Once touted as a model for 'everyone can mine and cash out,' the play-to-earn (P2E) model is now in deep trouble.

Since the first quarter of 2025, Web3 game financing has plummeted by more than 70%, with many star projects ceasing operations one after another, leading to a significant decline in player activity.

This crisis reveals a fundamental problem: when the returns of a game are tied to volatile tokens, everyone is forced to become a speculator, and every update may trigger a round of market turmoil.

This model links the fun of gaming to real money, relying on the fantasy that there will always be new players entering the market for sustainability. Once the momentum for token appreciation is lost, the entire system can quickly collapse.

Today, the Web3 gaming industry is facing a moment of awakening, gradually shifting towards a model that emphasizes asset utility and long-term retention, namely Play-to-Own (P2O). Currently, there is no unified Chinese translation for P2O; we can tentatively understand it as 'play to own.'


Speculation has never been at the core of gaming.

Some may still insist that P2E can provide opportunities for emerging markets, or that token incentives are essential for attracting new players. Unfortunately, the data has long clarified the facts.

P2E is based on the 'musical chairs' logic of high-inflation tokens. Developers continuously mint tokens to distribute rewards, hoping to alleviate sell pressure through new players.

In the short term, this can indeed bring superficial prosperity: an increase in user numbers and soaring token prices. However, as soon as the token's upward momentum stalls, sell-offs will immediately occur. According to a recent report, the daily number of active wallets related to gaming dropped to an annual low of only 4.8 million in April 2025, a 10% decrease from the previous month.

This is not a short-term fluctuation but a deep structural problem. Many late-stage players in P2E projects find that the returns are far below expectations, leading to a decline in participation willingness. As players leave, liquidity gradually dries up, and token values plummet, causing development teams to lose a crucial source of income. This vicious cycle continues until both players and funds are exhausted.

In traditional online games, no one would regard game currency as a financial product. If it really becomes this way, the vast majority of players neither understand nor are willing to accept such volatility, and the gaming experience will be completely destroyed as a result.


First own, then discuss value and returns

In contrast, P2O offers a healthier path: decoupling games from token issuance. It no longer supports inflated economies with airdrop rewards but treats items, skins, and equipment as assets with limited supply that players can freely circulate in the secondary market.

These items are truly scarce digital collectibles, with value derived from their utility and aesthetics in the game, rather than endless token rewards.

Many industry forecasts also validate this direction. By 2034, the NFT gaming industry is expected to maintain a nearly 25% annual compound growth rate, driven more by the 'sense of ownership' than pure speculation.

In traditional games, players have long been willing to pay for rare items. Blockchain simply makes this value more transparent, credible, and capable of cross-platform circulation.

To truly implement the P2O model, solid design and a high-quality experience are prerequisites. Developers must create gameplay that is attractive enough to make 'ownership' itself meaningful. Game items such as props, plots, and decorations should be issued in limited quantities, and the supply mechanism needs to be transparent and restrained to avoid the inflation issues that P2E struggles with the most.

Some are concerned that the secondary market will lead to excessive speculation, but as long as the value of transactions comes from culture or aesthetics rather than relying on unlimited token issuance, such trades are actually part of normal market behavior, similar to real-world collectibles trading.

In addition, a reasonable destruction mechanism is also essential to gradually recover part of the assets and maintain supply-demand balance. Ownership does not equal allowing inflation; instead, it requires more proactive management.


From 'airdrop fantasy' to 'player economy'

Many have noticed that the failure rate of Web3 games is extremely high. Over 90% of GameFi projects on the market have already shut down, with some experiencing a price drop of 95% within six months of their TGE, ultimately fading away quietly.

The vast majority of P2E games follow an old path: first promising to make money, then figuring out how to improve gameplay. As a result, tokens become the main focus, while enjoyment takes a back seat, leaving players with nothing but a mess.

However, a few projects are beginning to explore new directions: reducing token emissions and strengthening the asset system and descent mechanisms with limited supply. Even in an overall tight funding environment, these projects' wallet activity is steadily increasing.

Take our game Seraph as an example. Excluding the dramatic price fluctuations in the first few days before the TGE, our native token's price has remained relatively stable in the range of $0.15 to $0.20. So far, Seraph has been operating steadily for three seasons, with nearly 10 million tokens distributed as rewards, totaling a value of about $2 million. It can be said that this model is validating that the direction we adhere to is feasible and proving that the core concepts mentioned earlier are not just theoretical.


P2O is not a cure-all, but it is more reliable than the old path.

P2E was expected to 'revolutionize the gaming industry,' but reality has only brought a brief prosperity.

Now, even some of the once most dazzling star projects are quietly turning towards fixed supply economies and deeper gameplay loops. This is enough to indicate that the old model of 'mine first, sell later' is difficult to sustain long-term development.

Those who still cling to high-emission rewards are likely to continue shrinking, especially against the backdrop of slowing user growth and increasing caution from capital.

In contrast, games built on the foundation of 'ownership' rather than 'mining rights' may endure the winter and welcome a true spring.

Blockchain games do not lack for more airdrops and gimmicks; what they lack are more enjoyable games, healthier economic systems, and reasons for players to stay even without profits.


$SERAPH #GameFi #链游 #GameFi板块信号 #Web3游戏 #游戏板块