I've been running into ads that promise the "play to earn" games even before the pandemic. Some of them featured a game that all I needed was to merge this and that or pop bubbles and boom--I get money! I remembered finding ways to make money online and they encouraged gambling. There's always the rule of thumb in finances--if it's too good to be true then run from it. It reminds me of how I get irritated by those fake game ads and now these new fake game ads? It's already bad enough I was duped into downloading Gardenscape with the fake ads. Now, these fake ads are probably the worst offenders over mobile demos that irritate us with annoying display of stupidity.
Any gamer who probably owned a Playstation 3 or an XBox 360 (or any seventh generation console) would remember having to buy credits to buy extra content. A buyer may have had to buy Playstation Points (or the like) to purchase additional content. Later, there's the pay to play online which a person buys a whole year pass to play online. I think it's costly but they're running a business. For example, I think the amount of maintenance their servers have are now much higher because of the prevalence of e-Sports and tournaments. Online communities are getting bigger. It becomes harder to maintain so they need more money to maintain the servers. It's because an ongoing server is an operations expense. The gaming community should pay more money if they expect better servers. No server is ever maintained for free. Just think of why do you have to pay higher to get better Internet connection? Why do you think high quality Internet is costly? It's not just supply and demand.. It's also the cost of operations that also affect the price of the service.
I heard of the so-called "life-changing" with Axie Infinity. Just reading this made me think of why it's too good to be true:
But some gaming industry analysts say its business model is unsustainable, pointing to the need for new players to keep money coming in.
Jonathan Teplitsky of blockchain firm Horizen Labs warned most play-to-earn games were a "house of cards", fuelled by "hype and price speculation"."This entire system works well while the Axie company is flush with cash and willing to fuel a massive marketing machine," he said."If Axie wants to survive the next market crash, they will need to build some real-world utility into their game that does not depend on the mood of the markets."Sky Mavis co-founder and chief executive Trung Nguyen told AFP Axie Infinity, which is partly owned by players, was "not a zero sum game"."There are a lot of things other than monetary value that people can get from the game."
A gaming company doesn't get rich by giving away cash to its players. In fact, even the players know that they must buy at least three Axies. In a Ponzi scheme--you need to give in some money before you get into it, right? A pyramid scheme happens that some people will initially get their money back. In a scam, I got conned by the person who initially paid me back but no longer paid me back after the second transaction. I believe that the "play-to-earn" gimmick also works in the same way. Some people will initially get paid back but it wouldn't be sustainable. Does Axie Infinity (or any gaming company offering such a gimmick for that matter) always have a fresh supply of money to give back to the players? If it has stocks--I definitely wouldn't buy it in contrast to buying stocks from established software companies.
Gaming tournaments that give away prize money don't happen all the time. Why do you think that e-athletes must compete before the money is given? It's because the companies running them have to carefully assess if they're willing to give away such money to the winners? Notice that only the winners get the prize money while the losers don't get any money? That's why I believe that e-athletes have other sources of income when they're not competing. For all we know, their main source of business must be an Internet cafe, a restaurant, or any legitimate source of income to finance their activities. Maybe, some of them even run a gym since it's said exercise makes better gamers.
Besides, the stock market doesn't even guarantee you get rich quick fast. Stock markets are subject to supply and demand. The demand for a particular stock is dependent on the public perception's of the company, economic conditions (such as when companies started to produce less due to lower demand), and politics are in play. I think some stocks got bought during the pandemic when the demand for certain items significantly lowered. Not much gasoline was produced due to a lower supply. Gasoline is now starting to be produced all the more when the demand goes up. Stock markets dealers may even have to sell high now because waiting for it to be higher may close a deal. I tried to do so using a stock simulator to get the hang of it.
I think the whole cycle will just end up like a Ponzi scheme. People who will get the promise will soon want more. It will be a very hard cycle to break like a gambling addiction. I would say that those running the "play-to-earn games" are just trying to get rich quick at the expense of others. Why I don't even want to start is because is because it's too good to be true, right?
References
"'Life-changing' or scam? Axie Infinity helps Philippines' poor earn"