The ultimate use case for web3 gaming assets

One of the best content hacks I've found from being active on X trying to grow my own brand and putting the Hive blockchain and the inLeo ecosystem, is to get inspiration from engaging over there. It serves two purposes, I engage with people it benefits me to connect with, and at the same time their content and my replies help me build a concept that then I can convert into a Hive post.

I probably have around 70 post drafts on inLeo waiting to be written, but I can't simply find the time to do so and my to-do list keeps getting longer and longer, but I figured I'd write this one post because the topic actually got me excited while I was writing my lengthy - for X - reply to a content creator talking about real world use cases of blockchain technology.

The ultimate use case of blockchain technology for web3 gaming

Everyone has a different opinion on how Blockchain can be leveraged, and there are so many fronts and use cases where blockchain would literally solve all issues - like transparency in presidential elections, which we all know it's never going to happen, to comic book tracking through NFTs - and this is just my opinion on what the ultimate use case for web3 gaming via blockchain tech.

Gaming asset ownership across games and blockchains

Imagine you are an avid and committed @splinterlands gamer that got a new job and now does not have the time to grind the seasons or that simply doesn't understand the new in-game mechanics, but you have grown to love your cards and made a connection with your collection.

Then @holozing comes out and let's say that it is a simpler, less time consuming game - I have no idea how it will be but let's just say it is for the sake of the conversation - and you become a casual gamer of this new Hive game.

But then you have to not only get familiar with the in-game mechanics, the meta, the internal market and on top of that, you have to buy assets and/or grind through the game to earn useful ones that will allow you to perform at a competitive level.

But what if you didn't need to do this?

What if you could just migrate your Splinterlands assets into Holozing, and use them in the game?

Yes, I can already see all the potential issues you find about this concept, but hear me out before you go down to the comment section to tell me why this wouldn't work or why it is wrong in xyz ways.

Long term asset ownership

If you can buy an asset for a game in particular, but you were able to use that very same asset in other games, this would mean that it is worth holding onto it, because it has a longer term value on top of a diverse use case. Long term asset ownership would also imply that you can have a long term committed user base, even if they are not actively playing your game.

This also means that games can focus on delivering long term features and not focus only in short term deliverables because the user base wants the shiny new thing and they want it now. This encourages the team to make business and economic decisions framed on a longer timetable.

The example above uses two games from the Hive Blockchain, but now imagine if you could do the same with assets in two different blockchains?

We already have wallets like wombat that support assets from many chains and games, all we need now is the space working together to have interoperability.

This also opens up the door to new games not having to put resources - time, money and team members - into creating the in-game assets (wether it be NFTs, tokens, in-game assets) and just piggyback ride on existing tokens and collections from other games, pick the blockchain they want, and focus on creativity and gameplay instead of tokenomics, asset sustainability or any other finance related aspect that many good games fail at because they simply don't have the knowledge or budget to get someone who does.

Then you also open up a door for competition to having the best game out there, competing not only for the user base, but also for the asset base. It also opens up a door for long term, sustainable partnerships between different games using the same assets, making them be worth more for casual gamers who can use them for many games without having to reinvest in the new one, and for investors, it allows them to make decisions based on a gaming ecosystem instead of just one individual game.

This wouldn't be possible without blockchain, and obviously without interoperability, but I think it will come at one point.

Downsides

I can think of many, but I also have arguments for all of the ones I can think of.

Why don't you add your takes and downsides to this model in the comment section, let's get to friendly arguing.

Posted Using InLeo Alpha