Suggestion adapted to the future, a 360 ° turn for the MMO?

For those who do not even know what this is about, in a brief summary the games on the blockchain are Play to Earn that while you play or do some work in said "game" you get a coin or reward that becomes a Token and said Token is an NFT (non-fungible token) that can be exchanged for an enlisted Crypto and earn income, you can see examples such as Axie Infinity (there are many more).

How would a Silkroad Play 2 Earn server look like:

- In the little that I have thought and analyzed, there are many coins in the game that most are not even useful, so in different ways an important function can be created, we go with the most common and valued in almost all servers "Gold Coin "When you get a coin of this you can change it in the market and it will have a stipulated pre-sale value and then the market is responsible for raising or lowering the price like all Crypto (it depends on the amount of supplies of the token, it may have a higher or lower cost ) This is a more extensive topic, the truth is there are many things such as liquidity, token distribution, etc ...

- In fact, there can be two tokens: one that will be the farm and another for governance that can be useful for the alchemy or something totally useful and important in the game.

- Each character can be an NFT that starts from level 1, leveling up and obtaining armor can have a value in the market as well.

- To be able to give an important value / role to the gold of the game

"EVERYTHING IS AN ALASIS FOR THE BEST FUNCTION"

I will do an example in the aforementioned game:

- In Axie Infinity the SLP (Small-Love-Potion) is mined or farmed, which is an NFT, this Token can be exchanged directly for USDT, BUSDT or ETH and then to your local currency, but it does not end there, the token also has its own utility that is to breeder the Axie (pets or pokemon as many say, it is another NFT (it can be sold and has a great cost each character so to speak) so each breed (cross or mating) has a cost of SLP and in 5 days you get a new Axie that you can sell on the market or use it, the SLP is achieved in two ways: PVE and PVP.

- In Axie Inifinity there is the governance token that is the AXS and this is not mined which is a token that Devs launch on the market and has a much higher cost than the SLP for this reason and can also be changed by the previous Cryptos mentioned, the function of the AXS is the commission that you have to pay to make the crossing or mating of Axies.

The value of each token at the moment is: 1 SLP = $0.09 and 1 AXS = $128 price in USD

I leave this post to everyone's discretion and that people can debate even that they can contribute ideas and information on the subject.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]

I looked into this more tonight, because I've been interested in understanding how these blockchain games work and how to design/implement them for a while now, but there's certain aspects to them that still don't make sense to me.

First of all, this whole notion of "play-to-earn" games is as misleading as all the so called "play-to-win" SRO pservers. You can't spell "play-to-win" without "pay-to-win", so pretty much all these SRO "play-to-win" pservers are simply "pay-to-win" servers hiding behind a dishonest interpretation of what it actually means to be "play-to-win".

If you look at the entry cost of getting started in Axie, this is very serious flaw with the model, and why I think the term "play-to-earn" is misleading. Right now, it costs nearly $600 to actually be able to "play-to-earn". This is a dynamic cost, which is very problematic. At one time, it cost $1000s when things were at their peak, and obviously at the start, it only cost maybe $30 or so.

When you then talk about how money is generated in the game, and how the game grows in speculative value, the mechanics are almost the same as a ponzi scheme. The whole idea revolves around speculative value and people pouring new money into the game to become a part of it, in hopes of being able to sell their stuff at a higher price to someone else.

Users actions aren't actually generating any real tangible value (as these games aren't PoW based, so they're not mining anything or running the network by contributing processing power). This is obviously a huge problem, especially for people in the US, because we're basically looking at the gamification of investing via a non-regulated and decentralized monetary network. Crypto has some serious implications with being used for illegal activity, so serious thought needs to happen to ensure you don't just create another money laundering avenue.

When it comes to NFTs and allowing your character to be sold, all you're doing is legitimizing P2W. The only difference is that now players get to benefit from the transition as opposed to only the developers/publisher. I've yet to see a model being developed or talked about that addresses the issues that arise from "play-to-earn" games and the implications of allowing token conversion for real money.

The same is true of items or any game mechanics where the "rich get richer". Whales who spend the most can obtain the best stuff, and then profit the most from having the best. There's no real balance being talked about with this, as the main draw is that at least anyone who "buys in" has the opportunity to earn money by playing, but the money they're earning, is money that they're taking from new players who want to get started (hence the comparisons to ponzi scheme mechanics).

I think it's an interesting idea, but I've yet to see anyone propose a proper design that addresses all of the major problems with this model. All existing games don't care, because it's all about them making as much money as possible from fundraising or sales of tokens so they benefit, so none of these games are being created to actually exist for the betterment of players in my opinion.

Sure, a lot of people have certainly made money and benefited from it in the countries where it's currently most popular (Vietnam, Singapore, Philippines) but the value of those things is a result of people with money throwing money into the system to grow it.

None of these things could apply to Silkroad as-is in any meaningful way, as all you're doing is allowing players to use real money to buy/sell items/characters. You'd have to redesign the entire game from the ground up to try and work in any meaningful system, and even then, if you don't address the issues I've mentioned, then the game just won't work, because it'd be built around people with a lot of money buying up everything, and then selling to new players who would otherwise be barred from participating without paying more than the initial group of "investors". Silkroad in that state wouldn't be the Silkroad you know and probably love, so it'd never work.

I have posts talking about the major game redesigns I think the game needs, but trying to apply blockchain related things to the game would be an entirety different challenge centered around an idea that already divides the community.

I think it's certainly an interesting topic to think about and try to come up with a better solution than what's out there, but there's just no practical way to apply it to a game like Silkroad. There's too many game breaking problems that need to be solved when it comes to introducing real world money tied to in-game mechanics, and given how the community feels about pservers milking players as it is, this will just be another form of it hiding behind the guise that players can actually make money from playing the game (which isn't what really is happening in this model).

Quote:

Originally Posted by pushedx I looked into this more tonight, because I've been interested in understanding how these blockchain games work and how to design/implement them for a while now, but there's certain aspects to them that still don't make sense to me. First of all, this whole notion of "play-to-earn" games is as misleading as all the so called "play-to-win" SRO pservers. You can't spell "play-to-win" without "pay-to-win", so pretty much all these SRO "play-to-win" pservers are simply "pay-to-win" servers hiding behind a dishonest interpretation of what it actually means to be "play-to-win". If you look at the entry cost of getting started in Axie, this is very serious flaw with the model, and why I think the term "play-to-earn" is misleading. Right now, it costs nearly $600 to actually be able to "play-to-earn". This is a dynamic cost, which is very problematic. At one time, it cost $1000s when things were at their peak, and obviously at the start, it only cost maybe $30 or so. When you then talk about how money is generated in the game, and how the game grows in speculative value, the mechanics are almost the same as a ponzi scheme. The whole idea revolves around speculative value and people pouring new money into the game to become a part of it, in hopes of being able to sell their stuff at a higher price to someone else. Users actions aren't actually generating any real tangible value (as these games aren't PoW based, so they're not mining anything or running the network by contributing processing power). This is obviously a huge problem, especially for people in the US, because we're basically looking at the gamification of investing via a non-regulated and decentralized monetary network. Crypto has some serious implications with being used for illegal activity, so serious thought needs to happen to ensure you don't just create another money laundering avenue. When it comes to NFTs and allowing your character to be sold, all you're doing is legitimizing P2W. The only difference is that now players get to benefit from the transition as opposed to only the developers/publisher. I've yet to see a model being developed or talked about that addresses the issues that arise from "play-to-earn" games and the implications of allowing token conversion for real money. The same is true of items or any game mechanics where the "rich get richer". Whales who spend the most can obtain the best stuff, and then profit the most from having the best. There's no real balance being talked about with this, as the main draw is that at least anyone who "buys in" has the opportunity to earn money by playing, but the money they're earning, is money that they're taking from new players who want to get started (hence the comparisons to ponzi scheme mechanics). I think it's an interesting idea, but I've yet to see anyone propose a proper design that addresses all of the major problems with this model. All existing games don't care, because it's all about them making as much money as possible from fundraising or sales of tokens so they benefit, so none of these games are being created to actually exist for the betterment of players in my opinion. Sure, a lot of people have certainly made money and benefited from it in the countries where it's currently most popular (Vietnam, Singapore, Philippines) but the value of those things is a result of people with money throwing money into the system to grow it. None of these things could apply to Silkroad as-is in any meaningful way, as all you're doing is allowing players to use real money to buy/sell items/characters. You'd have to redesign the entire game from the ground up to try and work in any meaningful system, and even then, if you don't address the issues I've mentioned, then the game just won't work, because it'd be built around people with a lot of money buying up everything, and then selling to new players who would otherwise be barred from participating without paying more than the initial group of "investors". Silkroad in that state wouldn't be the Silkroad you know and probably love, so it'd never work. I have posts talking about the major game redesigns I think the game needs, but trying to apply blockchain related things to the game would be an entirety different challenge centered around an idea that already divides the community. I think it's certainly an interesting topic to think about and try to come up with a better solution than what's out there, but there's just no practical way to apply it to a game like Silkroad. There's too many game breaking problems that need to be solved when it comes to introducing real world money tied to in-game mechanics, and given how the community feels about pservers milking players as it is, this will just be another form of it hiding behind the guise that players can actually make money from playing the game (which isn't what really is happening in this model).

All your post's are so incredible. Thanks for that <3

Quote:

Originally Posted by pushedx I looked into this more tonight, because I've been interested in understanding how these blockchain games work and how to design/implement them for a while now, but there's certain aspects to them that still don't make sense to me. First of all, this whole notion of "play-to-earn" games is as misleading as all the so called "play-to-win" SRO pservers. You can't spell "play-to-win" without "pay-to-win", so pretty much all these SRO "play-to-win" pservers are simply "pay-to-win" servers hiding behind a dishonest interpretation of what it actually means to be "play-to-win". If you look at the entry cost of getting started in Axie, this is very serious flaw with the model, and why I think the term "play-to-earn" is misleading. Right now, it costs nearly $600 to actually be able to "play-to-earn". This is a dynamic cost, which is very problematic. At one time, it cost $1000s when things were at their peak, and obviously at the start, it only cost maybe $30 or so. When you then talk about how money is generated in the game, and how the game grows in speculative value, the mechanics are almost the same as a ponzi scheme. The whole idea revolves around speculative value and people pouring new money into the game to become a part of it, in hopes of being able to sell their stuff at a higher price to someone else. Users actions aren't actually generating any real tangible value (as these games aren't PoW based, so they're not mining anything or running the network by contributing processing power). This is obviously a huge problem, especially for people in the US, because we're basically looking at the gamification of investing via a non-regulated and decentralized monetary network. Crypto has some serious implications with being used for illegal activity, so serious thought needs to happen to ensure you don't just create another money laundering avenue. When it comes to NFTs and allowing your character to be sold, all you're doing is legitimizing P2W. The only difference is that now players get to benefit from the transition as opposed to only the developers/publisher. I've yet to see a model being developed or talked about that addresses the issues that arise from "play-to-earn" games and the implications of allowing token conversion for real money. The same is true of items or any game mechanics where the "rich get richer". Whales who spend the most can obtain the best stuff, and then profit the most from having the best. There's no real balance being talked about with this, as the main draw is that at least anyone who "buys in" has the opportunity to earn money by playing, but the money they're earning, is money that they're taking from new players who want to get started (hence the comparisons to ponzi scheme mechanics). I think it's an interesting idea, but I've yet to see anyone propose a proper design that addresses all of the major problems with this model. All existing games don't care, because it's all about them making as much money as possible from fundraising or sales of tokens so they benefit, so none of these games are being created to actually exist for the betterment of players in my opinion. Sure, a lot of people have certainly made money and benefited from it in the countries where it's currently most popular (Vietnam, Singapore, Philippines) but the value of those things is a result of people with money throwing money into the system to grow it. None of these things could apply to Silkroad as-is in any meaningful way, as all you're doing is allowing players to use real money to buy/sell items/characters. You'd have to redesign the entire game from the ground up to try and work in any meaningful system, and even then, if you don't address the issues I've mentioned, then the game just won't work, because it'd be built around people with a lot of money buying up everything, and then selling to new players who would otherwise be barred from participating without paying more than the initial group of "investors". Silkroad in that state wouldn't be the Silkroad you know and probably love, so it'd never work. I have posts talking about the major game redesigns I think the game needs, but trying to apply blockchain related things to the game would be an entirety different challenge centered around an idea that already divides the community. I think it's certainly an interesting topic to think about and try to come up with a better solution than what's out there, but there's just no practical way to apply it to a game like Silkroad. There's too many game breaking problems that need to be solved when it comes to introducing real world money tied to in-game mechanics, and given how the community feels about pservers milking players as it is, this will just be another form of it hiding behind the guise that players can actually make money from playing the game (which isn't what really is happening in this model).

Incredible man!

A 360 degree turn leaves you in the same direction by the way xD

And the real play to win servers are those where you can work on a set and sell it at the end of the week to a new player who wants to skip the alchemy part. At my server players earn more than I do because they can sell their gear without being burned at a stake for it.

Introducing NFT is like trying to let people sell items in the server but with some crazy acrobatics which only make sense for blockchain-savvy people.

I am an absolute ignorant in NFT tho so I might be wrong, but the explanation pointed out by pushedx makes me believe more that this is like Herbalife where people only "earn" when other people lose or invest hoping to win.

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Silverlight* A 360 degree turn leaves you in the same direction by the way xD

Was going to state that XD