Crypto Gaming Tokens: Which Ones Have Real Revenue (and Which Are Ponzis)

Follow the Money — Not the Hype

In crypto gaming, there's a simple way to separate real projects from Ponzi schemes: look at where the revenue comes from. If a game's token goes up only because new players buy in, it's a Ponzi. If the game generates revenue from people enjoying the product, there might be something there. Let me walk you through the landscape.

Projects With Real Revenue

Immutable (IMX)

Immutable operates a gaming-focused L2 and marketplace. Their revenue model:

• Protocol fees from NFT trades on their marketplace
• Partnership deals with major game studios
• Technology licensing for their rollup infrastructure

Immutable has partnerships with GameStop, Warner Bros, and others. Real companies paying real money for their technology.

Gala Games

Mixed bag — Gala has multiple games with varying quality. Some generate actual player spending. The ecosystem is real but the token economics have been... questionable. The team has had internal conflicts and legal issues that destroyed trust.

Ronin Network

After the devastating $600M hack, Ronin has rebuilt. Now hosting multiple games beyond Axie, the network generates genuine transaction fee revenue. Whether it's enough to justify RON's valuation is debatable.

Projects I'm Skeptical Of

Most "Metaverse" Tokens

MANA (Decentraland), SAND (The Sandbox) — these tokens are valued in the billions but the actual user activity is minimal. Revenue is primarily from speculative land sales, not from people enjoying a virtual world.

Move-to-Earn Tokens

StepN (GMT), Sweat Economy (SWEAT) — the move-to-earn model has the same fundamental problem as play-to-earn. Where does the money come from to pay people for walking? Advertising revenue doesn't cover it. New user purchases do. That's the definition of unsustainable.

How to Evaluate Gaming Tokens

My framework:

• Daily Active Users: Not downloads, not "registered accounts" — actual daily players
• Revenue per user: How much does each player spend? This determines the economic sustainability
• Revenue source: In-game purchases from players (good) vs. token sales to speculators (bad)
• Token utility: Does the token need to exist? Could the game work with a regular currency?
• Tokenomics: Is the token supply inflating? Who holds most tokens? Unlock schedules?

My Honest Take

95% of crypto gaming tokens will go to zero. The 5% that survive will be tied to games that people actually enjoy playing. The blockchain component should enhance the gaming experience, not BE the gaming experience.

If you want to speculate on gaming tokens, use only money you're completely prepared to lose. Your serious money should be in Bitcoin — an asset with proven fundamentals, not a game that might shut down next year.

Explore investment frameworks at our education page.