That’s excellent. So this integration would then allow for listing on Steam? (Just to verify that I’m interpreting this correctly.)
No, it won’t because Steam’s ban is not about the payment method, it’s about a game having any Web3 component. That means anything with a blockchain or crypto payments.
What this Xsolla feature does is allow the on-boarding of various payment methods supported by crypto.com without having to support one coin only. Basically, any coin/token supported by crypto.com can be accepted as a form of payment in Xsolla.
We implemented Xsolla payments support back in 2015
Then Valve made us remove it because they wanted all games to use Steam Wallet. So, we disabled it and re-enabled it for this Web3 version and disabled Steam Wallet.
More to the point, because a LOT of games use Xsolla, this feature is just going to further push tokens like $APE into extinction because there’s seemingly no value to using one coin/token over another.
This is a BFD. Even bigger than PayPal issuing a USD stablecoin last week.
Excellent! Thank you for the clarification on both Xsolla and Steam.
Hi @SmartAPE! Thanks so much for bringing your game to the DAO! I do think gaming is a big part of the future of Web3 if it is going to be successful and seems like a logical step for gaming to incorporate NFTs due to their benefits such as verifiable ownership, scarcity, provenance & authenticity, interoperability, etc.
However, current sentiment within the gaming community towards NFTs and crypto appears pretty negative and that’s a big hurdle to mass adoption. Do you see this game being powered exclusively by ApeCoin as potentially limiting it’s success? Since we’re in a bear market, the number of people actively engaged in Web3 is relatively low and those outside Web3 would have to be onboarded to crypto and ApeCoin in order to participate.
Does this mean the Marketing and Comms working group would need to budget for the marketing of your game and if so, how much do you expect that the game would need?
Being that the Marketing and Comms working group is not up and running and it will take some time until it’s fully functioning with an approved budget, do you see this as a potential challenge to onboarding people to play?
Thanks again for your proposal and looking forward to your insights!
Interesting . I almost gave up reading this
Hi @adventurousape - thanks for taking the time to read the AIP. I know it’s exceptionally detailed, but I am a clarity kinda guy.
Plausible concerns, indeed. But here’s the beauty of it…
Alganon is a “Web2 MMORPG game with Web3 components”. I could release it as planned in 2024 without the Web3 components and it would be the same game. In fact, the way it’s engineered, simple build flags are all it takes to disable the Web3 components (except for the Web3 wallet which is integrated in the pre-existing Web2 wallet - still need to work on a build flag for that at some point).
I did it this way because my “Game First” approach to Web3 - which I have written extensively about - requires that a good game should always come first. The tech stack is largely irrelevant. As are the Web3 components. And this is why, instead of starting from a new game, spending millions of Dollars and several years on an experiment, I decided to re-purpose these two Web2 games. So, the game neither relies on nor requires Web3 for it’s success or failure.
Also, the game’s design as an MMO, already had all the components required for implementing a pass-through Web3 tech stack. This means that, if I so choose, we could very well deploy different game servers and clients. e.g. a Web2 or Web3 version. This is basically similar to legacy and modern versions of various MMO games.
During the course of gameplay, a player wouldn’t notice any of the Web3 components unless they choose to. e.g. You could start the game, create a character, and go explore, quest, trade etc. and never encounter any Web3 components. You would only encounter those components if you actually do anything that triggers them.
For example, when you create a game account, you get an in-game wallet (Web2) and inventory stack. When you buy in-game currency, it’s that wallet that is used. If you however decide to trade in certain items which are tagged as NFTs, then an in-game Web3 wallet is automatically created for you within the same UI/UX as the Web3 wallet. You fund that wallet in the same manner that you would the Web2 wallet and you can transfer funds between the two. Your Web2 wallet and in-game ($TRIBUTE) currency remain in the Web2 wallet, while your NFTs and token ($APE) currency remain in the Web3 wallet.
Similarly, the game’s Web2 marketplace UI/UX works the same way. As you can see above, it also has web access and is identical to the in-game version. The Web3 version of that marketplace is going to be using a third-party White label Web3 marketplace SDK. So, you will see a tab specifically for NFTs in both the in-game and web versions of the marketplace. And you will be able to trade those NFTs with other players or sell them back to the game’s marketplace.
The game’s loot drops (via questing, kills etc) are also geared toward both Web2 and Web3 components. So, if you get a Web3 item - but you don’t have a Web3 wallet setup - it still goes into your inventory allowing you to later decide if you want to trade it or keep it. And then you need to activate your in-game Web3 wallet.
I have millions of Dollars and several years of my life invested in this game. Unlike some lucky studios who have the luxury of seeing several titles fail, I have never had that luxury. And for that reason, I tend to think carefully through what I do with my games so that I always have a “In case of emergency, pull lever” plan of action. My foray into Web3 is no different.
As to using $APE, that’s not relevant because the token used is of no consequence. It’s just a game that uses fiat or crypto currency as-needed. If the AIP doesn’t pass, which means that I won’t use $APE, I will just end up using $MATIC, $TLOS or $SUI - all of which we’ve run tests with. The difference with those tokens is that they don’t have a centralized community like ApeCoin does. And we have to do a lot more work to cultivate a Web3 install base to complement and merge with the Web2 install base. It’s specifically why I came here; because I believe that the key to wide Web3 gaming success lies in the merge of both factions - in a good game that isn’t Web3 in your face.
TL;DR is that Alganon neither needs nor requires Web3. And it never did. The second game, won’t be any different in this regard.
ps. If you take a look at the marketing push currently going on for nWay’s Wreck League, you will see similar sentiments regarding Web2 vs Web3. And that game, over two years in the making, started out as a pure Web3 game when it was all the rage. You have to adapt to market conditions. And you have to be quick about it - or your project is dead. Most Web3 games don’t have the luxury of that pivot, and that’s why they’re either dead or dying.
I have said this over and over again, there is no Web3 gaming without core Web2 gamers.
No, it’s unrelated. All games are marketed. Alganon is no different. It’s why I mentioned in the AIP that we would add ApeCoin and $APE to our marketing effort so far as to include mentions of them. But we will not be advertising obo of the DAO. So, it’s up to the DAO to undertake that effort as it sees fit via it’s own marketing initiatives (e.g. Web3 influencers, social media, Spaces etc).
And no, we don’t need the DAO to on-board gamers. It’s only a license. The additional costs (laid out above) are due to the fact that the DAO isn’t setup to
Acquire and maintain its own game servers + infrastructure
Have its own trained staff to support the DAO community of gamers
All gaming licensees, which are always full-blown corps, have all of the above. And it’s impractical - if not impossible - to sit around and wait for the DAO to do any of the above via a voting system that’s as unpredictable as it is ludicrous.
You’re welcome. As I will not be extending this AIP again, hopefully more questions will come in before it goes to draft tomorrow.
To be clear, this AIP is truly a test of the DAO’s future as a going concern. I don’t expect that it will pass nor do I need it to pass in order to do what I need to do with the game. The singular failure will be that I don’t get the close-knit Web3 community with a vested interest in the game. That aside from the loss of a massive impact of tangible benefits to the community via the [paid] ApeCoin Ambassadors hired to build the community through the game. If the DAO isn’t brave enough to embark on something like this - even as Yuga Labs is spending millions of Dollars on smaller games - then everyone needs to take a step back and ask “What are we doing, and why are we even here?”
There is not likely to be another opportunity like this because games take a very long time to make, cost a lot, and are a massive risk from start to finish. This is a $30M (from its inception to present day) game with a $250K per year license to a DAO that needs to break out in a big way.
ps. This just in:
Great! This was a test. There will be a quiz next week.
Thank you for the detailed reply. I’m a detailed orientated person, so love the clarity.
I don’t know if the DAO will vote for this or not, but appreciate you putting this forth and good luck.
Wow, thanks for sharing! That’s huge! So glad to see them entering the space.
Your topic will be moving to the AIP Draft phase in less than 24 hours. Are you content with the feedback received or do you wish to extend community discussion for another 7 days?
If we do not hear from you within 48 hours after your topic closes, your topic will be moved straight to the AIP Draft process.
We look forward to hearing from you.
@adventurousape You’re welcome.
I am not confident that it will pass; but someone suggested that if it fails, I should consider creating a new AIP just for a grant to use $APE as the game’s official token; much like grants given out by some chains to use their chain or token. But doing that takes away my primary incentive (which isn’t money) for bringing this project here in the first place. And if I wanted to do that, like others before me, I would have taken chain/token grants or partnerships long before now.
Yeah, it’s big news. Also, there’s this…
Most of us who have been doing this for decades now, do know that without an engaging community, your game - regardless of how great it is - will die. Period.
Impressed with what you’ve built and your pitch here – wanted to share my thoughts before you go to draft.
I understand the angle of your ask, but personally I think the DAO should be developing the SDK to integrate $APE into as many games as possible, not licensing one game or another.
Use cases are the heart of creating value for the ecosystem and adding $APE into your game could be a great one.
I’d ask for costs to implement $APE usage plus promotional budget and promotion to ApeCoin community. If there are components of the implementation you can share with other devs then that’s even better. Thank you,
@badteeth Thanks for opining on the AIP.
There are already SDKs and guidelines for implementing tokens in Dapps. So, there’s no need for the DAO to create it’s own SDK as that’s just re-inventing the wheel.
Right. So, asking for grants is the norm, and most chains actually have grants specifically for implementing their token. And with some (e.g. Polygon), there are no strings attached, you can use any chain you like etc.
But that’s not what my AIP is based on. I don’t need money to implement a token in my Web3 games because that’s an inherent part of the game’s funding.
My goal has always been to build a Web3 community around the game. And what better way to do it than with a Web3 community that has skin in the game and is a part of what it can become? It’s specifically why a large portion of the budget goes back into the community.
Take that away, and it’s just a grant to use the token in the game over a period of time. And as I mentioned in a prior comment above, this was already suggested in various discussions. As a result, I have refrained from making such a change (having already reduced the license term from 5 to 2 years); especially as I am unsure as to whether or not the current voting system supports multiple choice options. Without that, I would have to create two specific AIPs because this one is extensively about licensing and cannot be easily revised. So, I opted to just wait and see the fate of this AIP before I embark on a grant angle - which I probably won’t pursue because a grant to use a token wasn’t the impetus for my coming here or setting up an AIP in the first place. Lots to think about for sure.
ps. Yuga is building games that use $APE; not doling out grants.
Hi @SmartAPE ,
Snapshot shot does support weighted voting. Further information regarding available voting types can be found here.
Thanks @12GAUGE.admin ! I was aware that it’s supported in Snapshot, but I wasn’t sure if you guys had implemented it in the snapshot strategy. And if not, it would need to be implemented.
As it stands @SmartAPE, the only items that would go up for a weighted vote for ApeCoin DAO are the first round of Special Council and Governance Steward elections. Currently, any AIP up for Snapshot vote would need to be a single-choice vote, as per AIP-2 (later amended by AIP-200 to include the “Abstain” option).
ah-ok! Thanks @Chris.Admin for the additional clarity. I wasn’t sure if that strategy was setup in Snapshot. But now I know that it’s not.
I will plan accordingly.
against my better judgment, and going with the general consensus based on discussions that I have been involved in these past weeks regarding this AIP, I have decided to revise it in the draft.
This means that instead of the AIP being a term license ($1M per year) in which the ApeCoin community would have a hands-on game to play with, help build, promote, have its own exclusive servers etc. and in which a significant portion of the funding goes back into the community, I am going to reduce it to a simple grant for the use of $APE token as the primary token used by the game.
It is conceivable that I may create supplemental AIPs around this project in the coming months, with a view to realizing my original [game licensing] vision which is a lot more impactful to ApeCoin and the $APE token.
It is my hope that you guys will still participate in the on-going activities regarding the game as the development progresses in the coming months.
That is all.
UPDATE: I have now made extensive revisions to the original AIP idea, taking it from a game license AIP to an $APE token use AIP.
To the see differences between the original AIP idea and the current draft, follow these steps:
- Go to the top page of AIP-316.
- To the top-right you will see an Orange pencil icon with the number 6. Click on that number to reveal the page diffs
- When the diff page opens in split-view, on the lower-left you will see several icons, one of which looks like 6 ↔ 7 /7. Click on the << icon to the left of the number 6. Repeat until you get to 2 ↔ 3 /7
- On the left of page 2 ↔ 3 /7 you will find the last version (#2) of the original detailed AIP idea which was based on a much more impactful game license AIP which encompasses not just the use of $APE, but also ApeCoin DAO community involvement in the project.
There are also supplemental pages to the AIP, most of which contain outlines of my original vision for the project here on ApeCoin. Below are easy access bookmarks to each one.
Thank you for your ideas [and the ApeCoin DAO community for the insightful discussions]. A moderator will reach out to the author to finalize the AIP Draft using the appropriate template. In accordance with DAO-approved guidelines, if the author doesn’t respond within 30 days, the proposal will be automatically transferred to the Withdrawn category, and the author can re-submit the idea. Once the AIP is Drafted and meets all DAO-approved guidelines, it will be published on Snapshot for the official live voting phase at: Snapshot.
Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments. @SmartAPE, please see your messages for the next steps.
This topic was automatically closed after 14 days. New replies are no longer allowed.