Dressed to Gamble: How Poker Drives the Dynamics of Wearables and Visits on Decentraland’s Social Virtual World

Year 2025, Volume: 5 Issue: 2, 145 - 155, 31.12.2025

Amaury Trujillo , Clara Bacciu , Matteo Abrate

https://doi.org/10.57019/jmv.1673676

Abstract

Decentraland is a blockchain-based social virtual world where users can publish and sell wearables to customize avatars. In it, the thirdparty Decentral Games (DG) allows players of its flagship game ICE Poker to earn cryptocurrency only if they possess certain wearables. Herein, we present a comprehensive study on how DG and its game influence the dynamics of wearables and inworld visits in Decentraland. To this end, we analyzed 5.9 million wearable transfers made on the Polygon blockchain (and related sales) over a twoyear period, and 677 million log events of in-world user positions in an overlapping 10-month period. We found that these activities are disproportionately related to DG, with its ICE Poker casinos (less than 0.1% of the world map) representing a remarkable average share of daily unique visitors (33%) and time spent in the virtual world (20%). Despite several alternative initiatives within Decentraland, ICE Poker appears to drive user activity on the platform. Our work thus contributes to the understanding of how play-to-earn games influence user behavior in social virtual worlds, and it is among the first to study the emerging phenomenon of virtual blockchain-based gambling.

Keywords

Social virtual worlds , play-to-earn , online gambling

References

• Kerdvibulvech, C. (2022). Exploring the impacts of covid- 19 on digital and metaverse games. In C. Stephanidis, M. Antona, & S. Ntoa (Eds.), HCI international 2022 posters (pp. 561–565). Springer International Publishing.
• Bleize, D. N., & Antheunis, M. L. (2019). Factors influencing purchase intent in virtual worlds: A review of the literature. Journal of Marketing Communications, 25 (4), 403–420.
• Zhou, M., Leenders, M. A., & Cong, L. M. (2018). Ownership in the virtual world and the implications for longterm user innovation success. Technovation, 78, 56–65.
• Cannavo, A., & Lamberti, F. (2020). How blockchain, virtual reality, and augmented reality are converging, and why. IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, 10 (5), 6–13.
• Trujillo, A., & Bacciu, C. (2023). Toward blockchainbased fashion wearables in the metaverse: The case of decentraland. IEEE International Conference on Metaverse Computing, Networking and Applications (Meta- Com), 653–657.
• Grimmelmann, J. (2009). Virtual world feudalism. Yale Law Journal Pocket Part, 118, 126.
• Nguyen, T. T., Larsen, A. L., Doan, T., Ho, A., & Zirlin, J. (2021). Axie infinity [Available at: https:// whitepaper.axieinfinity.com/ (Accessed: 2024-7-12)]. Official Axie Infinity Whitepaper.
• Boellstorff, T. (2016). For whom the ontology turns: Theorizing the digital real. Current Anthropology, 57 (4), 387–407.
• Wood, G., et al. (2014). Ethereum: A secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger. Ethereum project yellow paper, 151 (2014), 1–32.
• Hassan, S., & De Filippi, P. (2021). Decentralized autonomous organization. Internet Policy Review, 10 (2), 1–10.
• Lo, Y. C., & Medda, F. (2020). Assets on the blockchain: An empirical study of tokenomics. Information Economics and Policy, 53, 100881.
• Goldberg, M., & Sch¨ar, F. (2023). Metaverse governance: An empirical analysis of voting within decentralized autonomous organizations. Journal of Business Research, 160, 113764.
• Parkin, S. (2022). The trouble with roblox, the video game empire built on child labour. The Guardian, January, 9, 2022.
• Kou, Y., & Gui, X. (2023). Harmful design in the metaverse and how to mitigate it: A case study of usergenerated virtual worlds on roblox. Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference, 175–188.
• Glas, M. A. J. (2010). Games of stake: Control, agency and ownership in world of warcraft. Universiteit van Amsterdam [Host].
• Ordano, E., Meilich, A., Jardi, Y., & Araoz, M. (2017). A blockchain-based virtual world. Decentraland, White Paper.
• Dowling, M. (2022). Fertile land: Pricing non-fungible tokens. Finance Research Letters, 44, 102096.
• Goldberg, M., Kugler, P., & Sch¨ar, F. (2021). Land valuation in the metaverse: Location matters. Available at SSRN 3932189.
• Guidi, B., & Michienzi, A. (2022). Social games and blockchain: Exploring the metaverse of decentraland. IEEE 42nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops (ICDCSW), 199–204.
• Nadini, M., Alessandretti, L., Di Giacinto, F., Martino, M., Aiello, L. M., & Baronchelli, A. (2021). Mapping the nft revolution: Market trends, trade networks, and visual features. Scientific reports, 11 (1).
• Gonzalez, P. (2022, June). Digital fashion in the metaverse [Master’s thesis, Politecnico di Milano].
• Bardzell, J., Pace, T., & Terrell, J. (2010). Virtual fashion and avatar design: A survey of consumers and designers. Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on Human- Computer Interaction: Extending Boundaries, 599–602.
• Boellstorff, T. (2015). Coming of age in second life. Princeton University Press.
• Boellstorff, T. (2020). Rethinking digital anthropology. In Digital anthropology (pp. 39–60). Routledge.
• Rodriguez Sanchez, M., & Garcia-Badell, G. (2022). Dressing the metaverse. the digital strategies of fashion brands in the virtual universe. Advances in Fashion and Design Research: Proceedings of the 5th International Fashion and Design Congress, CIMODE 2022, July 4-7, 2022, Guimar˜aes, Portugal, 387–397.
• Joy, A., Zhu, Y., Pe˜na, C., & Brouard, M. (2022). Digital future of luxury brands: Metaverse, digital fashion, and non-fungible tokens. Strategic change, 31 (3), 337–343.
• Goldberg, M., Sch¨ar, F., & Th¨urkauf, D. (2023). Retailing and customer engagement in the metaverse: An empirical analysis. Available at SSRN 4547100.
• Fiedler, I. C., & Rock, J.-P. (2009). Quantifying skill in games—theory and empirical evidence for poker. Gaming Law Review and Economics, 13 (1), 50–57.
• Griffiths, M., & Barnes, A. (2008). Internet gambling: An online empirical study among student gamblers. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 6, 194–204.
• Fiedler, I., & Wilcke, A.-C. (2011). The market for online poker. UNLV Gaming Research & Review Journal Available at SSRN 1747646, 16 (1).
• Zaman, B., Geurden, K., De Cock, R., De Schutter, B., & Abeele, V. V. (2014). Motivation profiles of online poker players and the role of interface preferences: A laddering study among amateur and (semi-) professionals. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 154–164.
• Newall, P. W., & Talberg, N. (2023). Elite professional online poker players: Factors underlying success in a gambling game usually associated with financial loss and harm. Addiction Research & Theory, 31 (6), 383–394.
• Armstrong, T., Rockloff, M., Browne, M., & Li, E. (2018). An exploration of how simulated gambling games may promote gambling with money. Journal of Gambling Studies, 34, 1165–1184.
• Sirola, A., Savela, N., Savolainen, I., Kaakinen, M., & Oksanen, A. (2021). The role of virtual communities in gambling and gaming behaviors: A systematic review. Journal of Gambling Studies, 37 (1), 165–187.
• Savolainen, I., Sirola, A., Vuorinen, I., Mantere, E., & Oksanen, A. (2022). Online communities and gambling behaviors— a systematic review. Current Addiction Reports, 9 (4), 400–409.
• O’Leary, K., & Carroll, C. (2013). The online poker subculture: Dialogues, interactions and networks. Journal of Gambling Studies, 29, 613–630.
• Fang, F., Ventre, C., Basios, M., Kanthan, L., Martinez- Rego, D., Wu, F., & Li, L. (2022). Cryptocurrency trading: A comprehensive survey. Financial Innovation, 8 (1), 13.
• OECD. (2022). Lessons from the crypto winter. OECD Business and Finance Policy Papers, (18). https://doi. org/https://doi.org/10.1787/199edf4f-en
• Houser, K. A., & Holden, J. T. (2022). Navigating the non-fungible token. Utah L. Rev., 891.
• Sharma, T., Zhou, Z., Huang, Y., & Wang, Y. (2022). “It’s a blessing and a curse”: Unpacking creators’ practices with non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and their communities. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.13233.
• Johnson, B., Co, S., Sun, T., Lim, C. C., Stjepanovi´c, D., Leung, J., Saunders, J. B., & Chan, G. C. (2023). Cryptocurrency trading and its associations with gambling and mental health: A scoping review. Addictive Behaviors, 136, 107504.
• Delfabbro, P., King, D., Williams, J., & Georgiou, N. (2021). Cryptocurrency trading, gambling and problem gambling. Addictive Behaviors, 122, 107021.
• Andrade, M., Sharman, S., Xiao, L. Y., & Newall, P. W. (2023). Safer gambling and consumer protection failings among 40 frequently visited cryptocurrency-based online gambling operators. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 37 (3), 545.
• De Jesus, S. B., Austria, D., Marcelo, D. R., Ocampo, C., Tibudan, A. J., & Tus, J. (2022). Play-to-earn: A qualitative analysis of the experiences and challenges faced by axie infinity online gamers amidst the covid-19 pandemic. International Journal of Psychology and Counseling, 1 (12), 291–424.
• Delic, A. J., & Delfabbro, P. H. (2024). Profiling the potential risks and benefits of emerging “play to earn” games: A qualitative analysis of players’ experiences with axie infinity. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 22 (1), 634–647.
• Hong, W., Jing, Y., Liu, R.-D., Ding, Y., & Wang, J. (2023). Wean your child off video games: Using external rewards to undermine intrinsic motivation to play interesting video games. Current Psychology, 42 (21), 17746–17756.
• Miikkulainen-Gilbert, H. (2023). Digital transformation: How can it provide the most value to fashion brands while enabling sustainable change? [Master’s thesis, Arcada University of Applied Sciences].
• Dolata, M., & Schwabe, G. (2023). What is the metaverse and who seeks to define it? mapping the site of social construction. Journal of Information Technology, 38 (3), 239–266.
• Echauri, G. (2025). Tech trends: Wired’s treatment of emerging technologies (2021-2023). Journalism, 26 (6), 1270–1287.
• Zborowska, N., Kingma, S. F., & Brear, P. (2012). Regulation and reputation: The gibraltar approach. In Routledge international handbook of internet gambling (pp. 84–99). Routledge.
• Trautman, L. J., Foster, I., & Larry, D. (2022). The ftx crypto debacle: Largest fraud since madoff? University of Memphis Law Review, Forthcoming.
• Kerr, J. (2018). How can legislators protect sport from the integrity threat posed by cryptocurrencies? The International Sports Law Journal, 18 (1), 79–97.
• Fischer, J. M. (2021). Is poker legal or illegal in california? UNLV Gaming LJ, 12, 27.
• Macegoniuk, A. (2021). How british island tax havens accommodate financial criminals? historical perspective 1956–2020 [Master’s thesis, Univeristy of Oulu].
• Zaucha, T. (2024). Racial capitalism, platform capitalism, and nfts. In Non-fungible tokens (pp. 139–154). Routledge.
• Xiao, L. Y. (2024). Loot box state of play 2023: Law, regulation, policy, and enforcement around the world. Gaming Law Review, 28 (10), 450–483.
• Varvello, M., & Voelker, G. M. (2010). Second life: A social network of humans and bots. Proceedings of the 20th international workshop on network and operating systems support for digital audio and video, 9–14.
• Boellstorff, T. (2006). A ludicrous discipline? ethnography and game studies. Games and culture, 1 (1), 29–35.