Author: Kaspar Chen

1816 words, about 8 mins reading

'Why You Bullish on Fully On-Chain Games?'

The question that many have asked me before, and I still remember the first time this was posed, my mind slipped into a transient blankness, as though I could not fathom the rationale. I could only hastily assemble rudimentary ideas, speaking of interoperability, composability, permanent storage and shared value, which are all inherent in the blockchain. In the end, these features could appear in any blockchain project, as they were the essence of the technology itself.

Upon returning home, I mulled over it more deeply, refining my answers by adding some actual gaming scenarios to manifest these features, such as the transformations that fully on-chain could bring to the user experience, and the deeper philosophical changes impacted by the decentralised concept. These became the answers I offered in subsequent encounters.

Yet, something felt amiss. These answers, derived from the question itself, may have been accurate, but were they the actual reasons for my own anticipation and excitement?

This introspective question led me to delete the previous answers word by word, forcing me to rethink, contemplate, and experience anew. I discovered that the enthusiasm I experienced was genuinely real, but I still could not identify its nature, only some fragments floating around, shimmering in the hazy land of my thoughts.

Fragment 1: The Charm and Logic of an Open World

Have you ever played The Legend of Zelda? Were you captivated by it? and Why?

My time on the expansive lands of Hyrule was a unique experience in my life. I revelled in the freedom of fishing, riding, cooking, exploring and wandering around times and times again. I created ice bridges across the sea to discover mysterious islands, only to find myself stripped off upon arrival... The unfettered freedom transcending reality allowed me to feel as though I could do anything in this strange world. And devoid of levels, auto-navigation, and ability points, made me feel as if I truly lived and encountered adventures there. his liberating yet natural experience allowed me to appreciate the charm of the open world.

Behind it all, however, lies a fundamental logic that sets it apart from most other games. Unlike the linear narrative, level-based, and mission-driven model of most games, Zelda is underpinned by a system and rule-driven model.

Comparing it to the highly flexible Assassin's Creed series, we may wonder: can Assassin's Creed truly be considered an open world? At its core, it remains a linear storyline comprised of levels and missions. Although its scenery design is grand and exquisite, players are ultimately guided along a predetermined path set by the game designers. The most obvious example is the inability to progress to the next area until the current mission is complete. Tasks lead players from one chapter to the next.

Returning to Zelda, we can find that the game's ultimate goal is provided from the outset: Defeat Ganon. But in terms of How and When are left entirely up to the player. It is like to giving you $10 to find me something to eat: the former approach would direct you to a McDonald's, instruct you to ask for a burger, pay at the counter, and return the burger to me, maybe with an auto-navigation added so you don't get lost.

The latter approach, however, simply asks for food. Whether you buy, steal, or make it yourself, and whether it's a burger or raw meat, all I request is something to eat. Under this mode, it is difficult to predict players' behaviour and routes, making the design of an organic ecosystem a critical challenge.

Zelda's solution is to establish various world rules and systems, achieving a natural and free world ecology through interactions between these systems.

In Zelda, we find that the weather is not just a single visual backdrop but a system that interacts with elemental, environmental, and equipment systems. When it rains, the water element attaches to the rain drips extinguishes the fire element of the bonfire, while also adding a conduct attribute when it meets the character's metal equipment, so, during thunderstorms, lightning will possibly strike the character.

This interplay of systems ensures that no matter how players engage with the game, their experience remains undisturbed, for all actions adhering to natural rules are inherently natural. This, in my opinion, is one of the most amazing achievements of Zelda and the ideal embodiment of what an open world should offer.

Fragment 2: The ‘Rules’ of Fully On-Chain World

Returning to the topic of fully on-chain gaming, let's consider why we should create such a realm and what it could offer.

In my previous article ‘The Ultimate Form of Blockchain Gaming,’ I mentioned the concept of "rules" repeatedly. In essence, the blockchain can be seen as an open world where interoperability and composability imply that player behaviour is unpredictable. Therefore, games like Dark Forest establish universal rules, allowing players to flourish within the framework. Although its rules may seem simplistic compared to a completely open world, Dark Forest has achieved impressive accomplishments (with active participation, contributions, construction, constant thought, ongoing discussions, and repeated references and learning) . And the emergence of more content-rich games like Influence reveals even more possibilities.

As a gamer, the true appeal of fully on-chain games, or what blockchain can bring to games, lies in the higher degree of freedom in rule-making and the unleashed potential for rule combinations, which creates an open world with greater freedom and authority for players.

Throughout the history of gaming, we have seen linear, level-based games that rigidly guide players; to RPGs that allow players to explore and interact freely within missions; and finally, open-world games like Zelda that offer complete freedom and natural immersion in a world governed by rules. In terms of the future, I think the next level of authority will enable players to be on par with game developers, granting players the ability to create and combine rules.

With this understanding, let's return to the world of Zelda. Perhaps I could create a 'Ridiculous Blacksmith' contract, which calls for the values of materials in the main world and collaborates with Midjourney, to enable players to forge any fantastical weapons freely. Players might craft a 40-meter golden sword, but it might be too heavy, depleting their stamina as soon as they lift it, and the low hardness of gold could result in a low attacking power. This rule-driven randomness ensures that all outcomes are natural and consistent, transforming an experience that was once only determined by developers into where players can actively create by themselves.

Humans have always aspired to be gods, but how we should define 'God' remains uncertain. We often speak of 'The Creator'. In a way, a 'God' may be a being with 'unlimited creative power', and that sounds like something fully on-chain games would bring us. In some sense, with FOCG, we might be one step closer to achieving the 'divinity.'

Fragment 3: The Glory of MODs

Experienced gamers might question the need for fully on-chain games, as MODs have already enhanced gaming experiences in the way of extending, composing and combining, be it early games like Counter-Strike or more recent ones like GTA or The Elder Scrolls. Indeed, MODs have fostered a thriving ecosystem.

However, MODs still face certain limitations. For one, they primarily focus on single-player games, enhancing the experience by modifying local game resource packs. But the core resources for multiplayer online games are usually not stored in local clients, meaning that players can only enjoy MODs individually or in a limited group. Although we could find traces of MODs in some multiplayer online games, commonly, they are presented as plugins or cheats on the periphery of game logic.

Moreover, creating MODs often requires cracking and re-encoding game resources, which demands a high level of expertise, making it an unattainable skill for most players. Thus, the MOD ecosystem remains somewhat niche.

Despite these limitations, MODs continue to demonstrate strong growth, which bolsters my confidence in fully on-chain gaming. Fully on-chain games can fulfil the long-standing aspirations of every MOD player and developer, providing them with even greater and broader opportunities for expression.

Why Am I Bullish on Fully On-Chain game?

Apart from the excitement and anticipation I feel as a gamer, I also observe a potential trend from an investor's perspective.

This is reminiscent of the early days of China's esports culture. In those days, esports was almost an underground culture, which was hardly recognized by mainstream society. Back then, Chinese children who played too many games risked being subjected to electroconvulsive 'correction.' Today, however, as more open-mindedness has taken hold and the ascension of the younger generation, esports has become a part of mainstream culture and showing a significant market value that cannot be underestimated.

Both the possibilities offered by fully on-chain gaming experiences, and the achievements of the MOD industry in a such closed environment, point to an enormous potential behind this trend. Although we cannot yet predict the extent of the waves it will create, I believe it will inevitably become the haven for all open-world gamers and MOD enthusiasts, representing the ultimate form of open-world gaming.

How Will Current Fully On-Chain Games Fare?

After discussing the potential of open-world gaming at length, let's refocus on the present. Most fully on-chain games are currently turn-based, whether it's the pioneering Dark Forest or recent releases like Sky Strife by Lattie, Dark Sea by 0xHank, Word3 by SmallBrain, or Museum Heist by Teratation Lab. Some games like Muddy Forest, Loot Realm, Treaty, and Influence are trying to build an Open-World RTS but still have not yet fully showcased the composability and interoperability. So are we going to say these games are no good? Definitely not.

As someone with an engineering background, I'm used to approaching problems and ideas in an experimental manner. Experiments typically involve a cycle of 'Identify Problem → Proposing Hypothesis → Designing Experiment → Conducting Experiment → Obtaining Results → Analysing Conclusions → Validating Hypothesis → and Finding New Problems.'

Fully on-chain gaming is clearly still in the very first round of this cycle, where pioneers are conducting experiments trying to validate many hypotheses. The goal of this stage is majorly to demonstrate that games can be deployed and well-designed under the fully on-chain condition. So far, the results have been promising. Expanding game genres and increasing game depth will be challenges faced in the coming stage, and we need to allow time for this development.

Many games today might only serve as temporary experiments, perhaps will fade into history as their developers bring what they learnt into future thoughts. But they are the foundation upon which creators will build, armed with deeper understanding, knowledge, and determination to usher in a new era.

So, let us look forward to the future, and the rising stairway lead us closer to the 'divinity'.