Yes & No, funded yes so well infact we went from plans of a double A game with edited Unity assets to building our own assets and triple A. Having something ready to go no, we have been open that this project is in early development and looking for a demo in the next 4 months. The funding in these proposals will provide onboarding support and a feeless SWAP for Hive.
No matter how you slice it- there is a request for 3 million from the community here! I feel it is asking an awful lot with very little evidence.
Bridging the chains would be huge! But we are already able to do this with most of the tokens listed in this post through hive engine. It might not be free but it works already.
The white paper indicates 250 million LVL would be sold in order to fund game development and the psyberx marketplace- with additional LVL held in reserve to fund further development. I am surprised that those funds and the additional that have been acquired through land and nft sales aren't sufficient or at least that there is more to show for it! I honestly think it would be a huge mistake for Hive if proposals like this were approved.
There is no evidence that the number of account creation tickets will be needed- especially when we have not seen a working multiplayer demo that interacts with the chain.
I respect that psyberx has lofty goals- I think it might be wise to reign some of that in and demonstrate functional multiplayer gameplay that interacts with the NFTs on chain before shooting for cross chain bridges and millions of account creation tokens. On a related note- how will the existence of additional LVL tokens on BSC and ETH (and I am assuming the other chains as well) effect the initial token supply of 500 million? Those additional tokens have already been minted I believe?
No matter how you slice it- there is a request for 3 million from the community here! I feel it is asking an awful lot with very little evidence.
Indeed which is why this large proposal which pays out daily is given 275 days, if we do in fact launch a successful demo as our roadmap states in the next 4 months we will possibly prove the need for additional tickets. You may be correct, only time will tell and yet this preliminary proposal is necessary to seek out additional Hive developers whether funded or not our goals are lofty.
Bridging the chains would be huge! But we are already able to do this with most of the tokens listed in this post through hive engine. It might not be free but it works already.
Indeed, the few that gain profit will not likely vote for or support something that would offer to help the entire chain and list any desired 2nd layer tokens to swap with the major chains directly.
The white paper indicates 250 million LVL would be sold in order to fund game development and the psyberx marketplace- with additional LVL held in reserve to fund further development. I am surprised that those funds and the additional that have been acquired through land and nft sales aren't sufficient or at least that there is more to show for it! I honestly think it would be a huge mistake for Hive if proposals like this were approved.
They are sufficient, the game is so over funded plans went from editing Unity assets for a quick double A game to building our own assets hiring more developers and a triple A game. Our marketing plan involves a majority of our funds going to the community via giveaways for social challenges, content creation and more stepping it up as we get closer to a workable demo. If we are successful and bring massive numbers to Hive begging for help later and not being able to handle it would be poor planning so here we are asking for community support. And for your opinion of proposals like this going through is respected yet do you realise the bridge funds would go to our communities developers? The creation tickets could be given instead of getting daily HBD funding as we desire to grow Hive numbers not profit from the proposal system.
There is no evidence that the number of account creation tickets will be needed- especially when we have not seen a working multiplayer demo that interacts with the chain.
We have 275 days on this proposal when it launches, this is just a preliminary announcement of 11 milestones in which will be proposals asking for community support.
I respect that psyberx has lofty goals- I think it might be wise to reign some of that in and demonstrate functional multiplayer gameplay that interacts with the NFTs on chain before shooting for cross chain bridges and millions of account creation tokens. On a related note- how will the existence of additional LVL tokens on BSC and ETH (and I am assuming the other chains as well) effect the initial token supply of 500 million? Those additional tokens have already been minted I believe?
They will not effect the initial supply at all, there are several million tokens allocated for each chains swap yet Diesel Pool rewards will be providing incentive for people to provide liquidity. WLVL has been minted on ETH chain thus far, as we are just now laying out these lofty goals we are not capable of achieving them in a timely manner without more assistance and community support.
But that is kind of my point- if the game is indeed over funded then perhaps a demo using those AA edited unity assets would solve some of the problems psyberx has been facing. Mainly that there has been a history of hype and funding attempts both prior to HIVE and since the project has come here- that hasn't resulted in a convincing demonstration of the ability to actually produce the intended game.
I think the game is the important thing here- not bridges and other additional developments.
We need to see multiplayer gameplay, NFT's being loaded into the game, usage of LVL in game... all of the basics that will enable this to actually be a multiplayer pvp p2e battle arena mmorpg with land etc. We need to see these things first.
The money to fund the bridges might well end up feeding back to developers from within the hive ecosystem and that is fantastic- but bridges to other ecosystems won't make or break psyberx as a game.
These additional developments and the potential problems that come along with them- like tokenomics impacts, security vulnerabilities of bridges, and others- could all wait until after the game is already playable and attracting players.
So correct me if I'm wrong...what you're asking for is for the game to come out first then have a chokehold because accounts won't be able to be created fast enough to keep up with demand?
I probably read your sentiment wrong, and I apologize if I did. I read your feeling that more needs to be released, and I'm super excited to see what comes out because of the potential, but at the same time, isn't a proposal all about saying, "This is what I want to do, when I'll do it, how I'll do it, and the time I have to do it in?" So far, I feel like most of the "big accounts" that have replied to this have seen it as one proposal without stepping back to understand it is a roadmap/plan of what @psyberx is expecting to ask for.
If they have 11 proposals (I think I read that right), doesn't it make sense to know the game plan at the macro level before voting on each individual proposal on the micro?
I say, let's see what the first "micro" proposal is, see if it has the proper milestones, etc. and vote on these one at a time. They have been revealing updates for a while now. I've seen their website get developed, their marketplace pre-view, their gameplay pre-view, etc. Once the marketplace is released, that's just one more amongst many signs that they're developing this, not rug pulling...this isn't a "Rising Star" with 13 daily active players...
just my 2 Hive cents...
I'll donate any resource credits I have, if there's a way to do that...
No I am certainly not asking for the game to be released and have a "chokehold" on accounts.
I think it is realistic to expect some sort of demonstration of the things I have suggested. All we have seen so far is a buggy single player experience. Sure there has been some development on the website and on the marketplace- neither of which demonstrate the ability to go from buggy single player unity experience to full fledged multiplayer brawler with direct connections to assets on chain. In fact the existence of the marketplace before the assets can be used in game is somewhat concerning by itself.
I also think it is completely ludicrous to ask for 2.7 million USD just to fund hive accounts! If the game wants to provide a free player experience there are other ways that don't require this from the community- for example players could play for free and without a hive account until they have earned enough LVL to fund the creation of an account and start to withdraw earnings and acquire NFT's. Besides which the amount of HP being requested in one of these proposals could also be used to claim account creation tokens regularly using its RC.
As I suggested in a previous comment- at this time there is no reason to think that this amount of accounts will be needed until we have seen what the game is actually going to be capable of.
I agree that getting a macro overview of the intended direction is beneficial- and each of the individual proposals will indeed be voted on their own merit. Having said that- claiming that the project will need a million new hive accounts looks to me like an attempt to drive more hype... and most of what we have seen so far is just that... hype.
Acknowledging the achievements of games like RS and other HIVE games that actually function on chain and have communities engaged in them is important. These games are successful without asking for additional funds from the community. They are proof that developing crypto games is possible- and difficult- yet the difficulty in what psyberx wants to achieve is far far greater. Skepticism on this is totally reasonable!
As I have said in comments many times before- I acknowledge the difficulty of this project, and wish it the greatest of success- but I won't be backing it until such time that it can demonstrate it can deliver on what it promises. Even waiting until then- it will still be early.
In my opinion the 1 million is not enough yet we will see, no proposal will be launched for some time, this is merely a preliminary announcement to talk with the community, so if many agree with you things will change and maybe proposals will be scrapped all together. The main purpose of this is to find more strong Hive Developers to join us whether funded partially with Hive or not is fine, just speeds things up.
To reiderate this is just a preliminary announcement on proposals to come, you have some great points, not all are agreed with yet taken into consideration and we will adjust or scrap these accordingly. The roadmaps have been laid out and withint 3-4 months we should have that workable demo. The primary reason for this is to get some strong developers to apply for work as we do not expect any of this to pass yet have ambitions to help the blockchain grow via onboarding and developing a feeless swap and will fund it either way.
I understand all of that. I eagerly await that demo. There are lots of projects that are making onboarding a priority and I don't think any of them funded the account tokens with the DHF!
You must be killin' it out here! @enginewitty just slapped you with 10.000PIMP, @dynamicrypto. You earned 10.000PIMP for the strong hand. You can still slap 3/3 more people today.
You must be killin' it out here! @enginewitty just slapped you with 5.000PIMP, @dibblers.dabs. You earned 5.000PIMP for the strong hand. You can still slap 2/3 more people today.
Yes & No, funded yes so well infact we went from plans of a double A game with edited Unity assets to building our own assets and triple A. Having something ready to go no, we have been open that this project is in early development and looking for a demo in the next 4 months. The funding in these proposals will provide onboarding support and a feeless SWAP for Hive.
No matter how you slice it- there is a request for 3 million from the community here! I feel it is asking an awful lot with very little evidence.
Bridging the chains would be huge! But we are already able to do this with most of the tokens listed in this post through hive engine. It might not be free but it works already.
The white paper indicates 250 million LVL would be sold in order to fund game development and the psyberx marketplace- with additional LVL held in reserve to fund further development. I am surprised that those funds and the additional that have been acquired through land and nft sales aren't sufficient or at least that there is more to show for it! I honestly think it would be a huge mistake for Hive if proposals like this were approved.
There is no evidence that the number of account creation tickets will be needed- especially when we have not seen a working multiplayer demo that interacts with the chain.
I respect that psyberx has lofty goals- I think it might be wise to reign some of that in and demonstrate functional multiplayer gameplay that interacts with the NFTs on chain before shooting for cross chain bridges and millions of account creation tokens. On a related note- how will the existence of additional LVL tokens on BSC and ETH (and I am assuming the other chains as well) effect the initial token supply of 500 million? Those additional tokens have already been minted I believe?
Indeed which is why this large proposal which pays out daily is given 275 days, if we do in fact launch a successful demo as our roadmap states in the next 4 months we will possibly prove the need for additional tickets. You may be correct, only time will tell and yet this preliminary proposal is necessary to seek out additional Hive developers whether funded or not our goals are lofty.
Indeed, the few that gain profit will not likely vote for or support something that would offer to help the entire chain and list any desired 2nd layer tokens to swap with the major chains directly.
They are sufficient, the game is so over funded plans went from editing Unity assets for a quick double A game to building our own assets hiring more developers and a triple A game. Our marketing plan involves a majority of our funds going to the community via giveaways for social challenges, content creation and more stepping it up as we get closer to a workable demo. If we are successful and bring massive numbers to Hive begging for help later and not being able to handle it would be poor planning so here we are asking for community support. And for your opinion of proposals like this going through is respected yet do you realise the bridge funds would go to our communities developers? The creation tickets could be given instead of getting daily HBD funding as we desire to grow Hive numbers not profit from the proposal system.
We have 275 days on this proposal when it launches, this is just a preliminary announcement of 11 milestones in which will be proposals asking for community support.
They will not effect the initial supply at all, there are several million tokens allocated for each chains swap yet Diesel Pool rewards will be providing incentive for people to provide liquidity. WLVL has been minted on ETH chain thus far, as we are just now laying out these lofty goals we are not capable of achieving them in a timely manner without more assistance and community support.
But that is kind of my point- if the game is indeed over funded then perhaps a demo using those AA edited unity assets would solve some of the problems psyberx has been facing. Mainly that there has been a history of hype and funding attempts both prior to HIVE and since the project has come here- that hasn't resulted in a convincing demonstration of the ability to actually produce the intended game.
I think the game is the important thing here- not bridges and other additional developments.
We need to see multiplayer gameplay, NFT's being loaded into the game, usage of LVL in game... all of the basics that will enable this to actually be a multiplayer pvp p2e battle arena mmorpg with land etc. We need to see these things first.
The money to fund the bridges might well end up feeding back to developers from within the hive ecosystem and that is fantastic- but bridges to other ecosystems won't make or break psyberx as a game.
These additional developments and the potential problems that come along with them- like tokenomics impacts, security vulnerabilities of bridges, and others- could all wait until after the game is already playable and attracting players.
So correct me if I'm wrong...what you're asking for is for the game to come out first then have a chokehold because accounts won't be able to be created fast enough to keep up with demand?
I probably read your sentiment wrong, and I apologize if I did. I read your feeling that more needs to be released, and I'm super excited to see what comes out because of the potential, but at the same time, isn't a proposal all about saying, "This is what I want to do, when I'll do it, how I'll do it, and the time I have to do it in?" So far, I feel like most of the "big accounts" that have replied to this have seen it as one proposal without stepping back to understand it is a roadmap/plan of what @psyberx is expecting to ask for.
If they have 11 proposals (I think I read that right), doesn't it make sense to know the game plan at the macro level before voting on each individual proposal on the micro?
I say, let's see what the first "micro" proposal is, see if it has the proper milestones, etc. and vote on these one at a time. They have been revealing updates for a while now. I've seen their website get developed, their marketplace pre-view, their gameplay pre-view, etc. Once the marketplace is released, that's just one more amongst many signs that they're developing this, not rug pulling...this isn't a "Rising Star" with 13 daily active players...
just my 2 Hive cents...
I'll donate any resource credits I have, if there's a way to do that...
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
No I am certainly not asking for the game to be released and have a "chokehold" on accounts.
I think it is realistic to expect some sort of demonstration of the things I have suggested. All we have seen so far is a buggy single player experience. Sure there has been some development on the website and on the marketplace- neither of which demonstrate the ability to go from buggy single player unity experience to full fledged multiplayer brawler with direct connections to assets on chain. In fact the existence of the marketplace before the assets can be used in game is somewhat concerning by itself.
I also think it is completely ludicrous to ask for 2.7 million USD just to fund hive accounts! If the game wants to provide a free player experience there are other ways that don't require this from the community- for example players could play for free and without a hive account until they have earned enough LVL to fund the creation of an account and start to withdraw earnings and acquire NFT's. Besides which the amount of HP being requested in one of these proposals could also be used to claim account creation tokens regularly using its RC.
As I suggested in a previous comment- at this time there is no reason to think that this amount of accounts will be needed until we have seen what the game is actually going to be capable of.
I agree that getting a macro overview of the intended direction is beneficial- and each of the individual proposals will indeed be voted on their own merit. Having said that- claiming that the project will need a million new hive accounts looks to me like an attempt to drive more hype... and most of what we have seen so far is just that... hype.
Acknowledging the achievements of games like RS and other HIVE games that actually function on chain and have communities engaged in them is important. These games are successful without asking for additional funds from the community. They are proof that developing crypto games is possible- and difficult- yet the difficulty in what psyberx wants to achieve is far far greater. Skepticism on this is totally reasonable!
As I have said in comments many times before- I acknowledge the difficulty of this project, and wish it the greatest of success- but I won't be backing it until such time that it can demonstrate it can deliver on what it promises. Even waiting until then- it will still be early.
In my opinion the 1 million is not enough yet we will see, no proposal will be launched for some time, this is merely a preliminary announcement to talk with the community, so if many agree with you things will change and maybe proposals will be scrapped all together. The main purpose of this is to find more strong Hive Developers to join us whether funded partially with Hive or not is fine, just speeds things up.
awesome answer thanks! we will be delegating HIVE Power to @psyberx for these.
To reiderate this is just a preliminary announcement on proposals to come, you have some great points, not all are agreed with yet taken into consideration and we will adjust or scrap these accordingly. The roadmaps have been laid out and withint 3-4 months we should have that workable demo. The primary reason for this is to get some strong developers to apply for work as we do not expect any of this to pass yet have ambitions to help the blockchain grow via onboarding and developing a feeless swap and will fund it either way.
I understand all of that. I eagerly await that demo. There are lots of projects that are making onboarding a priority and I don't think any of them funded the account tokens with the DHF!
in coming months we will prove we are not like the other projects.
!PIMP
You must be killin' it out here!
@enginewitty just slapped you with 10.000 PIMP, @dynamicrypto.
You earned 10.000 PIMP for the strong hand.
You can still slap 3/3 more people today.
Read about some PIMP Shit or Look for the PIMP District
!PIMP
You must be killin' it out here!
@enginewitty just slapped you with 5.000 PIMP, @dibblers.dabs.
You earned 5.000 PIMP for the strong hand.
You can still slap 2/3 more people today.
Read about some PIMP Shit or Look for the PIMP District