Web3 Gaming Has a Marketing Problem…(amongst others)

Let’s face it, the majority of gamers hate Web3 and what it has stood for up until this point. Get-rich-quick rug pulls, Play to Earn, To-the-moon NFT’s and Tokenomics have tainted the consumer facing communication of most of these terms. So now even if a game is outstanding, was built for gamers primarily to have fun and incorporates Blockchain, its DoA because of the language used to market and explain it.

But there are back-end advantages for gamers who play games with Blockchain integration. Digital asset ownership verification, additional security and digital asset history are all cool things for dev teams to use while designing a game. So why must the game be labeled a “Web3” game if it uses some of this tech?

Back-end services are used all the time in game development. Matchmaking, cloud servers, player to player in game communications, data analytics, anti-cheat and more are regularly used in GaaS and are almost always invisible to the player both in game and in marketing. Would you label your game a “Playfab” game or a “AWS” game or a “Easy Anti-Cheat” game? Absurd right?

Is this even possible or is any Web3 integration a death sentence to a game. Will it get sniffed out by gamers and then immediately labeled as a scam?