If the Aarcade was to launch some pay-to-PLAY minigames, which token would you like to pay?
- GHST
- FRENS
- Nothing at all
0 voters
2 Likes
I think GHST is the best choice. Clearly the gamers don’t want to be spending money to play, but with a higher monetary incentive, we will get better games.
Someone mentioned the idea awhile back to allow the dev to sell an NFT “game cartridge.” I think this would be pretty dope. Devs could launch a kickass game and sell the game for 5 GHST and then the rights to play could be sold later on 2nd market.
1 Like
I voted FRENS, but I am going through a bit of voter regret. FRENS are not transferable, and so someone that wanted to play may unexpectedly run into the problem of not having FRENS. Hopefully others can take this into consideration when they vote.
1 Like
No voter regret. You can change vote. It is not Snapshot.
I think it’s you??? That NFT can be premium content of the game.
1 Like
U right. I’m silly as heck
I’m currently not developing any games. I’ve got too much on my plate elsewhere. But I would love to support great games with real money.
I suppose frens/ghst doesn’t really make a difference TBH. They are the same thing in a way.
The only real difference is with frens, the buyer is forced to buy and stake GHST. The game dev recipients could just as easily liquidate the frens into tickets > GHST. Also if the tx are done in frens, that means the devs have to do additional work to allow frens to be transferred. Or make some kind of ticket that you buy with frens and then can be sold back into frens.
With GHST, the buyers can sell tickets from their frens and then buy the game with ghst. It’s really not much different the more I think about it.
Neither really have a play-to-win advantage over the other (or pay-to-win)
Direct transactions in GHST feel the cleanest to me.
The NFT game cartridges are a cool idea, especially if the devs could release slightly different variations of the cartridges as the game has big upgrades (same functionality, but different “generation”). So like the version 1.0 cartridge could fetch a premium in 2nd market if the game is a smashing success and grows to multiple versions. That’s definitely thinking more meta and long-term, but it is something that comes up to me.
1 Like
GHST is my choice however FRENS sounds intriguing…almost like a becoming a free arcade token.
Maybe I should switch my vote.
(Trying to reply here via email)
But just a dev , I would not like being paid in FRENS and it reduces income stability from developing minigames for Aavegotchi.
One thing that everyone should note is that:
Fee collected (whether it is GHST or FRENS) would be split into 4 sections:
Player Rewards,
Pixelcraft Studio,
Developer teams,
AarcadeDAO.
Percentage is yet to be confirmed.
If players are willing to pay with GHST, they received GHST as rewards of coz. Developers own GHST and they can freely HODL/sell them to pay for their daily expenses.
But if player pay with FRENS, then they can only receive raffle tickets as rewards. And Devs May earn FRENS of coz but they will have a hard time selling tickets in bazar and then to their currencies. The value of tickets are also highly dependent on coming raffles too.
So therefore I am in favor of GHST and much against FRENS tbh.
chair 
via AavegotchiDAO <aavegotchi@discoursemail.com>於 2021年9月11日週六，下午1:12寫道：
3 Likes
I think your argument is correct. The intriguing part of being paid in Frens (just for example) is that people have less of a monetary value attached to Frens tickets, it is more ambiguous.
Therefore users are likely to spend more FRENS than they would the “equivalent” amount of GHST.
1 Like
But would they like to be rewarded Raffle tickets too? It is ambiguous reward as well.
chair via AavegotchiDAO <aavegotchi@discoursemail.com>於 2021年9月12日週日，上午12:18寫道：
1 Like
I agree, the most simple approach is to accept GHST.