两年半，燒掉幻想：一個SocialFi項目的失敗自白

Original Author: kipit

Original Compilation: Luffy, Foresight News

TL;DR

• All angel and seed round investors will receive a full refund of principal plus interest, with investment funds returned in full via the original channels.
• Over two and a half years, Fantasy operated entirely on its own revenue, returning approximately $20 million to the community cumulatively.
• The core lesson we learned over these two and a half years is: If a product prioritizes economic incentives above all else, it first attracts speculators, not users. This principle applies not only to blockchain card games but is also the fundamental reason why most social tokens and early token projects struggle.

The decision to shut down Fantasy was not impulsive. We spent months exploring all possible paths, talking to people we trust, and seriously discussing pivots. We ultimately reached a consensus: we did not have enough conviction to continue. So, we chose to end things responsibly and let it close with dignity.

This article is a post-mortem: what we built, why we failed, and what new insights we gained about social products, cryptocurrency, and tokens along the way. We are not the first team to try this path, and we certainly won't be the last. If these experiences can help future builders avoid the pitfalls we encountered, then this entrepreneurial journey will have held value.

What We Built

For two and a half years, Fantasy was entirely self-sustaining through its own revenue. Although the project completed a $5.6 million funding round led by Dragonfly, the team operated without touching any of that investment capital. Few projects in the crypto space can claim this, and we are deeply proud of it.

The core data on value returned to the community is clear:

• Distributed 2,665 ETH (~$8 million) to regular players
• Distributed 1,078 ETH (~$3.2 million) to top creators/influencers
• Leveraged the Blast ecosystem, distributing a total of $12.2 million in ecosystem incentives to all players and creators
• Including Blast rewards, 86% of players ended up profitable

Overall, Fantasy returned significantly more value to the community than it extracted, making this the project's most valuable achievement.

We built one of the most viral and sticky products within the social crypto niche. We introduced novel mechanisms: industry mindshare influence scores, social graph prediction markets, lightweight free-to-play modes, and more.

We consistently iterated quickly and shipped products efficiently. Yet, even so, we couldn't break past our growth ceiling.

The Core Reason for Fantasy's Failure

There is one core reason for our failure: We tried to place cryptocurrency on a foundation that was not originally built for it.

Trading card games have a proven business model. Magic: The Gathering, Pokémon, and Yu-Gi-Oh! are globally popular, enduring top-tier entertainment IPs. Players are passionate about collecting, trading, and battling with cards, and their audience base is massive.

But every crypto card game has ultimately failed, from TopShot and Sorare to us. This is no coincidence; it is a structural flaw in the sector.

The core logic of traditional top-tier card games is to make a great game first, and treat financial aspects as secondary. Players initially acquire cards for the fun of gameplay. The financial premium attached to cards is a natural byproduct of a mature game design and a thriving community ecology – it is not the primary reason users join.

Crypto card games completely reverse this logic: cards become financial speculation targets first, and the fun of the game becomes secondary. This attracts not players who love the game, but speculators hoping to profit from card trading. The motivations of these two groups are entirely different.

Once a project is financialized from its inception, all subsequent operational decisions become constrained. You cannot freely optimize gameplay, as any rule adjustment directly impacts card prices. You are hesitant to launch new game modes to avoid redistributing community benefits. Eventually, the team stops focusing on refining the game content and is forced to become managers of a financial instrument. This was the industry dilemma we found ourselves in.

We recognized this problem early on and tried our best to break the cycle. We introduced the Arena mode to lower asset holding barriers, built lightweight traffic acquisition channels, opened free-to-play entry points, and even completely removed the NFT asset system to pivot towards a social prediction market. Each adjustment aimed to return to the "game-first" principle, but we ultimately couldn't reverse the overall negative trend.

The decline of the Blast ecosystem further exacerbated our difficulties. At its peak, Blast saw massive hype, and a wave of users flooded into Fantasy, hoping to secure rumored large-scale ecosystem airdrops. In the first month after our mainnet launch, revenue peaked, accounting for 70% of the project's total lifetime revenue.

This "peak at launch" trajectory made all subsequent operations a struggle against decline. Instead of methodically planning for long-term growth, the team was forced to passively manage the inevitable drop in traffic and hype after the initial excitement faded.

Financialization Fundamentally Changes the User Base

This common industry malady is everywhere in crypto. Social tokens were originally envisioned to reinvent the connection between creators and their fans. Yet, almost all such attempts have failed spectacularly for the same reason: true fans follow a creator because they appreciate their work, ideas, and community atmosphere – not purely for financial gain.

Once you insert a token's price volatility between the fan and the content they love, the pure emotional connection becomes corrupted. The most active participants in the community shift from loyal fans to short-term traders.

This is not a minor detail; it is the core constraint hindering the sector's development.

The crypto industry excels at designing incentive mechanisms and aligning participants' consensus – this is its core strength. But a common misconception exists: that simply layering financial incentives on top of traditional internet products, games, or social communities can upgrade the business model.

The reality is the opposite: adding financial attributes fundamentally changes the product's nature, and in most cases, it severely undermines its core value.

Trying to replicate successful web2 products with crypto and achieve scale won't work. Financial attributes are never just an add-on; they directly reshape the user base structure and their initial motivations for joining.

Deep Thoughts on Project Tokens

This logic applies not just to consumer products but also to crypto startups themselves.

Our team never issued a project native token. Despite considering it multiple times, we always chose not to. The reason is simple: issuing a token before reaching substantive development milestones is irresponsible. 95% of tokens see their price decline after listing. We firmly resisted the practice of launching a token knowing its likely fate, just to capitalize on the market.

Looking at various token launches in this market cycle, I increasingly believe that the launch mechanics of most projects are fundamentally flawed.

Issuing a token before having a working product or stable market demand is inherently wrong. I used to think traditional financial regulations were too strict, but now I fully understand their underlying logic: strict regulation protects ordinary investors from immature startups lacking commercial viability. The crypto industry skips this risk filter, and the entire sector is paying the price.

Rushing to launch a token before validating product-market fit does far more harm than good to the project. After launching, the team's attention focuses on the token price, and regular users only watch price charts. No one concentrates on product development, and the project stagnates entirely.

Even Across Protocol, a high-quality project with real revenue and steady growth, has publicly stated that having a token brought more negative impacts than actual value. This conclusion deserves deep consideration by the entire industry.

The well-performing token projects this cycle are exceptions, not the rule: projects like Hyperliquid, Pump, and Jupiter built mature business systems and achieved stable revenue first. They used platform profits for token buybacks and value accrual. Only after establishing real strength did they launch their tokens, backed by genuine conviction.

The DePIN sector is one of the few structural exceptions, but early batches of DePIN projects launched with inflated valuations that wouldn't hold up in today's market. Furthermore, the sector still lacks a universally recognized, long-term successful benchmark case.

Similar to financialized card games, projects that launch tokens too early easily fall into a vicious cycle. The high market expectations tied to the token severely constrain a startup's ability to flexibly experiment and find its correct development path.

Full Refund for Investors

All angel and seed round investors in Fantasy will receive a 100% full refund, with their entire investment returned via the original channels.

The reason we can confidently do this is because our operations were entirely self-sufficient; we never used external investment funds. Our investors initially backed us because they believed the project could grow into a valuable, multi-billion dollar enterprise. Since the project is now unable to achieve that goal, and we lack the conviction to use their funds for a pivot we are not fully committed to, returning the capital is the right thing to do.

We deeply value the trust our investors placed in us and will not waste that trust on blind attempts we ourselves do not believe in.

To Our Creators

Our sincere thanks to all of you! When our business model was unproven, you trusted us with your name and influence to build on our platform. You collectively earned over $3.2 million on the platform. We hope this return was worthy of the trust you placed in us.

To Our Community Users

Every community user made Fantasy what it was. All the impressive data mentioned above would not have been possible without your strong support. We strived to build the most fun social game in the crypto space, and for a time, we succeeded. Thank you for your day-to-day companionship, for actively building decks, and for participating in tournaments.

It's unfortunate we couldn't meet your expectations. We understand everyone's disappointment and regret, and we accept this outcome.

If someone still believes in a multi-billion dollar business idea behind Fantasy, they are free to pursue it. The opportunity in this sector is open and barrier-free. We are willing to share all our hard-earned experience and lessons learned without reservation.

We encountered many industry barriers that couldn't be easily overcome. Future builders don't need to repeat our mistakes and learn them the hard way. We hope you can adopt new development strategies, avoid our missteps, and build a better product than we did.

Writing this post-mortem is not a formal farewell; it is a practical reference for future entrepreneurs.

Currently, crypto card games have inherent limitations for growth. Social products that prioritize financial attributes are destined to attract speculators, not loyal fans. Launching a token prematurely, without a product that has demonstrated market demand, mostly hinders a project's development.

These were never just our project's difficulties; they are widespread pain points in the entire crypto industry. These problems are not unsolvable, but simply copying old models won't work.

We were not the first to try, and we certainly won't be the last. The most precious trait of the crypto industry is its courage to explore and experiment boldly. Entrepreneurial ventures are inherently uncertain, but every attempt holds unique value.

Finally, thank you again to everyone who once trusted and supported us.