Looking back on the complete bottom→peak→bottom encryption industry cycle from 2020 to 2022, the three new tracks of DeFi, NFT, and blockchain games are dancing, and the most dazzling in the chain game track are two projects Axie and StepN: Axie created the “Play to Earn” mode, which led to the frenzy of small picture gold mining; while StepN took a slant after the decline of Axie, using the “Walk to Earn” light mode that is closer to the player’s real life, to guide players to build a consensus: In addition to making money in the game, you can also find cool points for gaining health.
Judging from the old player retention rate indicators and the actual effect of urging sports, StepN is indeed the first chain game with a breaking effect and can even be evaluated as an excellent Web3 product, so the track of X to Earn It suddenly emerged and became one of the most important modules in chain games.
StepN’s walking to earn money has spread all over the encryption circle, especially the “four-day payback” after the shoes are on the BNB Chain, which made the madness reach its peak. Various X to Earn projects emerge in endlessly.
“Move to Earn track analysis” analyzed several StepN imitation disks, but before finishing writing, StepN began to ebb on the B chain (the second chain), and the cooling speed was faster than our codeword speed, so it’s unfinished…
Is the problem with the gameplay and operation of StepN? I don’t think so. The original sin is the dual-token model developed based on Axie. The underlying logic of this type of model has led to “Fomo succeeds and Fomo fails.” Its life cycle is extended compared to other projects.
The X to Earn track is still a hot spot in the eyes of players and investment institutions, mainly because it can be out of the circle and it may be combined with real life. But if you think about it carefully, are the projects in X to Earn really homogeneous? How to classify from different angles? How to judge whether the project is good or bad from the perspective of investment logic?
According to the level of the threshold for using the product on the client side (C side), we have established a “life application” standard, in which the product is to extract some of the actions that frequently occur in the player’s life, allowing you to earn while doing it. As a player, you have to do these actions. You use this kind of product while doing it, and then give you rewards as encouragement. I hope you can do better.
The life application category can be further subdivided into light-duty and heavy-duty categories. The light-loaded category means that this product can be played without purchasing other heavy-duty external equipment, and the entry threshold for C-end users is low.
For example, in Sleepagotchi (assuming that sleeping products do not need to purchase additional equipment separately and directly use off-the-shelf equipment such as mobile phones or watches), individuals can sleep; such as StepN, as long as they have shoes, they can run.
Light-weight products currently appear to have two characteristics:
Take the Sleepagotchi product as an example, it emphasizes the function of improving sleep, similar to SleepOn in Web2 To be honest, if Sleepagotchi can really play such a function, not to mention that I can make money by using it, I am willing to spend money to buy this product, which is the melatonin in Web3.
There is also the familiar running category StepN, which is heavier than the sleeping category and lighter than the skipping category and reading category, so it introduces the concept of “running more to be healthy.” It can be seen that the two projects, Sleepagotchi and StepN, have a common positive and positive narrative: Sleepagotchi is to promote a healthy routine (higher sleep quality and more falls), and StepN is to promote oneself to develop of exercise habits (long running time the longer the period, the greater the income).
Here is a brief analysis of the recently popular Hook, which is the star product of Binance’s IEO launch after 9 months of holding back. It belongs to the “Learn to Earn” type, and you can get rewards through questions and answers. From the perspective of product design logic, I personally don’t like it because:
Therefore, I feel that Hook’s product usage logic is weird, and it is purely for making money to answer questions. I don’t know if Binance had thought about what I said above when it promoted it. But these analyzes are really not important, as long as there is a good father of Binance, it is the last word.
The X to Earn track will always be a hot spot. If it is a life application category, analyze it from the perspective of the C-end, specific to several dimensions: the severity of the user entry threshold and the number of participants, whether the cool point is enough to convince people, and the difficulty of private domain traffic.
DISCLAIMER: The Information on this website is provided as general market commentary and does not constitute investment advice. We encourage you to do your own research before investing.
Join us to keep track of news: https://linktr.ee/coincu
Harold
Coincu News
The Crypto Market Outlook 2025 highlights key areas: stablecoin growth, tokenization, crypto ETFs, DeFi innovation,…
The Bitcoin quantum computing threat is years away, but reserves already support post-quantum signatures via…
Don't miss BTFD Coin's Stage-7 presale dip! Find out why it's leading the pack of…
A WSJ survey reveals crypto hedge funds banking issues over three years, with 120 out…
GraniteShares Crypto ETFs aim to offer leveraged exposure to crypto-focused stocks like Riot Platforms and…
Explore the best new meme coins for massive returns, including BTFD Coin with its record-breaking…
This website uses cookies.