---
# System prepended metadata

title: 'Modding: What''s next?'
tags: [aw, thougths]

---

:::info
:information_source: I decide to split it into chapters. The first chapter is about bridging web2 mods into on-chain games and discussing the changing roles of indie devs and modders. In the next chapter, I will talk about financialization,  related game design principles, and game physics in the onchain world. 
:::


:::info
:information_source: V2
:::


### Games Are ***A Medium of Expression*** ###

As a game designer, creating games is a way of articulating oneself in a way that isn't possible through any other form such as writing poetries or novels.

Today's gaming landscape is dominated by gaming giants. However, most of their game productions are moving away from being used as expressive art form. Instead, they are ***over-commoditizing*** the online experience, and game designs and content are gradually becoming more fungible with each other. "There is nothing new under the sun." (Ecclesiastes 1:9)

So, what's the problem? The issue is not that game designers themselves don't understand how to design games. In fact, many of them do. The problem is that as the size of the game companies increases, they become less willing to take risks, instead, they focus on generating safe and predictable revenue streams. For instance, if the cost of making a AAA game exceeds $200m, the company may choose to create a game similar to existing successful ones with minor tweaks, believing that this approach will ensure at least equivalent financial success. But what if the production team tries a different path? They would have to risk all $200m for only a small chance of making maybe $2b. On the opposite side, the Indie scene are more willing to take risk due to lower production costs, enabling the discovery of elements previously unseen. It's like opening a random door; you never know what lies behind it.

### ***The Indie Scene*** and ***The Modding Scene***
Self-publishing game developers are those who develop games solo or with smaller groups, in contrast to large AAA studios, they have more freedom of expression. They usually participate in neither indie or modding scenes. ***The indie scene*** refers to the independent games that build from scratch, which are often simpler in arts but more creative in game design. ***The modding scene*** is the process of alternating the official existing game content. Most moddings are free and have a feel akin to the open-source community.  Modding, in comparison to indie development, is more fun and easier - you don't feel the pressure from publishing games and no need to build from source. However, modding is harder and more complicated than it might appear, leading to a high burnout rate for two main reasons.

### Two Reasons on Why Mods ***Burnout***
***First, the costs of modding lack a way of being compensated, rendering them economically NOT sustainable.***

Modders are not paid by corporations or organizations. No matter how popular the mods, they are created by avid fans without economic benefits. But maintaining mods requires a long term commitment of effort and time, particularly as you start to acccumulate large communities. If lucky enough, a few may receive some financial supports from donations through the platforms like patreon. While the donation-based model might work for smaller mods, for larger mods, donations are not capable of compensating all cost. Then, the argument arises when these larger mods developers want to get more from it - they are benefiting from much of the previous development made by the "official developers". Unfortunetly, it is illegal to accept any form of payments except for donations. Most of the games they build on are protected by company's intellectual property and licensing agreement, where modders will encounter legitimacy consequences if they profit from it. Therefore, it is sad to see that most modders are in an awkward position of not being fully recognized for the independency and ownership of their contributions.



***Second, changes in the base game's rules can cause disruptions, thereby creating additional work for modders who must re-write the mod with the game mechanism change every time.*** 

As [Tslat](https://www.reddit.com/r/feedthebeast/comments/wjd0lm/is_modding_the_game_that_hard_these_days/), the lead of [AdventOfAscension](https://www.curseforge.com/minecraft/mc-mods/advent-of-ascension-nevermine)(one of the largest Minecraft mods) development team, explains, a change in the base game can lead to an exponential increase in rework for large mods in contrast of small mods. 
> when something does break, it takes us even longer to fix than an equivalent small mod because of the scale of the content and the additional boilerplate (see pre-emptive technical debt above), and you can see just how much more impactful this is on large mods.

Modders often find themselves in a passive position, having to adapt unconditionally to every update of the base games. Since these games are not designed with modding in mind, developers seldom consider preserving compatibility with each update. Everytime the game developers implement a major change of the source code, there are mods burnout due to imcompatibility. This occurs even in mod-friendly games like Stardew Valley and Minecraft, which have attempted to standardize the modding process with APIs - [SMAPI](https://stardewvalleywiki.com/File:SMAPI_compatibility.png#Notable_events) and [Forge](https://files.minecraftforge.net/net/minecraftforge/forge/) - built atop the source code. Despite these efforts, mod burnouts still occur. 


| ![SMAPI_compatibility.jpg](https://hackmd.io/_uploads/rknYqRl9n.png) | 
|:--:| 
| *SMAPI compatibility - [Stardew Valley](https://stardewvalleywiki.com/File:SMAPI_compatibility.png#Notable_events)* |


### So, what is the possible way out? 

Transitioning into the realm of on-chain games, onchain communities encourage ***experimental modding*** with broader content. Simultaneously, they provide an economically sustainable and persistent environment for the modding scene in a trustless manner. In a permissionless setting, the modders emerge not merely as participants, but as strong game influencers and changers. Such is the power of permissionless innovation; modders become indispensable forces in co-creating the onchain ecosystem, all while sustaining themselves from fully onchain in many different ways. 

***First, modders have a more flexible approach to profit distribution.*** 

They now possess the governance power to autonomously decide  the profit margins. Open-source, on-chain projects are not safeguarded by licensing. Instead, their protection arises from liquidity, which acts as a moat. The mods can profit based on the amount of on-chain activities as outlined by their smart contracts. They can make their creations into public goods and achieve a positive sum through staking and liquidity. The volumn of liquidity they captured help them avoid uneccessary fork. Consequently, only innovative and helpful creations have the ability to profit onchain. 


***Second, onchain games are immutable, which transforms mods from being mere extensions to integral components that live within the games and progressively become part of the game's fabric.***

Moders will no longer worry about being deplatformed or burnt out from the constant updates to the base game. Due to the inherent immutabilty, modders can built their mods respect to the [underlining physics](https://www.guiltygyoza.xyz/2023/05/composable-engineering) without the burden of maintenance concerns. Once they are deployed, they require no future upkeep. Most importantly, public live data onchain opens the possibility of a new type of game - the "meta-meta game," as [Ronan](https://twitter.com/wighawag) describes - a mod game that operates based on the live data of another game. In this context, the stacked mods mechanism can be imagined as more than a prediction market, where a tactical game mod operates under the live data of existing game. This in turn, further enriches the ecosystem.

### Conclusion
Once the modding scene becomes economically viable and permenant through blockchain, we foresee an influx of rich, expansive modding content crafted from initial game releases, transforming the onchain gaming ecosystem into a [hyperstructured realm](https://jacob.energy/hyperstructures.html). However, we still have a considerable journey ahead to witness massive modding and co-creation within the onchain ecosystem. Nevertheless, we stand ready and excited to foster open-sourced public goods that transcend technological and design obstacles on this adventurous path.

I appreciate the contributors who have shaped my thought process:
- [Ronan Standford (@wighawag)](https://twitter.com/wighawag)
- [David Amor (@@damor_eth)](https://twitter.com/damor_eth)
- [Neeraj (@Zomglings)](https://twitter.com/zomglings)
- [Richard Bartle](https://www.youhaventlived.com/qblog/)








---
*This is a Draft*



:::info
:information_source: V1
:::





---

Games are a ***medium of expression***. As a game designer, creating games is a way of articulating oneself in a way that isn't possible through any other form such as writing poetries or novels.

Today's gaming landscape is dominated by gaming giants and AAA studios. However, most of their game productions are moving away from being used as expressive art form. Instead, they are ***over-commoditizing*** the online experience, and game designs and content are gradually becoming more fungible with each other. "There is nothing new under the sun." (Ecclesiastes 1:9)

So, what's the problem? The issue is not that game designers themselves don't understand how to design games. In fact, many of them do. The problem is that as the size of the game companies increases, they become less willing to take risks, instead, they focus on generating safe and predictable revenue streams. For instance, if the cost of making a AAA game exceeds $200m, the company may choose to create a game similar to existing successful ones with minor tweaks, believing that this approach will ensure at least equivalent financial success. But what if the production team tries a different path? They would have to risk all $200m for only a small chance of making maybe $2b. On the opposite side, the Indie scene are more willing to take risk due to lower production costs, enabling the discovery of elements previously unseen. It's like opening a random door; you never know what lies behind it.

On-chain games with ***permissionlessness*** and ***experimentalism*** in mind offers players more flexibility of ***modding*** and expressing on top of existing games. In a world where everyone is encouraged to express themselves, game developers who initiate the game shouldn't claim ownership. Instead, the games truly belong to their community of players.

In traditional games, there are indie and modding scenes. ***The indie scene*** refers to the type of games that are developed by individuals or smaller groups, which are often simpler in arts but more creative in game design. ***The modding scene*** is an extension of official game content. Most moddings are free and have a feel akin to the open-source community. Compared to the indie scene, designing modding is more fun - you don't feel the pressure. Modders are not paid by corporations or organizations. No matter how big the mods, they are created by avid fans. Some of them are getting donations, but for most of them, they are ***economically NOT sustainable***. The argument arises when someone wants to charge for their mods - they are benefiting from much of the previous development made by the "official developers". Some of the games they build on are protected by company's intellectual property, where modders might even encounter legitimacy consequences if they profit from it. Sadly, most modders are in an awkward position of not being fully recognized for the independence and ownership of their contributions.

Transitioning into the realm of on-chain games, onchain communities encourage ***experimental modding*** while also offering an ***economically sustainable*** environment for the modding scene. The boundary between the indie scene and the modding scene will be nebulous in on-chain game communities. Thanks to the traceability that blockchain provides, game builders have a ***more flexible approach for profit distribution***. They can autonomously decide whether to profit and how much to profit through a tax economy based on the amount of on-chain activities as outlined by their smart contracts. 

Once the modding scene becomes economically viable within on-chain gaming, I anticipate a surge of rich, expansive modding content built upon initial game releases, which offers gamers more mods content to choose from. However, we still have a considerable journey ahead to witness massive modding and co-creation in onchain games. In the next chapter, I will dive into another possible outcome of onchain games brought by permissionlessness - financialization.









---
*This is a Draft*
