Inspired by the Cyberkongz VX ‘Klaw Machine’, the Aavegotchi-styled version of this classic arcade game can involve skill or just pure randomization with a Chainlink VRF outcome for the claw machine.
How our version would be similar:
- Rewards users with rare/semi-rare NFTs from various internal and external collections including wearables.
- Uses Chainlink VRF to determine outcomes from players
- Prices tickets in fungible ecosystem assets
How our version would be different:
- Inside the metaverse. Location can be fixed or variable depending on biddability across districts
- Would connect to a large custom NFT parcel display for viewability in the gotchiverse for the winner and the wider public. (Kind of like having an immersive parcel opening experience inside the verse).
- Has optional/flexible design capabilities. We could make tickets either very expensive and rewards randomly generated or we could go an interactable route and make success rates somewhat based on skill/failure to encourage long-term sinks.
Main Thought Process:
My thought is that a new public good can be established through using chainklink VRF and NFT display technologies to give players new opportunities to earn and do something with their alchemica tokens – especially as supply grows over time. The core outcome of the Ghost Operator NFT (or whatever name is preferable) is to act as (1) a major alchemica sink with tickets only craftable by alchemica, and (2) have some viewability/interaction-based element due to the uniqueness of the Gotchiverse technologies.
Optional design choices can include biddability for location placement, an actual game with failure/success outcomes, and various asset inclusion (FakeGotchis 1/1s somehow?) & pricing possibilities in terms of how much alchemica gets spent for what prizes.
What’s needed to get there?
Primarily funding like anything else. The commitment of Aavegotchi AND external assets for a prize pool could be a recurring cost depending on the scope of the experience and duration of DAO commitment towards this. Other notable resources needed are access to developers, coordination/input from Pixelcraft, community input, procedural votes, etc.
Funding
I am of the belief that the DAO can fund this in a sustainable way that makes sense under current operational constraints. The DAO has 5mn GHST and roughly 867k DAI with no debt in reserves, no debt, and is expected to have minimal costs in the medium term – in my opinion. Even without tapping into reserves the monthly drip of 150k DAI from the bonding curve could offer perpetuity for the machine if the DAO decided to go that route. For instance, a monthly commitment of just $20k would put our assets to work in a way that rewards current and future players with prizes for their alchemica, boosting utility and encouraging new players through inclusion of both internal and external collection. The DAO could also decide on other funding routes if actual gamification was introduced into the Claw machine.
So in sum, I feel that reserves and continuous drip funding could make this a sustainable gotchiverse experience that also brings in a lot of benefits that exceed costs over time. An additional source of DAO revenue also exists here as VRF tickets for the machine could be captured by us [the DAO].
Prize Pool Makeup
Another source of interest is how to cultivate an appropriate prize pool. In my mind this should include some internal DTF conversation on how to best acquire existing or new assets in the aavegotchi ecosystem, but there is also an external collection element. Who would pick the collections to buy into for the prize pool outside of aavegotchi? Do we need DAO votes for prize pool acquisition, or can we delegate it to a task force with earmarked expenses? Can we leverage Pixelcraft to bridge collaborations with other projects as a way to acquire NFTs in a way that isn’t public facing (OTC)?
A lot of questions remain here. But I would leave it up to DAO decision on how to best organize the appropriate methods for curating this collection, be that through votes, delegation, etc. Ideally an External Lead would handle these sorts of collaborations and deals with an emphasis on DAO inclusion in the process.
Risks
Besides the trade-offs in funding commitments, I think that there are relatively few risks to address in this sort of proposal. In my view external parties will want to play aavegotchi more if they see that popular external collections also have potential in winning. Proper marketing could really make this an amazing gotchiverse feature that includes a lot of tie ins with the aavegotchi protocol and our need for new players.
That being said, if the DAO puts external collections up for vote to be included and acquired in the pool we could risk triggering artificial floor price increases per announcement, or VP attacks. I would be hopeful that the DAO would just delegate this responsibility and funding arrangement to a task force, utilize partnerships to just do OTC deals if possible, and other methods of avoiding abuse.
Benefits
- Rewards both current and future players – also encourages adoption through wider NFT community partnerships.
- Tickets only purchasable in alchemica acts as a major sink. DAO captures ticket revenue for our coffers.
- Potential for public viewability of results with NFT displays
- Can be gamified if districts wanted to bid for the placement of this on a temporary basis (more alchemica sinks).
- Can be iterated upon for future interactions or inclusion into a wider Gotchiverse Arcade for final placement.