Can the play to earn gain regain the crown?
Axie infinity is trying to regain its footing after a series of events that led to the lost of hundreds of millions in a hacking attack that stemmed from a fake job classified.
Axie is known for its play to earn system that has offered new ways of earning for game players and a new type of job market that sees quick return for game investors. The game is also known for its highly volatile SLP token and of course the hack. The difference between success and failure of members of the Axie community are almost the same as night and day.
Axie had a large system of players, guilds, managers, and scholars all playing and earning SLP. With the hack of the game, the drastic drop in value of SLP and the overall sense of frustration and doubt being put on the platform it is as if the game is on its last legs as other play to earn games come into the fold and the metaverse is being built upon the premise of gameplay that rewards the user.
With the recent events that have led to a massive loss of profit for Sky Mavis some believe there needs to be a rethinking of how the platform is handled in order to continue on in the future.
In a detailed article on cointelegraph one writer speaks on what they believe will be the tools necessary for a rebound of the company as a whole. Let’s discuss some of these ideas.
The writer suggests that there was too much demand initially for the SLP token and that new player influx was too much for the best growth of the platform. This statement alludes to the fact that once the word got out on the game and how people could make a living off of the game many players, mostly those in poorer countries, flocked to the platform in hopes of creating a way to generate income.
The writer suggests that a slower growth might have prolonged the game and offered a smoother demand curve, the thought being that as the token slowly trickled into the economy and as spaces were slowly offered there would not have been such a diluted market. This instead was the situation as more players looked for “scholars” to play for them while they earned.
The value of SLP went down as only one group was associated with the token,there was not any risk diversification, which is very necessary in the growth of any token. Attracting players from other higher wage countries would in turn move the token and the game into a better light socially.
More abuse was the fact that single users could have more than one account, with some players playing on up to 50 different counts slowing down the platform and inflating the supply of SLP, keep in mind the more a token is available the less it is worth. In keeping with this idea the fact of rewarding every fight with SLP also diluted the market as each victory provided the player with 150 SLP or more. These earning would be kept for a while and not spent or traded which in turn is another oversupply issue.
The main theme of the article written by the author is the fact that SLP the main token was too readily available and there was no way to lose it, thus using simple rules of supply and demand , one could learn that the token was less valuable that anticipated.
The use of SLP was also a factor as the token was used to “breed” more axie NFTs that could then be sold or shared for a profit. The revenue made from the marketplace came from NFT sales and the use of SLP to breed new NFT. In speaking on this the writer also suggested that new ways of revenue must be found in order to sustain the play to earn game for the future.
In writing about the future of the game the token and its utility are the main focus with a new business plan being necessary for the future of the game to be as fruitful as it was before.