, but rather becomes stronger. If you launch activities motivated by 'earnings' while the player composition remains the same, it will only consume the game's lifespan even faster
So, does selling NFTs first really help blockchain games retain their legacy?
Based on most examples currently seen on the market, their lifespans are very short. This also brings up the previous article about blockchain game development. If the core player composition remains unchanged and everyone is here for profit, it means blockchain games have not yet entered the next stage. For details on how the next stage will develop, you can read this article (Title: How Can Blockchain Games Be Played Again: How to Grasp Future Development Trends?）
How can this problem be solved?
- By increasing the game's intrinsic value—in plain terms, playability—the game attracts more players to participate, such as launching innovative game mechanics or expanding the depth and breadth of the game content
- Building a healthy gaming ecosystem allows players to gain real value within the game, attracting more value creators to join the game. True value includes not only earnings but also satisfaction, achievement, social interaction, and more. For detailed player needs being met, please refer to this article(Game Operations | Analysis of 4 Types of Player Character Models: 10 Points for Spending and 12 Types of Advertising Emotional Appeals)
- Avoid over-relying on income-driven activities like staking. Staking is not a bad thing; there are many ways to play, but staking should not be solely for profit. In blockchain games, staking should be related to the game mechanics themselves, creating external added value or being part of the system
You might like these articles
● Blockchain Games: Why Does NFT Issuance Affect Retention?
● How else can blockchain games like GameFi be played: How to grasp future trends?
● Upgraded Game Economic Model: Analysis of the Dual-Token Model in Blockchain Games
What to take away
The practical value lies in the decisions and constraints behind NFT Issuance Affects Game Retention, not in copying one implementation without its context.