Based on some discussions that I am having with several people regarding this AIP, I have been adding sections of clarity to the AIP follow-up sections above. Similarly, I want to clear up some things here and which aren’t material to the AIP itself.
Yes - the game’s visuals look dated - because they are. That’s the whole point of the ongoing work which, as I pointed out above in my 2-part Q&A, eclipse the actual dev work.
To be clear, the game isn’t being “upscaled” for the rerelease in order to improve on the visuals. No, that’s not it.
The game already works at higher resolutions, all the way up to 4K, and looks fabulous on mobile devices. And no, there’s no mobile or browser version of the game, but I can run it on a mobile device in my lab using cloud streaming tools. The client also runs on Steam Deck, which is a mobile device. And getting it on cloud services is part of my long-term planning, ahead of any native UE5 build.
Improving on creative content such as 3D models in a game goes beyond higher graphics cap. For example, a typical model with 100 polys and low res texture set, isn’t going to look any better by just using higher res textures and materials. It just isn’t. Sure, you can use some middleware tools to increase poly count and then create all-new textures, but it’s a lot more work than just creating a new 100K poly model with high res textures - from scratch. It just looks nicer and cleaner. And that’s what we’re doing.
I made this clear in the AIP, and also explained why I didn’t rerelease the game after buying it.
And the way the game is designed, replacing content goes like this:
- create a new 3D asset, retain original filename for the base model
- create textures, materials etc for new model
- export to game engine format
- copy exported assets to game’s asset folder, overwriting the pre-existing asset name
- fire up the game’s editor (I posted a screen shot of this earlier) and load the game scene (world)
- locate the named 3D model, which will now look exactly as it should in Max or Maya
- locate the [deprecated] legal textures from the old model and delete them
- done!
As to the above, if the model has animations, those would automatically be loaded with the new model, replacing the older version.
That’s it. What you see in the editor is exactly what you will see in the game client once the server/client folders are updated with the new assets created by the editor.
And just like that, you have a new model IN THE GAME. No coding required. None.
Added to that, in the AIP, I specifically provide access to all dev builds (alpha, beta etc) of the game so that the ApeCoin DAO - who will be spending this money to promote their community and token - can see, gauge, comment, review, test etc and work with me on improving this game.
Specifically, I wanted a Web3 community involved. I already explained why. Heck, I made this clear in my “testing the waters” thread, which I later withdrew instead of going through with it almost a month ago. This is no different from how I have done ALL my games over the years.
And also, the content creation teams are very experienced in what they do. It’s all out-sourced because it’s a lengthy and super expensive process. We’re not re-skinning a game. We’re literally putting on a new coat of a paint on a house we bought, while replacing some parts of the roof, and maybe doing some bathroom remodeling while we’re at it. Why? Because it’s better to spend $5M to remodel than to spend another $30M and maybe 10 yrs rebuilding something new. There’s a reason why teams and companies keep making the same games over and over and over again, yet call them sequels.
Though it was ever only released in North America because it wasn’t localized, Alganon was very popular when it was online. It’s what accounts for all the media, marketing, YT channels etc. I already posted some publicly available stats.
The game does not need to be popular to be successful. All it needs to do is recoup its costs - as it did before - be profitable enough to pay for its monthly costs. That’s the traditional MMO formula, and the same for any live service game.
Josh Bycer wrote a fantastic article on live service games. Please read it, as well as this one over at Tech Raptor. There are many more.
And while you’re at it, look at this WoW metrics chart. And that’s a game released in 2004 - six years before Alganon. In fact, the original team started working on Alganon shortly after WoW came out.
If your game costs $100K per month to run, and it’s making $25K per month in revenue, that game is going to fail and be taken off-line. That happens over and over again. But if your game costs $100K per month to run, and it’s making $105K per month in revenue, you keep building on that game because new things means new money. Why else did I do no less than two expansion packs? We didn’t do a second one because we were losing money.
And brand and gamer loyalty goes a long way to sustainability of games. I should know. I’ve been making the same type of games for the same people for decades. And they never let me down. Not once. And it’s not just about loyalty, it’s about the fact that they know that I am an exceptionally dedicated and focused person when it comes to my projects.
Yes, the game has been off-line for a number of years. Yes, it has to re-engage the install base. Yes, it’s going to need additional marketing. Basically, the rerelease is like starting over - except we are starting from a previous checkpoint instead of from the beginning of the game. I could have just rereleased it - as is - and made some money. And that’s what you call a cash grab.
However, for the purposes of this AIP - which is a marketing and promo proposal - the whole point boils down to this two simple things:
- How can Alganon help promote & build ApeCoin DAO & $APE token?
- How can ApeCoin DAO help improve and speed up the Web3 release of Alganon?
That’s how a partnership works.
If Yuga Labs was focused on just NFTs for revenues and they were convinced that was the single source of revenue to boost their IP and indeed $APE, they wouldn’t be making games. Especially not for a small audience. So, yes, while those games aren’t popular, as I posted in my stats, they were enough to increase the otherwise stagnant Ape audience. Though not to the levels of even the worst Web3 games, let alone any Web2 game that has access to that stellar team and capital pit.
My point is that there are all kinds of marketing. Some hit and some don’t. And no matter how you look at it - and there are metrics for this btw - it always comes down to gaming. Always.
So, Alganon doesn’t need millions in MAU for it to be a marketing “success” for ApeCoin. In fact, it’s not even relevant how well the game performs. What’s relevant is that you do things and take steps that will “market and promote” ApeCoin. Right now, that’s not happening. At all. And obviously going by the stagnant Ape ecosystem and the rapidly falling $APE token, something isn’t working.
I believe that there’s going to be a LOT of noise once we get to the stage whereby we start showing off new content in images, videos etc. It’s specifically why I haven’t made any official public announcement, and everything out there about the game, comes from Steam and my social media feeds. And that noise is how people get to learn about ApeCoin how - and why - the hell did Derek Smart end up in Web3? The industry knows that I am a technologist, so, it makes sense that I would want to do this. My way. I never - ever - do something that I don’t believe in.
And even so, I’m not telling them anything yet because I know that they won’t get it and also they’re going to be very upset with me over that whole Web3 thing. Until they get to play the game again and realize my vision of what I wanted to do.
This was a bulletin from back in Aug 2022 (this DAO was barely about three months old then) after the server move & upgrade and the game & game services were updated, having been online and in dev for months prior.
And guess what? Go to Google and run some metrics on ApeCoin or anything related to this ecosystem. Those metrics aren’t even a blip on a chart because nobody cares but those of us in this 130K Ape cluster.
And if ApeCoin DOA was foolish enough to pay an influencer $83K per month for “promos”, guess what that would do? Nothing. Why? Because that influencer is still going to be catering to the same 130K cluster - and maybe a few interested people who wouldn’t see any value in buying $APE when there’s no tangible utility to the token.
I’m sorry, but staking your $APE isn’t going to save your bags. Nobody is coming to save your bags. And worrying about the LP and thus not spending the treasury isn’t going to change that. I have seen the math. The math doesn’t lie. The token is on a steady and protracted decline straight to $0 unless and until this DAO stops looking to Yuga Labs to do all the work. That’s like this guy:
This DAO needs to do something…
- Something DIFFERENT
- Something BOLD
- Something NEW
- Something WEIRD
- Something HARD
Spending a few thousand Dollars here and there is how we end up in death by a thousand cuts. Who benefits the most? Certainly not the DAO. It’s the grantees. Don’t take my word for it, go pull up all the funded AIPs, run up the numbers and draw your own conclusions. I’ve done that - because I’m nuts like that. And it’s a very bleak picture because not a single one of those AIPs has moved the Ape adoption needle. Why? Because they’re catering to us - in this cluster.
And guess what? If the token does crater next year - as many expect that it will - Alganon will still come out and with someone else’s token because I have no intentions of doing an ICO. Here and now, we have a unique chance to build a partnership that lasts years, instead of the length of a tik-tok video.
And unlike many others who just breeze in and out of here, I will always be around because I am always dedicated to what I do. I am not a fairweather friend. Love me or hate me, I’m the guy who will always be around. I’m neither a diplomat nor a politician, so I don’t have to cater to people’s feelings. I cater to what produces results.
I will make this clear once again.
The price of the license to do everything I listed for ApeCoin, is $5M. And it’s non-negotiable.
Those of you suggesting that I reduce it and give it a better chance of passing, are missing the point.
I could no more do a $2M for 2 yr license that stands some chance of passing than a $5M for 5 yrs license which stands little to no chance of passing. So why waste my time on that? Again, I didn’t pick a number out of a hat.
I mean, if I wanted to change my roof and my roofer says it’s 10K, then the price is 10K and I trust that he knows what he’s talking about. And maybe we haggle a litte because sometimes prices can be adjusted. But regardless, I still wouldn’t care what my gardener thinks because he’s not a roofer.
That’s another example of something someone floated to me. My question was, why on Earth would I tie my game to a token that’s fast cratering? Where’s the logic and sense in that? That’s like putting a banner on the side of a bus that’s heading for the scrap yard. So maybe the people on the bus route see the banner. Then it’s gone.
Here, this is our token as of this writing. Does that tell you anything?
So, no, I’m not doing that. ApeCoin couldn’t even pay me $2M just to use $APE. The DAO is better off spending that money on an influencer who is only going to care until the $APE funded fleeting moment comes and goes. Like a whisper. In the rain.
I mean, if I wanted to use someone else’s token for a fee, I wouldn’t be writing this AIP. There are so many tokens out there by a bunch of “crypto bros” that I have grown tied of saying “Yeah, no. Not doing that”. My bizdev manager and I get those all the time.
So, no, me using the token isn’t going to benefit me nor ApeCoin. What I do believe will benefit the DAO is a protracted engagement campaign like my proposal. That’s it. Again, nobody is coming to save us and no number of micro AIPs are going to change that.
We should build this. Together. I can do it. You just have to believe that I can do it. And if you don’t believe, then just vote no. But I don’t believe that doing a lower AIP that stands some chance of passing, is fair to the DAO and to my project. - and so I should make promises that I know stand a higher chance of failure. Not going to do that.
And it’s why I considered the milestone payment schedule - over 9 months - so that I can show that I believe in what I’m trying to do, that it can be done, it’s being done, and it will yield tangible results that benefit the DAO on a long-term basis. And all through the dev process, those of you interested in playing and testing it, can do so. Starting from the Web2 build all the way to the rerelease of our Web3 component rerelease.
I will add more comments as I continue to get feedback outside of this AIP.