Star Atlas

[perfect999]

I can't say a lot about this game in short term. The mini game is very boring. The star atlas can be bullish in long term but not for short term. The problem is so many competitors already appeared since metaverse has become a new trend. Im seeing the chart right now and the rebound can happen once the developer of star atlas will be at least giving the new announcement about the main game that will be used as metaverse.
The minigame didn't represent the metaverse virtual world that already promised. I can be bullish in long term but this time will be so difficult for the star atlas.
The price of ATLAS has been decreasing a lot since last year and can you tell me whether you are in a big lose or not?

The OP didn't provide extra details if what is the project all about and what kind of games they are offering but I see that it was related to metaverse as what you wrote. Well, that's fine that you can speculate that much since they are still early but it'll be better if you wait till most of their development comes. We can then judge them easily after that if this project was nice or not depending on the game that they will be releasing.

I think the reason why they deploy the mini-game first is that it's easier, it can be a kind of sneak peek on what is to watch out for or what's coming from them. Competition is normal but this should not stop them or anyone from showing what they got.

[FairUser]

That is the difference between star atlas, and the ones that are actually good. Axie Infinity may not be a great game, it is a bad looking game if you ask me, it is a knock-off terrible version of pokemon and I would say it is definitely not a good idea to invest all of your money into it.

However, the reality is that there is a game there, and another new one is coming up as well, so there is a tangible thing that you can hold on your hand. Whereas, Star Atlas is a website. That's literally all they are all about, they do not have anything that you can back, some videos, some pictures, images that are from "in game" but at the end of the day the game is not out, so they are selling just a promise, which is bound to crash and burn unless they release the game soon.

Perhaps p2e is not yet accessible to users and it is not an easy trend yet. In view of the hype surrounding the previous trend, I have come across many projects that create crappy products that copy past games and add some crypto related features . A long-term perspective with projects pursuing this field is possible, I believe, in the future if they maintain their status and develop well with the product.

[el kaka22]

Perhaps p2e is not yet accessible to users and it is not an easy trend yet. In view of the hype surrounding the previous trend, I have come across many projects that create crappy products that copy past games and add some crypto related features . A long-term perspective with projects pursuing this field is possible, I believe, in the future if they maintain their status and develop well with the product.

I understand that it could be something that would be a lot better than the ones we have seen so far, and that is a very noble and fair thing to do. However, we are talking about a project that has raised millions even before a single video, and even more millions after a few images and videos.

So, if you really think that they could build something that is much better than anything we have seen so far, then they should do it, and get the money that way. Why are we funding them to do something like that? Give me all that money and I can give you the same game, maybe even a better game?

I have an idea to build a roman empire related game where everyone is a citizen, people could be elected, there could be warriors, merchands, farmers and criminals could even become slaves and forced to fight in arenas. So do not tell me that millions of dollars are deserved, I can build a game if people paid me as much as they did to star at last. When the game finally comes out, they should change the name to Star at least.

[JeffBrad12]

I do know this token from FTX. I have been joining the telegram group since a few months ago but in my opinion, the development in the game didn't look so impressive as in another game. This game is also overhyped just caused by it was taking a similar theme to another game. For me, based on the performance of tokens issued by staratlas if this project didn't seem good at all.
Just look at the chart https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/star-atlas/ It will tell you everything.
The hype was so big but it was slowly decreasing to the bottom. This token is not yet having utility usage compared with other gaming tokens. That needs more development.

people already calling it scam or: "Only good marketing, but a trash project"

makes me kinda think about my investment

It's caused by the performance of game development being so bad. Even it was taking so many delays just only to release the minigame while you are seeing another game and it already developed the main game. Too much promise that already been made by the developer of star atlas. You can even see the performance of token.

There is a need for the team to make progress in their project during this inflation time to atleast revived their prices. It keeps dropping even bitcoin is somehow recovering. The idea and plans were impressive but since the market is declining they must act fast in making their project profitable as it may not able to recover when it keeps  on dropping to low in price. The price increase before due to hype. If there will be no definite development will happen it may be hard for them to market it again to convince investors to hold or buy.

This team has no idea about how long to develop a proper game that is similar to the star citizen. They keep saying bullshit about their game. Star citizen takes around 4 years to develop the game and it's not even fully finished caused by the development is still continuing. What about this? promised to developer the same thing as star citizen in 1 or 2 years. This is BS

[FairUser]

I understand that it could be something that would be a lot better than the ones we have seen so far, and that is a very noble and fair thing to do. However, we are talking about a project that has raised millions even before a single video, and even more millions after a few images and videos.

So, if you really think that they could build something that is much better than anything we have seen so far, then they should do it, and get the money that way. Why are we funding them to do something like that? Give me all that money and I can give you the same game, maybe even a better game?

In addition to launching that product, it is part of an assessment of the feature injection it creates in the market. Well, maybe money can solve all problems, but what is it if you spend a coin and the project dies? The goal is what they are delivering and how the user interacts. A well-supported project will be the basis from which we hope the future will be secure. There are criteria that it may not satisfy someone enough, but for me, the assessment is simply information transparency.

I have an idea to build a roman empire related game where everyone is a citizen, people could be elected, there could be warriors, merchands, farmers and criminals could even become slaves and forced to fight in arenas. So do not tell me that millions of dollars are deserved, I can build a game if people paid me as much as they did to star at last. When the game finally comes out, they should change the name to Star at least.

I expect you can do it rather than talking about the content. I said the ecosystem it's building with the metaverse space, the potential for mixed use with VR, and again bringing hype trends. Anyway, here's my opinion on the field

Perhaps p2e is not yet accessible to users and it is not an easy trend yet.