Is there another round for Web3 games? Veteran players review: when the heat is at its peak, you should at least run half.

null

Exclusive Interview: Money-Making Chicken

Host: GMA cccai Nann

Interview Time: June 24 (Thursday) 3:00 PM

Can Web3 games still be played? Do players make money in blockchain games through game understanding, capital, era-driven opportunities, or earlier execution?

This GMA exclusive interview invites deep blockchain game player Money-Making Chicken to share his journey from a traditional game merchant to a Web3 gamer: He made money in Mobox, StepN, and Seraph, but also experienced heavy losses and zero returns in some projects. Compared to macro industry judgments, this episode is more like a real player's reflection: Why did early blockchain games make money? What do ordinary players most easily misjudge? Where exactly is the real problem with Web3 games? And if the next wave of blockchain games appears, what might it look like?

GMA Talk Q&A

Q1: Do you define yourself as a player, an investor, or a content creator?

Money-Making Chicken: I never really see myself as an investor, because I think I'm not good at investing and not a qualified investor. I prefer to define myself as a player, especially a blockchain game player. I used to be called "Blockchain Game Chicken," but after losing money for a year or two, I changed to "Money-Making Chicken" to give myself a boost. I do content more as a side thing. Mainly, I stand from the perspective of retail players, sharing my experiences of making and losing money in blockchain games over the years with everyone.

Q2: What first attracted you to blockchain games?

Money-Making Chicken: The biggest attraction was definitely making money, but not just that. There are many mechanics in blockchain games to study, and it's very rewarding to figure them out. For example, when I played Mobox early on, I made lots of spreadsheets to calculate card draw data, home upgrade data, and figure out how to best combine cards to increase profits. That process itself was a lot of fun. Later, when I played Seraph, I got really into loot hunting—it was the blockchain game I enjoyed the most. For me, what makes blockchain games attractive is that they're fun, profitable, and give me a sense of achievement from research and exploration.

Q3: Do you enjoy gambling, and is that gambling more about competing against others?

Money-Making Chicken: The gambling in games for me is more of an internal or strategic gamble rather than direct competition with others. I don't really like zero-sum or negative-sum games against other people; it's not like I set out to make money off other players. With projects like running shoes, Mobox, Seraph, Gas Hero, and MapleStory, I approach them from a personal gaming perspective—thinking about how to play hard, study the mechanics, and find my own strategies. In the end, I did make money on many games, but my original intention wasn't to "gamble against everyone." I think that's important to clarify.

Q4: How do you view the relationship between players, project teams, and whales?

Money-Making Chicken: So far, I feel this gaming relationship is quite obvious. For example, in the later stages of Mobox, I could sense that the project team was playing against relatively mid-to-high-tier players like us. With Gas Hero, the project team focused more on relationship management, but in the end, our investments went to zero. Project teams have their own interests; whales think their investments will pay off, but they might get taken out first. A good blockchain game should have players willing to pay, bringing external blood into the ecosystem. But many blockchain games end up being a game of mutual gambling among project teams, whales, and retail investors.

Q5: When did you realize there was a business opportunity in games?

Money-Making Chicken: That started with MapleStory. When I played MapleStory as a kid, I realized that trading merchants were a very important part of the game ecosystem. In MapleStory, gameplay was one part, social interaction another, and trading was also very important. Back then, I didn't envy the high-level players or the ones with great gear the most; I envied the merchants in the market. Later, when I got to college and had a little money, I started being a merchant myself—selling gear, flipping gold. I also met a very skilled merchant friend who would lend me items to sell, and I'd try to buy them back to return to him. That helped me a lot.

Q6: Did your experience as a traditional game merchant help you in Web3 games?

Money-Making Chicken: It definitely helped, but it wasn't a direct copy. In Web3 games, my merchant side isn't as strong. Instead, I brought the mindset of studying mechanics and finding profit points from traditional gaming. For example, in Guild Wars, I felt that stage required forming my own guilds, so I set up 81 guilds. Setting aside the later collapse due to declining hype, I think that strategy itself was successful. Another example is Seraph: many people started by farming gold and selling it, but I chose to buy gold to upgrade to higher-level NFTs. These are all thought patterns I developed from playing traditional games and studying their economies.

Q7: What do you mainly look at to judge whether a game asset has value?

Money-Making Chicken: I still think like a player, not a professional investor. First, I look at whether I personally like the game and if I can get hooked. If I'm hooked, I'll research whether there are profit points—places where I can both have fun and make money. Then I check if the game has potential to become popular in the future. For example, with Mobox and Gas Hero, I felt they had some innovation for their time and that hype could spread further. As long as I judge that future hype might be greater than the present, I feel the current value is acceptable. But this judgment is often wrong.

Q8: When did you first encounter Web3 games, and why did you enter?

Money-Making Chicken: My first Web3 game was Mobox in 2021. I had never played a blockchain game before, but Mobox's quality at the time was truly eye-opening. After you pulled cards, you naturally got drawn into researching: how to combine cards, what bonuses upgrades give, how to best optimize for higher returns. I think for its era, it was an excellent browser game and the start of my blockchain game journey. It was also very beginner-friendly—you could go in knowing nothing and potentially get outsized returns.

Q9: Did concepts like NFT ownership and player asset sovereignty appeal to you back then?

Money-Making Chicken: They appealed to me a lot at the time. I even discussed these concepts with my company's leadership. I'd say that in traditional games, your assets essentially belong to the game company; if the game shuts down, your assets are gone. But in blockchain games, NFTs are on-chain, theoretically allowing another game to give utility to your NFT in the future. For example, if you have a Dragon Saber, another game that needs these players could design gameplay around that NFT. As a player, I found that very compelling back then. But looking back, I was also a bit naive. In the following years of blockchain game development, this concept has been mentioned less and less.

Q10: What do you think is the most fundamental source of profit in blockchain games?

Money-Making Chicken: The most important factor is the era, followed by mindset. Early blockchain games made money primarily because they rode the wave of the times. But what sets me apart from many ordinary players is that I don't just think about setting up one account, calculating the payback period, and doing "mint, farm, sell" every day. Instead, I assess whether the game has growth potential. If I think it does, I scale up and reinvest, capturing future growth and compound returns. For example, when StepN launched on the BNB chain, I judged it had potential. Instead of just getting two shoes, farming daily, and selling, I built a shoe factory to scale up. Of course, if you're wrong, it can be disastrous—so don't blindly do this anymore.

Q11: What do ordinary players most easily misjudge in blockchain games?

Money-Making Chicken: The easiest mistake is calculating the payback period when hype is at its peak. For example, with the running shoes game, early on some calculated a 20-day payback, then it became 25 days, 30 days, and eventually maybe 300 days. The problem is that when you calculate the payback period at peak hype, you mistakenly think the investment is safe. But assets and output keep depreciating, creating a double spiral that prevents you from ever breaking even, leaving you stuck at the top. So I think the higher the hype, the more you should avoid focusing only on the payback period.

Q12: In Web3 games, which is hardest: selecting a project, holding, or exiting?

Money-Making Chicken: For many, both holding and exiting are hard. But for me, the hardest part is selecting a truly good project. I've played many games where I eventually ignored the assets and they went to zero—like Big Time, Matr1x, etc. But if this approach hits on a good game and you hold until the end, you can get outsized returns. So the key is judgment. For ordinary players, when you find a good game, you also need to hold it and not flip back and forth. Same with crypto trading: if you find a good coin but can't hold it, making 500 today and losing 300 tomorrow, your net result could still be a loss.

Q13: After experiencing both making and losing money, has your perspective on "making money" changed?

Money-Making Chicken: In the past year, my perspective has indeed changed. I used to think about making a lot of money, achieving this and that. After losing money, maybe because I had no choice, I gradually became more philosophical: making 200-300 dollars a day isn't that bad, right? Of course, this acceptance might also be because I can't make as much anymore. But now I'm more willing to lower my expectations and not overthink things. That way, I might still make a little money and at least stop losing. Money—when you want too much, you might also lose a lot.

Q14: What is your most satisfying blockchain game experience?

Money-Making Chicken: If I only consider operation and exit, the one I'm most satisfied with is Seraph. I made a lot early in Mobox, but then reinvested in home upgrades and subsequent games, losing a lot back. The money I made from StepN was lost in Gas Hero, 2184, GMT staking, etc. Big Time also made money early, but I didn't sell and ended up losing it back. Only Seraph—I feel I exited with a relatively high percentage and a good exit point. Although I feel a bit guilty because we fought together passionately—the "500 Warriors" were very intense—rationally, when hype dropped and the project couldn't get listed on major exchanges, I had to consider exiting.

Q15: What do you think is the biggest problem with Web3 games?

Money-Making Chicken: The biggest problem is that most Web3 games are not mature games themselves. For blockchain games to work, first you need to have a very good game, and then use blockchain to solve some problems. You also need to find a consumer base that genuinely wants to pay for the game, so the economic model can turn. The issue with many blockchain games now is that they're full of people wanting to make money, with no one truly willing to pay. The MapleStory Universe already has the potential to be a mature blockchain game with rich content, but it didn't target the right player base. Blockchain games shouldn't start with the economic system and then look for fun; they should have fun first, then talk about the economic system.

Q16: Do you still believe in the Web3 game track?

Money-Making Chicken: I think blockchain games could still have explosive projects in the future, but they may not be mature blockchain games. It's possible that when everyone is pessimistic, a strong Ponzi scheme suddenly emerges, driving up hype and drawing people in again. From this perspective, there will still be opportunities. But if we're talking about truly mature Web3 games, I believe they could appear in the future, though I haven't seen a certain project yet. It might come from traditional big companies, using mature IPs, mature game content, plus NFT asset trading systems and wallet systems, bringing in both real gamers and blockchain gamers. It might not be as extremely profitable as before, but it would be more normal and sustainable.

Q17: If a newcomer asks you whether they can still play Web3 games now, what would you say?

Money-Making Chicken: If they have no prior game experience, I'd advise them not to start. Playing Web3 games now is a bit like looking for a golden dog among 100 shitcoins. Without experience, you'll get hurt along the way. Unless you're extremely lucky, but that's no different from opening futures or gambling. For players still in this space, I think you should remember one thing: when everyone is pessimistic, when an asset is at a low, if you judge it has future potential and limited downside, then be brave and bet. But when everyone starts talking about it, no matter what, sell at least half. I say this to myself too.

Q18: If a successful Web3 game emerges in the next three years, what would it look like?

Money-Making Chicken: I think it's likely to be a mature game driven by traditional big companies. It won't just be us crypto blockchain gamers playing inside; it will attract many real gamers. It will have a mature NFT asset trading system and wallet system, allowing blockchain gamers to participate and make some money. But it won't be as extremely profitable as the pure Ponzi blockchain games of the past—that's actually normal and sustainable. The previous model that relied on continuous inflow of new funds was never going to last. If we can discover and get in early in the future, we might still see decent returns. The MapleStory Universe is actually a signal: big companies are starting to try combining their IP games with blockchain.