Most P2E games are yield farms. The gameplay is a thin wrapper for a token emission schedule, where user acquisition is the primary KPI, not engagement. This creates a ponzinomic structure dependent on perpetual new player inflow, as seen in the collapse of Axie Infinity's SLP token.
the-state-of-web3-education-and-onboarding
Blog
Why Most P2E Games Are Just Dressed-Up Yield Farms
A technical autopsy of GameFi's flawed core loop: how tokenomics designed for capital extraction create unsustainable yield farms that fail as games, exposing players to hidden DeFi risks.
introduction
THE PONZI MECHANIC
Introduction
Play-to-earn games fail because their core economic loop prioritizes token extraction over sustainable gameplay.
The core failure is misaligned incentives. Game developers optimize for token price appreciation and treasury growth, while players optimize for maximizing token sell pressure. This is a zero-sum game where the protocol's success is the player's loss, unlike traditional games where value is co-created through fun.
Evidence: The average P2E game sees a >90% user retention drop after 30 days. The model conflates speculative capital with organic demand, leading to the inevitable death spiral where the only sustainable players are bots.
thesis-statement
THE INCENTIVE MISMATCH
The Core Thesis: GameFi's Fatal Flaw
Most Play-to-Earn games fail because they conflate speculative yield with sustainable gameplay, creating a system that rewards capital over skill.
Tokenomics supersedes gameplay. The primary loop in most P2E games is not playing, but earning. This inverts the fundamental value proposition, making the game a dressed-up yield farm where the 'fun' is extracting value before the next player.
Capital efficiency kills retention. When a player's asset value dictates power, skill and time become secondary. This creates a pay-to-win economy that alienates new users and accelerates the death spiral as early adopters exit.
Evidence: The lifecycle of Axie Infinity and STEPN demonstrates this. Both saw exponential growth in token price and users, followed by a collapse when the inflationary token emissions exceeded the utility and demand generated by the core gameplay loop.
key-trends
THE PONZI MECHANICS
Key Trends: The Anatomy of a Yield Farm Game
Most 'Play-to-Earn' economies are just yield farms with a 3D asset wrapper, designed to extract value from late entrants.
01
The Problem: The Inevitable Death Spiral
Token emissions are the primary gameplay loop, creating a hyperinflationary asset with no utility sink.\n- Token supply inflates >100% APY to attract initial players\n- Sell pressure from 'players' farming rewards crushes token price\n- TVL collapses 80-90% within 3-6 months of launch, as seen with Axie Infinity's SLP
>100%
Initial APY
-90%
TVL Crash
02
The Solution: Sink-or-Swim Tokenomics
Sustainable models burn or lock tokens through core gameplay, not just speculative staking.\n- Non-inflationary rewards funded from protocol fees (e.g., DeFi Kingdoms' Jewel emissions shift)\n- Mandatory token burns for essential actions like crafting, upgrading, or PvP entry\n- Dual-token models that separate volatile governance from stable in-game currency
>50%
Fee Burn Rate
2-Token
Standard Model
03
The Problem: The Player-Investor Duality
Users are financially incentivized to optimize for yield, not fun, destroying any emergent gameplay.\n- 'Players' are mercenary capital monitoring ROI, not engagement metrics\n- Game design warps around maximizing token farming efficiency\n- Leads to bot-dominated economies and zero genuine social interaction
>60%
Bot Activity
ROI-First
Player Motive
04
The Solution: Fun as a Financial Primitive
Bake enjoyment into the economic model so that playing well is more profitable than scripting.\n- Skill-based rewards where top leaderboard positions earn a majority of prizes\n- Dynamic difficulty & matchmaking that ties rewards to opponent skill level (e.g., Parallel's TCG model)\n- Provably rare cosmetic items that derive value from prestige, not utility
Skill-Based
Reward Curve
Cosmetic
Value Layer
05
The Problem: Centralized Value Extraction
Studio-controlled treasuries and NFT mint prices act as a massive, upfront VC round from players.\n- $50M+ NFT land sales (e.g., Otherside, Sandbox) before a playable game exists\n- Treasury controls >40% of token supply for 'development'\n- Players bear 100% of the downside risk for an unproven product
>40%
Treasury Share
$50M+
Pre-Mint Raise
06
The Solution: Player-Owned Economies
Shift value accrual to item creators and guilds, turning players into stakeholders, not customers.\n- Fully on-chain assets with composability across games (e.g., Loot Project's philosophy)\n- DAO-controlled treasuries where token holders vote on emission schedules and grants\n- SubDAOs for guilds & modders to monetize their communities directly
On-Chain
Asset Standard
DAO-Led
Treasury Control
DECONSTRUCTING THE P2E ILLUSION
The Yield Farm vs. Game Spectrum: A Comparative Analysis
A first-principles comparison of core economic drivers, exposing how most Play-to-Earn models are just gamified liquidity mining with extra steps.
| Core Economic Metric | Pure Yield Farm (e.g., Curve, Convex) | Hybrid P2E Game (e.g., Axie Infinity, STEPN) | Pure Skill-Based Game (e.g., Counter-Strike, Fortnite) |
|---|---|---|---|
Primary Value Driver | Protocol Fee Revenue & Token Emissions | Token Emissions & Secondary Market Speculation | Player Skill & Entertainment Utility |
Sink-to-Mint Ratio | < 0.1 (Net inflationary) | 0.1 - 0.5 (Weak sinks) |
|
Player ROI Determinant | TVL / Emission Schedule | Token Price / New User Inflow | Skill Level / Entertainment Value |
Sustainable Without New Capital? | |||
Core Loop is 'Work'? | |||
Ponzi-adjacent Tokenomics? | |||
Requires Continuous Token Emissions to Function? | |||
Intrinsic Utility Beyond Token Speculation? |
deep-dive
THE PONZI MECHANIC
Deep Dive: The Tokenomic Engine Room
Most Play-to-Earn games fail because their tokenomics are unsustainable yield farms disguised with 3D assets.
The core loop is extractive. Players deposit capital to earn tokens, creating immediate sell pressure that outpaces organic demand. This mirrors a yield farm like SushiSwap, where liquidity mining rewards dilute token holders.
Inflation is the primary gameplay mechanic. Projects like Axie Infinity and STEPN used hyperinflationary token emissions to bootstrap growth, creating a Ponzi-like structure dependent on new player inflows.
Real yield requires a sink. Sustainable models, seen in games like Illuvium, mandate that token sinks (e.g., crafting, upgrades) permanently remove more tokens from circulation than staking rewards mint.
Evidence: Axie's SLP token fell 99% from its peak as daily emissions overwhelmed utility, proving that speculative demand alone cannot sustain a token economy.
case-study
THE PONZI MECHANICS
Case Studies: From Hype to Hyperinflation
A forensic look at the unsustainable tokenomics that turn play-to-earn into pump-to-dump.
01
Axie Infinity: The Inverted Pyramid
The model required a constant influx of new players to pay the yields of earlier adopters. The SLP token's only utility was breeding new Axies, creating a hyperinflationary death spiral.
- Token Inflation: SLP supply grew by ~300% in 2021, massively outpacing sinks.
- Collapsing Floor: Entry cost for a viable team fell from ~$1,000+ to <$50, destroying the player-as-investor thesis.
300%
SLP Inflation
-95%
Entry Cost
02
StepN: The Treadmill of Depreciation
Positioned as a move-to-earn app, its core loop was a classic yield farm with sneaker NFTs. Earning required constant minting/burning of GST, but minting costs were always lower than the token's market price.
- Unsustainable Yield: Daily ROI for new sneakers peaked at ~3-5%, collapsing as user growth stalled.
- Pure Sell Pressure: >90% of earned GST was immediately sold, with no meaningful utility beyond minting more depreciating assets.
5%
Peak Daily ROI
90%+
Sell Pressure
03
The Illusion of 'Real Yield'
True sustainability requires revenue generated from external, non-speculative sources (e.g., transaction fees, premium features) to fund rewards. Most P2E games fund rewards purely from token emissions or new user deposits.
- Key Metric: Protocol Revenue vs. Token Emissions. If emissions are higher, it's a subsidy.
- The Exception: Games like Star Atlas aim for a dual-token model (utility + governance), but still face the fundamental challenge of creating non-speculative demand.
0
External Revenue
100%
Subsidy Rate
counter-argument
THE EXCEPTION PROOF
Counter-Argument: "But What About [Illuvium, Parallel, etc.]?"
High-fidelity games are the exception that proves the rule, as their success depends on decoupling from the token's financial mechanics.
AAA titles are outliers that succeed by treating crypto as a backend, not the core loop. Illuvium and Parallel build for gamers first, using NFTs for asset ownership and token rewards as a bonus. Their primary value proposition is gameplay, not yield.
The economic model diverges from classic P2E. Their tokens, like $ILV or $PRIME, function as governance and ecosystem currencies, not direct farming rewards for repetitive actions. This prevents the hyperinflation that killed Axie Infinity.
These games prove the rule: sustainable crypto gaming requires separating speculative finance from core engagement. The player's fun must not be a derivative of the token's price chart, a lesson ignored by 99% of P2E projects.
Evidence: Illuvium's Overworld and Arena modes are free-to-play, with revenue from NFT sales and marketplace fees funding development, not from constant token emissions to players.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
FAQ: For Builders and Investors
Common questions about why most Play-to-Earn (P2E) games are fundamentally yield farms with a gaming veneer.
Most P2E games are Ponzi-like yield farms where new user deposits fund earlier player rewards. The game's token and NFT assets are not backed by sustainable demand, but by the promise of future buyers. This creates an inevitable death spiral when user growth stalls, as seen in Axie Infinity's SLP token collapse.
takeaways
DECONSTRUCTING P2E ECONOMICS
Key Takeaways for Protocol Architects
Most Play-to-Earn models fail to create sustainable value, collapsing into extractive yield farms. Here's how to architect for longevity.
01
The Siren Song of Token Emissions
Inflationary token rewards create a ponzinomic death spiral. New players fund the yields of early adopters, with the protocol's token serving as the primary exit liquidity.
- Key Flaw: Token price becomes the core game mechanic, decoupling from actual gameplay.
- Result: Hyperinflation leads to >90% token price collapses within months, as seen with Axie Infinity's SLP.
>90%
Token Collapse
Ponzinomic
Core Loop
02
The Non-Existent Sink-to-Source Ratio
Sustainable in-game economies require sinks (token burns) > sources (token rewards). Most P2E games have this inverted, flooding the market with sell pressure.
- Key Flaw: Gameplay loops are designed for earning, not spending. Upgrades and items are often poor sinks.
- Solution: Architect deep, non-monetary sinks first (e.g., consumables, progression gates) before layering on monetization.
<1.0
Sink/Source Ratio
Sell Pressure
Primary Output
03
Extrinsic vs. Intrinsic Motivation
When financial yield is the primary driver, gameplay quality becomes irrelevant. This attracts mercenary capital, not engaged players.
- Key Flaw: Player retention is tied to token price, not fun. When yields drop, the player base evaporates.
- Solution: Build a fun game first, then add composable asset ownership. See Illuvium's focus on AAA quality before tokenomics.
Mercenary
Player Base
AAA First
Correct Path
04
The Asset Liquidity Trap
Making all in-game assets (NFTs) freely tradable destroys game balance and narrative. It turns itemization into a yield-optimization spreadsheet.
- Key Flaw: Developers lose control over in-game economies and progression curves.
- Solution: Use soulbound tokens (SBTs) or semi-fungible tokens for core progression items. Reserve full liquidity for cosmetic or land assets.
Soulbound
Key Design
Balance Control
Regained
05
The Web2 Subsidy Mirage
Many P2E games rely on continuous VC funding or token sales to subsidize player yields, masking a fundamentally unprofitable unit economics.
- Key Flaw: The model is a venture-funded Ponzi, not a sustainable business. When subsidies stop, the game dies.
- Architect's Test: Model your economy assuming zero new external capital inflows after TGE.
VC-Ponzi
Business Model
$0 Inflow
Stress Test
06
The Path Forward: Autonomous Worlds
Escape the yield farm trap by building for persistent state and emergent gameplay. Focus on durable assets and on-chain logic that create value beyond token emissions.
- Key Shift: Value accrues to rare, useful assets and land, not a monolithic governance token.
- Reference Models: Look to Dark Forest, Loot-derivatives, and on-chain physics engines for inspiration.
Persistent State
Core Primitive
Emergent Play
Value Driver
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall