224
« on: August 18, 2014, 08:47:09 pm »
My understanding is that, BitShares Play is only part of the decentralized game assets ecosystem, It is not enough to achieve the goal only with a DAC.
To have the agents and merchants interested and join, we need to have a lot of games in our platform, in the same time, game providers have interested in BitShares Play game platform, because:
1. BitShares Play provide a good economic chips system to protect the user's game chips(assets) from being dilute. Because in BitShares Play, the platform must find way to guarantee that the new created chips must be created by providing play shares as collaterals, or according the mechanism as a game contract hardcoded in BitShares Play. It seems that games in BitShares Play should not be given the ability to issue chips as they want (As Benevolent Entity). Though I want to provide games with the flexibility, but maybe it should not be considered if it hurt the users' chips assets and thus the ecosystem.
There might be challenges for us to find ways to keep the assets rule in BitShares Play, but hopefully we will find ways, at least for a subset of the game kinds.
2. Another reason game providers would have interest in BitShares Play, is that we have agents and users base here. From another aspect, this system have agents because of the games already being there in some sense too. So the question is chicken and eggs, which will come out first?
The answer for this is that BitShares Play will first have chance games like Dice and Lottery being part of the DAC as a start for games. This will make BitShares Play looks like a gaming DAC at first glance, but with things growing, it's final goal is to be a game asset Platform, and those built-in games will retrograde just as third-party games.