The Impact of Gaming on the Real Economy

[Motu_verse]

Also a huge problem for large gaming companies is that they can lose their old-school audience by introducing cryptocurrencies and NFTs. These guys are used to their games and don't want changes. Companies risk breaking their old ties by refocusing on a new generation of players. And this promises them huge losses. Their infrastructures are simply not configured to work with crypto

happened with epic game store, people labeling it as shit tier game store not because it was truly shit tier but because some people like to follow influencers and shouting the same word over and over again, the thing is that there are also many old school audience that are also influencer keep saying that blockchain integrated and even NFT is a gimmick, while some time its true that it might just be used for some gimmick not to mention the fact that many blockchain based game are just some recycle of failing mobile game and so on, doesn't really mean that the tech itself is not useful, right now many these blockchain game devs are realizing that building game that can be rated AAA requires massive funding, and most developers are just having some small funding about few million dollars of course it won't be sufficient, therefore the devs need to learn to raise some funds first then creating games.

Yeah! Very interesting opinion!
We agree with the statement that to launch a AAA game on the blockchain you need a lot of money And that you first need to convince the investor to finance it. But how to do that? How to convince investors to invest millions in a sector that was not so long ago the site of theft. A sector that is poorly organized from a regulatory point of view. Dangerous sector. What do you need to show an investor to convince him to get into it?

[Motu_verse]

Until now, I have not seen a role for cryptocurrencies. From what I understand, the game will accept customers’ money in cryptocurrencies and they can replenish the balance. Then all that will happen is a change in the databases according to the player’s activity, and they are more like gems or currencies found in most currencies, but the only difference is that these gems now It has a value and can be withdrawn, and after the player finishes playing, he will withdraw to his cryptocurrency address. Is this true?

There is already. What about those gaming cryptos? And play to earn games here in cryptos? But, what you said is only light and it already happened before, using a fiat and other similar payment methods. Maybe there is a reason on why they can't display the same cryptos that we have deposited? But anyways, the long wait is finally over because like I said earlier, there is already play-to-earn games that can have this function and many more.

However, both of them still has the ability to withdraw crypto from the wallet of our choice. The impact of gaming in the real economy can mostly be positive. As we all know their growth through the years. There is only people who can get addicted with it. This is only their downside.

   We cannot say that NFTs or play-to-earn games do not contribute anything to the field of cryptocurrency, especially in these times. Many games that can be considered priests in different parts of the world are obsessed with it because of the technology that we have in this era, to be honest.

   Even if the others don't know anything about the crypto trading category but are experienced in the gaming industry, they can still be considered helpful, just like NFT or play-and-earn games. Therefore, they still have a big impact on what I see and observe to this day.

Cryptocurrencies in gaming, especially in play-to-earn models, operate similarly to traditional in-game currencies. The major distinction lies in their tradability and withdrawal capabilities
It's fascinating to see how the gaming industry has embraced cryptocurrencies, creating new opportunities for players. The challenge of displaying deposited cryptos might be rooted in ensuring a seamless gaming experience and regulatory considerations. However, the emergence of play-to-earn games with withdrawal options would be a little problem for regulatory
The intersection of gaming and cryptocurrency opens up new possibilities, attracting enthusiasts from various digital communities. Even those with no prior knowledge of crypto trading can find value in these technologies within the gaming space

[Motu_verse]

After the huge decrease of value most of the NFT ecosystem suffered I believe it will take literal years before the mainstream public could be willing to give it a try, a lot of people probably lost a lot of money buying "land" and "properties" in those metaverses and games.

It was the crypto whales who were heavily investing in expensive NFTs, not the people outside of crypto most of the time, and these whales could easily sustain huge losses from NFTs. For them it was just entertainment and a gamble to get even more rich, which some did by dumping their NFTs at the top of the bubble.

The general public was never interested in them, gaming communities were very vocal that they will not tolerate NFTs in the games that they play, so large gaming studios quickly dropped their plans to make quick money on the hype, realizing that such integration would only backfire.

That's right! When whales enter the game, they destroy the economy with their capital. They're just taking out the market. And if you simply deliver Forex to crypto games, another place of sacrifice will be created
Therefore, we need a different approach to organizing the interaction between the game economy and the real one. Level the chances of the whales with their huge capitals, take care of creating opportunities to play on equal terms with ordinary guys and do not forget about the pleasure of the process

The problem with NFTs is that every one of them has a different contract, so investors never know what they are getting. If I buy an NFT of some digital asset, how do I know the game won't make one million more just like it and make my investment worthless? Even if the contract says you can't do that, there are loopholes in contracts that can be exploited, or maybe the game company will cheat in some other way.

The solution is a system where every single token is treated the same way. That way people can compare the currency in one game to the currency in another game directly.

What if we go the opposite way? Let it not be the game (or its developers or owners) who offer the gaming community NFTs (and yes, we agree, no one in this case will protect the gaming community from cloning). And let the gaming community decide when their asset (unique skin and skill) will be converted into NFT. Additionally motivating them to do this by increasing the opportunity in the game for their in-game asset?

This way the community will not receive stupid skillless shit JPEG images, but a consciously formed investment

[legiteum]

What if we go the opposite way? Let it not be the game (or its developers or owners) who offer the gaming community NFTs (and yes, we agree, no one in this case will protect the gaming community from cloning). And let the gaming community decide when their asset (unique skin and skill) will be converted into NFT. Additionally motivating them to do this by increasing the opportunity in the game for their in-game asset?

This way the community will not receive stupid skillless shit JPEG images, but a consciously formed investment

That's a better approach than most NFTs for sure, but the buyer of the NFT still has to trust the game maker themselves.

In other words, imagine I pay $500 for a super-duper magic sword, and then... the game makes 50,000 more of these swords just like mine and my investment is worthless.

Any NFT is basically a contract, and contracts always have "fine print" which end-users never read and companies exploit. That's why NFTs have such a bad reputation.

When you are buying an NFT, you are basically buying a legal battle, and those aren't very popular  .

Take a look at what we did with the Haypenny Promise to try to mitigate this problem with digital currency. The key here is that every single asset is treated exactly the same. And Haypenny's contract is very simple, very hard to game, and has a company (Haypenny) with a vested interest in making sure nobody screws over users.

Using raw NFTs means it's still the "wild west" and people can get ripped off really easily.

[Hispo]

After the huge decrease of value most of the NFT ecosystem suffered I believe it will take literal years before the mainstream public could be willing to give it a try, a lot of people probably lost a lot of money buying "land" and "properties" in those metaverses and games.

It was the crypto whales who were heavily investing in expensive NFTs, not the people outside of crypto most of the time, and these whales could easily sustain huge losses from NFTs. For them it was just entertainment and a gamble to get even more rich, which some did by dumping their NFTs at the top of the bubble.

The general public was never interested in them, gaming communities were very vocal that they will not tolerate NFTs in the games that they play, so large gaming studios quickly dropped their plans to make quick money on the hype, realizing that such integration would only backfire.

You are mostly right. Thought there was an aspect about the NFT bubble which you did not mention: YouTubers and Influencers. Clearly traditional videogame companies had to backpedal because of the reaction of the gaming community, however, there were very big influencers which came up with their own NFT projects and they tried to sell them to their own followers and audience, for them to make a profit out of it.
One if the most notorious cases in the Influencer drama landscape is the alledged scam pulled off by Logan Paul and some NTF shit-token he wanted people to buy. Like him, there were dozens who tried the same, even in this Spanish speaking community.

Obviously, those followers never were into Cryptocurrency or token but a good percentage of them got convinced to buy in...

[so98nn]

It looks like an excellent idea with a twist from the traditional gaming platforms offering a play-to-earn methodology. I hope you have a good range of gaming catalogs to entertain the users. Since most of the users have already discussed in-depth knowledge about 1:1 ratio pros and cons, I would like to refer to another marketing gimmick that you guys must follow. Most of the P2E start with something similar, however, after the specific period is passed on they fail to achieve actual earning ratios for the users. The revenue can go down dramatically if they start feeling they are not earning enough in-game currency OR the conversion rate is too low for the time spent on any games.

I have seen a few games where they offer real rakeback on in-game assets. For example, selling rarely-found swords or maybe a modern-day car, etc. (Just an example) for the in-game currency. So this keeps users engaged with games and all of them try to hunt down such rare items with increased levels of game difficulty. I am just giving out review as a gamer who would want such feature.

[Motu_verse]

It looks like an excellent idea with a twist from the traditional gaming platforms offering a play-to-earn methodology. I hope you have a good range of gaming catalogs to entertain the users. Since most of the users have already discussed in-depth knowledge about 1:1 ratio pros and cons, I would like to refer to another marketing gimmick that you guys must follow. Most of the P2E start with something similar, however, after the specific period is passed on they fail to achieve actual earning ratios for the users. The revenue can go down dramatically if they start feeling they are not earning enough in-game currency OR the conversion rate is too low for the time spent on any games.

I have seen a few games where they offer real rakeback on in-game assets. For example, selling rarely-found swords or maybe a modern-day car, etc. (Just an example) for the in-game currency. So this keeps users engaged with games and all of them try to hunt down such rare items with increased levels of game difficulty. I am just giving out review as a gamer who would want such feature.

Thanks for your feedback! What you are suggesting is a good idea. Great idea! And this is how we see it. It's not exactly what you're talking about, but it's very similar. In any case, the result for the player is the same

Our “liquidity pool” (1:1 ratio) ensures the growth of one economy at the expense of the depreciation of another. And vice versa. While the value of in-game assets remains unchanged in the in-game economy (something like the absence of inflation and deflation). So you can, by timing the moment (or creating this moment yourself), acquire rare and expensive in-game assets for cheap

This is one of our many financial plots embedded in the financial matrix of the project

[Motu_verse]

Thank you very much for participating in the discussion of our economic model. This is an important milestone for us and we truly appreciate all your feedback, thoughts and reactions.

We realized that we could not fully convey the essence of our idea. That's why we decided to create an MVP that will include
- basic game mode (Farm Mode)
- one mini game
- the structure of smart contracts, which currently includes several game mechanics and our 1:1 ratio
- control token
And launch it on the testnet so that those interested can get acquainted with our concept directly

We will be back here and would love to hear feedback from the community!


      *         *               ***             *******         *       *
      **     **             *      *                 *              *       *
      * *   * *            *        *                *              *       *
      *  * *  *            *        *                *              *       *
      *   *    *             *      *                 *              *       *
      *         *               ***                   *                 ***

[legiteum]

Good luck with your project!