Graphics, gameplay, or money are not one of the largest hurdles of Web3 gaming. It is just having stuff stored up when a game is finished. Games produce massive volumes of information that should remain accessible even once a game is concluded. World state, player possessions, history of progress, replays, and other information must exist somewhere reliable. The cost of storing everything on the blockchain is high and slow, whereas it is risky to keep it off the chain.
Walrus addresses this issue by allowing big game data to be stored in the form of blobs, which remain accessible over a predictable duration and without compelling that data to reside on a particular blockchain. This comes in handy immediately when games need to create worlds that are lasting beyond individual contracts or chains.
Nowadays, Web3 games are closely connected to the location of their data. One chain mints assets. Metadata is on another place. The game wisdom presupposes that such links will remain the same. Once a chain becomes crowded, costly or loses its popularity, relocating becomes difficult. Entire histories of games can be lost or fragmented.
Walrus is a change that decouples the data storage mechanism of a game and the game itself. In practice, game studios are able to store world snapshots, asset information, replay files and progress logs on Walrus. That data then becomes referred to as smart contracts or game engines rather than being placed inside. The information does not fit into any chain. It belongs to the game.
This provides a significant advantage. Games do not require history to be forgotten. In case a studio needs to upgrade contracts, change chains, or work on several chains, the game data will be available. The development of players does not go away. Asset histories stay intact. Societies do not necessarily need to start again.
The other large advantage is cost control. Game data grows fast. Being able to store it forever is too costly. Walrus leaves storage decisions to the studios on what requires long-term storage and what is removable. Replay files could be left months. World snapshots would take more time. Data on assets could be retained indefinitely. This flexibility makes storage aligned with what players appreciate and not what a certain ideology dictates.
Interoperability is a genuine asset. In the case of assets and state kept by storing them out of the game, they can be easily used by third-party tools. The same data can be examined by marketplaces, analytics, replay viewers, and mod tools without having to negotiate with the original studio.
This also adds transparency. Gamers are able to examine asset history. Societies are able to learn the dynamics of gameplay. Games that are already operational can be used to develop tools without compromising weak endpoints.
Walrus does not impose a given design. Studios continue to determine the behavior of assets, progress works and rules. Walrus only ensures that the information on which such decisions are based is not lost without notice.
This more importantly applies to long term games. The traditional online games remain alive since their worlds remain around. The failure of web3 games is due to lack of perseverance. That is made up by Walrus, who provides studios with an easy location to store their worlds.
I believe that Web3 gaming will not evolve through racing faster chains. It will increase as the games cease to disrespect data as disposable. Persistent worlds require persistent data but the data must not be rigid. Walrus offers that balance.
Walrus enables the creation of worlds, that is, game data independent of execution, and where the availability is not determined by default, which allows the world to survive upgrades, migrations and a shift in technology. That is the foundation of the real gaming ecosystems require.