I seen the first game live on Google hangouts, so as far as game development concerned it is no scam and some people in this topic are jumping to wrong conclusions. The game looked smooth but it was only a short video shooting an opponent, walking up and down, jumping around etc. Could not really conclude anything on the gameplay yet.
Ofcourse, for the other questions and concerns I cannot asnwer, and everyone should do their own evaluation.
Thanks for the update! Do you know if they plan to keep updating the game like Angry Birds (new levels and features and what not) once they move onto the next game? Or will they just focus on the new game? Yes, both. I'd say the first one is most critical. |
|
|
|
I seen the first game live on Google hangouts, so as far as game development concerned it is no scam and some people in this topic are jumping to wrong conclusions. The game looked smooth but it was only a short video shooting an opponent, walking up and down, jumping around etc. Could not really conclude anything on the gameplay yet.
Ofcourse, for the other questions and concerns I cannot asnwer, and everyone should do their own evaluation.
Any reason why they wouldn't post at least that short video publicly? Because trolls?  Do you think they can meet the mid-June release date? Reason was that the video should be pro and not some screencast of hangouts or quick selfish mobile vid. I'd say it is about time to release it, but I don't know the reasons why we don't have it yet. They said mid-(maybe earl)-june. I have no reason to not think they can, unless they say otherwise. I got no info other than you and everyone have too. I do know, if it is real, they better release a good (bugless) game instead some work-in-progress game. It has been a long wait, but let's be realistic, crypto projects/it projects never make their deadlines. So I'd say max end of june, otherwise don't wait for it ;-) Personally I did expect it at ION-launch, but guess I was wrong. |
|
|
|
|
I seen the first game live on Google hangouts, so as far as game development concerned it is no scam and some people in this topic are jumping to wrong conclusions. The game looked smooth but it was only a short video shooting an opponent, walking up and down, jumping around etc. Could not really conclude anything on the gameplay yet.
Ofcourse, for the other questions and concerns I cannot asnwer, and everyone should do their own evaluation.
|
|
|
|
Korvas, rdewilde, anyone else on the inside. Has there been any more clarification on how they will work with Google play to accept payment in game besides "amazon does it?"
No. From what I remember IOS was more of a problem than Android. But no detailed description was given. Most guess that the ingame incentive will not be crypto (but for example the non-crypto token called Electrons) which can be used to boost staking on the IONs thru ionomy platform. Indirectly it means that ingame earned/bought tokens would be converted from/to ION capital thru staking. Not a single official detailled source about this yet though |
|
|
|
BTW this is horribly bad practice.
For those not versed in networking
an address like
45.32.148.69:4001
45.32.148.69:4002
These are both running on the same server instance with that ip address... all that changes is the port. I.e. as long as that specific pc has enough ram to support running the wallet multiple times 1 pc hosts many masternodes. Staking wallets are usually lightweight cpu wise and ram is cheap.
SO basically for a small cost outlay for a vps they get big rewards. There is a reason that many masternode coins only allow 1 masternode per IP address. This is to prevent people doing this providing a real cost to each ip address to distribute it more.
This is another red flag for ionomy. If they wanted the coin to be not centrally possible to control with the masternode network they would prevent this.
Why would you want your coins to filter through 1 pc 20 times as transaction points? Its a flawed system in one port out the other never leaves the 1 pc.
Add that to the list suchmoon... more dodginess. Multi masternodes on 1 ip address reduces ionomy costs for controlling masternode rewards.
EDIT
Im also willing to believe that their masternode age required before it can function as a masternode to be quite low. I suspect their nodes drop off a bit and they don't know why so they use the masternode restart-all or whatever it is command quite regularly.
Psst its because you host many per ip address so that starts happening and since you just copied the code and didn't look into fixing it thats your bug... this is why the ips are changing too... they prolly have dynamic ip vps's going cause they don't need the static address for their purpose. They prolly restart the boxes wondering why the nodes are dropping.
Nonsense, it is POS not POW. You need coins per wallet to stake, for a masternode 20k. It does not matter if you run 2x 20k MN on two small servers or one big server. Same for normal nodes. It is relative to the number of coins in your wallet what the reward will be. It makes no sense, and does not matter, to split this into many wallets (except if it is a security measure). |
|
|
|
The reason why the price is not dropping is because it's not a free market. You can only sell at certain prices. If it gets added somewhere else the volatility will be much higher. Once again this is a terrible idea, no idea they would implement this but fixed prices are not good in a free market it is demonstrative of value.
That's not true at all :/ |
|
|
|
Lol I'm going to screenshot-archive these "conversations" on BCT and post those to Slack, get me more popcorn  |
|
|
|
It did two blocks after 2.5+ hours and now seems to be taking another nap because they moved 500k coins again in one of those blocks. 3004 zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 3003 Thu, 19 May 2016 17:04:00 GMT 3002 Thu, 19 May 2016 17:04:00 GMT 3001 Thu, 19 May 2016 14:25:20 GMT https://ionchain.com/address/ih4X5nhzYVi6Nd4tcGX1qvtC47dzdThZV8But at least they're nice guys. At least it will bring down the staking rewards/inflation rate, right?  |
|
|
|
...
Although I'm not on the team, I can say it is a bit hard to find the questions in the topic with all the nonsense in between it. Time-consuming at least.
What if we would round all of the unanswered questions up so they were in one post? Would they answer them then? They wouldn't have to search for them. Sounds fair to me. Probably Ionomy PTE on 1.? |
|
|
|
It is pointless to pose questions in this thread. The team ignores them and let us speculate about them. Then they get pissed about the rampant speculation and send their members in to defend those speculations with aggressive words and strawman arguments. They will provide no transparency, no clarity and will try to obfuscate things as much as possible.
I'm not gonna ask anymore questions, the team won't answer them. I'm just here to watch things crash and burn. 500 members can't prop up the "Ionomy" for long. People aren't gonna be happy when their coins are with significantly less than ICO price. But then again, when the fearless leader questions why his used car doesn't retain value, well...enough said.
Although I'm not on the team, I can say it is a bit hard to find the questions in the topic with all the nonsense in between it. Time-consuming at least. |
|
|
|
Are they not worried about the devs just instantly dumping their received ION bounty coins? I would venture to say this is exactly what would happen. A lot of devs wouldn't even touch it if they had to sell the coins. Would probably my lose too much value while dumping cause there is no volume. They will more than likely want BTC outright as they wont lose the value like dumping ION would.
I'm not convinced they thought this out properly. Not everyone in the crypto world is as thrilled about ION as the team and the couple hundred or so investors.
Nope. All bounties are public. If they are too high I guess theyll be discussed in public. If a developer adds a feature to the coin, I think (s)he should be free to dump if (s)he want. Coindev is paid by the market, sounds fair to me (except that funds already available for development should be used too). |
|
|
|
anyone else put any thought into how easy it is for someone with no business financial sense or dev on coin experience to get people to jump on their ship to sail or sink?
i mean satoshi discussed decimal requirements for coin supply etc Nd most pos coins have a reason for supply rates etc.
huey aka adam matlack seems to have just randomly pipped numbers out for rates. have customers ever wondered why they do what they do and the lack of transparency to every facet of their plan? i know i am.
^^^ this. Let's see the maths. Someone, with some sort of basic grasp of economics, must have had some say in how the coin supply works, otherwise... Well, I suspect it'll turn to shite anyway. But I'd still like to see the maths and logic behind it. I went into slack on one of the first few days of the thread and asked to see the maths and research they used to set the ICO price as well as an economic viability study. Got the typical run around. ... Well, to debunk your assumption about bounties being ION only:  I get what you are saying. I think it won't be an issue. Or you get BTC. Or you get ION. Or you sell ION for BTC. Or...well...you sell the BTC for ION ;-) |
|
|
|
Serious questionAsk Adam if he's willing to pay out in Bitcoin? The testers and coders I know only want Bitcoin to fix code. Why don't you go ask yourself? I don't see why he would not. How do you know this is not an option? You can trade ION on the market to BTC instantly anyway. From my understanding, Github page will be update soom with specific information on bounties. |
|
|
|
|
Is this the topic about ION?
Besides the osx issue everything is up and running it seems. Next target is game preview.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe they should launch a bug bounty program on the iond/qt and use all the expertise that is in here.
|
|
|
|
...
LOL, and you guys expect to get the general public to adopt this technology? Good luck getting anyone outside your ion/paycoin echo chamber to spend more than 3 minutes on this shit.
True, should be(come) no hassle, otherwise 90% will not use it anyway. Ofcourse there still is the webbased wallet. |
|
|
|
...
They already have the super POS solution at hand. Atoms produce Electrons that double the stakers staking power. The electrons are off chain which means that the team will have control of a Masternode to produce the extra coins. This can turn out bad.
Yes, would be great if that was moved onto the blockchain like a slavenode to the masternode ;-) But as I see it (just me again) the electrons are part of the Ionomy PTE business concept (so to earn investments/capital, in the end they are no foundation right?). If that's the case, I would prefer NOT to add it to the blockchain. Blockchain should be fast and stable. IF adding functionality to it, it should be generic and decentral. |
|
|
|
Windows Qt, Linux daemon, and now the Linux Qt are working fine. It's just a matter of time before the Mac build is fixed.
According to some apologists here the wallet was being tested for weeks - wasn't THAT the proper time to sort out build issues? But then again, every time I'm laughing at the excuses I know these guys will surprise me with an even more ridiculous excuse tomorrow. Well you are right if it is a code issue. From what I got (just me) from Github it could even be related to a CPU architecture/model diff. If that's the case, I can't blame them. In the other case, yes. |
|
|
|
...
At least we won't have to upgrade Slack to a paid plan with you around archiving every conversation in screenshots ;-) They fixed the Mac issue it seems btw. All ends well (so far). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
