We recently sat down with Gabby Dizon, Co-Founder of Yield Guild Games. Yield Guild Games is a play-to-earn gaming guild that invests in NFTs from games and virtual worlds like Axie Infinity to allow players to contribute their time and effort to earn an income from these games. In this conversation, we discuss how Yield Guild Games evaluates investment opportunities, the company’s operating and governance model, the growing value of blockchain gaming, and the future of the play-to-earn space. This is an edited and abbreviated transcript. Enjoy!
Today I have the pleasure of speaking to Gabby Dizon, co-founder of Yield Guild Games. Yield Guild Games, or YGG, is a play-to-earn gaming guild bringing players together to earn via blockchain-based economies. In this conversation we'll go deeper into how YGG works, how blockchain and games go together, and how gaming studios can become successful in this space. Gabby, welcome to the Metacast. What game are you currently playing?
Right now what I tell people is that my day-to-day life as a guild leader is so much like a video game that I can't get myself to play games anymore.
How YGG Functions
Let's talk about YGG and lay the foundation first. What's Yield Guild exactly? How do you explain it to people in the gaming space?
YGG is a play-to-earn gaming guild. That means we buy into NFT assets of different blockchain games. For example, we own a lot of axies, a lot of cars in F1 Delta Time, a lot of land in games like Sandbox and League of Kingdoms. Once we have these assets, we lend them out to our player base, the guild members. These guild members are playing with the assets that we own inside the game. They make some money off that through the game mechanics, get some token-based rewards, and are able to cash out to fiat. Think about it as a World of Warcraft guild with a bank account.
You distributed good equipment over your team members, to enable them to do raids and all that good stuff.
That's right. We onboard a lot of people into the cryptoeconomy via these games. They don't have to start with money, they have to start with gaming skill. Of course, you need equipment, and it might be expensive. Since the guild provides the equipment, you can come in and start playing right away.
Does Yield Guild also get involved more deeply into blockchain projects? Or does it just stay with owning and renting these gaming assets?
We invest, which means that we have an investment team that's getting into private rounds, buying tokens and NFTs. We try to get in as early as possible, similar to a VC investor, but we don't buy any part of the company. We're only interested in the assets of the game and the tokens that represent the game economy. That's what we want to help make successful.
I heard that you were also looking into letting others lend out their own assets through YGG. For example, a few months ago I wanted to get into Axie, so I bought a few axies. I realized that either my axies are never good or I'm just very bad at the game because I wasn't having much success. What if I wanted to rent out my axies? Could I do that through YGG, or I would have to do it another way?
It's part of our roadmap. We buy all of these assets and we make them available to our player base. We're making the platform to do that, but we're limited by the balance sheet and how much money we raise. If we want to serve millions of people around the world, we would have to keep raising money. Once we have that lending marketplace live, that means people can lend us their assets, and then we can lend them to other people as well. It's something that we want to do because then people can be investors. You can buy these assets and still put them to good use by lending them out.
The YGG Community
How many scholars do you have today?
We have a little under 5,000.
Can you talk more in-depth how you manage this? How does that work?
Yield Guild doesn't manage the scholars directly. We have 19 community managers who are also part of the player community. They recruit and train these axies scholars from around the world. We have community managers from different parts of the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Latin America, Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil. They form their local communities, recruit players, and train them how to play the game. We give them access to our assets so that they can lend them out to the players they're recruiting.
In the case of Axie, they earn SLP (Small Love Potion) tokens, and we do our revenue share on the SLP. 70% goes to the player, 20% goes to the community manager, and 10% goes to us. As a community manager, I'm incentivized to train and recruit people because I'm also getting a share of what they're earning. Ultimately, they're playing a different game.
How do you look at scaling this up? I feel like 5,000 is relatively low for the potential that you have. How do you look at growing this number towards a million?
We want to be in the millions. There's two components to that. One is the assets, and second is the managers. The manager system is scalable because we can recruit managers from any part of the world. Then they're the ones that go out and recruit the players. For example, we have a country manager in the Philippines that goes out and trains community managers, gives them content and training. The closest analogy we have isn't a game company, but a ride-sharing company like Uber. It does driver acquisition, gives them training.
On the other hand, we need to have a lot of assets to provide to these players. We're very aggressively breeding more axies, investing in more games, buying more land. We're investing into the future of the metaverse, into these assets in different games and virtual worlds, so that we can have a lot of different assets to provide to our player base. We imagine having community managers managing scholars all over the world.
Could you talk more about how you make these investment decisions? You now have more and more blockchain games popping up, more and more teams see the potential and start to build something. How do you choose which one to invest in, to buy tokens, land, or NFTs?
We've invested into 13 games today. Axie is the one that we're most known for, but we've invested into games like League of Kingdoms, Guild of Guardians, Ember Sword, Star Atlas, ZED RUN, and others. Some of those games are already live, and some won't be out until six months to two years from now.
The first thing that we look at is how the economy works. That's the most important thing because we're investing into these assets for a specific purpose. We want to invest in assets that are yield-producing, so that our guild members can earn some money off of it. That means taking a look at how the game designers are thinking about the economy, how rewards are produced, where the inflow of money will come from, what are they investing into, and how sustainable it looks in the long-term. It's not that different from taking a look at the economy of a free-to-play game, except that you're looking specifically at points where value can be transferred out to the blockchain. This makes them tradable peer-to-peer and eventually cashed out to fiat. We take a look at that, at the team, what's their track record, are they strong in crypto, are they strong in games, are they strong in both. If they're strong in both, we really love them. If we like it, then we talk with the team and make a decision to invest.
We invest mainly in the NFT assets, so we're investing directly into the game's economy. We also take a smaller position in the game's token. We're not a VC, we're not primarily driven by a multiple on our return. We want to make sure that our assets stay a long time and how our players earn an income from it. We're more like a Berkshire Hathaway that likes to invest in really good assets and keep them for a long amount of time.
You have a few games that are live. What return on investment are you currently looking at? What return do you have on every dollar invested each year?
We made a significant increase in the value of the NFTs that we invest in. What's more important is how much our players are earning from the assets that we have. For a game like Axie Infinity, a player is earning somewhere between $400 to $600 a month. In some cases, it could be as high as $1,000 or more. That's very important for us because in some countries around the world that's a very significant amount of money that's akin to a job.
These axies that we're talking about now would cost around that amount. It would cost $600 now to get axies.
You need three to start a team and start playing. There's a return on investment on an axies of two to three months, depending on different factors. If you look at it as a pure business, it's a pretty good business.
Could you give some insights into the different types of games and their relation to yield return? On one hand, you have land-based games, and, on the other hand, you have creature-based games like Axie Infinity. Are there others? How do the returns per player or scholar differ?
For example, League of Kingdoms is a strategy game similar to Clash of Clans. The difference is that players own land inside the game. If money is spent on top of that land in the map, a portion of the purchase goes towards the land owner in DAI or dollars.
In a game like F1 Delta Time, if you race and win, you earn the REVV token. The play-to-earn component is slightly different in each game. It more or less results in you earning either a fungible token that can be turned into Ether or back to fiat, or an NFT that you can then sell.
How do you expect this to evolve, as the industry and the whole blockchain space matures?
It's super early in the play-to-earn space. I'd say there's no playbook yet in free-to-play where people generally understand how money is made in a game. There's still a lot of experimentation on what works and what doesn't. It's only Axie at this point who's really broken out and found real product market fit to the point where they're earning 30-40 million dollars of marketplace revenue a day and doing a lot of user growth, without being available in any of the major app stores. But we're seeing now a lot of talent from the game and crypto industries making studios, new games, new experiments. We're expecting to see an incredible amount of innovation in the next 6 to 24 months, and a lot of high quality titles coming out from experienced teams.
Are there a few that you're excited about particularly?
Guild of Guardians is one that's created by the Immutable X and Stepico teams. It's a Diabloish ARPG with play-to-earn elements. It's a mobile title as well. I've always loved Diablo and ARPGs, so I'm really excited for that.
Ember Sword is a full fantasy MMO. They have different factions, players can choose what faction they're in. You can play it via browser or the full PC experience. We actually own a city in that game.
The greatest thing about what's coming out is there's a lot of variety in the types of games that are coming out. People can really choose what games they really enjoy, rather than just going for which game can make them the most money.
How do you think about allocations per game? If I'm not mistaken, most of your assets are axies. How do you decide how much land you'd buy of some game?
It comes when we do the investment evaluation. If we're fairly confident in a game, we want to have some exposure to it. When we have assets, and the game starts going live, our players can start playing it. We're not going to invest a million dollars in a game before it launches. We might invest $100,000, and then have the community start playing it.
When the community starts playing it, then you have a good idea of how the game is doing and a better sense of is it going to last, how are the developers thinking about iterating on the economy, how they're dealing with the community. This happened with Axie. We invested millions of dollars into it, but it didn't really start that way. It was because of the increase in community engagement over time that allowed us to step up our investment.
In all the games that we like we invest a small amount, typically in pre-launch. When the game launches we help them launch, we help with AMA, with community support, maybe airdrops, exclusive NFTs, and then we watch how our community reacts to the game. If our community is really into the game, then we know that it's worth putting in more money because the game can handle more engagement and a greater user base.
YGG’s Operating Model
You talked about your community. Could you discuss about how YGG is set up? Are you a company or a DAO? How does it work?
YGG is a DAO, not a company. We're a DAO of more than 60,000 players around the world.
A DAO is a distributed autonomous organization. It's a group of people that are working together towards a common goal. Usually they're bound together by a crypto token, for example. That token may represent a membership or governance in the group and what it's trying to do. That's also the case in YGG. Now there are 60,000 people who are part of the DAO, playing different games, interacting with the community, and earning money from the different games that we're doing.
How does your token work?
The token represents membership and governance access to the guild itself. There are certain exclusive benefits that you can get only if you hold a token. There's also different guild-specific NFTs that you get. They signify that you're a member of the guild. For example, there's a membership badge which is an NFT that anyone can get. It's for free. You just pay gas.
The token itself represents governance of the guild and the assets inside. Once we set up the governance forum, then people can propose and vote on different proposals. That's how guild management is done.
That builds on top of a community. Everytime we talk about blockchain games, one word that always comes back is community. How did you initially build up your community around YGG?
The initial community of YGG came from the Axie community. A lot of our early players, scholars, managers, and early investors were part of the Axie community. That said, there's a general interest in the play-to-earn and blockchain gaming space, especially as we invested into more games, like League of Kingdoms, for example. People were interested in playing that game. We've attracted people from different blockchain gaming communities and a lot of people who are interested in the metaverse.
What are the current challenges that YGG is facing?
One part of it is cultural. Play-to-earn is something new. We've noticed that there's a really ingrained notion in society that playing games is wasting time. A lot of people around the world have this skill, gaming, which they honed while growing up because it's fun, but they've always been taught that this is a time waster, it's not worth anything, you're better off doing something else, maybe studying, learning a real skill.
Now that we've unlocked gaming as a skill that can be monetized via play-to-earn, people are realizing that the skill that they've been learning the entire time is actually worth something, and they can earn money from it. It's a little hard to believe, especially for the parents of these players.
As YGG and play-to-earn gets bigger, there's still some disbelief in general society that people are doing something productive. But they are doing something productive because the inputs inside a game has an economy and you're getting something back, which is what work is. It shouldn't matter if you're doing it via MS Office or inside of Axie Infinity. You're creating value and you're getting paid because of the inputs that you do inside a virtual world.
Subscribe to Master The Meta
If you want to receive future interviews straight in your inbox, make sure to subscribe to our newsletter below.
The Value of Blockchain Gaming
That brings us to my next question. There's still a lot of people in the games industry who haven’t gone aboard the blockchain gaming hype train. What do you say to them? When was it that this blockchain game thing clicked for you? How do you try to convince them from your point of view?
I've been in blockchain games and NFTs since 2018. It's been met with a lot of skepticism from the games industry in the same sense as when there was a lot of skepticism about free-to-play in the early 2010s. I think there's a seismic shift that happens in our business model every ten years. Within those ten years, people optimize their learnings for the current business model, to get really good at it, which means being good at a story-based or a free-to-play game.
When the shift in the business model happens, a lot of people are making money there, so there's resistance to what's new. But there are some people who are mavericks or not doing well in the current business environment, and they try to create something new. Generally, it's either dismissed or people are downright hostile to it until it's proven that the new model really works. In such cases, people start moving into it. If you go into a new business model, and you're early, and it works, then it's great. That's where the new Kings or Supercells are formed. But there's a lot of trends that come up that are slower to take off, and game developers are wary of being pulled into a new trend every so often.
You can make a case for AR/VR. It was going to be so big, and then it ended up being not very big yet.
AR/VR, streaming games, a lot of different business models. A lot of independent game developers are living title to title. It's hard to have the promised land, this is where the riches are, and then for everything not to work. It's happened again and again. I've seen it in my almost 20 years as a game developer. There's generally a lot of skepticism until something really works. It wasn't until Axie Infinity had what I call its “Clash of Clans moment” that game developers finally started paying attention.
This was when things just really started taking off around May. Axie was growing 30% a week, and the daily volume was going up to the point where it became the highest grossing game in the world, without a presence in any of the app stores.
Did that have anything to do with the switch to Ronin?
Yes, it was absolutely because of the switch to Ronin. Axie had been growing prior to that, but it had been stifled by Ethereum gas fees. When Ronin came out and people could transact without paying gas, the user base and transactions shot through the roof. So many people were joining that it really stress tested the game's capacity.
This is a community question: how important is it for games to create their own layer 2 or side chain?
Creating a layer 2 is hard mode. I don't think every game should create one. The pioneers who were creating these ones earlier, like Immutable X, did so because there were no good choices. But for new games coming in, I would absolutely encourage everyone to take a look at the current infrastructure, don't care if it's layer 1 or 2 side chain. But you wouldn’t want to be in Ethereum if you want to have high throughput in terms of transactions. You could be on a Ronin, Flow, Solana, Polygon. YGG doesn't care which, if there's a good game.
What are the risks on building on someone else's layer 2 on Ronin?
It’s that you don't have any control of the platform. You have to thoroughly understand the tradeoffs of the blockchain that you're building on. Some are built for speed, some for decentralization, some for security, some for permission, some are completely permissionless. What happens if you're in a permissionless blockchain, then something else takes off and the entire network goes down? You have no ability to deal with it because no one owns the blockchain. You're sharing control of a global database with other people around the world. There's a lot of factors to consider that aren't present when you're running your own private database.
The Play-to-Earn Space
What is for you the difference between play-to-earn and blockchain games? Is there any?
Blockchain games is the base level where you're using games that make use of a blockchain as a way to store assets instead of a private database. If your assets are in a blockchain, whether they're NFTs or tokens, you externalize them and give ownership to the users who buy these assets. A lot of games can be blockchain games if they use the blockchain in some way. They don't need to be play-to-earn.
Play-to-earn is a very specific business model similar to free-to-play. You're using assets in a game, for example, NFTs, to play a game and earn some kind of token-based reward. That means you're investing in an asset and you're getting yield. This token can be transferred back and sold into Ether or back into fiat currency.
Let's say I'm a big shooters player. After 10,000 kills with a certain weapon I receive a cosmetic NFT, a rare skin of that weapon, and I'm able to sell that for a lot of money because not a lot of players have 10,000 kills with that gun. Would you consider that a play-to-earn game?
Yes, that would be play-to-earn. It's one step removed because you receive an item and sell it, rather than getting a token directly. But that's still play-to-earn if you can sell the item that you get.
What are you looking for and avoiding in play-to-earn games to get involved in? I'm interested in some red flags that you see and you want to stay away from?
The biggest red flag is an early focus on the price of a token that’s related to a game. It's very dangerous to hyper focus on price, especially if the price goes up by many multiples when the game launches, because there's hype, maybe there's artificial scarcity. When people play, then earn that token and start selling it, the price starts going down. Then people are disappointed and may think it's a scam.
We like to see the sustainability of an economy a lot more than "Is the price of a token going up?" It's not a quick game to earn a lot of profit, and then move to the next one. I think this is damaging for the economy in this space. We want to take a look at games that are thinking about how the economy might evolve in the next six months, one year, two years, five years. In my opinion, every play-to-earn game eventually turns into an MMO, if it wasn't already, because you're looking for a sustainable economy with assets that your players have created and are using. You need to be the governor of economy, and design experiences in the game for that asset to be useful, for people to want to put money in.
Is there a play-to-earn model that hasn't been built yet? Some game you'd like to see or some model that hasn't been done successfully that you think has a lot of potential?
There's a lot of different applications that haven't been built yet. Some have been in development. We're seeing things like first-person shooters, grand space operas trying to be the next Eve Online, full fantasy MMOs. There’s a lot of experimentation in this space.
What we're not seeing yet is melding play-to-earn with VR. That's the true promise of Ready Player One. It's a niche with a niche. Developers are wary of that right now, but there's a lot of different gameplay styles that are coming up in the next few years.
I'd like to have your thoughts on the sustainability of a model like Axie. I'm curious to see what happens with Axie Infinity once there's no longer an inflow of new players who want to start playing the game. What are your thoughts on that?
The Axie growth model right now is predicated on new user growth. Our growth is driven by breeders who buy SLP and give value to it, because they want to breed axies, and SLPs are an ingredient for that. Then they either sell them to new players coming in, or provide scholarships for new players.
At a certain point when no new players come in, then the demand for new axies and SLPs would stall. You could say that that's true for every business, be it a free-to-play game, a store, or even a website like Facebook. If no new customers come in, then you'll stop selling. The challenge is to build iteratively and keep on adding value and functionality into the system while the user growth is still climbing.
We're still very early on in the play-to-earn space. Axie has done over 1.5 million DAU already, but I think it could hit 10 million or more. That said, they've actually been developing a lot of different gameplay in the last two years. The land gameplay has been under development, the new version of battles.
One of the key differences is that once you have three axies, in theory, you're set, your axies don't die. They can stay with you. For a lot of other businesses, they lose quality, and you'll need new ones. There’s a repeat purchase, which wouldn't be the case for Axie.
It's a very interesting game design question because it goes into how you design the assets that interact with your economy. axies have no concept of durability. They don't degrade in the current model. This means that it limits the demand for new axies because your axies don't die, and they can keep producing SLP cash flow forever.
This presents a problem in that it may limit the demand for new NFTs, for new axies, because you have three and you're okay, unless the metagame changes or you want to collect more. There's nothing that's preventing the Sky Mavis team from introducing different functionalities to Axie. This is more like a game design problem - how are you going to use NFTs? How do you put in the concept of durability? How do you make the player want to spend more in a sustainable manner? Why would you need to do NFTs if these become broken or they die?
You talked about how free-to-play suddenly emerged after people were focused on more console and PC games. How do you see blockchain games with respect to the traditional games? Do you see this as something in addition? Do you think there'll be a lot of PC and mobile games start integrating blockchain?
I see it starting to happen. All games that have a concept of an economy will move towards play-to-earn at some point. Play-to-earn drastically increases the total available market of games in general. You're not playing games for entertainment anymore. You're playing games possibly for an income. Probably it's not a fulltime job, but it's a supplemental income. It makes the economy more real when you're able to get value out of it. I think that games with an economy will mostly be built on top of blockchain.
How do you see traditional AAA publishers, like Activision and EA, moving into blockchain games?
Very slowly. The reason is, one, they're making a lot of money already with current titles, a lot of which are multibillion dollar franchises with product release patterns that are hard to break. They've optimized themselves at creating this pipeline in the last few years.
Second, they're public companies. If they go into something new that's potentially scary, that means they have a lot of risk on the legal and regulatory side. Lawyers will be cautioning them to do something that's potentially gray matter as of now.
Third, they have public shareholders, which means that there's a real possibility of being sued if a public company comes out with a game that has a token, and people don't like it. It's very hard for the biggest game publishers to get into play-to-earn. This presents a new field of opportunities for independent developers to come in and experiment, backed by VCs, or maybe on their own, and try these experiments to create something new.
Right now I see game development in play-to-earn as the greenest field of opportunity for new developers to come in and try to make something new, and upend the world order a bit, which hasn't been seen since the 2008-2010 when all of these social gaming companies were coming up.
Do you recommend every person who wants to build a new gaming company to start looking at blockchain games?
It depends. If you want to build a narrative-based game, I don't see where blockchain might fit in. For a lot of indie games that are very mechanic-based or storyline-based it probably doesn't make sense. I wouldn't try to shoehorn blockchain into every game.
What blockchain does is it makes your economy real, it puts your assets in a blockchain that players can own, they trade by themselves, and then cash out to whatever currency they're in. If there's an economy in the game, and that economy can be exchanged for real value, it should be on a blockchain.
What about teams who have experience in building multiplayer games with economies but they don't have any internal knowledge about blockchains? How would you recommend them to move forward?
There's a lot of highly technical teams already. I'd suggest just taking the time to do a deep dive on the crypto side. That's how we started in 2018, by learning smart contracts. Honestly, no one in crypto has more than three years of smart contract experience. Even the best ones probably have a year or less of experience. If you're already super technical, just dive in and learn the differences of programming for smart contracts, rather than programming on a database. I'd build that scale internally.
There's a lot of really good game economy designers in free-to-play. What they need to internalize is that in free-to-play you're optimizing for continuously selling stuff to the player. You want the players to create value in the economy via the gameplay, and then sell it to other players. Then you're taking a much smaller percentage of that.
Axie itself is taking a 4.25% fee of all transactions. You're more like Amazon Marketplace rather than the direct seller. This is the biggest shift for free-to-play designers that are used to squeezing value out of players. How are you giving value to players so that they can make money in a game, they can have value, and other players want to buy from them? That's the unique challenge.
The Potential of Loot
I'd like to touch upon what's been on most of the crypto gaming space's mind for the last month. That's Loot. In my head, this is something fundamentally new. As my colleague on the Metacast, David, presented it, you have to burn everything that you know about games, and start rebuilding from scratch. How do you look at Loot? How do you describe it to people? What opportunity do you see in it?
Loot is interesting because it upends everything that we know about making games. Loot is an NFT that has a bunch of items that are written in text. You may have a divine robe, plate armor, staff. These are all recorded on a blockchain, and it does nothing else, which is crazy. There's so much commotion about it because there’s this purity about something that was released, that anyone could build..
Because these items are purely on chain, you can build experiences on top of it on a community-driven level. Players could experience this, using a common set of assets. It's a very crypto-native way to think about things. It throws out the entire rulebook for how games are made.
Is Yield Guild in any way involved in that?
Currently, no. I own a bunch of Loot items. I have a divine robe, which is not even the rarest item in the game, but it's the most desired. Yield Guild doesn't make games, but we support games that have a play-to-earn component. We’re interested to see how it develops.
We don't want to shape how the game is formed. It's too early for YGG to be involved as a guild itself. But I think there are members in the community that are involved in Loot and love the conceptual idea of creating something new from nothing, using the very strengths of blockchain. It's very mind boggling.
What are your personal thoughts on the future of this thing? Do you think this can work?
There's two things. One, the ultimate power that's highlighted by Loot is that of composability. It's not something that's highly priced by traditional game developers because the traditional thinking is "I want to make the items in my game, and sell them. Why would I invite other people to use my items? That would be like sucking out my user base if I make my items available in another game." It's a very protectionist mode on your economy, which is what the traditional game industry is used to. Fortnite wouldn't want other players using its skins and items in another game. It doesn't make sense for that business model.
Loot takes away all of that. It just gives you items and dares you to build upon it with the implicit notion that these items are all shared by the community such that if there are different games that are made, then you have to share the assets that are there.
Second, it takes advantage of the pure crypto economy in that it doesn't require you to have a lot of production value. One of the things that people miss about blockchain games is they think these games will take off when the production value is higher. They can have something as polished as Call of Duty with crypto in it.
What makes crypto games special is the ability to have a functioning economy inside a set rules of a game environment that allow people to have value out of it. This means that even if you strip away all of the graphics and the production value, it'll still work. This is what most game people miss because they're used to the production process of creating a highly polished Triple-A game experience. What you need in crypto is a functional economy. Everything on top of that is secondary.
From the perspective of a gamer, how sustainable do you feel play-to-earn is for you? What happens when you're doing this for a living?
I like the philosophical take on it. People have this notion that "If it becomes work, then it's not fun anymore." I really want to push back on the nature of that and ask the question: what if all kinds of work that earn you money can be fun? You don't have to have a binary question between "Am I having fun or am I doing work?" This implies that work isn't fun. What if there are many manners of doing work that are fun, and I can earn money from that? That's a question that we're trying to answer. I think that's something that most people miss because they have this implicit notion that work isn't fun.
What is the best piece of advice you've ever received about building something in the blockchain games space?
It's to discard the notions that you've had and just try new things. A lot of people are afraid to make mistakes. When you're facing a new field, you have to question all of the assumptions that you held, especially in doing something like making games. You have to test all of those assumptions, try them, and see if they still hold up. A lot of the things that we internalize in the game industry don't hold as true or as important when making blockchain games. You have to figure out what those are.
Could you share with us a bold prediction about the blockchain games industry?
The blockchain games industry will be over a trillion dollars ten years from now.
That's a bold prediction. Thank you, Gabby, for being on the Metacast.