Blockchain game development stuck in 10 core issues

Original title: "pawn said | looks back to 2019 and counts the 10 core problems in the development of chain tourism"
Horseman GO

In the past year, we have transformed from the traditional game industry to the blockchain sector, and launched Horseman GO, a chain game.

In game development and testing process, there is no lack of difficulty and detours, through deep contact with industry at the same time, also let us realize that although block chain concept is very hot, although the chain has developed not short time, although it seems about to swim there has been a lot of "mature" theory, but in fact, compared with the traditional game, the field was very, very young, everything is not settled yet, so I need a large number of professionals with great concentration to explore and strive to explore, to welcome the spring swim development.

Pawn said | looking back to 2019, the inventory chain development of the 10 core problems

On the last day of 2019, we threw the brick by listing 10 questions about chain travel and what we think about them.

1. Chain tour is "chain" or "swim"?

The biggest particularity of block chain is that it is not only a brand-new technology, but also brings a series of new paradigms in system economy and user governance. But having more options and more mechanisms is not necessarily a good thing. In fact, in the development of chain travel because of this particularity brought about a huge cognitive bias.

In the past, too many so-called "chain tour" products, full of "chain" features, and far ignored as "tour" existence, which directly led to the low playability of these products, poor experience.

Admittedly, founding that the fundamentalism, think to swim should handle all game content on the chain's, but out of the chain is the essence of the game, and oriented in the world is perhaps the most captious customers - players, in the current mainstream public chain can carry under the background of complex games operation logic to handle, don't focus on the perspective of "you" will no doubt be self-destruction of the Great Wall.

What's more, "chain" that system and play, whether it can be transplanted to the game to reproduce success, still to be verified. What's more, that model has yet to be fully tested for the average user.

In the current environment, the best answer to this question is if chain game practitioners design products by putting "chain" before "tour" at the beginning.

2. What is the best way for blockchain to power games?

This question seems particularly easy to answer, as previous changes and transformations in the game industry have demonstrated that when a new technology emerges, replacing its counterpart in the existing mature system with a new technology can perfectly embrace new development opportunities and market dividends.

The emergence of online games, for example, is to put the core data and important operations of games on the server side, to perfectly solve the piracy problem of stand-alone games, while allowing multiple players to appear in a game to bring social value;

For example, the emergence of page games is to change the presentation of the client desktop from a huge client to a web browser with zero download demand, which greatly reduces the user entry cost and drives the development of game-oriented digital marketing by leaps and bounds.

The emergence of mobile game, for example, is to port the client from PC to mobile phone, so as to lower the entry threshold of the game again, so that a wider audience can play the game conveniently, and thus massively expand the whole game market again.

Therefore, in the early stage of block chain development, the whole industry widely believes that, referring to the previous information technology revolution, games are still the most likely to be the first business model to implement the application. As long as the assets in the game are transferred to the chain for processing, the glory can be restored.

However, the world never changes the way everyone thinks it will, and the results taken for granted are never always satisfactory. Practice has proved that the game assets on the chain from beginning to end only exist in the fictitious demand.

Blockchain is great, but it's a bit too much of a given that you can replicate success in a game with simple functional substitutions. This is not the only way blockchain can power a game. The core nature of blockchain's "trust machine" has made it possible to come up with a disruptive new business model.

3. Is the hottest the best?

At the end of the year, a so-called "investment nature of technology entertainment projects" particularly popular, the name of the Game is also flaring "pure" Game attributes. Project team with aura, as well as the good of the marketing chain for the blessing is the main reason for the hot, but the word long white paper packaging and let practitioners can see more complex expression of fog, ultimately, cannot hide their money plate of the essence, and finally the process from emergence to decline and even does not have other pure plate project comes last.

In the middle of the year, there is another team of high light chain tour new debut, the team's first work is known as the chain tour work, "has been imitated, never exceeded", so this new work has also caused a great response in the chain circle, but the final number of users only for the team's very popular first work 1%.

I remember that a famous professional manager published a book "my success can be replicated" more than ten years ago, which also inspired a generation of young people to work hard. Unfortunately, in the chain travel industry, in this just emerging industry, all the success can not be copied.

The same is true, at least so far, of traditional games.

4. Who are the survivors of the chain tour?

There is a classic fallacy in logic called Survivor bias, which means that you can only see the results of a screening, but not be aware of the screening process and therefore ignore the key information that has been screened out. Typical examples include the popular science of success, in which the unilateral characteristics of successful people are expanded unlimitedly and understood as the only correspondence between "If" and "Then".



In the past, when we looked at an industry, we used this fallacy to explain why so many failed products had the same characteristics, because they often borrowed from the same successful product. Chain travel industry, generally so.

Strangely, from a gameplay perspective, who has been able to locate the "survivors" of the chain game so far? There is no answer to this question, so it is even stranger that there is a survivor bias in the industry. Previous products that looked like survivors had distinctive features that were not classic game expressions, and subsequent projects rushed to imitate them. This survivor bias, in which even the survivors got it wrong, would undoubtedly lead the entire industry in a dangerous direction.

5. What is the significance of NFT?

Recently, some industry experts very solemnly discussing, NFT (Non - Fungible Token, Non homogeneous tong) why not fire up. I don't want to say anything else, but I can ask a few questions about this situation in games, which are the focus of NFT applications.

When NFT is placed in a game, it often refers to the game assets. Generally speaking, it is a token protocol launched by the public chain represented by ethereum that defines the NFT standard. The biggest function in the game field is that this token can be used across games. Therefore, NFT application mode is highly expected because it is very "blockchain".

However, from beginning to end, year after year, from the day it came out, NFT never caught on in the gaming industry, nor did the hottest ether cat.



I'm not going to comment on the quality of this standard here, but it's fair to say that ethereum's expertise certainly makes it a good standard, but there's one thing I've never heard of -- gaming around a virtual asset standard.

It's not that you can't, it's that you don't have to.

Game assets are always subordinate to the game, but do not define the game. Now the biggest problem is the mode problem, is the problem of capital, is the problem of gameplay, is the problem of efficiency, is the problem of experience...... It will take a dozen more questions before the asset question comes up.

So NFT is not meaningless, but in the current situation of chain travel, it is too insignificant to be worth mentioning. Expecting an unimportant thing to define the industrial landscape is like fishing for fish.

Unimportant things, however well done, are at best "unimportant good things", that is all.

6. Do you need to send token for chain game?

This question was raised in a previous interview, and here is a direct quote from the article:

In the game to provide a token that can be circulated in the market, we are very firmly believe that there is only a negative effect on the game.



First, people feel that the point is unclear, the game is for us to play the game or let us go to coin;

Second, the token that affects the game economy ecology and enters into the issue circulation will greatly increase the complexity of the game economy ecology, which is not conducive to its healthy growth.

Third, it is not conducive to the understanding of traditional game players. Tok-related issues, circulation, ownership ratio and unlock time of all relevant parties have nothing to do with the game, which should not be consumed by pure players.

Fourth, like the third problem, Token issue in the game is also common, there is no success so far, we do not need to refer to an unverified mode;

Fifth, this is also to put it bluntly -- the issue of sending tokens in the minds of users is too notorious, and also comes with original sin, it is just a game, fun, you have to send a token that can be used for circulation, there is no way to justify the motive is not pure.

7. Are financial features helping the game or harming the game?

Block chain technology since the start of known, with extremely strong financial characteristics, such as capitalization, pass card, issuing, and DeFi concept, with extremely strong financial attributes, so the past to swim with these attributes, such as chain swim tend to send a token in the game (this problem will be mentioned behind).

For example, the biggest entry point of blockchain is the wallet (which may become an exchange in the future). Both the wallet and the exchange are products of the experience model of financial application. The advantage is extremely rigorous and extremely safe. The downside to this benefit is also obvious - it is extremely inconvenient to use.

So the chain swim is still in the coin circle and the chain circle dangle, has been unable to get out of the circle, even a street across the traditional game circle can not play in - just a wallet to countless traditional game players to get stuck.

After all, players are playing games, not buying and selling assets, and the status of experience should far outweigh that of security. A may not be appropriate examples: in the early years of krypton gold I play one of the three card games, now don't even remember the account password, if this is in part description: for game players, playing a great game, playing a straightforward, but can not play immediately toss, what assets assets, is not so keen?

Block chain game, the top priority must be to definancialize.

8. Smart contracts, really smart?

I don't think we need to expand on that. I think we all know what's going on, but we can't stop talking about it.

Just a few days ago the personage inside course of study mentions the name of intelligence contract, should change to digital contract from accurate Angle, because not all contract is intelligence.

Very much!

However, we understand this aspect from a different Angle, the name of smart contract is really too far ahead, so far ahead that people can imagine that it really can do anything. But the reality is grim -- the best things blockchain can do are bookkeeping and depositing, and don't expect to surpass these two application models too much just because you think contracts can be "smart."

Can only say: along with the chain, the development of the chain also has a long way to go.

9. Is chain games a viable path?

The so-called chain change refers to the partial blockchain transformation of the existing business, which seems to be a very safe approach, but now the direction of chain change seems not quite right.

Whether it's a chain change or a refactoring, the needs of the game player have to come first. The game player can't create his own needs, such as ownership of assets, transaction security, liquidity, etc. But how much of the hundreds of billions of dollars a year in the traditional gaming industry has to do with these "needs"? Very, very few, I'm afraid.

Broadly speaking, through the development of the past few decades, game types and game modes have been very fixed. Now all the introduction of new technology is a transformation of the traditional mode to some extent.

10. Investor perspective, how to influence the chain tour industry?

The development of any industry, cannot leave the instrumentality of the capital chain block industry is a typical example, it is from belongs to block chain industry chain nature also cannot escape the law of development, so the industry chain to swim CP millions dollars portfolio has emerged, more common size order of magnitude smaller.

But because the chain of chain swim both block and game the distinct characteristic of the industry, led to a serious realistic problem: investors used to take the token chain circle (so to swim often take token), game circle investors feel free chain also too far (regardless of style or a business), and ecological chain hatch they only care about token distribution don't care about the game itself.

Traditional game circle of investment tends to be a better game play and excellent research and development, the release team, the team got after investment funds will be used to improve the quality of the game (picture) is one of the most important, and make greater efforts to promote and win market share, the chain is very pure, because the business model is clear, mature business system.

However, as more dimensions are introduced in the chain tour, the demands for interests of all parties are more complicated, and the development of chain tour will change in this situation. Originally the game is supposed to attract players, let them pay for the quality of the game and the gameplay, the result to the chain here, the gameplay has become to attract people to catch the service...

Better games will bring more players, and at the same time lead to the activation of the blockchain ecosystem. There is no problem with this closed loop. However, if you want to skip the important links and ignore the gameplay, quality and experience of the game itself, you should directly involve the players, make the ecosystem active and token increment, which is undoubtedly not in line with the development law of science.

With tens of millions of dollars of investment, you can make a game that's a little better than the first generation but not nearly as good as the second generation, which is unthinkable in a traditional game.

There must be something wrong.

Some of these questions we already have definitive answers to, some we're still exploring, and some require the entire industry to come together to build consensus and improve the environment. But no matter what, we've always believed that immediate action is the best course of action.

As the paper said in its New Year's message today -- zhang qifan, wait for the wind to come.

Source:mp.weixin.qq.com

Welcome to join the official BlockBeats community:

Telegram Subscription Group: https://t.me/theblockbeats

Telegram Discussion Group: https://t.me/BlockBeats_App

Official Twitter Account: https://twitter.com/BlockBeatsAsia