Red Flags, pack sales, and mixed signals: inside the Abstract-Blast’Em Feud
GAMING CHRONICLES 121
Gaming Chronicles focuses on curating the latest web3 gaming news every week.
You will find the latest news, educational content, and game reviews.
TLDR :
FIFA x Avalanche
YGG expands to game publishing
Blast’em vs. Abstract
🗞️ NEWS
FIFA PARTNERS WITH AVALANCHE
The rumors were true: FIFA built its own L1 on Avalanche, a custom blockchain “to unify its digital strategy across collectibles, ticketing, and more”
The first step of this partnership is the migration of FIFA’s NFT platform, FIFA Collect. This product was launched in 2022 on the Algorand blockchain, before the Qatar World Cup
Through FIFA Collect, fans can buy, trade, and collect officially licensed NFTs of iconic football moments, memorabilia, and highlights from FIFA events
The NFTs are primarily distributed through booster pack sales, similar to FIFA Ultimate Team. I expect there to be a good overlap between the two
As of May 2025, 800,000 users are registered on the NFT platform
Only 8 months ago, the platform sold out the FIFA World Cup 2026 "Right-to-Buy" collection (granting rights to buy the tickets) in 24 minutes. $999 per pack, with 115 available, totaling $115K in revenue
FIFA Collect is an initiative led by Modex, a company specialized in building Web3 experiences for sports fans and creating new monetization opportunities (e.g., through NFTs). Modex signed an exclusive partnership with FIFA
Interestingly enough, Modex was founded in 2017, with early plans to create the “World’s first app store of the blockchain”, then ICO’d in 2018 (the token is pretty dead), and pivoted in 2021 to its current model. Only landing a partnership with FIFA in 2023
When reading comments from Reddit users from 6 months ago, it seems Modex took larger ownership of FIFA Collect more recently with this partnership
Overall, Avalanche is a more accessible blockchain than Algorand, so I expect trading volume to increase with future collections. Many of the prior collections were also launched on Polygon
This will likely open new doors for Avalanche to partner with large consumer-facing brands. A strategy it has been pursuing for the year or so
YGG EXPANDS TO GAME PUBLISHING
Last Monday, we already touched upon the topic of “casual degen” games. A term coined (?) by YGG, which recently announced it is expanding to game publishing with the launch of LOL Land
The publishing arm will focus on “lighthearted, addictive games that embrace the chaos and culture of crypto degeneracy”
Gabby Dizon, the co-founder of YGG, mentions that targeting the casual degen market is their “expression of everything they learned” over the past years, investing and playing hundreds of crypto games ~ Games Beat
We’ve seen a meteoric rise of this category through various idle ponzu games this year, like Onchain Heroes, Big Coin, Hedge Empires, Defi Dungeons, etc.
Gabby has an extensive background in game development and was previously a business development manager at Boomzap Entertainment and founded his own studio, Altitude Games, in 2014
Why are so many games of this type being churned out?
As countless games have failed in crypto, we realized the only PMF among the Web3 audience is games that make people money (often social casino or ponzu). Plus, some of these games have incredibly high spending depth
Add to this the relatively low cost of developing these casual games. And you can greatly de-risk yourself as a studio when developing a title. But do these games grow the pie of players? No, I wouldn’t say so
YGG’s first title, LOL Land, is a “casinofied” take on Monopoly GO, in which you turn on a dice-roll mechanism, and gain coins based on your placement on the board, the numbers in the middle, and landing on the right tiles
I bought 600 rolls ($60) and ran the game in my background, which granted me enough coins to buy back close to an equal amount in YGG tokens
But I’d argue the game currently lacks a strong gameplay loop or good meta progression (like Monopoly GO). On the contrary, it’s meant to be casual
It’s interesting how guilds in crypto continue to evolve. YGG was born out of Axie, transitioned its success to investing in games, and is now building its own titles
And last December, we covered Breeder DAO’s transition to Sovrun, which also came out of guild management, and shifted to investments and building apps
BLAST’EM VS. ABSTRACT
Blast’em (BM) vs. Abstract (ABS): a clusterfuck of finger-pointing, presales, KOLs, false claims, and more…
In this week’s drama, there seem to be two truths, A and B. Let’s explore both viewpoints:
BM applied to the Abstract’s Builder Program and was contacted by Raj for a call. Initially, Abstract would support them and show public validation.
However, after further investigation, the team couldn’t proceed with the partnership, due to a couple of red flags:
The game’s logic lived off-chain and was unaudited
The team planned to do a token presale before ABS could see the product
The founder outsourced development work
The founder of BM took these red flags as a mere feedback loop and then proceeded with an NFT presale. While claiming Abstract was still supporting them
Phin claims it was clear the founder’s intentions were max extraction, and not building a real product. And also urging the founder to refund any sales to this point, as the Pack Sale was already live and going
In both stories, the beginning aligns: Abstract initially planned to support BM but ultimately did not proceed. BM later clarified that it had corrected claims of not being publicly associated directly
Abstract suggested the pack sale instead of a token presale, and BM agreed. But, eventually, Abstract backed out over security concerns, the off-chain logic, and the concerns over being eager to raise funds
Post revoking that support, the allegations started going around that the team was untrustworthy, leaked via Raj (again, allegedly)
Phin then made a vague Tweet that many interpreted as targeting BM. When asked, Phin denied it was about them privately, but refused to clarify that publicly, damaging the game’s reputation
In the end, BM still plans to launch on Abstract (but not sure that is still on the table) and accuse the team of hypocrisy, poor due diligence, and controlling the narrative:
“put yourself in our position and support us as much as you can against this tyranny”
Today, we received an update from the BM team stating they will soon share details about their upcoming plans, including Vintage Packs, audits, and development, in their next announcement
From this point, we can expect they will launch on a different chain
Overall, it seems like a misalignment between the two parties that couldn't be resolved, spiraling out of control. Furthermore, the red flags pointed out by the Abstract team do make me wary of this team
Let's hope the presale participants don't end up on the losing side of this feud
FLASH NEWS
Shatterline is shifting its focus from online multiplayer to single-player
Elderglade's ELDE token is now live (a match-3 RPG on Telegram)
Galxe announced Starboard, combining off-chain and onchain data
Realms of Alurya announced they will put their game in maintenance mode
Sophon announces the first five projects of its incubation program
Proof of Play is building a marketplace for Pirate Nation and 3rd-party games
🆕ALPHA CORNER
Early Games: Night Spawn and NomStead
Join our telegram chat for daily updates & alpha as well: https://t.me/raidenalpha