WEB3 GAMING: THE GAME IS FREE. BUT WHO MAKES THE MONEY?

 

BIZ MASALA | THE BIG STORY — FIRST CUT

From familiar PC and mobile games to blockchain-based digital assets: business models, money trail and risks.

By Murthy ASR | Biz Masala | 17 October 2026

You know PC games, browser games, mobile games and console games. Web3 gaming does not replace those formats. It adds a different layer to some games: blockchain records, tokenised items, player-to-player trading and, in certain projects, cryptocurrencies. The business question is whether people enjoy the game, spend money on it and return often enough for the company to build a durable business.

1. What is Web3 gaming?

Imagine buying a special football player card. In a conventional game, the item is usually governed by the publisher’s systems and terms. In a Web3 game, some items may be represented by tokens recorded on a blockchain. Depending on the design and rules, players may be able to transfer or trade them through supported marketplaces.

An NFT (non-fungible token) is a unique blockchain token. It may represent a character, collectible, weapon or other item. But the token, the item’s usefulness inside the game and its market price are different things. A token record can survive even if a game closes, while its practical value may disappear.

Conceptual illustration of tokenised game items; not a screenshot of a specific game.

2. Web3 versus the games you already know

Feature	Conventional game	Web3 game
Where you play	PC, console, mobile or browser	Same devices
Revenue model	Sales, subscriptions, in-game purchases, ads	May use those models plus asset sales and marketplace fees
Digital-item ownership	Usually governed by publisher systems and terms	Some items represented by blockchain tokens
Trading	Only where publisher permits it	May support transfers or external marketplaces
Player earnings	Tournaments, creator schemes or permitted trading	May include token or asset rewards; never guaranteed income
Crypto required?	Usually no	Not always visible, but some projects rely on tokens

3. How Web3 gaming companies make money

Digital-item sales: Characters, skins, player cards, equipment, collectibles and upgrades.

Marketplace fees: Fees or commissions on eligible player-to-player trades.

Conventional game monetisation: Paid access, subscriptions, expansions, advertising and in-app purchases.

Memberships: Premium features, special events and access.

Licensing and partnerships: Sports, entertainment and other intellectual property, subject to contracts.

Infrastructure services: Blockchain tools, wallets, developer platforms, transaction services and marketplace technology.

Token and digital-asset activity: Token/NFT sales and related services; these require separate scrutiny and can be volatile.

4. What do company disclosures tell us?

Animoca Brands: activity beyond game sales

Animoca Brands’ FY2024 update reported US$314 million in bookings, a company-defined, unaudited non-IFRS measure. It split this into US$165 million from digital-asset advisory, US$110 million from Web3 operating businesses and US$39 million from investment activity. The operating-business category included blockchain-based sales, in-app purchases and other non-blockchain sales. The US$314 million figure is therefore not gaming-only revenue or net profit.

Mythical Games: transaction volume is not revenue

In May 2025, Mythical Games said its blockchain titles had generated US$650 million in completed transactions across more than seven million gamers. This is a reported transaction-volume figure—not US$650 million of company revenue and not proof of profit. To assess the business, we need retained marketplace fees, in-game purchases, licensing and other operating income, weighed against costs.

Immutable offers infrastructure for developers building Web3 games. Its business should be assessed through disclosed service revenue, transaction-linked fees, adoption and recurring customer activity. A large ecosystem or many sign-ups do not by themselves prove profitability.

5. A simple example: marketplace fees

Suppose players trade digital items worth ₹1 crore during a period and a marketplace charges 5% on all eligible trades. It would generate ₹5 lakh in gross fee revenue before costs, assuming the fee applies to the full volume and is retained by the marketplace. This is hypothetical—not an actual company fee or financial result.

6. The play-to-earn promise

Play-to-earn models offer rewards in tokens or digital assets that may be transferable or tradeable. The key question is where the value comes from. If rewards depend mainly on new users buying assets, the model may weaken when demand slows. If revenue comes from genuine player spending, advertising, licensing or services, it may be more durable—but the economics still need proof. Players who join mainly to earn money may leave when rewards fall or token prices weaken. A game needs compelling gameplay and returning users; financial incentives alone may not sustain it.

7. Opportunity and risk

Potential opportunity	Key risk
Tradable items and secondary markets	Demand and prices can be volatile
New revenue options for developers	Complexity may deter ordinary players
Global communities and collectibles	Legal and tax treatment varies by market
Infrastructure sold to studios	Adoption does not guarantee monetisation
Player rewards and participation	Speculation may overshadow gameplay
Portable ownership records	Token ownership does not guarantee game access

8. Questions for investors and gamers

1.       What is actually being sold: a game, marketplace, infrastructure, advisory service or token?

2.       Does the headline number mean revenue, bookings, transaction volume, funding or token valuation?

3.       How many users return and spend repeatedly?

4.       What share of income comes from ordinary game purchases versus token activity?

5.       Are operating costs, cash flow and profitability disclosed?

6.       What happens to an asset if a game loses players or shuts down?

7.       What gaming, consumer-protection, tax and digital-asset rules apply in India and other markets?

Biz Masala verdict

Web3 gaming is not simply a new kind of video game. It is an attempt to combine entertainment with blockchain-based digital assets and new transaction models.

Some companies have demonstrated commercial activity. But transaction volume is not revenue, bookings are not automatically recognised revenue, funding is not sales, and revenue is not profit. The strongest test is whether a company can attract people who enjoy the game, keep them engaged and earn enough recurring income to cover development, marketing, technology and support—without depending entirely on speculation.

Sources and editorial notes

·       Animoca Brands, FY2024 investor update (unaudited non-IFRS measures)
https://www.animocabrands.com/announcement/animoca-brands-investor-update-for-the-quarter-and-fiscal-year-ending-on-31-december-2024

·       Mythical Games transaction-volume report, The Block, 2 May 2025
https://www.theblock.co/news/business/2025-05-02-with-release-of-fifa-game-looming-mythical-games-says-its-generated-650-million-in-transaction-volume-352994

·       Immutable developer platform
https://www.immutable.com/products/immutable-zkevm

·       CoinMarketCap Academy, Web3 gaming activity in 2024; secondary industry analysis
https://coinmarketcap.com/academy/article/web3-gaming-in-2024-sidelined-in-the-crypto-boom

·       Grand View Research, India blockchain-in-gaming market forecast; commercial forecast, not company revenue data
https://www.grandviewresearch.com/horizon/outlook/blockchain-in-gaming-market/india

Editorial note: This is a first cut, not a final audited industry survey. Company disclosures use different definitions and reporting bases. Animoca’s bookings are unaudited, non-IFRS and span several business lines; Mythical’s transaction volume is not revenue. Commercial market forecasts are not realised sales. Re-check source links and current private-company disclosures before publication.

 

BUSINESS  |  MARKETS  |  IDEAS  |  INDIA