The business logic of traditional mobile games always feels frustrating. The obvious costs are already enough to make people feel distressed, but the key is that those hidden costs are even more painful—so-called service fees and channel fees, which ultimately come out of players' wallets. The same item, after passing through multiple intermediaries, ends up costing players significantly more unjustified money.



Recently, I saw that Shatterpoint made an interesting move in this regard. They updated their platform's data dashboard to allow users to see detailed breakdowns of transaction costs. This increase in transparency is indeed a significant improvement compared to the traditional game's black-box fee system. Users know where their money is going, which at least makes them feel more at ease.

This actually reflects a direction that Web3 games are trying to explore: transforming the economic model from closed to open, giving players more control over asset flows. Whether this approach can truly shake up the ecosystem of traditional mobile games still depends on subsequent execution and market response.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 7
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
MetaRecktvip
· 3h ago
Transparency is truly scarce. The traditional gaming approach clearly aims to keep you in the dark for comfort, and Shatterpoint really hits the nerve on this issue.
View OriginalReply0
GasFeeVictimvip
· 5h ago
Finally, someone dares to speak frankly about this. The traditional mobile game model is just blood-sucking, with layer after layer of exploitation—who can stand it? Transparency is easy to talk about, but very few actually implement it. The success of Shatterpoint depends on subsequent follow-up; let's not let it be another flash in the pan.
View OriginalReply0
Deconstructionistvip
· 12-18 16:52
Transparency sounds good in theory, but how many actually implement it? Shatterpoint's recent move at least shows a decent attitude.
View OriginalReply0
CryptoNomicsvip
· 12-18 16:42
actually if you run the correlation matrix on fee structures, traditional gaming's opacity isn't a bug—it's a feature. shatterpoint's transparency dashboard sounds nice until you realize the real rent-seeking happens upstream in token mechanics, not downstream fees. ceteris paribus, they're just moving the inefficiency, not eliminating it.
Reply0
ChainWallflowervip
· 12-18 16:38
Finally someone has explained this clearly. The charging logic in mobile games is just an advanced version of cutting leeks. I like the transparent cost breakdown approach; at least you won't be completely fooled by black boxes. Wait, can all games learn from Shatterpoint's move, or is it just another fragmented ecosystem? Web3 gaming is indeed a promising direction, but I wonder when mainstream players will truly start to see the benefits. It sounds good, but in the end, it all depends on who executes it more ruthlessly. No matter how loud the slogans are, they are useless. Would introducing this transparent mechanism to the market actually reduce the profits of game companies? If so, it will once again be a battle of interests.
View OriginalReply0
RektRecordervip
· 12-18 16:38
This wave of transparent ledgers indeed hits the pain points of traditional gaming, but to be honest, how long Shatterpoint's action can last is still a question mark.
View OriginalReply0
All-InQueenvip
· 12-18 16:29
This move really hits the mark; it's definitely better than those games that just keep sucking players dry in silence.
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)