[_fat_santa]

I see it as accounting trickery in the Web3 space. Rather than these games having a valuation that is based on active player base, in game purchases and other "traditional" metrics, they instead value the company based on the Market Cap of the coin they own.

A game might have 100 players but it worth $10B because they have a warchest of coins that they minted.

[bernf]

Coin market cap is also a made up term for alt coins. They equate it to how MV of a company is share price * outstanding shares. For a coin you can mint a million coins, and sell 5 of them for 10$ (to yourself most likely), and boom crypto exchanges list it as having a 100M Mkt cap, despite liquidity being zero. If it was truly liquid market all of these are worthless.

[wahnfrieden]

these projects not pulling their weight from launch are able to sustain that based on the hopium of ongoing competitive edge / bigger value being delivered based on current potential. the coins are worth that much mostly based on speculation that the project will pull off bigger wins with their investment into it, even if it seems there's value (however questionable to you) coming from a few directions already for holders.

so when the bigger studios, better independent teams, and big platforms that aren't rushing to market this early, even regardless of whether or not these studios are involved in nfts, i expect coin value will drop if they become obviously behind these adjacent products/experiences

sustained shitcoins that play their cards early on delivery of half baked projects will see their hopium veil evaporate

i think some studios can pull this off though, the aaa metaverses suffer from a blandness that comes as a cost of having so many players involved in one shared world. and it's easy for a shitcoin to buy a studio