The gaming landscape is evolving, caught in the dance between legacy systems and the emerging world of decentralized technology. Games used to be measured primarily by narrative depth and visual fidelity, but now, thanks to blockchain, the metrics of success are shifting. This conversation came alive during the recent BeInCrypto panel titled “Traditional Studios vs. Blockchain: Can There Be Common Ground?” moderated by Alevtina Labyuk, Chief Strategic Partnerships Officer at BeInCrypto.
Gathering insights from industry figures like Mark Rydon, Co-Founder of Aethir, and Inal Kardan, Director of Gaming at TON Foundation, the discussion painted a complex picture. Their main takeaway? Blockchain doesn’t have to upend traditional gaming fundamentals; it simply broadens the possibilities if developers can convincingly demonstrate its value to a rather skeptical audience.
The Evolution of Gaming Success
When it comes to the gaming ecosystem, many players cling to familiar measures of success. Alevtina Labyuk kickstarted the discussion by offering a candid reflection on how stagnant traditional gaming can be: “Despite having a foot in the industry 15 years ago, I can say, not much has changed in the fundamentals of gaming success. The story and the graphics were everything. Now, thanks to blockchain and mobile technology, we’re introducing new factors to this equation.” This commentary encapsulates the reality that gameplay today is no longer solely about immersive storylines. Players increasingly prioritize user agency, economic participation, and digital ownership.
However, the panelists were unified in recognizing a crucial commonality: the average gamer remains indifferent to underlying technology. The pursuit of recognizable achievement in a game is often at odds with the technological intricacies that power it. The challenge remains—how can blockchain maintain a meaningful presence without overshadowing the core enjoyment derived from gaming?
Transforming Metrics of Success
The conversation hinted at a fundamental shift in how we gauge success in gaming. Traditional metrics of reviews and graphics quality are now being juxtaposed with newer measures, such as user experience and economic dynamics. Blockchain introduces consumer engagement as a core gamer experience, encapsulating economic participation and individual ownership in a way that can complement existing gaming frameworks. The current landscape is not only about buying games anymore; it’s also about buying assets and establishing ownership in digital arenas.
The bottom line is that players generally want engaging experiences, and if blockchain can enhance that without complicating things, it stands a chance of being embraced. However, it must be crafted as an ancillary feature rather than the central selling point. Developers who can integrate this technology seamlessly may pave the way for its acceptance.
The 95% Problem: Indifference to Blockchain
Many players are curious about blockchain’s potential, yet a staggering 95% are seemingly unaffected by it, as Inal Kardan articulated: “Players don’t need blockchain. They generally have one motive—fun.” This assertion underlines an essential reality: games should primarily focus on providing enjoyment, and if blockchain elements become apparent, they must enrich rather than detract from that experience.
If security or ownership becomes relevant, however, the indifference can shift. The power of blockchain becomes understood when asset security becomes paramount. For instance, within the popular Telegram ecosystem, millions enjoy trading simple digital tokens, but a dedicated segment employs smart contracts to manage, secure, and ensure uniqueness in these transactions. This hints at a nuanced understanding of when players genuinely start to value blockchain technology.
Navigating Centralization Risks
The risks associated with centralized systems represent one of the strongest arguments for blockchain’s incorporation into gaming. Mark Rydon shared notable insights from the CS:GO skins market, valued at a staggering $6 billion, yet entirely governed by one developer. This centralized control demonstrated the pitfalls of reliance on a singular authority. Recently, Valve imposed new rules that allowed lower-tier skins to be exchanged for more valuable ones, drastically inflating the availability of higher-tier items and effectively collapsing their market value. Users were left with a significant loss—an experience many would agree is often indicative of centralized systems.
This starkly highlights why decentralized solutions are being sought. In a blockchain-supported environment, transactions and ownership rules are codified in immutable smart contracts that prevent unilateral changes to asset management. This security fosters a sense of trust and, by extension, value among players.
Real-World Lessons from CS:GO
Rydon’s example encapsulates the urgent necessity for a shift in how ownership is viewed in the gaming realm. Centralized economies are at heightened risk because a single entity defines the entire ecosystem. When developers have the power to alter the terms of engagement, the very assets players have invested in become at risk. Blockchain circumvents this vulnerability, promising an immutable ledger that secures players’ economic interests without allowing for rapid devaluation.
This integrated security transforms blockchain from a speculative idea into a practical solution that enhances player trust and maintains value. Gamers who seek transparency will find blockchain a worthy ally. Developers who prioritize creating this trust will sustain their games’ value within rapidly evolving digital economies.
Studio Commitment: Builders versus Talkers
As discussions progressed, the conversation pivoted to traditional studios like Sega and Ubisoft, showcasing their fumbling attempts at blockchain adoption. Alevtina Labyuk posed a critical query: How can these giants integrate blockchain without undermining the centralized control they’ve long valued? Inal Kardan was less than optimistic, stating, “Most are merely scratching the surface. They drift from one blockchain to another, seeking grants while lacking genuine substance. This isn’t how games should be developed. Some companies are committed; others are not.”
This skepticism illustrates the misalignment between the ultimate goal of building great games and merely seeking financial gain from technologies. Quite simply, efforts that focus on extracting resources do not bode well for sustained innovation.
Short-Term Thinking in Blockchain Integration
This fixation on immediate financial gain overshadows longer-term benefits, tying Web3 gaming to speculative motives rather than robust gameplay. As Kardan succinctly summarized, the industry’s majority is merely about accessing funding from protocols, not prioritizing genuine player experience. What’s alarming, however, is that this focus risk taints Web3’s reputation as a speculative space rather than one of innovation.
Continuous campaigns for financial extraction — as opposed to authentically expanding gameplay through innovative approaches — could ultimately stifle the development of grounded gaming experiences. If these corporations wish to capitalize on blockchain’s potential, they first need to formulate a legitimate strategy to turn the player experience into a central concern.
Developer Responsibilities for Authentic Use Cases
As the dialogue continued, the panelists reached a consensus: developers bear the responsibility of illustrating real-world applications for blockchain in gaming. Mark Rydon placed the onus on innovators, suggesting that blockbuster titles like GTA 6 could be the game-changer needed to highlight blockchain’s viability. The intention is clear—developers need to prove to players that blockchain is not just a fleeting trend or a cash grab, but a technology that can genuinely enrich the gaming experience.
Successful integration of blockchain needs to address a real player problem, transforming the technology from a mere gimmick into a useful instrument for enhancing gameplay. Without this, Web3 gaming risks being viewed perpetually as an empty search for value rather than a technological step forward.
Addressing Practical Friction Points
Despite the progressive strides in Web3 technology, Inal Kardan raised concerns about the practical challenges that still hinder widespread adoption. With mobile ecosystems’ limitations and platform restrictions, he pointed to significant barriers that impact user experiences:
- Platform Restrictions: Apps on platforms like Telegram often don’t facilitate straightforward transactions for digital assets, leading to a cumbersome process for users.
- Payment Barriers: Many scenarios restrict direct crypto payment options, limiting the ease and appeal for new users.
- Trading Limitations: Navigating these transactions within mini-apps remains cumbersome or entirely prohibited, making onboarding for everyday users challenging.
As Kardan aptly concluded, “Why should Web2 studios relinquish their control?” Traditional developers have streamlined control across various domains, from platform management to distribution, leaving little incentive to decentralize.
What’s Next?
The panel wrapped up with a forward-looking perspective. Mark Rydon anticipates a swing toward AI-generated content, yielding deeper customizations and automated pipelines. In contrast, Inal Kardan believes while AI will indeed dominate, blockchain will emerge as one of several monetization routes available to mainstream developers.
The essence of the conversation was clear: blockchain should enhance, not replace, the foundations of great gaming. The common ground between traditional gaming and blockchain remains an opportunity rich with potential. Still, until legacy studios commit to authentically decentralizing their approaches and developers focus on real value creation that resonates with the player experience, this common ground will remain aspirational, not factual.
