Play to earn economies as base layer protocols for games

-Faucets inject asset supply into an economy

-IP: eg. How should the intellectual property of the ecosystem be licensed?

-Economic policies: eg. In-game asset supply, balancing mechanisms

Through token incentives and community ownership, we are able to unbundle the role of a publisher through a bottom-up set of contributors, players, and guilds which instead drive worldbuilding, product development, and governance.

-Monetization: eg. value accrual mechanisms, transaction fees

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

Player retention in gaming is everything. Despite this, publishers optimize for company profit at the cost of player value and well-being. They are able to do this due to their end-to-end ownership and control over the development, distribution, and management of games.

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.

The core vision behind play to earn (P2E) is to address these issues by offering real player ownership of in-game assets and their surrounding world, ultimately creating greater stickiness and retention of communities.