Recently, I’ve seen a few play-to-earn pools that “look really enticing,” but once I do the math, it’s overwhelming: the emissions are fixed and constantly sprayed out, while demand keeps itself alive on nothing but sentiment. Once inflation kicks in, the little liquidity in the pool gets squeezed until it’s like toothpaste. In the end, it can only rely on newcomers to keep footing the bill. To put it simply, in the game, as long as the “coin-printing speed” is greater than the “consumption scenarios,” a collapse is only a matter of time.

When I look at projects like this now, I’ve gotten into the habit of treating them like backups first: you need redundancy, otherwise if one link in the chain slips, the whole system is ruined. I count the consumption side as one backup, and the real buy orders as one backup—exit mechanisms also have to be counted as backups… if one piece is missing, don’t expect the pool to hold up.

Airdrop season is quite similar: a point-based system has people competing like they’re at work, and the task platform also has anti-Sybil/anti-bot controls. As a result, everyone becomes even more short-term—do it today, run it tomorrow. If the blockchain game economy also relies entirely on “grinding out rewards,” then it’s no different from just farming—don’t pretend it’s a long-term ecosystem.