In the past period, AI games have surged.



From AI NPCs, AI Dungeon, AI auto chess, to various Agent game experiments, there are new demos every day on social media. Almost everyone is saying:



"AI will rewrite the gaming industry."

But things are starting to get a bit strange. Players have begun to have one more question:

When AI can do things stronger, faster, and more accurately than humans, who exactly am I playing with?

If you observe carefully, you will find that there is always an empty spot in all discussions surrounding AI games —


Who can guarantee that the actions in the game are real players?

Who will guarantee that the system has no hidden modifications?

Who will guarantee that winning and losing are not controlled by AI or scripts?

This has instead become a new opportunity quietly welcomed by chain games (On-chain Games).

1. The major trend of AI games: content has become richer, but 'fairness' has become scarce.

After AI enters the gaming industry, it brings two significant changes:

1. NPCs and players are becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish.

AI NPC behavior is becoming more and more like real people, even stronger and more stable.

2. Game companies are starting to control more underlying logic.

AI-driven gameplay means more black boxes and less transparency.

You don't know if the program is automatically 'adjusting your win rate' behind the scenes.

What is the result?

Players are starting to question for the first time:

Am I no longer competing against people, but interacting with an algorithm?

This cannot be solved in traditional Web2 games.

Lack of transparency is a structural issue.

2. This is precisely the window for chain games to fight back: chains are not for 'making money', but for 'verifiability.'

The rise of AI games has made it necessary for the gaming industry to have an external mechanism to answer:

  • Who is a real player?

  • Is the random number fair?

  • Is the match tampered with?

  • Is the win/lose verifiable?

Traditional games can only say:

'Trust us, we won't mess around.'

And the chain can accomplish:

Don't trust me, check it yourself.


The stronger AI games are, the more important the verifiable features of chain games become:

1. Player behavior on-chain → proves they are real people.

2. Random numbers are generated on-chain → cannot be cheated.

3. The battle process is auditable → no black box that cannot be disclosed.

4. Settlement on the entire chain → wins and losses cannot be changed.

This is something AI cannot do.

In other words:

AI games enhance 'production,' but chain games enhance 'trust.'

When content is in infinite supply, trust becomes a scarce commodity.

3. Player demand is shifting: from 'fun' to 'trustworthy.'

This trend has already shown three very clear signals:

Signal 1: Players are once again pursuing 'real player battles.'

Because AI is too strong, real people become scarcer than content.

On-chain identity + On-chain behavior records =

I know I'm competing against real people, not AI.

Signal 2: Competitive games are becoming the category most impacted by AI.

AI is strong enough → player win rates are compressed → dissatisfied → leave.

On-chain competition can restore 'fairness.'

Signal 3: The bottleneck of chain games is no longer 'making money', but 'experience.'

Web3 is transitioning from 'P2E' to 'P2P real battles.'

The market is being reshuffled, and new models are emerging:

It's not about earning more, but about not being deceived.

Four, why is Jackson.io considered a sample of this wave?

If AI games are 'productivity explosion',

then Jackson.io is more like 'rebuilding production relationships.'


It is not a traditional chain game in the conventional sense, but rather a:

On-chain verifiable battle protocol (On-chain Match Engine).

Jackson's core value lies in three points:

1. Both sides in the match must be real human on-chain accounts.

No need to guess whether the opponent is a script.

2. The entire battle process is verifiable.

Every action is recorded on-chain, traceable and public.

3. Winning and losing are not black boxes, but contract calculations.

Game companies cannot adjust your win rate.

Combined with Sui's high performance and ZK Login's entry capabilities,


Jackson.io is essentially building a:

'Anti-cheating infrastructure of the AI game era.'

This is much more important than 'making a game.'

Five, so will the biggest winner of the AI game era be chain games?


It's not the old-fashioned kind of chain game we imagine.

It's not the kind of gold farming game from 2021.

It's not the bubble narrative of P2E.


The real winners will be:

A new chain game ecosystem that can provide 'real players' + 'verifiable fairness' in the era of AI games.

That is to say:

AI is responsible for content, the chain is responsible for trust.

AI makes games stronger, the chain makes games more real.

Jackson.io just happens to hit the golden point on this timeline.

If AI games become the mainstream of the industry, then:

  • 'Real players' will become a scarce resource.

  • 'On-chain verification' will become a standard requirement.

  • 'Fair competition' will become a strong necessity.

And all these demands cannot be solved by Web2 games.

This is the beginning of a new track, not the revival of an old cycle.

\u003ct-21/\u003e