Nghia Nguyen | SIPHΞR

The key problem with a web3 gaming economies is that they try to inflate the value pie past 100% which is impossible. Fortnite Pie: Input: Gamer Spend Output: 100% to Epic Roblox Pie: Input: Gamer Spend Output: X% to 3rd Party Dev, Y% to Roblox, If a web 3 game wants to output some value to gamers, or 3rd party devs, or NFTs, you can, but they all have to share the 100% output pie. And also has to find enough input value to make it all worthwhile. I feel like sometimes in web3 we think there's a black box that creates more output value than input. Let's look at $APE coin and Otherside for example. Let's say the game can generate $500M of spend in game, all spent with $APE. Input Value: $500M (in $APE) Player spend. Okay let's imagine Otherdeeds holders get some value, 3rd party devs need some value, and of course Yuga Labs needs lots of value to operate the metaverse. Let's call it 25/25/50. Output Value: $250M in $APE to Yuga, $125M in $APE to Otherdeeds Land Holders, $125M in $APE to 3rd party devs. All sorts of implications: 1. $APE derives little to no inherent value from Otherside, as output receivers need to sell it to realize value to pay expenses. 2. In order for Otherdeeds to be worth it purely financially (not experience) then the total output value received for holders needs to be higher than 100k * current floor ($2.5k) = $250M. So If you buy here at floor you need $250M passed back evenly to Otherdeeds holders just to breakeven. 3. Any other items in the game that have "hard value" (not cosmetic value) also need to fight for a share of the input value. Little bit of a rant here but web3 gaming has a lot of challenges to solve on the economic side and has to first embrace the fact that fundamentally there is no black box value multiplier.