Play to earn economies as base layer protocols for games

We believe P2E games should be careful about designing incentive structures that are based on gameplay alone. By doing so, they expose themselves to the risk of skewing their membership towards mercenaries, who are more likely to jump from game to game in search for higher returns (similar to how yield farmers jump from farm to farm in DeFi protoco... See more

While the legacy metrics place an emphasis on “how many players does your game have”, we believe P2E ecosystems need to focus on “who are the players and contributors”. As such we highly encourage P2E ecosystems to carefully curate it’s early community members and players. This can be done via manual whitelisting and other measures such as gated pa... See more

Culture building — “Come for the culture, stay for the ownership.”

We believe getting worldbuilding, culture, and incentive design right is mission-critical for building a thriving P2E economy.

By considering P2E economies as the economic and social base layers for an entire ecosystem of games, we believe that building a P2E ecosystem is less about game development and much more about worldbuilding, culture, and incentive design of the underlying economy.

For economies to be sustainable, the sinks need to take more of the token supply out of the economy than the faucets that bring the token into the system, otherwise, there will be natural downward price pressure as supply increases over time.

(eg. SLP earned by completing quests or battles)

-Faucets inject asset supply into an economy

(eg. SLP burned through Axie breeding fees; breeding is incentivized in general to build stronger teams and obtain higher rewards)

-Sinks take supply of an asset out of an economy