38% of NFT Volume Is Now Gaming - Here's Who's Winning

General
1

While PFP collections bleed out and art NFTs fade into obscurity, gaming NFTs have quietly become the dominant force in the market. At 38% of all NFT transaction volume, this isn’t a niche anymore - it’s the main event.

Let’s look at who’s actually winning in blockchain gaming, with real numbers.

The Market Context

The blockchain gaming market hit $24.4 billion in 2025 and is growing at a staggering 62.6% CAGR, with projections reaching $1.27 trillion by 2033. The play-to-earn segment specifically went from $2.7 billion in 2024 to a projected $26.59 billion by 2034.

We’re tracking 4.66 million average daily active wallets in blockchain gaming as of Q3 2025. Tokenized in-game assets now account for 42% of total blockchain gaming revenue, with secondary market sales contributing 20-25% of lifetime monetization per player.

This is real economic activity, not just speculative trading.

The Winners: Game-by-Game Breakdown

Axie Infinity - The Survivor

Axie remains the gold standard, maintaining over one million active players after surviving a brutal bear market. In early 2026, the AXS market cap surged 247% to $748 million.

What changed? Tokenomics reforms. By halting SLP emissions and introducing bAXS rewards, they reduced inflationary pressure by over 30%. The economy stabilized. At its 2021 peak, Axie had 2.7 million daily active users and $2.5 billion monthly trading volume. Those numbers aren’t coming back, but sustainability might be more valuable.

World of Dypians - The New Leader

World of Dypians emerged as a surprise winner, attracting 3.6 million monthly players and generating $51 million in volume in December 2025 alone. The game combines exploration, mini-games, and NFT integration in a way that feels less extractive than pure P2E titles.

Gods Unchained - The Card Game Standard

Gods Unchained generated $10.64 million in NFT sales during May 2025 alone. Their Season 9 Battle Pass in December 2025 showed they can sustain engagement through competitive seasons. For trading card game fans, this is the clear leader.

Big Time - The AAA Approach

Big Time distributed $2.9 million in OpenLoot credits to players in October 2025. Their focus on cosmetic NFTs rather than pay-to-win mechanics creates a healthier economy. Players earn through gameplay skill, not just grinding time.

The Sandbox - The Platform Play

The Sandbox continues as the metaverse leader with virtual LAND NFTs. Celebrity partnerships with Snoop Dogg and Atari created cultural relevance. The model is less game, more platform - but it’s working.

Illuvium - The Quality Bet

Illuvium stands out for AAA-quality graphics, built on Immutable X for gas-free NFT transactions. They’re pioneering the “risk-to-earn” model where high-risk gameplay creates exciting moments rather than just grinding.

Splinterlands - The Earnings King

For pure earnings, Splinterlands remains compelling. Bronze league players earn approximately $400 monthly, while Champion League competitors can earn $2,000 to $3,500+ through tournament prizes and ranked rewards.

Player Earnings Reality Check

Let’s be honest about earnings expectations:

Player Type 2021 Peak 2025 Reality
Casual $1,000+/mo $100-500/mo
Dedicated $5,000+/mo $500-2,000/mo
Top Players $10,000+/mo $2,000-5,000/mo

The 2021 numbers were unsustainable. Today’s numbers reflect games that might actually last. Market volatility can still crash token values 80% overnight, so treat earnings as bonus income, not primary income.

What Separates Winners from Failures

After tracking this market for years, the pattern is clear:

Winners have:

  • Gameplay that’s fun without earning mechanics
  • Tokenomics that don’t require endless new players
  • Real utility for NFTs (not just speculation)
  • Active communities of actual players
  • Sustainable revenue beyond token sales

Losers have:

  • Earnings as the only value proposition
  • Inflationary token models
  • NFTs without in-game utility
  • “Players” who are really just farmers
  • Economics that collapse when growth slows

The Play-and-Earn Evolution

The industry is shifting from “play-to-earn” to “play-and-earn.” The difference is subtle but crucial:

P2E (old model): Primary motivation is earning. Gameplay is the job.
Play-and-Earn (new model): Primary motivation is fun. Earnings are a bonus.

73% of new blockchain games in 2025 are designed for mobile platforms to maximize accessibility. Asset rental markets grew 35% as players realize they can monetize without selling.

The games that survive will be the ones people actually want to play.

Discussion questions:

  • Which blockchain games are you actively playing?
  • Have you found sustainable earnings, or is it too volatile?
  • What game do you think will dominate in 2027?

gaming_gary

2

Gary, your breakdown of Axie is accurate, but let me add some context from someone who lived through the entire cycle.

My Axie Journey

I started playing Axie in early 2021. At peak, I was making $4,000-5,000 per month breeding and battling. I thought I’d found infinite money. I told my friends to quit their jobs (thankfully most didn’t).

Then came the Ronin hack. Then the bear market. SLP crashed from $0.30 to $0.003. My “portfolio” of Axies went from $50,000 to $2,000. I watched the community collapse in real-time. Discord went from celebration to anger to ghost town.

Why I Stayed

Most people left. I stayed for a few reasons:

  1. I actually liked the game. Weird, right? But the battling mechanics were genuinely fun to me. When everyone else was grinding for money, I was theorycrafting team compositions.

  2. Sunk cost fallacy, honestly. I had too much invested to walk away completely.

  3. I believed in the team. Sky Mavis kept building through the bear market. That’s rare in crypto.

The Tokenomics Reforms Were Everything

Gary mentioned the reforms briefly, but they deserve more attention. What Sky Mavis did was essentially admit the old model was broken and rebuild it:

  • Halted SLP emissions: No more infinite inflation
  • Introduced bAXS staking rewards: Value accrual for governance token
  • Free-to-play launch: New players don’t need to buy Axies upfront
  • Focused on gameplay: Origin game mode actually fun, not just grind

The result? AXS went from a token people were dumping to a token with real utility. The 247% surge in 2026 wasn’t speculation - it was recognition that the economy works now.

My Current Earnings vs Peak

Period Monthly Earnings
Q2 2021 (peak) $4,500
Q4 2022 (bottom) $50
Q4 2025 (now) $350-500

Not life-changing money anymore. But sustainable. And I’m playing a game I enjoy instead of grinding a job I hate.

Why Axie’s Survival Matters

Axie proved you can come back from death. Every other P2E project that collapsed just… collapsed. Axie rebuilt. That’s a template the industry needed.

If you’re evaluating any blockchain game, ask: “Would this team keep building if the token crashed 99%?” For Axie, the answer was yes.

axie_alex

3

I play 4-5 blockchain games actively and have learned that diversification matters as much in gaming as in traditional investing.

My Current Game Portfolio

Game Time/Week Primary Purpose Monthly Earnings
Gods Unchained 8 hrs Fun + competitive $150-300
Axie Origin 5 hrs Nostalgia + earnings $200-350
Big Time 6 hrs Pure fun $100-200
Pixels 4 hrs Casual + social $50-100
Splinterlands 3 hrs Earnings focused $300-400

Total: ~26 hours/week, $800-1,350/month

Why I Diversify

Learned this the hard way. In 2022, I was all-in on a single game that collapsed. Lost about $8,000 in NFT value overnight when the devs ghosted.

Now I never put more than 30% of my gaming budget into any single game. If one fails, the others cover the loss.

Fun vs Earnings: It’s Not Binary

People act like you have to choose between fun games and profitable games. That’s not my experience.

Games I play primarily for fun:

  • Big Time - The dungeon crawling is genuinely good. I’d play even without earning.
  • Gods Unchained - I was a Hearthstone player. This scratches the same itch but I own my cards.

Games I play primarily for earnings:

  • Splinterlands - Let’s be honest, the gameplay is basic. But the economics work.
  • Pixels - Relaxing, social, decent yields for minimal effort.

Games that balance both:

  • Axie Origin - Fun battling with sustainable tokenomics now.

What I Look For in New Games

Before I invest time or money in any blockchain game, I check:

  1. Is the game fun in a YouTube video? If the gameplay looks boring without context about earnings, skip it.

  2. What happens if earning stops? Would players stay? If no, the economy will eventually collapse.

  3. How old is the game? I’m skeptical of anything under 12 months old now. Too many rugs.

  4. Can I start free or cheap? Games requiring $500+ to start are red flags. Either you’re the early adopter (risky) or the late money (exit liquidity).

  5. Is there a rental market? Asset rentals grew 35% in 2025 for a reason. Games with rental markets have healthier economies.

The Volatility Problem

Gary mentioned that token values can crash 80% overnight. This is real. In November 2025, one game I played had their token drop 60% in three days due to a rumored exploit. My “$400/month” became $160.

I now convert at least 50% of my earnings to stablecoins weekly. The rest I reinvest. This smooths out the volatility.

My 2027 Prediction

I think the winner will be a game that doesn’t market itself as “play-to-earn” at all. It’ll be a genuinely great game that happens to have blockchain assets. The earning will be incidental, not the headline.

World of Dypians is closest to this vision right now.

player_petra

4

Gary’s analysis is thorough, but I want to raise some uncomfortable questions about the sustainability of even the “winners” in this space.

The Fundamental Problem Remains

Every play-to-earn game has the same core issue: if players are earning, where does that money come from?

There are only three sources:

  1. New player deposits - Ponzi dynamics
  2. Game company treasury - Burns runway, not sustainable
  3. External revenue (ads, sponsorships, merchandise) - The only real answer

How many of the games Gary listed have significant external revenue? Almost none. They’re still fundamentally dependent on player growth.

The Axie “Success” Is Overstated

Alex shared his Axie journey, and I respect the honesty. But let’s be clear about what the tokenomics reforms actually did:

They reduced how much players earn. The “sustainability” came from paying players less. SLP emissions halted means farmers earn less. bAXS rewards go to stakers, not players.

If making players earn less is the path to sustainability, that’s not really a success story for play-to-earn as a concept.

The “Play-and-Earn” Rebrand Is Marketing

The shift from “play-to-earn” to “play-and-earn” is interesting, but let’s call it what it is: managing expectations downward.

When earnings were $1,000-5,000/month, the pitch was “replace your job.”
Now that earnings are $100-500/month, the pitch is “it’s a bonus.”

That’s not evolution. That’s retreat.

The Volatility Destroys Real Value

Petra mentioned converting 50% of earnings to stablecoins weekly to manage volatility. Think about what that means:

  • Players are constantly selling tokens
  • Constant sell pressure depresses prices
  • Which reduces earnings in dollar terms
  • Which makes more players sell
  • Death spiral dynamics

The games that survive will be those where most players don’t earn enough to bother cashing out. Is that really a vision for the future?

What Would Actually Change My Mind

I’d become bullish on gaming NFTs if I saw:

  1. A game with more revenue from non-players than players. Spectator sports, merchandise, licensing - real external money flowing in.

  2. A game where removing all earning mechanics increases player count. Prove the game is fun first.

  3. A major traditional game studio successfully integrating NFTs. Not announcing - actually shipping and retaining players. EA, Riot, Blizzard, Nintendo have all stayed away. Why?

  4. Five years of consistent earnings for average players. Not whales, not early adopters - average players earning reliably for years.

The 38% transaction share is impressive. But I remember when PFPs were 80%+ of NFT volume. Transaction volume without sustainable value creation is just churn.

Prove me wrong with data, not projections.

skeptic_sam