Crypto games are often repelled by some traditional gamers. This is because the Web 2 gaming community feels that some Web 3 gaming projects are often linked to resource extraction, speculative actions, and game design where token farming is rewarded over entertainment.
Whenever major publishers, Ubisoft or Square Enix, announce blockchain projects, their communities frequently express dissatisfaction; Twitter quarrels and threads in Discord are filled with posts supporting the idea of discontinuing the projects.
Despite the aura, blockchain-based gaming is still alive due to investment, and projects are developing momentum with an inverted paradigm.
A trend is emerging that prioritizes game quality, followed by the integration of blockchain characteristics. Overall, the entertainment value of a game determines player retention, and tokenization gives the players an extra economic layer, as people may want these mechanics. This is a structural change of the play-to-earn period, where token rewards motivated all the play, and a project would fail as soon as the rewards stopped coming in.
We will explore these inversion strategies using three case studies for analysis.
Approach One: Making Blockchain Completely Invisible
Off the Grid managed to do what most chain games have found difficult to accomplish: astute success without foregrounding crypto. Shortly after the release, the title reached the top of the free-to-play ratings in the Epic Games Store, which appeals to the traditional gaming audience with little knowledge of interacting with blockchain infrastructure.
The game is based on GUNZ, an Avalanche subnet, but all blockchain features are not emphasized and are optional. The fundamental gameplay and graphics are done off-chain, and NFT in-game items are optional features for interested players. This proves that the industry has recognized that blatant advertisements of blockchain can scare away gamers.
“Gamers are still pissed about their game cards being used to mine Bitcoin and Ethereum back in the day, and they’ve never forgiven the blockchain people,” explained Viktoriya Hying, co-founder of Base layer-3 gaming chain B3. “Every time any big publisher said they’re going to try something in blockchain, all their fans revolted against them.”
Gunzilla Games did work on the title to a significant degree, but they did not publicize token sales and advance the product in the early stages.
The visibility of the game was created naturally due to social-media distribution, in which gameplay videos spread virally with no sign of blockchain integration.
This strategy demonstrates that titles powered by blockchain can compete with traditional releases, provided the quality of the gameplay takes the lead.
However, one question that remains unanswered is whether optional blockchain functionality has the potential to produce enough economic activity to compensate for the extra complexity compared to traditional game development.
Approach Two: Building AAA Quality First, Adding Blockchain Second
Illuvium is a high-end creature-collection RPG with Ethereum-deployed graphics (Unreal Engine) and auto-battler dynamics, built upon Ethereum and Immutable X.
The development team has corrected the mistake by minimizing micro-transactions and providing more free content, hence being fair and providing meaningful rewards to dedicated players.
But the financial reality is stark. The ILV token has dropped from its peak, trading below its launch price.
This scenario reflects the fundamental contradiction of AAA blockchain gaming: building genuine quality would take a long time and require a significant amount of capital, while the token issues prior to the game will create price pressure before the game is complete. Illuvium launched tokens to fund development, but market expectations demanded immediate returns that gameplay couldn’t support.
The case shows that a high level of gameplay quality can be attained through AAA blockchain titles when developers focus on making rather than promoting the hype of the token.
Illuvium is proving actively that the game can be sustained because of its entertainment value as technical aspects evolve. The recent events of the project indicate a game-first philosophy: on November 15, 2025, Illuvium released their MMO Combat Expansion, introducing fifteen lines of weaponry, with changing mechanics; five days later, on November 20, their Staking V3 was launched on Base L2, speeding up transactions at lower costs.
Approach Three: Fun-First Philosophy With Frictionless Onboarding
Chainers demonstrates the manner in which the removal of cryptocurrency-associated obstacles may appeal to regular users. The game was released in 2023 and is based on a philosophy founded on “fun-first, earn-based”, which puts a greater emphasis on entertainment and less on speculation.
No cryptocurrency wallet or understanding of blockchain technology is required, as users can register with either email or Google credentials. Onboarding is also similar to Web2 gaming, and it consists of downloading, registering, and playing. The blockchain-driven elements, i.e., NFT rewards and the token called CHU, are components of the game and do not constitute the conditions of entry.
The effectiveness of this method is proven empirically; over 600,000 gamers have joined and have already minted more than 25 million NFTs. The supply of CHU is capped at 3.33 billion units, which are to be distributed within a 60-month period, thus avoiding the inflation trends that plagued antecedent play-to-earn systems.
However, the basic tension remains unchecked. In case 600,000 participants are minting 25 million NFTs, the relevant question lies in the query of whether that has been based on meaningful entertainment or simple farming assets. The existing paradigm still associates gameplay with financial incentives, a structure that historically turns recreation into labor.
Mobile platform restrictions from Apple and Google on NFT functionality also limit how these games can deliver on their blockchain promises. And most importantly, the strategy is dependent on the continued expansion of the player base in its ability to maintain token valuation; in this case, once the growth level off, the economic layer can be destroyed regardless of the inherent fun to play quality of the gameplay.
The Fundamental Tension
The major structural issue that the blockchain gaming industry will face is that, in traditional games, publishers control the economy and thus retain the economic value within the closed ecosystems. Blockchain gaming, in its turn, promises the right to ownership and meaningful economic participation, which fundamentally changes the processes of value distribution.
This sort of offloading of economic value creates a row of complications. When games are turned into means of making money, they will turn into games of work instead of recreational activities. This danger was demonstrated during the play-to-earn boom: the downfall of the tokens of Axie Infinity caused the mass exodus of the players and made the game unable to support itself based only on entertainment value.
These were compounded by the play-to-airdrop paradigm. Hamster Kombat had amassed 300 million users before its token airdrop, but the number of active players dropped by 86 percent over the following months, resulting in a 41 million user drop by November 2025. Apparently, over 60 percent of Web3 gamers, according to Seraph CEO Tobin Kuo, drop out within just 30 days because of a lack of long-term incentives and bad gameplay.
Investment capital is becoming harder to secure as venture firms recognize that premature token launches create unsustainable pressure. “Three or four years ago, you had your random blockchain games with tokens and NFTs—it was much easier for you to get funding from different VCs,” explained Keith Kim, head of strategy at Nexpace. “Because people were not too well-versed in the aspects of sustainability, revenue, and all these things.”
Nicolas Pouard, Vice President of Ubisoft’s Strategic Innovation Lab, highlighted the challenge: “It’s very, very difficult, very hard work to build a game and to be able to finish it, polish it, and deliver it to the players in the right way. Web3 is adding something even more difficult, because it’s adding uncertainty. It’s adding polarized opinion around it.”
What the Three Approaches Reveal
The next step, which will be completed empirically, will be whether the entertainment value and tokenization can coexist in a sustainable way or not, and whether the blockchain gaming sector will continue being a speculative sector that will never reach product-market fit beyond the airdrop farming.
The “crypto game” term has been actively used to drive away mainstream users; those who have achieved success tend to focus on the quality of gameplay without positioning blockchain capabilities as a marketing priority.
The relative effectiveness or ineffectiveness of these strategies will ultimately determine the ability of the underlying technology to achieve a groundbreaking role within the future of gaming or continue to be a footnote in its history.
