Two things often discussed together in blockchain games are actually different: whether rewards can attract players, and whether the game is fun and worth coming back to. Rewards can be a way in, but once they’re gone, players may not want to open the game again if the gameplay has nothing fresh to offer. Without specific usage data, I can’t claim that any game retains its players, nor pretend I’ve tried one myself.

Rolling 24 hours: $IMX +3.01%. Rolling 24 hours: $GALA +5.26%. Rolling 24 hours: $AXS +2.55%. These are just changes in the spot prices of three separate tokens—not proof of player numbers, game revenue, or demand for in-game items. A price increase isn’t a direct measure of the product experience.

Asset trading may give players another option for dealing with unused items, but “can be resold” doesn’t mean “more convenient.” It also depends on whether the items have a real use, whether the trading rules are clear, and whether reselling is genuinely hassle-free. If an item is worth nothing but its resale value, the game can easily turn into an exercise in watching the ledger; if trading fits naturally into the gameplay, it might actually help. At present, there’s no verifiable news about these games’ adoption or usage data to show whether their players come back. More than the price gains, I’d like to know: aside from rewards and cashing out, what’s worth opening the game for again?