Is There Actually a Game That Requires Blockchain?

In my previous post, I started with a question:

What happens if we forget about coins, NFTs, Play-to-Earn, and all the other things commonly associated with blockchain games, and start with only Blockchain + Game?

That left me with a harder question:

Is there actually a game that requires blockchain?

So I started looking at some of the obvious examples.

Axie Infinity

Axie Infinity was the first one that came to mind.

Axies can be collected, battled, bred, owned, transferred, and traded.

At first, this seems close to what I was looking for.

But then I tried removing the blockchain mentally.

An Axie could still have an ID.

It could still have stats and genes.

Its parents could still be recorded.

It could still be bred.

It could still fight.

It could still be transferred from one player's account to another.

All of that could be stored in a normal database.

The ownership model would be different, of course.

But the game itself would still work.

So Axie seemed to use blockchain in meaningful ways, but I couldn't say that the game was technically impossible without it.

Gods Unchained

Gods Unchained made the distinction even clearer.

It is a trading card game.

You collect cards, build decks, and battle other players.

Blockchain gives players ownership and trading capabilities for cards and connects parts of the economy to crypto assets.

But the card game itself doesn't require that.

In fact, the current getting-started guide says that a player can install the game, create an account, and play without linking an external crypto wallet.

A wallet becomes important for things like trading, the Forge, and some reward systems.

That suggests something interesting:

The game and the blockchain layer can be separated.

Replace the NFT cards with cards stored in a normal account database, and you can still build decks and play matches.

The Sandbox

The Sandbox is different again.

LAND and other assets use blockchain ownership, and the platform explicitly emphasizes things like ownership, scarcity, transferability, and creator monetization.

Those are real differences.

But I tried the same test.

Could a centralized platform let users own virtual plots, build experiences on them, visit other users' creations, and trade those plots?

Yes.

The ownership relationship would change.

The platform operator would become the authority over the database.

But the basic game and creation systems could still exist.

Play-to-Earn doesn't solve it either

I also thought about Play-to-Earn.

Maybe earning something with real value was the part that fundamentally required blockchain.

But that doesn't seem right either.

A centralized game could keep a player's balance in a database and allow rewards to be exchanged or paid out under whatever rules the operator sets.

Blockchain changes important things around that reward:

Who controls it?

Can it leave the game?

Can it be transferred without the game operator?

Can a third party verify it?

But earning something by playing is not, by itself, a blockchain-only mechanic.

So far, I haven't found one

At least so far, I haven't found a game where I can confidently say:

This game is technically impossible without blockchain.

That doesn't mean such a game doesn't exist.

I'm not an expert on every blockchain game, and there may be examples I haven't seen.

But the examples I looked at made me realize that I may have been asking the wrong question.

If we allow one trusted operator to run a server and control a database, that operator can reproduce an enormous amount of functionality.

Ownership.

Trading.

Scarcity.

Breeding.

History.

Rewards.

Even interoperability can be reproduced if the same operator controls all of the systems involved.

So perhaps the useful question isn't:

“Can this game exist without blockchain?”

Maybe it is:

“What meaningfully changes when blockchain is replaced with a normal database?”

Who becomes the authority?

Who can rewrite the history?

What survives if the operator disappears?

Who is allowed to build on top of the data?

Maybe that's where the interesting difference actually is.

So I'm changing the question.

Not:

Blockchain Required?

But:

Blockchain Preferred?

That's what I'll try to figure out next.