被忽略的人性 VS 被放大的 Fi

avatar
鉴叔
4 months ago
This article is approximately 4180 words,and reading the entire article takes about 6 minutes
GameFi破局的关键到底是什么?Game和Fi各占比多少,才更健康?这轮新生的GameFi项目中,有哪个值得重点研究,提前布局?

In recent times, various sectors of the market have blossomed in turn, with Inscription opening, Solana charging, and Depin following closely. Various signs from different sectors are sending us the same signal:

The bull market is finally getting closer

At this time, the old players who received the signal will subconsciously start thinking:

Next, which track will the sector rotate to? Which one should we focus on?

Is it the already popular L2? Or is it an inscription that is gaining momentum? Or is it GameFi, which has the potential to break out of the industry?

There are already many analysis articles and judgments on the market for the first two options, so today, I want to focus on the third option. At this time, there is still an opportunity for early layout - GameFi.

What is the key to GameFi’s breakthrough?

What is the proportion of Game and Fi to be healthier?

Which of the new GameFi projects in this round is worth focusing on and planning in advance?

1. Humanity goes to the left, GameFi goes to the right

When it comes to GameFi, I believe most people’s memories are still stuck in the last round of so-called “big hits”. On one side are 3A chain game masterpieces that have a staggering amount of financing but are still difficult to produce, and on the other side are the pie with ultra-high yields. However, no matter how the economic system is designed for P2E mining games that continue to stage a death spiral, so far, players have always been trapped in the vicious cycle of buy NFT - do tasks - obtain tokens.

What the designers of this strange circle often say is Dont expect peoples loyalty, but you can expect peoples greed. They believe that as long as they grasp greed and continue to increase their financial attributes, players will No brainers, rushing like a duck.

Yes, greed is human nature, but don’t forget that human nature is not just greed.

In Maslows hierarchy of needs theory, the need for security such as property ownership is still the lowest and lowest need. Higher-level needs include belonging, respect and self-actualization.

被忽略的人性 VS 被放大的 Fi

It may be difficult to understand in theory alone, but if you replace it with real choices in real life scenarios, it is:

Ill give you 500 yuan a day, let you take a class you dont like at all, and often work overtime, without any time for yourself...

How long can you hold on to this kind of job?

Would you give up socializing, giving up pursuing and exploring other passions for the rest of your life just to make money?

Will you suddenly wonder in the dead of night, What is the meaning of life? What happens after you make enough money?

Here, I’m not saying that it’s wrong to stand up and talk without back pain, or that making money is wrong. What I want to say is that when only a single need in human nature is satisfied, people will eventually have the idea of ​​​​migrating to other levels of needs, and they are destined to be unable to achieve this level of needs. Stayed too long. Only when needs at different levels are met will people continue to be involved in it stably.

Returning to the GameFi track, Fi should be the motivator rather than the main force for Game.

This is also the fundamental reason why the GameFi track had a high overall death rate in the last round. When a group of people are all competing for the same low-level needs, it is of course difficult to break the circle, and they will increasingly deviate from the higher-level needs of human nature, ultimately presenting an embarrassing situation where human nature moves to the left and GameFi moves to the right.

So since Fi is not the sword that breaks the circle, what is it?

To answer this question, we must first clarify what exactly is being “broken” by “breaking the circle”? Is it just a breakthrough from Web3 to Web2?

Not really! To break the circle, it is not the circle of people that is broken, but the circle of demand.

In the past, we would habitually draw a clear boundary between Web3 and Web2, thinking that Web3 is a group of people and Web2 is a group of people. The essence of breaking the circle is to let the Web2 group of people come to play GameFi, and naively thought that Fi was to attract them. A major driver of boundary crossing.

But what about reality? A Web3 person may be a clerk in the Web2 company during the day, using various Web2 software. Occasionally, he has some savings, and then tries his luck in Web3 to see if he can make a big bet; or, All in After Web3, whether you build a studio by yourself or join a project team, you will ultimately continue to use the employment mechanism and collaboration methods of Web2.

You see, there is no clear boundary between Web2 and Web3. The difference is not the people, but the needs. When a Web2 person is not short of money, his demand is the ultimate experience, and these experiences cannot be achieved in the current Web3, so he stays in Web2. But when he pays more attention to the needs of making money and privacy, he will be attracted by the rich financial gameplay and decentralized attributes of Web3 and move towards Web3.

Therefore, to break the circle, what we need to break through is not the circle of people, but the continuous upward breakthrough in Maslows 5 types of needs circles to meet the needs of the same type of people at different levels. In other words, how to make a GameFi project not only meet financial needs, but also meet social, belonging, respect and meaning needs at multiple levels is the ultimate key to breaking through the circle.

Now that the problem-solving idea comes to demand, we will follow this line and continue to dig deeper:

What quantitative indicators should be used to measure whether a product meets needs? Sufficiently compliant with human nature?

The answer is obvious – time

Regardless of Web2 or Web3, when it comes to the individual person, one thing is unchanged, limited, and fair. That is, everyone only has 24 hours a day. If we put aside the 8 hours of sleep, the time everyone can control every day is these 16 hours.

During these 16 hours, we have to eat, drink water, go to work and make money. This is the time we pay for the lowest physiological and safety needs, and the remaining time is the unified duel field for major Web2 and Web3 projects. Whoever satisfies more levels of users’ needs will be able to seize more of users’ time and immerse them in it.

被忽略的人性 VS 被放大的 Fi

Therefore, in the face of human nature and needs, there is no so-called distinction between Web2 and Web3; the competitors of major GameFi projects should not be another GameFi project.

Time is the common battlefield for all businesses in the future. Meeting multi-level needs is the key to GameFi and even the entire Web3 project breaking through the circle.

2. 70% Game+ 20% Fi+ 10% Meme

At the beginning, I mentioned that compared to L2 and various local dogs that are gaining momentum now, although the GameFi track has not improved yet, it still has the most potential to break out of the circle. Why?

Because games have long been deeply ingrained into the DNA along with human evolution and have become part of human experience.

Whether it is the portraits of ancient Egyptians playing Senet chess in unearthed cultural relics, or the ancient Olympic Games with physical confrontation as a game, or until 1952, the first computer game Noughts Crosses developed by Cambridge University scientist AS Douglas . It can be seen that although humans are changing and games are also changing, what remains unchanged is that games have always met the different needs of humans at different stages.

被忽略的人性 VS 被放大的 FiIn ancient times without electricity, playing games was undoubtedly a way to bring the tribe and its members closer together. Games gave people a stronger sense of belonging and honor to the tribe. Later, physical confrontation games were named the Olympic Games, allowing humans to promote city-state friendship and unity through this form of games. Until modern times, more and more electronic games were developed. Games bring instant feedback, The honor system, sense of achievement, social motivation and other factors make it immersive and even addictive.

Although Fi is a product of the past 10 years, Game itself has become something engraved in human DNA. It can be said that it is not that Game needs humans, but that humans cannot live without Game. Moreover, from the perspective of the needs just mentioned, other Web3 native tracks only meet one level of needs, while the GameFi track itself integrates the needs of Game and the needs of Fi to meet the more diverse needs of humans. Therefore, even if the GameFi track is not improving yet, it is undeniable that it has a higher probability of being out of the circle.

Since it is a high probability that GameFi will be out of the circle in this round, the problems it will face next are obvious:

How to match Game and Fi to be healthier? After leaving the circle, how to retain the traffic that has migrated?

After studying many GameFi failure cases, here is an optimal ratio formula to break the game - 70% Game+ 20% Fi+ 10% Meme.

The 20% Fi is easy to understand. As I said just now, it is the little motivation to push users to come in, giving users the motivation to try to create a wallet, understand what digital currency is and how to trade, but it is only motivation, and Not the main force, because making money does not occupy the entire demand level, it only accounts for 1/5 – 20%. The rest of the more advanced needs of belonging, respect and self-realization must return to the game itself.

In the past, when it came to GameFi returning to the game itself, everyone always mentioned playability, and everyone knew that fun and exciting are the last words. But what is fun? What is the standard of stimulation? How are they quantified?

Thousands of people have different views, and perceptual words such as “fun” and “stimulating” are too vague and not precise enough.

A more accurate quantitative indicator should be - immersion time.

We all know that attention is where the time is, so how can we keep our attention at a stable level for a long time?

The attention curve of Lucy Jo Palladino, a Ph.D. in psychology from the United States, may give us some inspiration:

被忽略的人性 VS 被放大的 Fi

It can be seen that human attention is closely related to the external stimulation received. In this inverted U-shaped attention curve, when the stimulation level is too low, human attention is the worst and there is insufficient motivation to do things. Corresponding to the GameFi scene, When the game itself is too simple, players will naturally be unable to focus and immerse themselves in it.

On the contrary, when the stimulation is excessive, that is, when too many economic models with high returns, high risks, and relatively high thresholds such as Fi are added, the players adrenaline secretion level will be too high, which will also lead to excessive excitement, nervousness, and fear. Emotions will eventually leave.

Therefore, based on the power of 20% Fi, we need to put 70% of the focus on the stimulation points and rhythm design of the game itself, changing from the original indicator of monitoring the players gold-making efficiency to the indicator of monitoring the players immersion time.

For example, let go of your obsession with whether players make money, and just observe whether the game itself can keep players immersed for at least 3 hours a day?

For example, try adding some visual and auditory information to test whether players are more immersed? Compared with Hellbound and Uncharted, the information increment of the latter is obviously higher than that of the former, and it is also easier to immerse.

For another example, can 10% of Meme elements be added so that players can not only play, but also create, transform from participants to creators, and then find similar people?

In the past, we cared too much about whether players made money and whether they were willing to invest again, but in fact we forgot that attention itself is money.

Return 70% of the effort to the game itself to let players immerse themselves first, then use 20% Fi to drive new players in, and finally use 10% Meme to allow players to find similar people and feel the meaning of self-realization when creating. Perhaps, this kind of healthier Proportion is the basis for breaking the game and retaining users.

3. From 0 to 1 is innovation, 1+ 1+ 1>∞ is also innovation

After writing the theory, the final goal is to return to the most practical issue:

This round, which project should be arranged in advance? Which project is the most innovative and has the potential to break the circle?

To answer this question, we must first clarify what innovation is?

In the last round, whether GameFi project developers or players, Dole finally looked for those innovative projects from 0 to 1, whether it is 3A masterpieces or P2E, they always bet on those new models that they have never seen or played before. ,New thing.

Yes, this thinking model is correct, but there is a problem here. “New” = not historically verified = high risk = everyone accompanies the project team to cross the river by feeling the stones = the money invested becomes the trial and error of the project team cost.

It is true to innovate, but it does not have to be completely from 0 to 1, nor does it have to be a big production or 3A. Perhaps, the combination innovation of 1+ 1+ 1 is the new trend of this round of GameFi innovation.

This point was inspired by a chain game I was playing recently - Cards Ahoy hereinafter referred to as CA. This game just ended its second beta in November, and the data is very good, and will start its third beta in mid-January. It is not a 3A masterpiece that burns money, nor is it an unprecedented type that is absolutely innovated from 0 to 1. What inspires me is that it combines and splices together various needs that have been verified. , and finally established an inner loop.

CA is a card game with a Meme style. It takes 60 seconds to get started easily. But it is not just a card game. The game includes daily battles, asynchronous battles and other auto-chess gameplay. As I said above, the key to determining whether this round of GameFi projects can make it out of the circle is diversification. The satisfaction of needs comes back to the game. Behind every game form and gameplay is a wave of fixed needs. When the two forms are combined and refined 1+1, the two waves of needs behind them will be met. It also solves the problems and shortcomings caused by a single form.

被忽略的人性 VS 被放大的 Fi

被忽略的人性 VS 被放大的 Fi

For example, CA has strongly integrated auto-chess and card gameplay, which not only reduces the difficulty for users to get started, but also retains the fun of card game strategy and card grouping, ultimately showing the effect of 1+1>2. There are many successful cases in the history of game development for innovations that combine two proven gameplay methods, such as: Don’t Starve (survival + construction + Roguelike), Clash Royale (simplified RTS + cards), Overwatch (FPS) +MOBA), Assassins Creed 4 Black Flag (RPG adventure + naval battle), etc.

After experiencing the adventure and radicalness of the last round of GameFi track, players have also learned skills in this cycle. Compared with projects that have always been trying to make a big pie, we prefer small and beautiful games that can be participated in immediately after buying NFT; Compared to the unknown from 0 to 1, we prefer the familiar gameplay in Web2 plus the economic model of Web3; compared to the grand map and complex gameplay, we prefer simplicity, speed, and fun.

This is also the reason why I am optimistic about the game CA. It is practicing a 1+ 1+ 1 type of combined innovation, which not only draws on the successful cases of combined innovation in the history of Web2 games, but also combines the gameplay of Fi in Web3. Joined in to make every virtual prop in the game NFT, and the pricing and market control are based on the players needs based on the game mechanism, rather than the product pricing the game, truly providing game investment (including time, money, social interaction relationship) value quantification and transaction channels.

被忽略的人性 VS 被放大的 Fi

After experiencing the closed beta, it does feel simpler and easier to use than other chain games. It can even be said to be superior. The American cartoon style provides a hotbed for the growth and co-creation of Meme, and the gameplay is also completely closed-loop. According to the official DC, the total number of reservations for the public beta during the cold start event in September exceeded 1.2 million. During the 10-day deletion test in November 2023, nearly 25,000 users participated in the internal test, with a total online time of nearly 180,000 hours, more than 40 million collision data, and a cumulative transaction volume of more than 210,000 TUSD (test currency). , equivalent to USDT), the retention rate exceeded 47% in the ten days after the test. In addition, during this test, the highest transaction price of a single card NFT in the trading market reached 600 USDT. Generally speaking, the internal test data performs well among the current blockchain games.

被忽略的人性 VS 被放大的 Fi

In addition to having enough gameplay, this innovative 1+ 1+ 1 combination game also has a very big advantage - it is fair and low-risk. We all know that the last round of chain game projects with good backgrounds had long RD cycles and were either difficult to produce or ran away, while those with poor backgrounds either had problems with the exit mechanism or tricked people directly from the beginning of NFT. It was not easy to succeed. Those with a good background and good experience have to work on a first-come, first-served basis. Whether you make money or not depends entirely on the timing of your participation.

But this kind of 1+ 1+ 1 combination micro-innovation project is different, because the perspective of such projects is often a verified need, and then continuously + 1 integrates new gameplay. In this way, The initial investment cycle is relatively short, and the content is delivered in advance and can be fully experienced after it goes online. People who enter early can buy NFTs and compete. If the strategy is well designed, there will be profits. Even if you enter late, you are not afraid of taking over. After all, card games rely on continuous operation and gameplay design. As long as new cards are continuously invested and old cards are combined to form new gameplay, an internal loop can be built. In this way, no matter when you enter the game, it will be relatively fair and the risks of participation will be Also relatively small.

被忽略的人性 VS 被放大的 Fi

Therefore, from the perspective of demand satisfaction, CA is the most humane and easiest to get out of all the new chain games I have seen so far. It can be said that the basic market can reach 70 points. The next step is to see how it designs 20% Fi gives Web2 players the motivation to cross this boundary.

First in terms of game assets:

Cards Ahoy has previously released MEME VIP PASS, which is divided into four levels: white, purple, gold, and black based on Holder rights and rarity, and was given to OG players and community contributors through Freemint in the early stages.

It is not difficult to see in the game’s economic system that PASS is at the core of the game’s economic system. In the previous two game tests, airdrops of game tokens, ice crystal keys and other rights were obtained through PASS pledge. As for PASS, a freemint NFT, the current floor price of ordinary white cards has reached 0.3 E, but it is still undervalued compared to other games of the same period, and there are expectations for airdrops such as tokens and game NFTs in the future.

In addition, fromCA’s white paperFrom the looks of it, it has indeed put a lot of effort into the economic model. From the perspective of past chain games, economic systems that only focus on token output will often face accumulating token selling pressure. These accumulated selling pressures will cause the project team to spend a lot of energy on monitoring and maintaining token prices rather than on gameplay design. At the same time, players also need to constantly observe currency prices and adjust their positions instead of enjoying the fun brought by chain games. CA has optimized this point and added diversified output, not just tokens, but also NFTs.

被忽略的人性 VS 被放大的 Fi

Only when the output channels are more diversified, the game play methods are more diverse, and the consumption scenarios are richer, can a healthier and fairer Fi attract enough new traffic influx and experience. After the traffic comes in, how to retain it is the fundamental measure of the life cycle of a game.

It is worth noting that after the second test, the CA economic system made a major update and adjustment, decoupling the value of the CAC token and giving it the function of purchasing season blind boxes. Coupled with the card alchemy system in the game, you can already feel the flywheel turning. In addition, CA’s MEME VIP PASS card has also been enhanced a lot, which can be said to be the core shovel for playing games. During the third test period, in-game orange and purple cards are produced in limited quantities, so entering early will bring certain advantages to players.

In terms of breaking the circle, the publishing platform behind CA is Metalist Game. The team members come from first-line game manufacturers such as Tencent, NetEase, Ubisoft, and Blizzard. The official website partner information can also be seen on Binance, OKX, NetEase, Associated Press, and Everlasting Tribulation. Wujiang and other leading Web2 Web3 manufacturers indicate that they have strong channel resources and the ability to break through the circle on both sides.

被忽略的人性 VS 被放大的 Fi

In terms of game mechanics, CA has also made preparations to handle the large traffic of Web2. On the one hand, the game is easy to learn and can be played anytime and anywhere. Similar to Clash Royale, there are hundreds of millions of potential players; on the other hand, after the third test, it has been planned The guild system and the comeback arena, and the gameplay of using 1 U to earn 10 W U will also be very attractive in Web2.

In general, the CA game has corresponding strategies and solutions from the potential of leaving the circle, to the health of Fi design, to how to retain migratory traffic after leaving the circle. It is reported that there will be more in the future. There are more surprises and innovations coming out.

If innovations from 0 to 1 are more likely to produce hits, then 1+ 1+ 1 combined innovations like Cards Ahoy will be more longevity. After all, every 1 is followed by A demand that has been verified, and then continuously superimposed and integrated, is likely to present a scenario of 1+ 1+ 1>∞. This is also the innovation I want to see in this round of GameFi track.

Therefore, if you want to find some targets for early layout in this round of GameFi track, you can look for multi-element Web3 games like Cards Ahoy that are light on investment, heavy on operation, micro-innovative, and more viable.

After all, only by surviving can you have more possibilities. Time is not only the common battlefield for all future businesses, but also the test standard for the vitality of all future products.

write at the end

When a tornado comes, no matter how unpredictable and stormy the surroundings are, there is always a core point that remains intact and can clearly see the restlessness around it. In the last cycle, if we were all too caught up in the wind and ended up being swept away, this round, we might as well try to return to the most essential center and wait for the wind to come.

Unfortunately, we don’t know how long it will take for the winds to pick up, but luckily, we now know the name of the center of the tornado – “Humanity.”

No matter what the type of Game is, no matter what the mode of Fi is, among the various permutations and combinations, there is always one that is unbiased and just meets most of the needs of human nature. Find it, lay it out, and utilize it. .

Original article, author:鉴叔。Reprint/Content Collaboration/For Reporting, Please Contact report@odaily.email;Illegal reprinting must be punished by law.

ODAILY reminds readers to establish correct monetary and investment concepts, rationally view blockchain, and effectively improve risk awareness; We can actively report and report any illegal or criminal clues discovered to relevant departments.

Recommended Reading
Editor’s Picks