We just yelled out 'preeeeeach!' in the middle of a cafe.

Why?

The first part, of the last sentence, of the second paragraph of this linked article. Which reads:

"Developers can also build in-game marketplaces..."

But hold up. We're getting ahead of ourselves.

Let's lay down some context before we continue...

Justin Kan, co-founder of Twitch, has a Web3 gaming start-up called Fractal - it's a platform that developers can use to create Web3 games.

And it also allows developers to 'build in-game marketplaces.'

So why is that half-a-sentence getting us all riled up?

Because it's the key to making Web3 gaming work.

We harp on about the current state of blockchain gaming a fair bit, but it bears repeating...

Here's how (most) Web3 games currently work:

• You buy an expensive NFT, in order to play

• You grind to try and make your money back

• Which means games don't need to be good to encourage playership

• Which means we get a bunch of crappy games, that need a constant flow of new players buying in, in order to pay out the existing ones

Here's how they need to work (if Web3 gaming is going to take off):

• The games are free to play (hooray!)

• To foster repeat playership, the games need to be good

• Players can collect NFTs of varying rarity, in-game (for free)

• Players can then sell those items using the in-game marketplace

• The game makers can then collect a royalty from each sale (e.g. 5%)

See how the former benefits the game maker, but puts the player in debt right out of the gate? Whereas the latter benefits both?

Plus! With the second option, game makers get to build an in-game collectible once, and profit from it infinitely (vs. build once, profit once).

As for the player?

They feel like they're winning because not only is the game fun & free to play - but if/when they sell an NFT, they keep 95% of the profits.

So, yeah...learning about a development platform that not only understands this, but facilitates it?

That's exciting enough for us to publicly embarrass ourselves.