My original Twitter link:
Recently, I have noticed that many people are comparing STEPN and P2E games, and there is also a group of projects claiming to be Move-to-Earn that have hastily emerged after some poor packaging. So it's time to talk about the uniqueness of STEPN.
-
STEPN vs GameFI
Some people question whether STEPN is a game. Of course, it is a game, because Sid Meier, the godfather of electronic games, said, "A game is a series of interesting choices." When you calculate how to repair and upgrade limited GST, when you decide whether to synthesize gems, when you consider whether to open or sell blind boxes, you are already playing a game.
At the same time, STEPN doesn't have to be a game. Its gameplay is strategic, without immersive gaming experience, high-quality graphics, or sound effects. But these are not disadvantages. Unlike a game, STEPN can be better because it creates external motivation, while a game creates internal motivation.
As many people criticize, people play P2E games not for fun, but to make money. Just as we have felt countless times in electronic games, games should create fun for players and create attractive virtual worlds. On the other hand, fitness apps, like fitness gyms/personal training classes, are external supervision and motivation that people need to purchase because they cannot control their own inertia.
Therefore, the biggest difference between games and STEPN is revealed: under internal motivation, once the game loses fresh and interesting content, players easily get bored and quit. Under external motivation, users can overcome their own inertia and develop exercise habits, and economic incentives can encourage them to stick with it.
I am a loyal fan of "Ring Fit Adventure" and "Just Dance," but after completing the game, I lost the motivation to continue playing. STEPN is different. I have been playing for three months and will continue to play. Because STEPN sets a long habit formation path and multiple behavioral choices for players, while also setting a daily output limit to avoid excessive concentration of use. We can also interpret this point with Sid Meier's design concept in the "Civilization" series, "Games give players short/medium/long-term goals, which occupy your mind and never make you feel like you've done everything you want to do. You always have something to look forward to, as if you are not playing in the moment, but immersed in the future."
If someone compares STEPN to Axie Infinity, it must be because they haven't carefully studied the user ecology of STEPN: there are no guilds here, and the leasing system has not yet been launched. NFT holders are the players/users themselves. The official even restored the invitation code system to avoid rapid user growth, with the aim of protecting the stability and health of the economic ecology.
In contrast, the P2E game ecology is completely different, with a serious separation between players and asset holders. I remember forwarding the data from an Axie user survey, which showed that only 5% of their active players hold AXS, and the number of NFT holders in Pegaxy also shows that the majority of assets are concentrated in the hands of guilds. STEPN does not have the distinction between managers and scholars, for a simple reason: not everyone likes to play P2E games, but everyone goes out for walks.
-
STEPN vs SocialFi
There have been countless attempts in the social field by Web3 applications, but due to the difficulty of migrating user social networks and the imperfect and unnecessary incentive mechanisms, many SocialFi projects have tried their best but received little attention.
STEPN, on the other hand, takes a different approach. It is like a single-player game where players need to interact and discuss strategies with each other, as well as the dramatic tension brought by random elements (opening blind boxes). Social behavior itself is not rooted in the application itself, but happens outside the application. The social influence that revolves around strategy and gameplay discussions is extremely powerful (think about the discussion about EDG winning or the recent discussion about the old man ring).
In addition, STEPN is more accessible and acceptable to the general public. It focuses on people's social relationships and health in the real world, and users will form clusters autonomously with people around them. Even if we take a step back, recommending a green and environmentally friendly fitness app to our loved ones and friends is much easier than recommending a card game with little creatures.
-
STEPN vs Move-to-Earn
Finally, let's compare similar fitness products, which can be roughly divided into two categories:
-
With external devices
-
Without external devices
Fitness apps that require external devices may have mediocre sales. The sales of fitness exchanges are one-tenth of those of Just Dance. Although these two games have differences in release time, I still believe that the biggest reason for the difference in sales is that Just Dance only uses gyroscopes for detection, supports cross-platform play on Xbox/NS, and can also run on mobile phones, while the fitness ring requires both NS and Ring-Con.
So, if we look at fitness apps without external devices, does STEPN have any advantages? Of course, it is the anti-cheating system. Because of the existence of GPS positioning, the exercise process/user status/exercise results can be mutually verified. But it is hard to imagine how an indoor and device-free application can achieve all three points at the same time. If it can't even do "proof-to-move," how can it ensure the fairness of move-to-earn?
Of course, the best anti-bot system ultimately depends on a team that is quick to react and has strong execution.
Finally, let's review:
STEPN has strategic gameplay, good external motivation, active community participation, and an effective "proof-to-move" mechanism.
This is a new genre, and the experiment has just begun.
