Welcome everyone, just a couple more minutes while we get the space set up and all our
Welcome everyone. My name is Adam Clang. I'm the CEO and founder of Fix Gaming and along with me, I also have Abel Adontas. He's the CTO of Fix Gaming and we run. Hello.
And we have a game called Cryptophytes and we've been running basically since 2018. So we've been in the space for a long time. And I think this the topic of today is actually about Web3 Gaming in 2024 and we have a bunch of different kind of topics.
So this is going to be a lot of probably a prognasticating, like what's going to happen? You know, where are we at? Where have we been? And so I'd like to hear a lot of different speakers and their perceptions of everything. Let me see, get that off here. So let's see here.
Richie Leon, would you like to introduce yourself, what you're doing and how long you've been in the space?
Yeah, yeah. Hello, everyone. I hope your day is very well. And yeah, first of all, I can talk about ourselves, who I am or what's the Richland. Yeah, you know, you can say to me, Richie, but my official name is Umar. I'm a founder of Richland community. Normally, I'm an architect and I was also actively doing architecture also.
I am a YouTuber and streamer about the Web3 Games. You know, Richland is establishing to provide investors and gamers with access to high-quality projects and long-term projects to find the right information and share it with people.
And, you know, we are mainly focusing on the Turkish community. But of course, I have a lot of members in the different communities like Brazilian or Latin American or Spain, blah, blah, blah.
And, you know, I'm just I'm not just a classic content creator or YouTuber. I'm like a like a hard gamer also in the same time, a normal content creator, because I love the game.
I love the playing game because of this. I'm just searching on the deeply in a new project and testing at some new games or new ecosystem and then share with these people.
Yeah, that's it. All right. Well, thank you. Yeah. Thank you very much. Let's do our next speaker. But welcome back. Would you like to introduce yourself?
You broke off a little bit. Yeah. Yes. Yeah. Oh, hello. Sorry. I have some problems with Bluetooth and just minted my first ever one of one. So I'm just posting about in Discord.
Yeah, I don't know what we're doing. I'm guessing this introduction. It's only five minutes past. So Gaspode to content creation around Web3 Games covered about 200 plus games at this point.
Two things in written format through newsletters and game reviews and games of GG host Twitter spaces with the longest one over 70 episodes and loads of streaming and YouTube videos and mainly focusing on reviewing games right now, as well as the community companies. But yeah, great to be here.
Nice. Nice. Nice. Yeah. I've been seeing a lot of your content on Twitter lately. So thank you very much for the Web3 influencer space here. Let's see.
Let's haunted space. Would you like to introduce yourself? And also everyone that's speaking, please keep your intros no longer than a minute, please.
Hello, everyone. I'm Leo. I'm the CMO of haunted space. Maybe I can give a brief, really brief introduction regarding our project if it's OK.
Yes, that's what I'm saying. Just introduce yourself in a quick intro of your project, please.
All right. So how to space is the first video game or one of the first video game will connect the Web2 world.
So the people that plays on Steam, PlayStation and Xbox with the Web3 world. Now, how are we going to do that?
Basically, our game is divided into two parts, a single player game and a multiplayer game.
But the single player game is a complete Web2 game that will be released in the end of Q1 on Steam, PlayStation and Xbox.
So we are going to get the user base from them and then we are going to move them to the multiplayer site.
There is going to be a free to play game that will be basically a crypto game.
So it will be available on the Epic Megastore and on PC.
So this is a really, really brief introduction regarding the project.
Maybe I can add some stuff later.
All right. Thank you. Thank you for being here today.
Footprint analytics, that's going to be an interesting perspective with the data side.
Can you introduce yourself?
Yeah. Hey, guys, my name is Alex.
I'm the community beauty guy over here at Footprint Analytics, been in space for about two years now.
Footprint's been in space for about two and a half and we got some really cool data analysis tools you can use.
You can choose from like 30 plus chains to get data from.
And we recently just released our 2023 year in gaming report.
So if you're curious, you can go to our profile.
It's one of the most recent tweets there.
You can actually check out all the gaming metrics for 2023.
Thanks for having me up here, guys.
I'm excited to join the space and chat with you all.
Great. Thank you for being here.
I'm the co-founder at Striker Game Studio, which is building Search for Anamira.
It's a free to play PC sci-fi space shooter that's about to go into private beta in three weeks.
And Juan Perez, how about you introduce yourself?
Yo, yo, yo, what's good, everybody?
It's great to see a lot of the people here that interact with on a daily basis, which is great.
I've been working in the space now for about two and a half, three years, especially doing BD in the space.
And more recently decided to launch Rev, which we're working on helping games with their top of level marketing and essentially giving them like an on-chain analytics tool, which has been really cool.
And to see grow and also hosting a community called WebVGG, where we're building virtual events to hopefully help people network more in the space.
I think it's something that's super needed and also advising a couple of different projects and, you know, all going really great.
So very excited for 2024 and very excited for the conversation.
Three years into space, Seabass, how long have you been in this space?
And why don't you introduce yourself?
Hey, guys, my name is Seabass.
I'm actually JRP's brother.
My name is Sebastian Perez.
I've been in this space now since 2021.
I initially joined into Solana and then kind of had transitioned and made my way over to a bunch of other blockchains,
primarily for gaming and seeing what gaming could be.
Currently the community captain.
So essentially I do community marketing over at party icons.
If you guys don't know about them, you're going to know about them.
And so I'm excited to be here, you know, and talk to you guys.
Awesome. Thanks for being here.
All right. Last intro, Jordan.
Can you introduce yourself?
Hey, what's up, everybody?
I'm Jordan and I'm building Eureka, which is an upcoming game Eureka.
It takes place at the discovery of a new continent in 1850.
You and all of the other players explore the continent from first person.
If you explore in real time at 1850 speeds and this is a full sized continent and you all build an entire nation on it together.
And, yeah, that's Eureka.
And, you know, one thing I want to hear from all the speakers, you can actually put it in the Twitter space.
Comments is how long have you been in the space?
Is it been three years, three years?
Yeah. I heard I was at JRP or three years.
Richie Gaspode, I'm just curious, when did you guys start in the industry?
Just everybody could just shout that out. Two years.
OK, Gaspode has been two years.
Anybody been four or five years?
I mean, does, you know, investing badly count?
Well, I guess in the Web3 gaming space specifically.
So if you've been around kind of watching it, I guess that could probably count because you've been through kind of the ups and downs, the bull and the bears and all that.
So with the perspective that you have, depending on how long you've been in here.
So if you started in a bull market, probably have been through a bear market.
If you started in the bear market, then you're kind of waiting for the next bull market in it.
But I guess let's start with the kind of the first topic here is what are you looking forward to seeing in the Web3 gaming space this year?
Do you think anything new is going to start?
Do you think there's any trend that's developing any new kind of technology, for example, like account abstraction?
Is that going to come back in a bigger way?
Is MetaMask, what they call like externally owned accounts or EOA wallets going to become less common?
I'm just curious of everyone's predictions.
Feel free to go ahead and jump in.
I want to try to switch this up and get this a little bit more lively.
So just feel free to unmute and give us your thoughts.
G.R.P. I see your hand up. Go ahead.
Yeah, of course. I think that there's a lot, honestly, and it'll kind of take us in ping pong in different directions.
But I think one of the things that has been really interesting to see is how other technologies are really affecting the way that Web3 builders are looking to actually build.
And so an example of this is just the use of AI, right?
Being able to use it to kind of get you to a different gaming experience, which, for one, Jordan is trying to do with Eureka.
And something that I think we'll start seeing a lot more of is being able to play these games in unique spots.
We see a lot of telegram games like Discord games, like I think we'll continue to see that trend because people are looking to grow their community.
Community is the number one kind of thing that a lot of people are thinking about right now.
And if they're able to create a really strong community, they can ultimately launch a really have a really strong launch that bodes well for like the future of their project.
So I think we'll see a lot more like we're seeing a lot more tooling around community as well, which is great.
And that's actually what Rev's working on.
So I obviously biased, but at the same time, I work with various projects working on this particular idea of being able to create a community.
We see it with community managers being like one of the top jobs now within Web3 Gaming.
So, yeah, very interesting things.
But like I said, we can talk about so much.
Well, here's what everyone else thinks.
Yeah, on the community aspect, though, you know, I've always seen that kind of tenant push in the Web3 space is, you know, having a really strong community.
Do you think that is because of the kind of the limited market side of the kind of the Web3 Gaming space?
And I think actually footprint analytics, you could probably chime in on this.
But I believe I looked at Blockchain Gamers Alliance 2023 end of year report and they had what was it?
Seven hundred, eight hundred thousand unique active wallets in the space for that year.
And I can't remember if that was growing or stagnating footprint.
Do you have any insight on that since you're in that in that side?
Yeah, just give me a couple of minutes to check on the data here and I'll get back to you.
OK, cool. Sounds good. But from my memory, I think it was around seven, eight hundred thousand unique active wallets.
And I don't know, you know, in like twenty twenty two, I would imagine it was probably more because of, you know, the bull market and then the bear market.
It always kind of, you know, contracts because, you know, there's pacing less money to be made.
And I think I'm kind of having a a period where with Web3 Gaming is, you know, there's some AAA studios coming into the space.
Actually, the BGA report actually showed that there's a lot of them coming into the space.
But, you know, talking around, especially to the Web3 investors, they think that a lot of these, you know, the Web, I'm sorry, the AAA or even just bigger game studios are kind of looking at it.
Well, we're just going to create our own thing, our own ecosystem, rather than kind of participate in kind of this community that you have.
I've always kind of felt like they're not really embracing Web3 as much as they should.
So I'm really curious. I see a bunch of hands up, so I must have hit some notes here. Feel free to jump in.
Yo, could I jump in this real quick? Sorry, Jordan. I just saw you unmute your mic, man. I'm so sorry.
So to the to the point, you know, to Jeremy's point with community being one of the key components of this, I mean, you really think about it in Web3.
We build a lot of our community within Discord. You know, you have founders in there.
So, you know, community is going to be one of the most important aspects because of the direct connection that founders have to community members, that team members have to community members.
Rather than having to go this route of if I have an issue with the game, then I have to go, you know, to support, email them in, you know, wait three to five days.
And there is no direct connection to anybody there, you know.
And so because of that, you know, it can also it can be a pro anicon, a pro being that it's, you know, there's more ways that you can get to know your player base.
There's more ways you can have focus groups.
There's more ways that you can, you know, build for a specific audience and that community that is, you know, what they specifically want.
So there's a pro in that there is a huge con as well, where, you know, if your project or if you're having trouble, you know, with doing something in your project and your community goes sour, then that community can be very negative, very, very fast.
So it's all about nurturing, you know, that community and how you come across to them.
You know, do you reward them?
You know, do you take care of them?
Do you show time in there?
You know, do you hop in Twitter spaces like these and talk to, you know, talk to the community, you know, talk to new audience members?
You know, do you build that community and, you know, take care of it or do you just disregard your community and act like it doesn't exist?
So you can see this, you know, if you take a bunch of different projects and check into the community and how that how that audience responds to them in Discord, you can pretty much tell right away if that founder is active and if that founder is taking care of the people that, you know, are in their community.
Yeah, I thought that was a great point.
Just to kind of take it a little further, I think in Web3, we have this thing and it's why we're all here and it's why there's so much energy in this, you know, there aren't that many people here, but we can all feel it.
And it's that this amazing blockchain technology has given us perfect alignment between community and project and this has never happened before.
There's never really been anything like this where the people you're trying to get to play the game also have a direct financial incentive to discover your game, help it grow, help it be early on it, stay around.
It's crazy out here and we are all in the trenches for years here developing the skills to do this well.
And honestly, like a prediction about this, we all know how AAA studios are about managing their community.
They're terrible at it. They're so like they could be doing all of this and instead all they always are doing are just like pissing everybody off and then not caring and then being obnoxious about it.
We've seen it over and over and over again.
And I think that they're going to have a pretty rough time attempting to take all their gaming expertise imported in here.
And the kind of race we're going to see is can they figure out the community side faster than we can figure out the gaming side?
And I don't really think so. So I'm pretty optimistic.
Yeah, I think I think you have a great point there.
And I really it's not to think that like such a that like this word one brought it up community and it's it's interesting to go on like a sort of a tangent on how we can with technology really go.
A bit the extra mile. And one of the things we we were experimenting with the one we first started developing crypto fights was like the idea of community driven development.
So basically, very synthetically, the game has actions like each character does actions.
And we were at the time, tinkering with this idea of, OK, maybe the frequency in which players use certain actions should in some in some way sort of steer development in a certain way.
So having it having the game be built in such a way that that the players decisions over time sort of steer the which features should be built and stuff like that.
And I think that's in that respect, I do think that we're probably already further away than than some triple A studio.
I mean, triple A students have a lot of analytics and a lot of processes to figure out what players want.
But I think that a more direct approach leverage with technology.
I think I think many games are starting to look into this.
And I think it's a very, very interesting aspect. Yeah.
Just like really, really quick, an example of this, I'm actually building Eureka directly into Discord.
The entire game is going to be playable in the Discord bot that you can install in any Discord server with two clicks just like any Discord bot and no additional onboarding is needed.
I was only driven to do that because of wanting to align the location of the community with the gameplay as tightly as possible.
Right. So it's like exactly what you're talking about there.
Yeah. And I want to bring it back a little bit about the question about active wallets for the year in twenty twenty three.
I'm going to bring in kind of a different perspective on active users.
And when it comes to games in twenty twenty two, there's about two thousand games that were released based on our data.
And twenty twenty three, there's about twenty seven hundred games released.
And only six percent of those twenty seven hundred games actually passed over a thousand daily active users, which I think is kind of a little bit more focused of a metric to look at instead of overall active users is, you know,
our games actually getting a decent amount of sustainable active users and based on the data for twenty twenty three.
Not so much really actually down ten percent compared to twenty twenty two of games having more than a thousand daily active wallets actually connecting and interacting with the protocol.
So regarding the question in general regarding how the twenty twenty four is going to be different for gaming, I have a little different view because in my opinion,
the the key point is that a lot of also big brand in the web to worlds.
I'm talking about the AAA to the huge AAA studios are going to jump in.
Some are already invested in a number of games, like, for example, Ubisoft.
But the thing is, as an example, you always use like the free to play because in general, for example,
the Web 3, the crypto part of the gaming obviously at the moment is not seen super well by the Web 2 community, but it's because it's something innovative.
That's the thing. And the same thing was, for example, with the free to play like 10 years ago.
But when a big player like Epic Games with Fortnite made it mainstream, everyone followed them.
So the thing is that there is, in my opinion, this year, there is going to be a big change because there are going to be some big release from AAA huge AAA studios.
And in that way, they are going to bring so many users inside the crypto world and everyone is going to benefit from it.
So all the people are in the space, but in general, everyone in the Web 3 space because there is going to be a ton of users
because obviously at the moment, the majority of the Web 3 gamers are also investors.
While instead, obviously we need a bigger chunk of people, of gamers that move, that just gamers that move in the Web 3 space.
And that's also what we are trying to do.
That's why we decided to create our Web 2 game on Steam, PlayStation and Xbox.
And then the multiplayer day is going to be the follow up on the crypto side.
Gatsby, I see your hand. I want to go ahead and go.
And also, before you go, the BGA report that I mentioned, I just posted in the thread of the space.
So I'm going to answer the direct question.
I was going to I was going to crush JRP's dreams and a couple of other people about how important community will be.
I think it is a factor of size right now for the community.
I'm this close to CEO because there's only six people in the Discord.
So I do think that will change as we get more games coming in, gamers coming in and they scale out.
Hopefully they keep the overall kind of mentality of the community.
But I think keeping it as hands on as it is now would be difficult as the overall size of the space actually scales.
Well, I'm most looking forward to the fact that a lot of the games that had a raise,
maybe end of the last ball, middle of the ball, kind of getting to a point in the development cycle,
where the game is just messing me on telegrams, where the game is starting to hit a really good strike.
We're not just playing janky first attempts to show what the game might look like.
We're starting to get games come out that have had that kind of love and attention and are looking decent.
They're ones that you wouldn't be as embarrassed to show people and say, oh, yeah, this is the game I'm now playing.
We're obviously still getting new people coming and they'll be in the early stages.
But I think the year that we've got coming up is going to see a lot of games fully completed
or near as completed as they're ever going to get.
And I think that kind of quality uplift is going to be really good for the space.
I just want to push back a little bit on what you just said in the sense that I do agree that
the general approach to community that we can have in smaller projects where people are closer
to the CTO and so on does not scale. But I think that with blockchain, we probably have
the opportunity to find ways with technology where the community can be more involved
in a scalable way. Like I was saying, community driven development in the sense of
analytics or events drawn from the usage of NFTs and so on could infer which features the game
will develop or incentives on those NFTs to fund development of specific functionalities.
And I think that might scale. I don't know if it scales or not, but I think that it might scale.
Whereas like you pointed out, the general approach of handling community will not scale.
My biggest risk around that idea, especially people suggest the idea of DOWs to suggest
development of games. And I think it's a terrible idea. If people don't agree,
if you give people the illusion of choice and their choice isn't picked, they'll be upset.
So if they didn't have any choice in the development and it goes slightly differently,
they might hang around. If it goes completely gets them, they feel they actively kind of voted for.
They can get salty really quickly. Or if it's truly decentralized, you end up with different
communities slowly forking off, same as what you've seen already in the NFT space with other bits.
They keep making their own fork and the community gets more and more small. And the
main line of the game loses to these pockets where people didn't want the direction that
everyone else voted in. So I think it slowly chips each other away by giving too much choice
to people. And also a lot of people don't know what they want.
I think the cynic in me tends to agree with you in the sense that people, and from the experience
of dealing with the community myself, I think that people tend to not agree. But I don't know,
maybe in small pockets, maybe not small, but localized pockets, they can agree on some things.
And yeah, but basically what you pointed out is an anti-democratic view on how people work.
And yeah, I think there are always going to be challenges there of having people agree.
I see we have a couple of new speakers in here. JRP, I see you're actually a couple of hands up.
Let's see, 3XP and Midarama, Valeria Games. Why don't you go ahead and introduce yourself
since you're at the party here. Oh, perfect.
3XP, why don't you go ahead. Sorry. So yeah, Sarvesh here from 3XP. I'm sorry,
Gordon Late Twitter was trying to run me in. Hi, Juan. But you're just trying to get in
the flow of the conversation and excited to kind of hear everyone speak here.
Okay, great. And is it Midarama? Yeah, that's perfect. Yeah, thanks for having me up.
Love the conversation. Anytime I see web through gaming, I have to jump in
and just kind of listen in. But on the topic you guys were talking about earlier, I think
the number of users, when you talk about Web 3 versus Web 2, you can't compare the numbers.
Web 2 users, I think someone mentioned this, 95% or more don't spend any money. Only 5% spend money,
and then out of that 5% that spend money, most of your revenue comes from the top 2 or 3%.
Most of that actual revenue is made up from that percent. And then you compare that to Web 3,
where it's like, well, pretty much 100% of the people spend money. And on top of that,
they spend 10 to 20 times more. A whale in Web 2 is considered 10K. A whale in Web 3 is
considered 100K. So it's 10X. So not only do you have 5% spending, as opposed to,
sorry, you have 100% spending, or let's say close to 100% spending instead of 5%,
you also have that spending times 10. It just gives you some number of players and how much it
matters. That's actually a really interesting point. Footprint analytics, do you have any kind
of data to corroborate that? It seems like it would be right, but is there any kind of data
that back set up? Yes. Sorry, I just, I missed the data point there. What do you want me to
double check? The number of people that spend money in free-to-play games in Web 2,
at what percentage of the gamers actually are spending money?
Geez, I wouldn't know that one off the top of my head. I'd have to hit the quick old Google.
Normally, for Web 2, we strictly mainly focus on the straight on-chain metrics. So for something
like that, it's a little tougher for me to get. That wasn't the full question. He basically was
contrasting Web 2 and free-to-play. He claimed 95% of free-to-play players don't spend money
and then versus Web 3 where essentially it's like 90 plus percent. That's what I was curious.
He also said instead of like 10,000 being a whale on Web 2, it could be like 100,000 plus
on Web 3, which means that if Web 3 is successful, then we're going to have
to force the Web 2 people to come over because we'll have all the money.
But I was just curious on that. So I'll tell you, I did a quick chat GBT search and it says,
again, it's chat GBT, but they have their references, says the percentage of mobile gamers who spend
money on free-to-play in Web 2. According to this report, only 0.19% of mobile gamers
contribute to nearly half of all the revenue generated. But if you look at Web 3,
we can kill that one pretty quickly because you have people in Web 3 who never spend any money
and only take money out of the ecosystem and a lot of the systems are designed for that.
Initially, the point of whales spending more in Web 3 might be true, but those whales aren't
spending the fun and they're spending a way that they're expecting to get a return of an investment
on what they spent. So whilst they will be spending more, they're looking for that
investment to go up, whereas whales in Web 2, which games should be aiming for, even Web 3 games,
they're spending and they're happy that they spend that money. They don't want any of that
money back at any point because they've had the enjoyment for it. So whilst Web 3 whales are
spending more, they're looking for an ROI. So I think it's actually worse in Web 3 for that point.
Anamir, I see your hand up.
Yeah, we moved a couple of points, but on the community bit, I think as a founder, it's super
easy to be very active in your server when it has 1,000 people. It starts getting more difficult
when you hit 10,000, 50,000 people. And also, yes, as much as you want to take the community
along, there are realistic decisions that you have to make. And to Gaspard's point,
you don't want douse making all the way decision because that could mean an even bigger fire that
happens later. On the spending part, it's the spending that we're looking at in terms of
per player, if you want to call them. These are speculators. So yes, they're an important
stakeholder because they do help keep the trading volumes up. But you need to start
balancing that because these are the people who are just getting money out of it. You need
to balance that with people who will come in through organic use acquisition for free-to-play
games. Then you'll have spenders. You'll have your whales, spenders who are OK with spending
without the expectation of return. So as long as you don't have multiple segments within your
customer base, it starts running into long-term problems when you think about it from
sustainability perspective of that game, who's going to spend and who's going to earn.
One, go ahead. Yeah, I think Gaspard's point is kind of shortsighted because it talks to where
we're currently at in the space, but doesn't really kind of take into effect later on, like
long-term benefits for essentially creating an ecosystem is kind of what's happening, right?
Like right now, there is no value that can be exchanged from that 1% really that is investing
below 1% that is buying stuff and ultimately then pushing it out to other spots. And I don't
think that we have figured that out yet perfectly. I think we've seen it be done in other games. And
being able to financialize that as much as, and I agree, like is a really bad point right now.
I think it'll kind of we'll figure our way as we go. And ultimately, obviously, as we get more
gamers and we get more information on these gamers, we have like analytic tooling out there
that is working on this particular thing of being able to track what they do in game and then
be able to kind of essentially resell to them, right? I think we're going to see a lot more of that
and we'll get to a point that it's sustainable, but that is going to be a super important point.
I think one of the main selling points outside of lower cost of acquisition and higher TVLs
ideally across the board for games that hopefully happens in the next five years,
so that everybody, it just makes sense to be a Web3 game. Like it makes financial sense to do that.
You know, one of the things that I think Jordan brought up, if correct me if I'm wrong,
was kind of where why we're all in Web3 and how kind of all of the incentives align. And I think
what really stood out to me, I think, and what it means is essentially tokens, is that there's
kind of like a financial interest in the game that you're playing because you own an NFT from
it or maybe you have the token. And I'm actually curious maybe with a show of hands in your project
or if you have a comment on who has a token with their project launched or planning to launch. And
do you think it's a kind of critical part in your strategy is to actually have your project have its
What was it? Mitter Raiment, why don't you go ahead and tell me more about that?
Yeah, so we do have a token. And I think the thing with Web3 is you can separate the classes.
And Jeremy made a good point. Parallel is a great example. You look at the wheels in parallel,
and if you look at the wheels in parallel, who love playing the game, you really got to ask yourself,
are they in there for the speculation? Or are they there because they really enjoyed playing
the game and then you get into the community and you realize, damn, these people just really
love this trading card game. And so I think, yeah, because of how the past has gone, we're
very inclined to think that anyone who spends money in a Web3 game, it's purely for the
reason to make profit because probably actually being the highest daily active users. That's the
reason why people were there. But on the point about tokens, yeah, we have a token. I think
anytime you raise money through Web3, it's kind of like a Kickstarter or a GoFundMe or whatever
the case may be. They kind of operate as your initial investors, your angel round, your VC.
And for that reason, you could, and I want to be careful with the term, I don't want to call them
investors, but you understand what I'm saying. It's kind of like those people who help lift your
project, get them off the ground, and then in return, you give them tokens, they help fund
the project or make everything possible. So in return, you give them tokens, which is great.
But then on the flip side, the tokens don't have to be given out in the game. As a matter of
fact, I would say tokens being given out in the game is probably going to be a huge detriment in
terms of the long-term sustainability. There could be events like season one or a tournament
or certain events throughout the game that can give out tokens. But I think if it's part of like
how Axi was, where it's like just daily farming tokens and bot farms are being set up. And
in that event, I don't think you will have a sustainable ecosystem if you're giving out your
token inside of the game. I still think it's important. We have like a very complex tokenomics
model. I won't get into all of the details, but on the point of token, I think it's important for
an ecosystem. But I also think they should be careful how you give it out inside of the game,
if you give it out at all. And so you can make the token, for example, the only currency for your
marketplace. So if you want to trade in game assets, you got to use this token. You can
have a merch store and say anything we saw in this merch store is sold through the token.
And you need to use the token to do it. You can use the token to acquire the premium currency
for the mobile game. You can give tons of utility for your token. And that can be great
for the early investors and just for your overall ecosystem. You just have to be very careful
when giving out the token, you know, and you don't want to have a bunch of bot farms set up
and people quitting their jobs to farm it. Right. But I imagine like Gaspone and Jordan,
I'd like Jordan, but you know, that kind of the extractive nature of 2021 and 2022
of Axie Infinity and all these other games were really what the game was, where the party was at.
And kind of going forward and looking into the future, I'm just curious, is it really just a
fundraising vehicle or is it actually a kind of a long-term value that Web3 Gaming will have?
So Jordan, why don't you go Jordan first and ask for it after that.
You know, so I'd say like theoretically, most games probably shouldn't have a token and don't need one
and what you just find without them. I think that it's something you really need to justify
with the game design. I think most games in Web3 should have NFTs. I'd be interested to see how a
game would be, you know, a blockchain game without a token or NFTs. There's definitely a lot of good
answers there. But like if you design your game in a way that needs one, then you need one. Like
so with Eureka, this game is, you know, people are building this full continent, full country
and it's a real economy. It's literally just players, you know, you produce with it a
sawmill. Someone else uses that to build their gold mine. They have, you know, their gold mine is
using food from another player's farm nearby for their workers. They're taking their gold nuggets
out of the ground and depositing them in another player's bank. It's all market rates.
And so Eureka is this game of opportunity and blockchain makes that real opportunity
because you can convert out into money. It's actually fundamental to this game design
that your gold nuggets can be exchanged one to one for the token. And so, you know, in terms of like
having that mechanism within the game to give the token out, you know, most of our tokens are
the gold nugget pairs. They're buried underground. They actually have to be mined out of the ground.
And we're basically every time a gold nugget is pulled out of the ground, one to one, a token
is released into supply out of lockup. And so the actual supply of the token is completely driven
by players building and operating these gold mines successfully.
But you're not answering the question, though, of kind of the financial aspect of it, though,
kind of outside of the game. It might be using what is the market price outside of the game
and kind of dollars, for example, what I'm focused on is making the game play insulated from market
price fluctuations. What I care about is that the exchange rate in my economy for a gold nugget
to some fish or an axe or, you know, a cool gun or something, that that maintains the ecosystem
within the game, regardless of if the token price is X, Y or Z. I think that that's the thing that
games need to focus on. I don't understand. So, for example, if you have a kind of a fungible
currency that's externally traded, but within your game, you know, you can barter, I guess,
with it is what I'm hearing with other resources in your game. But the external token price,
let's say it goes to 50 cents a token. How does that not going to affect the game play inside
where it's like a gold farming? Right. So it's not a gold farming game.
It is a whole economy. Most players won't be operating gold mines. You know, you could just
be running a wagon train, shipping people, you know, the three week journey from one town to
another. There's so there's an entire economy in the game. And you could basically think of it
like the entire every every commodity in the game would to, you know, coal to every everything.
It all trades as a pair against the gold nugget within the game. So what I care about is that
you have a rate that gold nuggets get pulled out of the ground by mines. And, you know,
that it's currently three gold nuggets for an axe. And if a bunch more players start pulling
gold nuggets out of the ground, it'll become two gold nuggets for an axe because there's
inflation within the economy. That balance is what I care about. The amount of gold nuggets
for an axe doesn't change if the external world price of gold nuggets goes to fifty dollars
or fifty cents, whatever you said. The what what would happen then is the axe is also now worth
three times that. Right. Like the utility within the game is the thing that needs to say peg to
itself. Hey, guess what? Jump in on this. I'm sure you have some good insight on that.
I don't know. I feel like I'm not explaining it perfectly. I agree.
Well, I think I agree anyway. My first point would be that I think we need to get away from.
So the fact that previous games were extract extractive, that's nothing wrong with the player.
They played exactly as long as they were cheating, played exactly within the game's rules
and the game set up to allow them and in a lot of cases encourage them to do that.
When it started going downhill and Devs turned to, oh, please don't extract from our game.
That doesn't work if the rules allow it, people are going to do it. And I think that's what
games need to be aware of. It doesn't matter if you build enough community sentiment around
making sure they don't spend it. The game needs to incentivize them with hard rules,
not to take the money out and to re-spend it into the ecosystem. I think that's where
what Jordan was saying kind of comes into it. It needs to be more valuable to players
inside the game. But I do think you need to understand how much it is going to be worth in
the outside world. And I've kind of banged on about it before that you need to have a spread
of players across your ecosystem. If there's real world value, you're always going to have farmers.
But what you need is that a good percentage of your player base is only going to spend,
they're not going to take any money out. So if you had someone farming gold,
but I had a gold mine, and I wanted to make a gold plated horse, and to do that I needed to get
all your gold nuggets, I would be a spender in the game. And I would buy out someone who's
literally just playing to actually mine the gold. So it's making sure the community is spread across
those. So that there are some people maybe earning from the game because they sell items,
but you've got enough people in the games who in a traditional work to game will be happily
buying skins, happily buying items, happily the people on WoW, who buy from the gold farmers,
or buy the power leveling, because they enjoy the game. So you need to have enough people in there
willing to spend just for fun, if you are going to have a token that actually survives,
because otherwise everyone's going to keep trying to take a bit out of it. And unless you have
web two style revenue streams, you know, as in a season passes as you sell things as a studio,
you're not going to have any money to prop up the fact that tokens are going to keep leading the
ecosystem as someone pulls out gold, sells it, and then goes and buys food with it,
because that's kind of what they need the money for, rather than the gold nugget in the game.
Yeah, I'm still kind of left puzzled, because you know, I was looking at, I think on Twitter
there was somebody can review the Coinbase versus SEC, and it looks like they've closed out kind of
the oral arguments. And apparently Coinbase made a really good argument, you know, that these tokens
are not securities. And if anyone's been trying to create a token in the US and talk to lawyers,
it's extremely difficult and extremely, there's a definitely a risk there.
You have to kind of figure out, are you a utility token versus a security? And there's
just not really a compliant, like a low risk way of doing it. There's always this kind of
unknown risk that you're having to face with, you know, having a currency. And then on the same
topic, there's tons of these web three gaming tokens pushed on Twitter, where they have,
you know, multi million dollar market caps without a game. And, you know, I guess,
like personally, in my opinion, I think that, you know, if it's a kind of, you know, not a,
like a, like a Bitcoin documentary project, where they're just complete frauds, and they're just
trying to steal money. And as long as they're not, you know, those people, but they're legitimately
raising money to, you know, build a game and kind of put it into the, I don't think it's really kind
of harming a lot of people. You know, we're trying to kind of break new ground here with this web
three gaming and, you know, just having these tokens in general, you know, should not be
looked at as like a way to get rich, but they are. And it just seems like there's all these kind
of non gaming aspects to our industry that I'm trying to kind of sort out personally.
So footprint, I see you have a thought on your thoughts.
Yeah, regarding kind of like tokens and the discussion about price goes up, price goes down,
I think, you know, at the end of the day, we're kind of all talking about sustainability
within the game and thinking long term. And I think when we look at the game, I think one of
the key features we should do is segment our users between genuine users, like real people and actual
parts themselves. And then from there, see where all the value of the game is getting abstracted
from and seeing if this value being abstracted is actually from your real genuine users or from,
you know, say, leading a bunch of hints that of course, this might be a bot. So from there,
you would then reorganize how much value gets abstracted from this part of the game that may
be more dominated by bots, and then reorganize the structure to put more value into another
aspect of the game that's more dominated by more genuine users. And in this way, we can keep a
little bit more sustainable, because at least these more genuine users are more likely to then
invest what they earn from the game back into the game. So I think really one of the biggest
struggles with the tokens is really targeting your real genuine users, your real whales, just
to keep sustainability going long term, and always constantly tweaking the value of traction
from different parts of the game. Hey, Ginta, welcome back. I see you're in our speakers list
now. Why don't you intro yourself to everyone and give us your thoughts.
Hey, guys, GM, GM, or GM, wherever you are, I've been listening to the session. It's been
a really, really interesting discussion. For those of you who don't know me, I'm Nobara,
I'm Global Comms Manager for Gensokishi, which is an MMO, 3D MMORPG, coming from Japan. And it's
been really interesting to hear your perspectives on narratives in the space and how it's going.
I wanted to just kind of give a shout out to everyone in the space, because I really
appreciate the insight that everyone is bringing to this discussion. I don't know exactly what you
wanted me to share thoughts on. So if you have a specific question, please let me know.
Well, there's actually a bunch. I mean, for example, we were just talking about kind of
the tokens and kind of why are they in our industry. I also mentioned kind of the Coinbase
first SEC. Is it a security or is it a utility token? Is it going to be compliant? I mean,
I think me, that is probably one of the biggest things that could happen for industry is where,
especially for US projects, which we are, is to have a token and be kind of compliant with it.
And I think that just unlocks probably billions of dollars, to be honest, for our industry. So what
are your thoughts on that specifically? Well, I think it's really interesting to see how that
gets adopted by gaming communities specifically, because like in the case with the game that I'm
working for again, so obviously we've started from Japan, but as we're growing our community,
we need to expand on to exchanges and to projects and teams and legislators in other countries as
well. So we're trying to work constantly with a variety of countries and the regulations that
they have in place to make sure that we're compliant across the globe. Because a lot of the
times when we've come up with a campaign or we've partnered with someone or we've been listed on an
exchange, maybe someone else doesn't have access to it. So I think even though it's probably a bit of a
frustrating process, and I know that there's a lot of issues in the US around legislations and
issues with the SEC, I think it's good that this is happening now, because it's allowing us to
build with more security and better understanding of what is happening on a global scale. Because
my feeling is that in previous years, a lot of the projects and teams were quite localized
in the sense that if a project is based in the US, they're most likely to main the cater to the US
and they wouldn't do research on whether their products and what they're offering is available
in other countries. Whereas things are becoming so global now that if you manage to push out your
product to a wider audience, it means that you have taken into consideration a variety of
legislations and regulations around the globe. So I think in the case with utility tokens and so on,
the ones that we're seeing now, the ones that we're seeing on big exchanges, the ones that are
trending across the globe and not just being locally pumped, you have more security in those.
So if you're an investor or a player or whatever, you would feel a lot more confidence investing
into something that is being globally adopted rather than just local to one country.
So I think even though it may be still difficult with a lot of things, it is quite good that we're
being tested in this way, because it just means that we're going to be building with more security
and that things are going to start looking a lot better for us. And we're going to be building
trust a lot quicker. But not only it also guarantees the quality and output of the people
in the space, because in previous years, and especially when we had the rise of Web3 gaming
back in 2021, 2020, there wasn't that much restraint. There wasn't much to look into.
Whereas now, we are almost trying to compete with Web2 companies and games. So I feel like even
though we might struggle at times, it's a revolutionary time and it's quite good for us.
So very much the principle of survival of the fit is going to be in place. Thank you.
Yeah, well said. Jordan, I've seen your hand up and also haunted. Let's try to close up our
thoughts because we have our next round of speakers coming on soon. So Jordan, why don't
you go ahead. I just want to push back slightly on a part of what you said. We're talking about
these things as securities and saying people don't get hurt, which I know is probably not
what you're saying. But people have gotten really hurt by this industry. There are huge numbers.
I'm sure we've all gotten hurt by this industry when we held a token that turned out to be a
rug and we are all fortunate to be able to still be here. I think there's a fundamental problem,
and the judge in that Coinbase case addressed this, which she said it slightly differently.
These things are securities by traditional definitions of securities. They just are.
You have a centralized project. They have this asset that they own a huge amount of that
they're selling publicly to people. And the better you do your token, you try to align it
with the incentives of your project growing. You try to create this situation where if your
project as well, the token price actually gets affected. We had all these early projects where
their token didn't actually change if they got a ton of attention and that was a problem. We're
making these things more securities by traditional definitions. That's okay because we need to
change the regulation around that. Clearly, we would all agree that if there was a regulation
that said only a project where there is accountability to its founders who hold the token is allowed to
put out a token. As in doxed founders, they filed some sort of paperwork. It needs to be
way easier to do. It needs to not be this incredibly expensive, tedious process where the
SEC just gets to say no to everybody. But there should be some accountability to a project
if they are selling a token. I think that that would massively improve our industry.
It's been the wild west out here for a while. I think we agree on a lot of that. What I meant
is that obviously the bad actors are creating just a bad environment to regulate it and create
a compliant way. I posted a tweet on the space where if you think about gift cards or gift
points, loyalty points, and if they were an ERC-20, is that a security? That's the thing,
like yes in a way, right? A lot of people have been getting away with a lot of shit on this
for a while. Well, okay, I'll tell you what. I think I agree in whole that the compliant way
to do this needs to be, like I said, easy. It shouldn't kind of make a walled or a gatekeeper
that only lets the big players in. It needs to be fair and it needs to be compliant so good actors
come in there and create awesome stuff. It's not like the classic securities world is at all good
actors. There's an entire incredibly valuable market just for selling shells of ticker prices
that are already approved to be listed on exchanges and then a totally different color.
Yeah, that's exactly and that's what I think. I don't want it to be where they don't allow,
because I actually talked to the lawyer on this. It was kind of a different structure,
but like, oh, they need to be a broker dealer for this. I was like, oh, and then I actually
looked into what you have to do on that. It's like, no one's going to do that. No,
that's why there's very few. Then to actually go compliant, well, you have to go get a legal
opinion and a legal opinion is really just an opinion. Then if the SEC comes back with
just crazy things and hoops that you got to jump through, which is basically what I was saying,
is they're going to make only the big players that have a lot of money behind them to basically
enter that market. I hope it doesn't happen that way because I think we're all here and
it should be kind of a ground up innovation and not have just this really onerous issue.
I think this might even be just a USA issue. I really don't know, but I hope to see that as
the industry. I'm going to watch the court case and see what happens. I think it's going to be
another month or two before see if it proceeds or not, but we'll see. We're about to close out
our first hour and bring in some other speakers. They should be coming in now. Thank you,
everyone of our speakers that have come in so far and give us your thoughts.
Much appreciated. I hope to see you again in the future. Yeah. Co-host is going to bring in
our next round of speakers. Thank you very much. While that's happening, Abel, what do you think
in terms of, I think it was, I forgot which speaker it was, but about how your economy
kind of works and an extractive nature and your game with the token. I'm just thinking what
we're doing with crypto fights, but we would like to do with crypto fights. Just what are
your thoughts on that, I guess. I don't even know how to articulate it.
Well, I think that like someone was saying, I think who first pointed that out was Jordan,
but my thoughts tend to lean towards whomever was saying that there needs to be a balance between
the personas of the players that are taking the actions. I just know that from the feedback
from our community, oftentimes the things that they want are things that aren't actually
like sustainable in terms of game development. Yeah, they want what their own private interests
want, not what the holistic community would be beneficial, right? It's a tragedy of the
comments. Better drops, better drops, better drops. But I think that there needs, so maybe within
the game organizations that develop games within teams, there needs to also be forces that pull
towards one side and pull towards the other. So I think that devising an economy that is
sustainable and that makes sense in and of itself is a good compass. But oftentimes,
especially when you are dealing with smaller communities of very engaged players,
whales, and stuff like that, you also have some monetization objectives,
and you need to weigh those aspects of it. Your game is only
viable long term if there is a way to monetize the player base.
So you can sort of, you can't shut your eyes to, like the game needs to be viable in terms of
game design, and it needs to be viable in terms of sustaining itself such that it can continue
to be developed. And that's where I think that, although it's not really the case with us in
crypto fights, but I do think there is a space in terms of scaling that aspect. So having incentives
in such a way that you make decisions of which features to develop based on certain behaviors from
players that indirectly sort of fund development. So that's like a couple of, like a bit of a
thou aspect to developing games. I do agree with Gaspol when he was saying that we can't go full on
thou because people never agree. But I do think that it's helpful to have some aspects of that as
well. So that you can steer development in a way that's both profitable and also fair, I guess.
So, yeah, those are my thoughts on it. And I definitely think that there is a lot of asymmetry
created from having bot players, like having people. And in crypto fights, we did have that
experience firsthand in one of our previous iterations where we were giving out weapons
that had a certain backing in tokens. And we observed that kind of very weird behavior
that gave us all a bunch of weird signals. Right. But that kind of happens, like, you know,
even in World of Warcraft, you know, if you can basically farm gold and sell it externally to the
game, you know, incentives are still there. But I want to bring in Cyber Elite. I actually see,
looks like you have a token. Would you like to introduce yourself and give us your thoughts on
tokens? Cyber Elite? You there? Hello, sorry. Hi, I'm Jeffrey Monis, the co founder of Cyber Elite.
A little bit about cyber elite, we are a massive social application with competitive features
for gamers embedded with an anti cheat technology caked into the mix with biometric verification
system called gamer face. We started this journey to stop all the cheaters because they're ruining
everybody's games. So that's what we're here to do. We've created an anti cheat system. And
this is for all players from casual to professional. So I see you have a token,
has it been launched yet? Yes, the token is live on Ethereum right now.
You can essentially purchase that through Uniswap. And, you know, why did you decide to launch a
token with your project? Our token is a utility of the platform. So the token as of now is our
marketplace token. And eventually that will go into our social antics. So creating like a social
economy, a creator economy, that also ties into like being able to tip players, stake into teams,
etc, expanding like a wider eSports ecosystem. So now when people are coming to our platform,
they're able to use like the smart contract systems that automatically pay out winners.
So like, for example, in today's market, there's a lot of people that are hosting tournaments,
and they're the players, the teams are still waiting six months plus for their money. So we
use smart contracts to automatically distribute those funds after a tournament is done.
But but in terms of the like kind of the external markets, if the external markets like on I don't
know if it's on an exchange, a centralized exchange or DeFi, but if the price goes up of that token,
is it positive, neutral or negative to your project? It would be positive for the community.
Um, it would be positive for the project, sure, because it would bring more community members
into it. But essentially, this would be all for the community, we're giving the tool, we're
creating tools for the game developers, we're creating tools for the fans, we're creating
tools for the players, and they're going to utilize all this stuff, we kind of just
developed it and we're placing it there in their hands.
Hmm. I want to get to Synergy Land. Would you like to introduce yourself and give us your thoughts?
All right. Yeah, yeah, of course. So I'm just Rod. I'm the community manager
at the Synergy Land. Synergy Land is an action RPG. Our main inspiration
behind the game is Diablo and Albion Online. We right now have a farming section of the game
fully live in Testnet, which we will release once we will reset, once we release the main
net on the 22nd of February. Then in Q2, we'll have our dungeon part of the game out. And
during the remaining of the year, we'll be focusing on launching PVP, 3D pvp, pet pvp,
and possibly 5pvp. Could you just ask a question again? So is it, I know it is about tokens,
but is it more about the external markets, correct? No, it's more about what is the point
of a token in our industry and where do you see it going in the next, I don't know, couple of years.
Okay, yeah, so I think I have to answer this in two parts. So first, I think there are
too many tokens right now, in my opinion. I think there are projects that should not launch
a token or should try to integrate into an ecosystem token themselves. And this is not
because I don't think a game should have a token. I think certain games definitely need
a token and make sense for it to integrate. But I do think that some projects do not recognize
how hard it is to successfully design and launch a balanced token economy. And I feel like
some of these projects should try and just get together with some others.
The example that I come to mind is NeoToko. So NeoToko has bytes, and they are willing to work
with people to integrate their token in their game. And I'm sure there are other teams and
projects that have tokens that would be willing to do that. So maybe some projects,
at least for the first few moments of their development, they maybe should not
waste some time in developing a token and stress testing it, make sure all is balanced and ready
for a successful launch without possibly having any negative impact on the project. I would
maybe consider this if I was launching or founding a project myself today. I don't think I would
launch a token from the first moment or even the first six months. I'll be really
quite careful with that. In terms of the future, I think tokens will just have more
and more power. I think we'll end up seeing tokens everywhere, not just in gaming.
I think gaming, most of the web tree games will end up having tokens. I think there are a few
who work just fine with just NFTs and tokens will just complicate a system that could be
quite simple. And I think none of us really know what it will look like in six months,
one year, three years, five years. So that sort of thing in terms of how tokens and NFTs
will behave because as we see every single day, things change at lightning-fast speed in web tree.
So we can talk about that right now and try to think what's going to happen in six months
and then in six months, something totally different happens. But overall, I like
tokens. I feel like we're starting to get some games, be able to design balanced economies with
our tokens, starting to get some really fun and actual useful utilities with the tokens,
some balanced economies. And I think we're coming closer and closer to finding a project that
is able to make a successful, fully successful integration with a token without any bad
repercussions coming to it. I want to switch it actually into kind of a different topic that
is somewhat related to tokens, but it also we've got to think about the game and what
network or blockchain it's being run on or integrated with. And I think in our previous
space, we actually talked about kind of cross-chain interoperability. For example,
if you have a bunch of Matic and you like Matic projects, but something else comes out on Ethereum
or Solana or whatever, how does that kind of work in terms of you think the web tree player
perspective? Do you think it's going to hinder the adoption of other games or do you think it's going
to kind of help? I mean, one thing I can kind of spot right away is that there's going to be a
lot of kind of conversions going on. If you have maybe just a very diverse portfolio,
you think about people have a bank account with money in it, but when you think about
it in this way, you kind of have a wallet with many different kind of currencies, game tokens,
NFTs and whatnot. And so I'm kind of curious on our speakers here, what do you think that looks
like and how it'll work? Gintso, I'd like to hear from you on that. Gintso, are you there?
Oh, there you are. Could you just repeat the question?
The connection is a little bit bad because I'm not at home. I'm so sorry.
Oh, sure. Yeah. So if you have different blockchains and games are on different blockchains
and each player has kind of different assets, NFTs, tokens, even kind of the base blockchains
currency, how do you see like a world where there's all these different web three games on
different blockchains and how from the player's perspective, do you think that would work? Do you
think that's like going to help them adopt? So, for example, you know, you have a bunch of
polygon games and there's a game on a different blockchain. Would you be more likely to adopt
it or less likely to adopt? I'm just curious of what you think of the cross chain interoperability
aspect. Well, it seems to me that interoperability is the way to go forward. And it's
hard saying this, obviously, because Gensio is only on polygon now, but we are going to expand
onto more networks because, you know, in a world where there's such an oversaturation of the market,
there's so many teams, so many games, the space is so competitive right now. It is just impossible
and quite demanding to only have your game on one blockchain. And not just only, I think,
when we're speaking about interoperability, we're talking about the in-game assets as well. So,
you wouldn't want to be in a place where, you know, you've maybe paid for something or bought an asset
and invested into something that you can only use within that game, within that project and within
that blockchain. So, even though there are blockchains that do specialize in gaming projects like
Ronin recently has been quite successful, I feel like the only way going forward is to have that
interoperability, just for the sake of bringing in global audiences. Because regardless of our
personal preferences, there's a big disparity between the usage of blockchains in different
countries. So, as someone who's working with a lot of European teams and a lot of Asian teams,
I can see that the tools, the exchanges and the blockchains that people in those regions use
can sometimes be very, very different. And if you're trying to reach a global community,
you need to ensure that everyone who is joining you has a variety of options to do so.
And if you're collaborating with other projects that may be on other blockchains,
you also need this. So, as much as comfort there is in building on only one blockchain,
or we might feel secure with that one blockchain that we've chosen for the time being, I just
don't see it being something that is going to remain a trend. I think in 2024, probably the
majority of gains that we're going to see coming out are going to be released simultaneously
on multiple blockchains and platforms, just for the sake of global accessibility. Because
projects and teams are not localized now, we need more engagement, we need more eyes
on what we're building, what we're trying to do. So, the easier and the more accessible it is,
the better it is for everyone in terms of marketing, in terms of reachability and in terms
of compliance as well. Because if you manage to have global reach and you're okay in a variety
of countries, then it means that you're doing everything right. So, yeah, I definitely think
interoperability is the way to go forward. Yeah, Abel, when we started on Ethereum,
we were trying to kind of do something that I think very few were, was kind of layer one gaming,
and we ended up having to call it quits on Ethereum as that solution. And we looked at
Bitcoin SV, and we're actually able to achieve something that was actually pretty terrible.
And, you know, I kind of wonder with, you know, like Ronan, in my opinion, I might be wrong on
this, but when they had the big run up, and they had a lot of security issues from that,
you know, I kind of wonder if the scalability of the chain is going to become an issue
eventually. I think that's probably not the problem right now. But, you know, with Ethereum,
it might be, but do you have any thoughts on kind of this interoperability issue or question?
Yeah, I think that's probably, probably, I think this effect already happens,
that we are going to use different projects are going to use different chains for different
purposes, right? So we're talking about Bitcoin SV, and also the other day, we were talking about
with some people from scale that have zero fees, a little, it's a slightly different model, but,
and I'm sure there are other things where, where fees are very low. I mean, there are things that
you can only do in those circumstances. So if you want to push your analytics or some
metrics about real-time gameplay on chain, you can't use Ethereum, you can't even use
Polygon and stuff like that, I can't use any of that. And I do think that, like,
from, like, I don't really understand what are the use cases that are prime for Ethereum,
for example, unless it's for, like, to speculate on. Yeah, for speculation, I don't understand.
Well, that's Bitcoin, right? BTC. Yeah, right. But your original question was
like, which, what was the original question? Really?
Well, you know, there's actually another space, you know, they're actually talking about this,
you know, it's called the next big thing, interoperability in a network economy.
So I imagine that, you know, if we are going to have, you know, let's say millions of things
are on, you know, thousands, maybe tens of thousands of different, you know, blockchains,
that there's going to have to be the kind of the middleman or the lubricant between those
networks for them to trade and transfer. And it kind of looks like a foreign exchange market
on steroids, right? Right. I know where I was going with that conversation. Basically,
I think that there is a strong case to that interoperability. But there are certain use
cases that are only going to be viable on certain chains. And I think that in the long term,
that is going to determine which chains are going to end up being used the most.
And I think there was someone that said a couple of while ago that the project,
or in this case, the chains that are more willing to integrate with other chains,
are probably going to be the chains that think they are best poised to fulfill certain use cases.
So I think we're probably going to see a lot of that. And maybe the people that are going
to be pushing for this interoperability are going to be the ones that have chains that are
like better equipped to handle. And I think one of the main points that we need to think about
is that through output. So how many transactions we can handle, how much data we can stick in there.
So I think those are very, very important parts of fulfilling those use cases.
So that's from one angle, I guess, the technical angle, we could say. And then also from the
more community angle, I guess, this speculation thing is also like an aspect to it. So people
want to use chains that are popular, that have good rep. So I think these factors will likely
be playing out as we evolve. But I do think that we hear it more and more. We heard today
like that people are bridging from web to web3, and this interoperability. I also think that
account abstraction is also essentially a step towards that interoperability. Because
as soon as people start registering on your website or on your projects,
and then you handle the intricacies of which chain stuff is happening on,
that sort of opens up that are even more to experiment with putting stuff on different chains.
Right. And that's actually a good segue into kind of the next topic about how our developers
adapting to kind of the evolving demands and expectations. And in the Twitter space,
I put the BGA report. And one of the top things was essentially the onboarding friction for new
users. And I think that's definitely probably like 2021, 2022, everyone had to get kind of like
metamass and seed words. And if you talk to kind of the normies, they have absolutely no idea what
the heck they have to do this for. Like why can't they just do username and password or hit Google
log in and just start playing it. And then account abstraction is a really interesting
development that's kind of been around for a while. But you know, we're kind of maybe getting into
where kind of when I said earlier in the space is that like, there's billions of gamers.
Why are they not on web3? And I think part of it is because there's an also actually that ties
into this the stigma that the web3 space in general, like the particularly the ICO time period
has put a ton of stigma into a lot of normies thinking that, you know, crypto blockchain and
all that is just it's just a big scam and you don't need it, you know. And so I think, you know,
those kind of two things right there make me think that kind of have a education and reputation
issue, the hampering, the growth of the space. I do think account abstraction, I'm very interested
and I'm glad that we're going in that direction where we're making it kind of more web2 or
standard web2 experience. But under the hood, you know, you can kind of utilize these technologies
that, you know, don't have to kind of put them through this non standard or novel way of doing
things while still giving them all the benefits, you know. Yeah, I think that's an earlier some
gentleman was talking about that some big web2 players are coming in and they are going to fix
all the problems. And I think that if big web2 player comes in at any time, people won't have
to install Metamask to get the token. So yeah, and I think about that other point of the
reputation. So I think, like I was saying earlier, that the throughput of the network and so on,
those are factors. I also think that the reputation is almost another opportunity. So I think that
we're probably going to see and already seeing like projects or chains or games that are either
that are very concerned with the rep. So maybe painting the pitch of the chain or the project
based on sustainability, or maybe like you buy you get the tokens and they represent something
in the real world. So I think that like that itself, like the fact that the fact that it's
this problem of like, like you said, the normies have a perception that web3 is a scam, that that
problem, which impacts us all at the same time is also an opportunity. So I think that probably
that are going to be projects that are going to be tackling exactly that. So having that are going
to be very concerned with the credibility with the image that they have to paint the picture
of sustainability, of fairness. And I think that in the end, I think those things probably are going
to benefit the ecosystem. So if we all can think a little bit more specifically, I'm more thinking
about the chains and so on. And I guess the change is a couple of years ago, more towards
proof of stake and so on. We're already a movement in that direction of one, like a reaction
to the narrative that it's not sustainable environmentally and so on. So I do think that
those reactions of all the het is bad, I think that will ultimately lead us to a place where,
and you earlier you were talking about the all drama with the SEC, I think it's a little bit
that where if we are able to surpass this type of that type of criticism on that stigma,
then we're probably going to be at the stage where we are more sustainable and creative and so on,
then the alternatives in the quote unquote real economy. So I think, I think, yeah,
those things are probably just temporary setbacks. Well, you know, it kind of made me think that,
I know Ubisoft's been poking around the space. It kind of made me think, well, what if there
was kind of like an Ubi blockchain, Ubisoft blockchain, and they had like an Ubi coin,
you know, to transact on it or something. And like, what would I was just kind of asking myself that
question. I was like, God, this is kind of a letdown way, because it's essentially, you know,
what would happen or kind of what Ronan is, is there'd be a big player, you know,
in like a triple A studio, creates their own silo, right? Yeah, and their own coin,
and you have to still come into their house. And, you know, they wouldn't allow any other
non Ubisoft titles to come in, most likely, because they wouldn't need to. And, and they would kind
of get all the benefit. And sure, you know, the smaller players would have as much of a chance,
maybe, maybe they will, I don't know. But, you know, especially if there's a lot of
incentives, and they, you know, the SEC says it's okay, and maybe they register, whatever,
whatever they need to do. But I would be thinking, God, it's not really why we got into web3 gaming,
or kind of the blockchain industry, it's more of the kind of democratized access. And
I don't want to say decentralized, because there's kind of arguments for and against that. But
I think it's a really good kind of experiment. So yeah, what I'm gonna do is we had,
and sorry, before you say that, Abel, we had a couple of speakers, we had to cancel on us.
So what we're gonna do is actually cut the speaker of the space short. And I want to kind of close
with, you know, some last thoughts from our current speakers in here. So Abel, why don't you go ahead
and then synergy and gents, oh, and so I believe if you could kind of give us your closing thoughts
on 2024. Yeah, I just wanted I don't want I don't have any specific closing thoughts, but I
wanted to take a note on what you say, by referencing something that Jordan said earlier today, but because
I pulled up the website for Ronin, and it's like, it's what you're saying is like that letdown.
And I think his insight was interesting. I don't know if it's true or not, but I think it's an
interesting phrase to end the space with, which is the question is, if we are able to figure out
the development side or the game side before they are able to figure it out to the community side,
because if you open up Ronin, that's precisely like what what the time seems to be like then
wanting to cash in on the aspects of the web three community. So I think I think that's a
good thought to end this with. And yeah, I just want to thank everyone. And I really enjoy this
space and hope to be here again soon, I guess. And have a good evening. Yeah, thank you. All right,
Synergy, you're up. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. It's amazing spaces. I was actually able to be here
since the first moment. So I would love to come back one day. And yeah, we don't have much much
to say about 2024. I'm just personally excited to see some good quality web tree games coming out
and I thought we've had some games in development for over two years. And I'm excited to see those
coming out with with the full launch this year. So we can start so I can start playing with some
friends I've made in web tree. I'm just excited for that. Gintso, would you like to close your
with your thoughts? Yeah, I just wanted to first say thank you for having me. It's been an amazing
discussion. I've I've learned quite a lot. And it's always great to hear everyone's perspectives
because everyone is kind of specializing in a different thing. But I think 2024 is going
to be a year of a lot of changes and the year in which we're really kind of bringing everything
together and putting our very best in the space to really champion web three web three gaming
and everything else in the space. So it's going to be an amazing year. And I'm I think that the
people that are here and the people that spoke earlier are at the forefront of this and are the
people kind of building the space and really determining how things are going to develop from
now onwards. So quite excited to see how it's going. Hopefully we'll talk again and look back
on this discussion and see how right we all were. But until then, I'll be observing and I'll be
really interested to hear how you guys feel about the space and hopefully we'll join on another
session again together soon. Awesome. Thank you. And cyberly, what's your closing thoughts?
I believe that the future of web three and web three gaming is going to be great.
As we were talking about interoperability and multi-chain stuff and what the devs do to need
to adapt, there's just great things behind closed doors that are being worked on.
A lot of tech. And one of these initiatives is 4337. This is a smart account initiative.
This allows users to sign up with their email in an easy sign up process that ties a blockchain
wallet, whatever chain that they want to participate on, to that email address. Once
this stuff starts getting fully developed and out and pushed, and there are companies that have
this stuff readily available, if you want that information, DMS. The thing is, is once this
starts becoming more known by the developers, there's going to be less onboarding friction
because we'll be able to use the tools and then create a UX around it, UI, UX.
So it's not necessary UI, UX problem anymore. It's an education thing like Crypto Fights had said
earlier. So we need to educate everybody to get some of these tools in the hands of people building
things that are great. And let's do that. That's what 2024 is going to be. Let's make it great.
Awesome. All right. Well, thank you very much, everyone. This will wrap up our web three
gaming in 2024 and beyond. Stay tuned in about probably two weeks. We're going to have
another episode with more amazing speakers. So please follow us. And we'll put this out
when we end. You can go ahead and retweet it. All right. I'm going to end it. Appreciate it.