Bitaigen Research Telegram (TON) mini‑games have seen their vitality eroded by an over‑reliance on clicker‑style titles, a scarcity of innovation, and a one‑dimensional support strategy from the TON Foundation, resulting in user attrition and a downturn in the overall ecosystem.
Recently, data for Telegram bots and Miniapps have shown a pronounced decline. Not long ago, propelled by the explosive growth of clicker games, Telegram Miniapps were a focal point in the blockchain space.
However, beneath the surface of that prosperity lay a looming crisis. The TON Foundation’s support policy leaned heavily toward clicker games; while this produced a surge in users and activity in the short term, it also sowed the seeds of ecological imbalance. When novelty fades, homogeneity deepens, and depth is lacking, the entire ecosystem begins to recoil.
As the tide recedes, it becomes urgent to reflect on the strategic missteps of the TON Foundation and to search for a fresh narrative that can steer the next phase of TON’s development. The bot statistics quoted in this article are sourced from the Telegram Apps Center, TON App, and The Open League (see appendix). Below, the author joins forces with the editor of Bitaigen (比特根) for an in‑depth discussion.
In this article we outline the current state and bottlenecks of the Telegram TON mini‑game ecosystem, dissect the foundation’s biased support strategy and the user loss caused by homogenisation. By analysing the latest bot and Miniapp data we uncover hidden risk points and suggest possible breakthrough directions, helping readers grasp the key dynamics that will shape TON’s next steps.
1. The Downward MAU Trend Is Hard to Stop
OGenLab continuously monitors 820 Telegram projects; the cumulative monthly active users (MAU) recorded from October 1 to October 31 total 879,922,503 (raw, non‑deduplicated).
- MAU decline amount: a cumulative drop of 295,971,112 within the month, roughly 33 %.
- Trend characteristics: daily figures show an accelerating decline, especially for large‑scale projects with more than 5 million users. Those projects initially fell slowly, then sped up, dragging the overall MAU downwards.
This phenomenon indicates that even top‑tier projects cannot withstand the shock of user churn, and deep‑seated issues must be addressed inside the ecosystem.
[Image source: https://x.com/OGenLab/status/1854060874304221435]
2. Structural Shifts Behind Project Rises and Falls
Among the 820 monitored entities, 249 projects experienced growth in October, while 491 saw a decline.
- Established star projects: flagship titles that have already issued tokens—such as Hamster, Dogs, Catizen, etc.—recorded the steepest drops, with sharp reductions in activity and participation.
- Emerging projects: a handful posted modest gains, but both the number of rising projects and the magnitude of their growth were insufficient to offset the downturn of the older titles.
In the segment of projects with fewer than 1 million users, the number of declining projects still exceeds the number of rising ones, indicating a broad‑scale contraction in the mid‑to‑small‑scale tier and a lack of fresh forces capable of reversing the trend.
The structural problem lies in waning appeal of legacy projects and an under‑performing pipeline of new entrants; the ecosystem urgently needs innovation‑driven momentum.
3. Migration of Project Scale and the Downgrading of User Demand
OGenLab grouped the 820 projects into eight MAU brackets and examined the changes observed during October, revealing the following tendencies:
3.1 High‑Scale Projects Flowing Downward
| Bracket (MAU) | Projects in Week 1 | Projects in Week 4 | Primary Flow Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| **> 50 million** | 2 | 1 | 1 project fell to the 10‑50 million range |
| **10‑50 million** | 18 | 15 | Several dropped to the 5‑10 million range |
| **5‑10 million** | 22 | 31 | Received downgrades from higher tiers; some further fell to the 2‑5 million range |
The flagship tier (> 50 million users) contracted from two projects to one, demonstrating a substantial drop in activity among the ecosystem’s biggest players and a top‑down contraction overall.
3.2 Mid‑Scale Projects Show Marked Downgrades
- 2‑5 million: project count rose from 35 to 41; during this period 10 projects descended from the 5‑10 million bracket, while another 10 slipped further into the 0.5‑2 million range.
- 0.5‑2 million: project count increased from 78 to 99, primarily fed by downgrades from higher tiers.
Pressure on mid‑size projects is mounting as they struggle to retain users, and attrition becomes increasingly evident.
3.3 Small‑Scale Projects Surge in Number
- 0.1‑0.5 million: projects grew from 142 to 181, absorbing a large influx of downgraded titles from higher brackets.
- 20 k‑100 k and < 20 k: especially the < 20 k tier, which swelled from 84 to 161, reflecting a striking surge.
The rise in tiny projects does not signal a thriving ecosystem; rather, it is a by‑product of the overall downward drift, with little fresh blood to rejuvenate the environment.
[Image source: https://x.com/OGenLab/status/1854060874304221435]
4. OpenLeague’s Predicament and Its Bright Spots
OpenLeague enjoys a certain degree of market recognition and an established user base, yet it has not escaped the downward user trend; some metrics have deteriorated even more sharply.
4.1 User Decline Is More Pronounced
- Activity drop: compared with other projects, OpenLeague’s user base shrank faster, likely due to insufficient innovation and a lack of effective engagement mechanisms.
- Competitive pressure: a flood of new competitive‑gaming projects siphons off existing users, eroding market share.
4.2 Inconsistent Project Quality
- Ecological noise: sub‑projects and events vary widely in quality, lacking clear positioning and high‑calibre content, which hampers attraction and retention.
- Experience gaps: several offerings suffer from design and functional flaws, delivering a sub‑par user experience that accelerates churn.
4.3 Highlighted Sub‑Projects Worth Watching
Despite the challenges, OpenLeague houses standout sub‑projects such as “AKEDO Game” and “RentTycoon”, which have displayed deep‑green growth periods and sustained upward trajectories, offering a glimmer of hope.
[Image source: https://x.com/OGenLab/status/1854060874304221435]
5. “One Whale Falls, All Things Rise” or a Complete Zero
To gain a finer view of project‑level user dynamics, this article compares two seven‑day windows: September 24‑30 versus October 25‑31.
5.1 Analytical Method
- M1: user change in the September window = users on the last day − users on the first day (both > 10).
- M2: user change in the October window, calculated the same way.
- Plot M1 on the horizontal axis and M2 on the vertical axis, add an auxiliary line x = ‑y to help flag potential artificial inflation.
[Image source: https://x.com/OGenLab/status/1854060874304221435]
5.2 Quadrant Interpretation
| Quadrant | Relationship of M1 / M2 | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| First (top‑right) | M1 > 0, M2 > 0 | Growth in both periods; indicates sustained upward momentum. |
| Second (top‑left) | M1 < 0, M2 > 0 | Initial decline followed by recovery; if the point lies to the right of **x = ‑y**, the rebound may be genuine; left of the line suggests insufficient recovery. |
| Third (bottom‑left) | M1 < 0, M2 < 0 | Decline in both windows; high risk of termination. |
| Fourth (bottom‑right) | M1 > 0, M2 < 0 | Early rise then fall; if positioned left of **x = ‑y**, the drop outweighs the prior gain, warranting caution. |
- Potential inflation: points near the origin and close to x = ‑y imply M1 + M2 ≈ 0, possibly indicating a lack of genuine new users.
- Promising projects: those in the second quadrant and to the right of x = ‑y, showing a clear recent rebound.
- Risky projects: points in the third quadrant, demanding a life‑force assessment and remedial strategy.
- Watch‑out projects: fourth‑quadrant points left of x = ‑y, which may be entering a spiral of loss.
6. Summary
Telegram Miniapps are currently confronting an unprecedented crisis, concentrated around two core dimensions: commercialisation and content.
6.1 Commercialisation Challenges
- Current model: revenue is primarily driven by volume‑selling and token‑listing schemes.
- Pain points: token sellers and exchanges have already purchased a wave of traffic; new user acquisition is weak. Games generate large quantities of tokens but lack consumption scenarios, forcing users to dump tokens, which leads to rapid post‑listing decay.
6.2 Content Bottlenecks
- Dominant gameplay: most leading games still rely on clicker mechanics and viral‑referral tasks, offering limited depth.
- User perception: over time, Telegram games have earned the label “Earn‑to‑Sell,” making it difficult to attract long‑term players.
Turning the tide will require the creation of truly deep‑play games that rebuild user trust, allowing the next brilliant gaming star to shine in Telegram’s sky.
We look forward to fresh content ideas and novel commercial models that inject vitality into these games and usher users into genuine gaming experiences.
OGenLab, as an enthusiastic game studio, will keep monitoring Telegram’s data pulse and will soon deliver a deeper dive into TON‑chain projects.
Observing the fall of giant projects alongside the rise of emerging forces is still insufficient to illuminate the whole ecosystem. As the ancient proverb goes, “When the mountains seem impassable and the waters block the path, a hidden village appears beyond the dark willows.” We hope to witness a flourishing Telegram application landscape soon.
The above constitutes Bitaigen’s (比特根) editor’s analysis and sharing of “Who Stifled the Life of Telegram (TON) Mini‑Games?” – thank you for reading!
Related Reading
- Telegram Founder Arrested – TON Ecosystem Value Still Holds
- Telegram Click-to-Earn: Ads, Airdrops & Economic Strategy
- TON Blockchain Security: Key Risks and Optimization Strategies
💡 Register on Binance with referral code B2345 for the maximum trading fee discount. See Binance complete guide.
⚠️ Risk Disclaimer: Crypto prices are highly volatile. This is not investment advice.
