Despite the promises of decentralized ownership and trustless systems, most crypto games today are only partially decentralized. While game assets may be stored on-chain, the game logic, state, and storage often remain off-chain on centralized servers. The reason for this is that building a fully decentralized game on-chain is currently challenging due to the limitations of blockchains.
According to Ludens, the CEO of Lattice, building a fully on-chain game at present is akin to building video games on a computer from the 1980s. The blockchains, even Layer 2 solutions, are not yet powerful enough to process the large number of transactions required by video games. Additionally, developers face tradeoffs when using blockchain technology to make the game accessible to non-crypto audiences.
To overcome these challenges, developers have implemented hybrid systems that allow players to leave their assets in the custody of the game while still being able to move them into their wallets if desired. One example is Syncspace, created by Aurory, which enables non-crypto-native players to experience the game without having to handle the complexities of a crypto wallet.
However, there is a passionate community of players interested in fully on-chain “autonomous worlds” that are built from the bottom up by the players themselves. These autonomous worlds, though they face numerous hurdles, have shown impressive early results. For example, one group of players modded a game to form a communist collective where everyone shared the same resources.
Related Post
Web3 games have faced issues due to the sector’s brief history. During the last crypto bull cycle, many blockchain games focused on being financial products first and video games second. This approach led to significant interest when token prices were rising, but enthusiasm waned when token prices fell. Games like Axie Infinity, Pegaxy, and Crabada, which once promised high returns for players, have since experienced significant declines in player numbers.
In response to this, Web3 games are shifting away from the “play-to-earn” model and embracing phrases like “play-and-earn” or “play-and-own.” The focus is on the ownership of game assets and the enjoyment of the gameplay itself, rather than solely on financial returns. The industry recognizes that the core focus of games should be leisure and entertainment.
The emphasis on financial returns in the past has also attracted scammers to the industry, tarnishing its image. However, it is more difficult for scammers to pull off their schemes in Web2 games compared to Web3 games.
On the other hand, builders interested in creating autonomous worlds are pushing for on-chain maximalism in blockchain games. Fully on-chain games have all their assets, game logic, state, and storage on-chain, ensuring immutability and transparency. This approach enables open composability, similar to what is seen in decentralized finance (DeFi), where different protocols can integrate and interact with one another.
In fully on-chain games, second-layer rules exist in the form of smart contracts built on top of the original smart contracts. These rules are experienced by all players in the game, unlike third-party mods in traditional gaming that only modify the player’s local experience.
Examples of fully on-chain games include Dark Forest and OPCraft. Dark Forest allows players to create permissionless guild systems through external smart contracts, enabling collective action against more powerful players. OPCraft, on the other hand, saw one player create a communist society where resources were shared among all members through an on-chain smart contract.
These autonomous worlds are still in their early stages and face various challenges. However, they demonstrate the potential for truly decentralized and player-driven gaming experiences. As technology continues to improve and blockchains become more powerful, we can expect to see more fully on-chain games that revolutionize the gaming industry.
