Topic: Play to earn model vs move to earn model. (Read 423 times)

I remembered that play-to-earn game; it was like a joke before I experienced a play-to-earn game where I experienced earning $100  up to $250. At that time, we players were pioneering.

then those play-to-earn games only ran for 1 week; after 1 week, the rules changed immediately, and that's when the so-called rug pull started. I just told the story. which is not really forever in such things.

If Play 2 Earn games changed the lives of a few people, move to earn doesn't.

TBH, the move to earn model has goods and bads depending on how you will look at it. If you think that the app will give you money just by exercising and don't focus on the amount of money that you will get, it might change your way of thinking and because of that, you might be forced to make some exercises and that's good for our health. Move to earn is a double reward for us. You will make your health better through exercising and you will earn as well. On the other hand though, the earnings isn't that high that's why if somebody will use these move to earn apps or whatever they're using, don't focus on the money that you can get or it will just make you disappoint.

Move to earn model will not solve any problems at all. The amount of money that you're getting isn't even enough to pay your bills. If you're focusing about the earning aspect, forget about it. Maybe it might make your health better because you will be forced to exercise for the sake of a "SMALL" amount of money, but that's all. Solution to economic problems? I don't see it happening TBH. The model will just vanish or at least will be unpopular.

When you make everything a job we all become less free, not more free.

What something like the sweatcoin idea does (I recall hearing about it because I did some surveys asking if it sounded good as an incentive to exercise) is actually gamify some mundane task, rather than create any economic fluidity. It also is highly optimistic and prone to abuse, and if you do not immediately start thinking of ways to abuse the system, then you are very naive and likely holding a bag or two, respectfully. This goes for most systems like this. It stops being fun or valuable as a tool and becomes a minmax effort.

Even bitcoin, a currency designed to overcome the shortcomings of the current fiat currency system, has not really brought any significant benefits to the economy, let alone trash projects left over.

In short, don't be too delusional and fall into the trap of crypto projects. Until now, the cryptocurrency market is just a money game, nothing more and nothing less. No project will bring us convenience, benefits or practical applications, let alone create positive impacts on the macro economy. The cryptocurrency market is just a place where we create virtual models to take money from each other, money will go from the hands of stupid people to the hands of smarter people. That's all.

How can a "paid to walk" app be a micro or macro solution for economic problems? Are you kidding me? Do you think that the people will leave their jobs in order to focus on earning money 24/7 on a paid-to-walk app? Those apps are paying pennies(unless you are living in a Tier 1 country).
1.Those paid-to-walk apps are a variation of the Get-paid-to(or GPT) websites like Swagbucks and Qmee.
2.This sweatcoin isn't an actual cryptocurrency. It's more like a token, just like the points you earn on Swagbucks.
3.The play-to-earn model was a total ponzi scheme scam. No wonder that games like Axie Infinity died in terms of popularity.

Currently, I don't see how those technology is seriously or slowly impacting the economy. Through out this year, I don't think I have hear anything related about "play to earn " Or "move to earn" Crypto but I have been hearing about Bitcoin, Ethereum, meme coins, Solana coin but have not heard about sweat coin.

Other valuable and important cryptos like Bitcoin and Ethereum can impact the economy but not any kind of shitcoin that will not even have a reasonable value in the future.

There is no model that we didn't see towards the beginning of 2023, different model just for the team to raise money and launch nonsense. All most all of those projects were nothing to speak about. The only model I like is that move to earn model, if we remove the hype and greed around these projects, they are actually good for the society particularly lazy people that doesn't want to work out will be motivated to some exercise because they know they are not doing that exercise for free.

Airdrops also has hands in why these project were killed. I just think there are some project who are not supposed to launch airdrop in the first otherwise the right purpose of the airdrop will be defeated, hence why many of them all died after the bear market.

There has been some kind of games developed, that used to offer real tokens  and any user who is good at playing them will be able to earn crypto depending on the games design.
I prefer them to the move to earn model which of course requires that I sweat to earn tokens that may not be converted to real coins or usable tokens.
The method of trading in-game tokens earned through the levels of achievements or as a reward when playing some of these play to earn games, for other cryptos or fiat on any exchange, makes the play to earn model a possibility for passive income.

Upon doing my own research on play to earn vs move to earn model, the play to earn is better and users can connect a wallet funded with purchased tokens to play and win as much as NFTs and utilities that can be traded of course.

I’m confused on how is this related to the topic about the comparison of play to earn on move to earn model.

---

Both model is just a sugar coat to create a fake euphoria about they are working hard to earn tokens while in the end both model are destined to failed because those work done by participants can’t gain profit for the company that rewards users who done the task.

It’s more realistic those who use ads task to pay users since the user work is earning money for the company.

If we go outside we will see that there is no shortage of employment in the world and different people are in different occupations. Some are selling fruits, some are cleaning the mess, some are office workers and some are office officials. The country is running according to someone's decision and someone is running according to someone else's decision, that is, everyone is working. If a doctor is asked to construct a building, he will not be able to construct the building, whereas if an engineer is asked to perform surgery, he will not be able to. That is, every person is right in every position if he chooses his desired profession. For some people playing sports is a profession and for some people watching sports is an addiction.

It's not something to depend on for survival and upkeep,I heard that the earnings are relatively small compared to others.They're both gaming technology that requires users to function properly like performing various tasks and end up receiving cryptocurrency rewards.

I haven't really tried any of them before but that shouldn't discourage anyone too.Its doesn't really seem beneficial to me and its something that you can go into just for fun and during your leisure time and make extra income for yourself,Just so you can be able to stay fit and active earning crypto.

Currently currency prices are almost no longer balanced, especially when the market is all affected, the presence of crypto currency is an alternative for entrepreneurs to spend their money buying several types of coins, as to maintain their foundation. If at any time there is a high jump then these coins will be able to make money. other capital besides fiat money, there are many schemes that we have to play so that we don't just watch them but have to be among them to both benefit.

Maybe Davos has a good reason to promote SWEAT:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/11/this-entrepreneur-is-aiming-to-reverse-his-carbon-footprint-here-s-how/

To me it seems like an ESG project, so perhaps it could have some future on the way to Net Zero...

Don't think of it in strictly capitalist terms (banning cars and promoting bicycles doesn't make much financial sense either).

There's a huge ecological agenda going on right now. It is what it is.

Some play to earn could be played idling and then I heard some of them had like a mining and staking feature. All of those are an example of passive income, while move to earn is obviously not like that because the main goal for us to earn is if we are only actively moving. I saw lots of comments that someone can make a living and earn a very good amount of profit from some play-to-earn games but I don't think move-to-earn can be like that because one can't just move unlimitedly. It's ridiculous even if you intentionally did it only for the sake of earning a reward. I'm not also sure if this can be considered as a side hustle but maybe this can only be done for fun.

If Bitcoin gold and Bitcoin SV are still surviving why wouldn't a coin that got millions from investors at the start and it's printing more millions still be alive? Rebrand, a bit of hype, trapped whales with millions of tokens, the usual...


Difficult, no, everyone is copying the outcome
- 95.23% in two years despite a bull run now
- 90% drop in players

Every single one of those "pay to work doing a repetitive task that looks like a game in order to earn a penny" model is heading the same way.

Neither of the model is actually not a passive income, because you need to excel an effort to any of that model to get significant income.
Move to earn doesn't seem beneficial from the financial aspect in my opinion, because the coin you're earning on most of the platform are very little that it would literally take you a while to accumulate enough coins to qualify for the minimum withdrawal.
On the other hand, play to earn model will require you to at least spend a few hours everyday to keep the earning mechanism running. You will also need to spend money for you to maximize the earning potential and not to mention that you also need to compete with other players.
Therefore, both needs extra time and effort that would hinder your time with your business or 9 to 5 job.

While you've made it quite clear, I agree with you and then I can only say that those micro or macro development earning app systems are just so waste of time and much efforts are being expected while earning rates are being overrides. The so apps modernity were too congested to provide global economy up springs and its technological developments is concealed beyond comparison of the blockchain potentials to spread the wide range of blockchains of today's in a global circulations.

Is this play-to-earn model referred to in this topic section similar to the one before that made noise in the crypto industry? Right now, it seems like it's difficult to repeat what happened to Axie Infinity, right? Maybe if we just play, it will be fine because it gives us amusement.

Then it's really in favor of the gamers; now with the move-to-earn model, it's a wide issue. I remember last year there was an app on the cellphone that you could download that, when you played it, you'd earn money immediately, or something like this. We practice cryptocurrency, which also gives us profit through trading, right?

I've been into P2E and they're profitable at the beginning but it's not a sustainable business model and the same goes with move to earn. But I think I like more the move to earn because it gives people the way to move their bodies and the main benefit of it is about being healthy as you need to move from here and there and you can just treat that as a favor to yourself and you're doing an exercise that's being incentivize but just do it mainly for your health.

Maybe some people collected some sats from faucets in the yearly years and they went up x1000, but they would have been much richer if they went and found a job, even for a day or two, and used the earning to invest in Bitcoin. Those microearning yielded less than a dollar per hour, while in real life you can make at least a few dollars per hour.

The only argument is that someone had zero earning opportunities, but I don't believe a lot of people are in that position, especially in the age of Internet when you can do something online.

That is exactly true! And maybe, that's the reason why most of these projects failed to go mainstream because how can they earn money out of this project? How many projects have tried this "move-to-earn" model, and yet, you can't see them in popular trading platforms. Most even didn't get the chance to be listed in the exchange. The sustenance of this niche seems to be quite challenging as they need to find a way how to generate their income such as getting ads or sponsorships from related companies.

But don't know how STEPN is doing in the market, one move-to-earn model that I know so far which is still alive, at least their app and website.

As anyone else says, this is a minor side hustle at best and chasing scraps at worst - neither is particularly appealing when you've got a much larger source of income like a salary. Sometimes these new coins prove profitable if you get in and out at the right points in time, but it's much like winning the lottery. Make money while working out is simply a gimmick that will not last and has no basis. If you cannot see how you are earning money, then it's because you are the product and giving up your personal information - but these trash promotions aren't even focused around that, they are just trying to build a user base of people who might able to sell some worthless cryptocurrency on to another user before it implodes.

When you're getting paid for something in a token, the rule is this:
If for the said action in the normal world nobody would pay you a cent, then the amount of tokens you will receive for that "work" of yours will also be worth less than a cent.

Simple economics!
Nobody is interested in paying you to walk as you don't generate any revenue.
Nobody is interested in you playing games as long as you don't pay first to play!

Hehehehe, at least you would get to grow big muscles after doing the squats faithfully.
Obviously, the move to earn model of business will not help even the micro economy of any individual and am sure play to earn follows same suit, unless for airdrops and other tokens that can't be converted to cash but used to purchase items online that the play to earn model allows.

Microearnings have already helped early BTC adopters to earn from zero considerable sums of money in current BTC rates. It's not always a waste of time. Sometimes there is long term potential on microearnings offers and they should be analyzed by people who are looking for opportunities and can't find them on their local communities. Each case is one case. What works for you might not work for someone else, but what works for him, might not work for you.

Therefore, I don't discourage anyone from seeking for offers, even inside the microearnings niche. The important thing is to be constantly searching something to make an income from, even when it seems nothing is going to work for you. It's necessary to be attentive to what life is bringing and trying to show. There might lie the opportunity you have been looking for, but couldn't find so far.

That seems to be the case. Sweatcoin is basically a product for non-crypto users while they offer Sweat Walelt for crypto users, at least that's what they said on their website. Sounds like Uniswap and their UNI token, or just any altcoin project in general.

This reminds me, I used to track my physical activity with an app a few years ago. They offered rewards in the form of free stickers or wallpaper if I reached a certain milestone. Some argue that these rewards can help my brain feel rewarded for every exercise, but I never feel that way. I'm not sure how I'd feel if I got a token for doing exercise, but I'd feel terrible if my goal is to earn money by doing squats and I only earn $1 after a month or so.

they are paying coins to move. i don't see this working there is some kind of big fitness gym supporting such a project and making its tokenomics that is beneficial for all. play to earn is more realistic already but this one is just a dream. People today are already used to memecoins and they could forget about Sweatcoin. There are just more projects out there that are already working with a great community.  Upon reading, Sweatcoin and Sweat Economy are just one right?

You are right. Only devs are benefitting from it since they did it as a means to make people help them make their token and apps known, and decieve them with having returns, which I see to me as an empty promise. It is all a waste of time and energy on these micro earnings app, because those token might never have a high market value. You will just be there enslaving yourself while the devs are smiling and enjoying the effort of your labour. If you have better plan for your future, then learn a skill, get a job and use 10% of your income to invest in bitcoin. Micro earnings cannot improve anyone's  financial status, talk more of solving any economic problems.

None has benefitted me and I've never subscribed to any of them because they are not really worth it. I'd rather invest my time doing something profitable than wasting my time on these micro earning opportunities. The developers of these apps are the ones smiling to the banks, they generate a lot of revenues from running ads, collecting and selling users data but the users are rewarded with peanuts for their data, time and effort.

The whole digital money thing was pretty difficult for me when I first heard of Bitcoin as well, but I think it's the kind of issue that newer generations (starting with Gen-Z) don't have because they grow up with digital stuff as a part of their lives since birth, so money that only exists digitally is just added to a long list of digital-only things, and being digital doesn't mean being less real.
As for 'move to earn', I think it's a problematic concept because of how physical movements are capitalized, which reminds me of some episodes of Black Mirror showing dystopian worlds. I don't think this model has a fighting chance against major cryptos, and I hope it won't become popular, to be honest.

The days when it was easy to get valuable cryptocurrencies through accomplishment of tasks have past. Engaging in these play or move-to-win projects rewards participants with worthless coins. I might consider engaging in these tasks if it will have other benefits beside the coins. There are some of the projects that might bring health benefits or help to develop some physical or Intelligence Quotient. The easiest way to own a valuable coin now is either to mine, buy or over services.

I have never invested or tried any move to earn projects so I can only answer the other option.

The move to earn model sounded great during the pandemic since a lot of people were unable to get out and do their usual physical activities. It died down a couple of years after the pandemic since those who usually don't exercise were back to their old habit. The market for this project is limited to people with active lifestyle and that's less than the market of gamers.

With the move to Earn (M2E) model which involves earning through physical activities, like walking, running, swimming, being tracked by ones device to earn tokens and points, it is obviously tied to real-world movements and health care benefits for those who need to burn off some fat or stay fit.
The Play to Earn (P2E) model, is a kind of web3 game that focuses on in-game accomplishments which is centered on virtual gaming rewards.

Many business models may focus on either of both models, if they intend to become economically suited to fit the decentralized system and virtual reality environments, but I understand the fear is that, these models have yet to be the best of ideas for anyone wanting to earn passive income stream seeing that they are a results of the progress cryptocurrencies and the decentralized system including advancement in AI bots has so far made.

I think the world is more focused right now on making cryptocurrency and AI bots work better than virtual reality environments with less users and unusable tokens.

First of all move to earn project is a good thing for the individual himself as it does not only allow for income but also allows for the individual to build healthier lifestyles. I think that move to earn project is a little better if we are talking about long-term results here.

However we cannot ignore the fact that move to earn is a little less convenient than play to earn projects. Some people are not privileged enough to have the ability to move to earn when they are tethered to work or to their homes.

People always believe on something easy for them to do then earn that's why they always get fucked up by those scammers pretending to create something innovative things that reward on every movements they make.

Maybe its better for people to ignore this especially if they need to buy something expensive NFT just to increase their earnings since usually they are just scam and they will fall the same with other scam gamefi which came out first after they gather a lot of money from people who believe that this is really great and for long term.

I have these two tokens, and the application, and active on both platforms, it's a total waste of time imagine spending hours playing and making you sweat for a few cents worth of tokens you cannot do these two at the same time.

And if you do this on a large scale can the price sustain to make it worth the effort of those doing the tasks, Axie Infinity was a huge success but after they crashed all the other play-to-earn models followed similar paths same thing with the move to earn models.

This got me laughing because this micro earning as you called it is very disheartened if you calculate all effort put just earm 1-2 dollar is very disgusting the worst of it they keep seeking attention and protecting their road map and with good article to convince you at the end of following in participating you will realize the effort was made in vain.

It remains me the last game I involved the time and energy spend coming up to see that it was just wasted efforts.
Until they change their pattern of rewards they will end up loosing all their investors and other inventors are coming up with better earning strategies with good rewarding system.

Most of these apps that offer this kind of earning model are too small and aren't worth much to be able to contribute to the economy in a big way, not to mention that most of the time, it's really difficult to earn in most of them, the only time that something like this model has ever been successful is when Axie Infinity boomed in popularity, that one was driven by too much hype investments that it lead to that point though. Maybe the only thing that these models can contribute to the economy is that it rewards individuals that are participating in the game a small amount of reward that they can then sell to get fiat or any other cryptocurrency and then they can use that money to spend on something thus making some contribution to the economic cycle of buying and selling products and services.

After trying both types of games, I realized that they are essentially the same, merely wasting people’s time. I don’t know about other people’s experiences with them, whether they are better or just like mine, but I feel that the system is akin to an MLM pattern where you need to buy their tokens and then use their services to earn the rewards they offer. In reality, the rewards they provide are also very low, so you need a lot of time just to collect 1-2 dollars, which is actually not worth it. Yeah, maybe some people say that they don't have a problem with this, but I personally conclude that this microearning platform is just a waste of my time.

It is really that simple, those using their time in this kind of activity are not really think things through, as they would better off just using that time looking for a regular job than spending their time doing this.

As even if they could manage to get an amount of coins that was considerable after a long time of doing this, there is no way for them to know if by the time they want to make a withdrawal the coin will still hold any value.

I think you're confusing things a bit, Play to earn model and move to earn model are just some of the small apps that have emerged from blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies.

In fact, they do not constitute any important economic strategy and do not provide any solution to any economic or technological problem. They are just small applications for profit and nothing more, and the profits that come from them are very small and cannot constitute economic income for individuals, let alone support the economy or influence it.

None are beneficial to me, since earning in this kind of model is very hard.  Like for example, earning in play to earn needs a player to spend some amount in order to gain advantage against other player, they need to spend money in order to get part of the money they spent, this is beneficial to those who have deep pocket but not on normal users like me.

While move to earn scheme also needs to purchase in-game items in order to boost the earnings thus, the models are almost identical to play to earn scheme.  It can also be said that it is borderline a Ponzi Scheme where earnings and rewards came from new people that is introduced to the system and invest money in order to get advantage against other users.




It is never a solution to both micro and macro economics problems even if adopted on a large scale.  First, the token needs to have a value to use in real life world.  To have stable value or have high liquidity it needs to be backed up by fund that can sustain the market value of the token.  So the main concern is the source of fund to back up the financial activity.  And where does this fund come from?  Obviously, it will come from users and investors who need to purchase certain items to be a premium member.  In the end, the users are first milked with funds before they can milk the system.

According to the business model of sweatcoin, they intend to gain revenue through merchant partnerships but this model is yet to be established.


They will eventually fade when new system of earning is introduced, or when their financial model collapses.  We have seen several projects like these to fade into existence after some months of operation because they can't maintain the reward system or the value of their cryptocurrency in the market.

They both got their own benefits but I'm not going to lie, it's really difficult to make money because they're all taking a lot of efforts to do and the rewards that they give is somewhat not that worth the effort, sure there's some outliers that did made some people a lot of profit but we have to understand that there's not a lot of these outliers out there and most of these projects that do this kind of thing aren't really good with doing follow ups that would lead them to something better, the worst thing too is there's probably a lot of these projects that are a rugpull scheme that doesn't benefit the new players.

I agree. In the most of the cases micro-earnings are only appealing to people who are living in very extreme economical conditions, in countries where inflation has completely ground the value of their Fiat, so they need to ding alternatives for it in cryptocurrencies and other payment systems.
For a country to succeed and see some positive changes in their macroeconomics, it is necessary to do actual investment into the education sector, into job creation and building new universities and high education institutions of all kind.
At best, micro-earnings are a temporary solution for people who seek to accumulate a bit of extra money, at the worst, it is a complete loss of time.

Though, I am not going to lie, I first I felt optimistic with the concept of move to earn, but it does not sound to be a sustainable model to do sctisl business, unleds there id dome serious partnership behind all of it, like Adidas or Nike, so those users actually expecting to get paid for sweating could get something worth their time.

It's not a solution to anything. Microearnings have always been a waste of time. Only the poorest and most desperate people do them, and still it's not worth for them. They would have been better off spending that time on developing skills that could help them earn better money - these days you can learn almost anything on the Internet.

And even thinking about macroeconomic effects of microearnings is just funny.

It is of course not as it used to be before when the talk of cryptocurrencies or the Blockchain network was a myth and everyone including me, wanted nothing to do with it, because it felt like a Ponzi scheme or the subject of cryptocurrency was just too complex and incomprehensible to understand.

How can they say money is invisible and decentralized and it can hardly be tracked and it can only be available online and has the same purchasing power as the fait we have grown accustomed to from birth; this was my thoughts until now having known better and understand to the point where I can say that in this world currently, the cryptocurrencies exchanges and the decentralized network use a 'play to earn model' which is different from the 'move to earn model' that apps offering same prices and rewards in tokens like Sweatcoin among others use.
This is the business strategy for most emerging and upgrading technology companies that have been created sinçe and before the bloom, acceptance, regulation and advancement in cryptocurrency and its investment.

Which model has been more beneficial to you, when you think of investing time and resources to earn a passive income?

Can the 'move to earn model' offered by a company like Sweatcoin, of whom are willing to pay tokens to users who have either sweated using the app while running or swimming, be a micro or macro solution to economic problems, if adopted on a large scale?

Or would this 'move to earn model' just follow its hype and fade into existence leaving cryptocurrencies to be the only better innovation that is much more helpful to the economy?

Your thoughts are welcomed!