Futurum's Gaming Gamble Is It Education or Just Another Crypto Hype?

So when that press release landed in my inbox, it was just another shiny object telling us that they’re going to “revolutionize” education with the magic of Web3. This time, it’s Futurum Gaming, with their “Race to Infinity” game showing a 59% gain in math skills. My first thought? Doubt, mixed with a large dash of jadedness.

59% Improvement Suspiciously Specific?

Let's be blunt. That 59% figure would raise the alarm of “cherry-picked data” to anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of statistics. Where did this number come from? What was the sample size? What control group was used? Has the study gone through the normal scientific process of peer review and been published in a leading academic journal? The press release provides none of this vital missing context. The whole thing is a black box of a claim, smokey jazz hands to wow while withholding meaning.

I've seen this movie before. Company X comes in with the big tricked out PowerPoint and the big promises. They’re counting on you to not dig deeper and demand accountability. Remember the early days of MOOCs? They collectively pledged to democratize education and rectify the achievement gap. Years later, as completion rates are still in the toilet and the achievement gap is wider than ever. Hype doesn't equal results.

NFTs and Education Strange Bedfellows?

Then there's the "Paddles! NFT" collection. Playable in-game heroes that come in varying rarity tiers, providing both brute-staking rewards and competitive edge. This is where the “education” narrative begins to fall apart, real fast.

Look, I understand the allure of NFTs. The promise of digital ownership. The potential to build community. The speculative upside. Integrating them into an educational game feels like shoehorning a trendy technology into a space where it doesn't necessarily belong.

Are the learning opportunities of “Race to Infinity” really improved by introducing them as NFTs? Or are they simply a means to extract even more cash from gamers? This produces a pay-to-win environment that undermines the fundamental principles of equity in education.

Consider the message this sends to kids: success in math is tied to owning a rare digital asset. Is that truly the lesson we want to impart to them?

FTRM Token A Ponzi Scheme Waiting?

The FTRM token planned to be issued in Q2 2025 should raise additional red flags. It will serve as the primary currency for in-game purchases, upgrading NFTs, reward system and DAO governance. Translation: another crypto token with questionable utility and the potential for pump-and-dump schemes.

The whitepaper – not included in the press release (shocking, I know) – will have to be pored over. What are the tokenomics? What are the vesting schedules? Who are the early investors? What credible mechanisms exist to keep the market from being manipulated?

The disclaimers in the press release—notably the last half—are even more telling. Instead, they explicitly disclaim that the information they provide may be incorrect. Investing in the FTRM token is extremely speculative and carries a high level of financial risk. Why would anyone lay down capital for something that the company developing it is willing to concede might be unsafe and impermanent?

This is not to suggest that ALL blockchain-based educational initiatives are automatically misguided. Futurum Gaming needs to increase transparency and deliver more credible proof. Color me a skeptic, but I do want to be convinced that “Race to Infinity” is really more than just another crypto hype train, camouflaged as education. The burden of proof is on them.

We need to ask ourselves: Is this truly about making learning fun and accessible, or is it about capitalizing on the latest crypto craze and extracting value from vulnerable individuals? Those answers, I imagine, are much more complex than Futurum Gaming wants you to think.

Including Immutable Passport is a smart move, especially when it comes to onboarding Web2 users. It fails to respond to the most important issues about the lack of educational value and high financial risk associated with this project.

Tony Walden's quote about "environments where learning is the product, and these environments have economic gravity" sounds impressive, but it raises concerns. Are we commodifying education? Instead, we’re commodifying learning and making it a product that can be purchased.