Recently, I’ve been watching a few blockchain game pools, and the more I look, the more I feel that what’s dragging them down isn’t “nobody playing,” but inflation and mismatched outputs. The tokens are issued too easily, but the outputs are just air (or rely on the next wave of people taking over), so the pool is like a leaky bucket—eventually it will dry up. Big players aren’t fools either; their path dependence is obvious: first, they come in and take all the rewards, then switch to another place, leaving retail investors inside waiting for a miracle. To put it simply, for blockchain games to survive, the consumption must genuinely eat up the output; otherwise, no matter how beautiful the interface, it can’t hold up.

Recently, that main public chain is upgrading/maintaining, and everyone is guessing whether projects will migrate. I’m actually more concerned: whether they migrate or not, if the economic model relies on infinite issuance, switching chains is just switching pools to continue leaking. The final outcome isn’t destiny; it’s more about probability: the more inflation isn’t controlled, the higher the chance that the pool will be drained. Anyway, when I see “high output,” I just ask myself: who’s paying the bill?