The Wolves DAO Files #14: The Pros and Cons of Factory NFTs
Exploring the impact, risks, and potential future direction for factory NFTs
Introduction
Factory NFTs have become a topic of debate within the Web3 gaming community. Concerns about their impact on the economy, the difficulty of control, and the legality of their asset structure have surfaced. In this article, we delve into the discussions surrounding factory NFTs, exploring their viability, risks, and potential future directions.
The Challenges of Factory NFTs
The Wolves highlighted several challenges associated with factory NFTs. One major concern is the potential resemblance to Ponzi schemes, where the value of NFTs fluctuates wildly, leading to asset inflation followed by crashes. Additionally, the idea that participants receive free NFTs indefinitely raises questions about sustainable economies.
No successful economy is based on participants getting free stuff in perpetuity. Value is derived from work.
Many argue that the true value in gaming lies in the transformation of one scarce resource into another, such as the conversion of time invested in the game to in-game currency or other valuable assets.
Marketing and Exposure
Despite the concerns, factory NFTs can serve as valuable marketing tools, helping developers build a large and enthusiastic player base. By airdropping NFTs for free, projects can generate short-term speculation and interest among secondary traders. However, long-term success hinges on whether the game or project itself can sustainably attract and retain the attention of the target audience.
Factory NFTs can be used to build a large and fanatical player base as marketing and exposure to their game and collection, but there needs to be substance there in the first place that appeals to the target audience and then later on, a broader audience.
The true value lies in creating a game that people genuinely want to play, offering enjoyable experiences, and providing incentives for players to invest in the ecosystem.
Sustainability and Value Creation
A crucial factor determining the success of factory NFTs is sustainability. If the game or project fails to provide sufficient value beyond the initial hype, the market will cool down, and the prices of NFTs will plummet.
The issue isn't the "Factory" model itself, but how you can control the output of the factory.
To address this, developers must focus on delivering engaging gameplay and long-term utility for NFTs. Factory NFTs could be designed to enhance game progression, offer limited edition cosmetics or skins, or provide access to exclusive content without granting significant advantages over non-NFT holders. However, maintaining a delicate balance between creating value for players and avoiding the pitfalls of hyperinflationary death spirals is essential.
Alternative Approaches
Some participants in the discussion pointed out successful implementations of factory NFTs that generate other NFTs, without falling into the trap of being a Ponzi scheme.
The Parallel game ecosystem serves as a noteworthy example. Special Edition and Alpha Edition cards act as factory NFTs, allowing players to generate "echoes" or non-factory versions of the cards. This approach demonstrates a potentially viable model that combines the creation of NFTs with gameplay utility, providing an attractive value proposition without relying solely on speculative trading.
No strong opinion on whether this will work long-term or not, but it's interesting to see, and I think it's one of many potentially viable approaches.
Another healthier approach involves transitioning factory assets to function more like factors of production, requiring active management rather than facilitating rent collection. Initial holders can still benefit from airdrops or similar incentives if it aligns with the project's goals. However, over time, the ownership of NFTs should shift to parties who can maximize their usefulness.
The troubles start by leaning too hard on elements like "passive income" and "forever".
It can be very short-sighted to cater to the Genesis crowd too hard and lock up designs too early.
By adopting this model, factory NFTs can evolve into dynamic assets that promote engagement and utility within the ecosystem. It enables a sustainable approach where ownership aligns with the ability to generate value, rather than relying solely on speculative or passive income motivations.
Design Considerations
When distributing assets with valuable utility, such as NFTs, it's important to consider the opportunity cost involved. The financial viability of the model hinges on providing benefits that generate sufficient revenue relative to selling the asset outright.
Even though NFTs seem like they may have little/no marginal cost to create or ascribe utility to, there's an opportunity cost to factor in when distributing any asset with valuable utility
These benefits can take the form of marketing, but it's crucial to understand the target audience and their spending habits over time. Alternatively, selling factory NFTs based on the discounted value of future-produced NFTs could be a primary revenue source. However, the current trend leans towards distributing them for free, potentially leading to secondary market profits.
Another way they could benefit the developer is by providing a sink for another asset, for example by requiring a token input cost to create the output NFT (of course supply control is key to avoid a ponzi issue).
Risks include misaligned expectations, inadequate supply control, and the risk of monopolization. Future iterations should focus on ensuring users provide more value to the project than they receive.
The current implementation of factory NFTs has missed opportunities and design risks. Careful consideration is needed to avoid exaggerated marketing and maintain transparent communication. Proper supply control mechanisms are crucial to prevent issues of inflation or scarcity.
Additionally, the focus should be on fostering gameplay and value creation rather than solely extracting value. Future iterations can learn from these experiences and strive to ensure that users contribute meaningful value to the project. Balancing expectations, implementing effective supply control, and fostering a focus on gameplay are vital for the success of factory NFTs.
Conclusion
Factory NFTs bring up concerns about economic impact, control, and legal structure. While challenges exist, these NFTs can serve as valuable marketing tools to attract dedicated player bases. However, sustained success depends on creating engaging games and projects that offer long-term value beyond initial hype.
To ensure sustainability, developers should focus on gameplay experiences and ongoing utility for NFTs, striking a balance between value creation and avoiding hyperinflationary risks. Transitioning factory assets to function as factors of production, rather than a passive income source, presents a healthier approach. It is essential to address distribution strategies, revenue sources, supply control, and monopolization risks while managing expectations transparently.
By learning from past experiences, future iterations of factory NFTs can unlock innovative monetization models and enhance player engagement in the Web3 gaming landscape.
Special Thanks To
Rich Cabrera, Kaizen, Marcmcg, Rick Crosschain, Zapdan, The Gwei, Full Meta Alchemist, Kevin | Koin Games, Kieferzang, Jryann, and Ceddy for actively contributing to this discussion and providing valuable insights.
This Substack post was put together by @Web3_Memento.
Need Help?
Need market intel and advice to help your Web3 project succeed? Get in touch with The Wolves today and receive a free consultation!
Disclaimer
None of this is financial or legal advice.