ENJIN Coin UNITY3d Plugin

ICO : OCTOBER 3RD, 2017
https://enjincoin.io/
​

What do you guys think about the new ICO coin that is a ERC-20 token supported by a powerful framework of open source smart contracts and software development kits. (SDK’s) It is a decentralized platform to trade items and transfer virtual ownership between players.

I just had a conversation with the CTO Witek Radomski about the Unity3d 2017 plug ins for easy integration into games.

I think this will be fantastic for game developers and anyone who is offering virtual items, especially for the customers who have to rely on the company when purchasing virtual goods. I am not a programmer or a coder so I am not 100% on how feasible this technology is but it does look like something that is going to help the gaming community. What are your thoughts?

Google Play doesn't allow you to offer other currencies for in game items etc, and so I asked him the question in which he answered

"​

we'll have to fight the fight to get crypto working on mobile platforms - in a way this could be used purely as the game item system

tech wise there will be 2 ways in - integration with the SDK directly, or via an API which is 1 extra degree of separation


but licensing wise we'll have to fight for the ability to use these tools on mobile platforms


eventually we believe anyone trying to prevent blockchain on their platforms will become obsolete

if you think about it as a game item database then it doesn't really conflict with the license terms that I'm aware of "

Edit :
Here is a list of solutions they plan on creating

 

Does anyone have a opinion on this? Would be interested to have a discussion on it

 

There is another long thread talking about block chain integration for item trading you can look up. It has a bunch of discussion.

My general thoughts have always been why? I really don't see a reason for integrating a system like this.

 

Unsupervised (unobstructed by the whims of the state) RMT comes to mind.

Also goddamn your avatar gets more spooky every 2 months or so.

 

Sure. I've hear the arguments for using crypto payment systems. And even if I personally disagree with them, I do get them.

But that doesn't explain why I should integrate it directly ini my game. Why not just wait until the tech catches on enough for the major payment providers to do the work.

Thank you.

 

The phoenix man has come to reap the sinners...

Well yeah, unless that's your intention there's not reason to do it.

My guess is they want to get around of any supervision the system that major payment providers will enforce.

 

This sounds a lot like a promotion of a new cryptocurrency.

Either way. I think integrating a crypto with actual monetary value into a game is a great way to end up in a situation where you SUDDENLY have to deal with either banking and gambling regulations of your country and possibly laws related to money laundering.

On a practical side...

I checked their site, and I dislike it.

Everything is a marketing spiel with a little meat. There is no technical information about integrating it into a game. No information about storage/memory/cpu footprint. Unity SDK isn't there.

Github code seems to be geared towards ... NodeJS? Seriously?

Overall impression is negative, and the whole thing looks like one more team trying to get rich by riding cryptocurrency train.

 

Yeah I mean I personally think it is a good idea, but integrating it in mobile games will be very tough. GooglePlay/Apple wouldn't allow something like this since it would kill their profits.

It seems like a really good idea, however the technology side of it doesn't even seem feasible right now with the current state of crypto currency .

 

Selling or endorsing cryptocurrency services are out of the scope of the Unity forums.

 

Thread is reopened in light of Unity's stance of working with crypto currency providers.

 

Thank you for reopening, I would like to discuss more about this. Is anyone interested in it? Would you implement the SDK's in your game when they are implemented within the Enjin gaming communities?

 

The important part: What would a game gain from it?

 

All of the benefits crypto currency brings to you. +
.
Under there Unity3d section they list

Code (csharp):

1. Unity is a popular cross-platform game engine used by over a million developers. The Unity  C# SDK will allow creation of transaction requests, reading account balances, creation of  subscriptions, and querying toplists.
2.  

Normally when someone makes a payment via your in game items, the processor who could be google play or whatever you use, will take 30% of the revenue. With this system it will only take a very small % considering everything is executed in a decentralized system.

They plan on fixing a lot of issues like

Code (csharp):

1. Trading items outside of the game environment is cumbersome and difficult. If a player gets  banned, they can lose all of their items and currency.

Here is a extended list of solutions that they have :

 

What benefits do cryptocurrencies have over Regular Ass Dollars That Everyone Can Access?

 

You can read a very good article here : https://www.huffingtonpost.com/ameer-rosic-/7-incredible-benefits-of-_1_b_13160110.html

Plus it has a lot of major benefits of being on the Ethereum network. ( it is a ERC20 token )

 

Now just wait a minute. If it still takes a "very small %", it is not so different from any normal processor.
Being decentralized means you and your game has limited control, which is not a good thing.
Being cryptocurrency means that in order to get something, people will have to convert their cash into "banana money", and most likely will not be able to withdraw it back easily.
And in case they are able to withdraw it, then you may be hit by banking/gabling regulations in your country.

But when banned player loses their items, it is the right approach. For the developer.
Also, why should trading outside of game environment be allowed by the developer?

Most of the list is either highly dubious or require no cryptocurrency to be normally implemented. A portion of items listed attempt to tie in the developers into enjin coin services.

Now. What unique benefits does the coin in question bring?Aside from merely being a cryptocurrency.

 

The article is bad.

Fraud: You can still be scammed and in this case you won't have a mechanism for getting the cash back.
Lower Fees: This is lies. Bitcoin fee can be as high as $4 or $5 per transaction.
Immediate settlement: This is a great way to get tax collection agency greatly interested in you.
Decentralization/Recognition: Would mean that the system will be used for money laundering and then might be shut down at government level.

 

"Being decentralized means you and your game has limited control, which is not a good thing." Explain

"Being cryptocurrency means that in order to get something, people will have to convert their cash into "banana money", and most likely will not be able to withdraw it back easily." This is simply untrue.

"And in case they are able to withdraw it, then you may be hit by banking/gabling regulations in your country." It isnt classified as a currency, I hope you know this. Also, yes different governments have different regulations as with anything. Most likely you will pay capital gains, but it wouldn't "penalize" you for using crypto.


"But when banned player loses their items, it is the right approach. For the developer." The player shouldn't lose all of there money just because a developer banned them. Also, not every player gets banned fairly. So this protects the players


"Also, why should trading outside of game environment be allowed by the developer?" This certainly isnt for every single game developer to implement. Just like how, not every game developer sells in game items.


"Most of the list is either highly dubious or require no cryptocurrency to be normally implemented." This is also very untrue. Their goal is to have an entire ecosystem of P2P transfers, currency settlements, item transfers, plugins, an exchange, and more to integrate ENJ for a streamlined experience. They teamed up with Bancor aswell. What people don't understand is that token transfers will largely remain on the backend and not much will change for the end users. Think about the coin Ripple, XRP, and their RTS system but replace businesses with games. Similar concept

 

This is unlike bitcoin, that article is for main crypto currency. It is on the ether network, and you can literally send a $.10 gas fee. This is why it works better as a ERC20 token.

Money laundering happens with fiat currency every single day. There will be no difference.

 

As a developer you ideally should retain control to whatever happens in your community and player's items. Decentralization means that for example, there might be an equivalent of chinese warcraft gold miners, or sites that will take your player base and profit from it by selling them items from your game, except you'll get nothing from it. That means a risk. Likewise, if the developer is stupid enough to allow player-made items to be distributed this way, this can tilt age ratings a LOT.

No, they should lose their items. The job of the developer is to produce good environment for other players. Risk of losing all your stuff is the primary reason for the people to play nice with others. So, when somebody doesn't play nice, they are penalized for it. That's the point of banning and losing the account. If you take this risk away, you'll create more toxic environment. Which is a bad idea.

Another problem is that having online account is actually an anti-piracy measure. So in a game with a strong online component a normal idea would be to tie everything to an account you have a control over. Blockchain, however, especially in a situation where player-owned servers are allowed could create situation similar to abuse of steam card system. Where serverse are made for one day, used to mine up some items, which could then end up being sold to your official instances, greatly altering balance of local economy. Preventing that would require extra work.

So, the long story short, decentralization is not a good thing.

I'm not seeing it. I see an attempt to start another payment provider and profit from people utilizing their services + maybe an attempt to profit from initial gold rush of a new cryptocurrency. Also, how would you know what their goal is?

 

"Decentralization means that for example, there might be an equivalent of chinese warcraft gold miners, or sites that will take your player base and profit from it by selling them items from your game, except you'll get nothing from it."

As a developer you will be able to select items you want to exchange. A player wont be able to just sell anything they want in the game.


"No, they should lose their items. The job of the developer is to produce good environment for other players." Sadly developers dont always produce this environment.


"Also, how would you know what their goal is?" I read the whitepaper



Edit: Have you actually read the whitepaper?

Also I double checked, and there are no fees other than the gas fee with could be sent at a minuscule amount. ( Unlike bitcoin )

Also the trading platform, is a smart contract and is a escrow. So you dont have to trust 3rd parties.

 

@Eagerkid maybe I went a bit overboard about it, but the thing is I simply want to know how exactly this platform supposed to be useful. And you're the one trying to promote the platform.

As I said, a good portion of what you linked reads as a marketing spiel/sales pitch, which is supposed to bedazzle the reader so the reader starts seeing the "endless possibilities" everywhere and buys into it.

Decentralization is not inherently good. You're supposed to retain control over things related to your own game. The rest largely sounds like something that can be done via traditional means. And that's a problem, because I'm not seeing any unique features.

 

"but the thing is I simply want to know how exactly this platform supposed to be useful. And you're the one trying to promote the platform."

I have already given you reasons to see how it is useful. And if you take the time to read the whitepaper it will explain how it will be used. I have no connection to Enjin coin or its company. I am simply a crypto currency enthusiast who is trying to discuss a interesting coin.


"You're supposed to retain control over things related to your own game."

What are you not in control of if you use this platform? You decide what can and can not be traded over the network. The developer is still able to decide how they will run their game and if they even want to use this technology. Which the pros are listed.


Am I right to come to the conclusion you are new to crypto currency? You seem to think Bitcoin is some how involved when you were talking about the fees. You wouldn't be paying any fees to use this platform outside of the gas used to push the transactions on the ethereum network which could be placed at $.10 or lower.

You can receive a payment from another country within 5 minutes, that payment can be processed, and even converted to USD if you so choose too. Where traditionally, an in game item from the google play store could take a 30% cut from your item, hold the money until it is processed, and then deposit into your bank account which could take additional fees.

 

No, and seeing this kind of "argument" is incredibly disappointing.

I read the white paper, and honestly it is more of the stuff I spoke of in the first post, except there is more water in it.
https://forum.unity.com/threads/enjin-coin-unity3d-plugin.497638/#post-3236666

It is more of attempts to bedazzle and throw buzzwords at people .

Spoiler

^^^ This.

All I see is that they want to make their own payment processor system they want to control, most of functionality didn't really need crypto algorithms, and there are multiple spots where they can insert their fees or lock people into their apis.

Neither impressed nor excited. Wanted to know if there's more to it, but maybe this is all there is to it.

 

Thanks for your opinion, I am hoping to hear more.

 

The Gamecredits partnership will bring a marketplace sometime next year.
The wagering aspect of it uses their MGO tokens which can also be used to buy/sell game items.

It's official: https://unity3d.com/company/public-...deal-unity-technologies-bring-blockchain-game

Although they aren't mentioning the item marketplace yet as they are working on finishing the GPlay store and wagering integrations.

 

https://gamecredits.com/gamecredits...ring-blockchain-benefits-to-3-billion-gamers/ also.

Seems like Unity is firmly in bed with crypto currencies already. Still not seeing developer benefits though. Seeing plenty of Unity benefits.

 

The Gamecredits platform is designed to benefit developers. It will only charge 10% commission instead of 30%.
Meanwhile, enabling wagering, tournaments and item marketplaces in your game is also great for developers as it draws people into your game and you can entice them to buy more stuff for example.

 

Where is the proof of it being better, do you have any? Actual proof, I mean?

 

Not sure what kind of proof you want. It will be an alternate Android store that lets you keep 90% of the revenue, not 70%.

Here's the website outlining their plans specific to developers.
http://www.thegnation.com/developer-benefits/

...and the rest of the ecosystem:
http://www.thegnation.com/ecosystem/

I think this is great and will be looking at picking up unity. Currently using Corona SDK.

 

Haha, that's not proof. That's a claim.

Am I getting 70% of 100% of the customers able to pay or 90% of 0% of the customers able to pay? At the time of this post, that would mean it's entirely theoretical and assumes that all the existing customers would be somehow also putting money into this. That won't happen, will it? not only this, you will be fighting competitors.

The whole thing is laughable and insults my intelligence. I'll be back when there's actual split test proof it results in higher developer income.

 

When cryptocurrencies are involved and people speak of decentralization, a normal logical move would be to have transaction fee at 0%. Because when a system is truly decentralized, transactions can be processed by server owners.

By having 10% instead of 30%, they're simply trying to undercut existing stores by offering more favorable terms and are effectively "building their own casino". Since there is a transaction fee, they're simply trying to build a competing platforms with slightly better terms, and such platform doesn't really need blockchain and cryptocurrencies to work. Could've been done the traditional way.

 

The store still needs to function, receive updates, fixes, new services etc. So of course there will always be some comissions. It's impossible to have a store that runs for free. As for the block-chain, that's just the way they decided to build it. There are advantages in terms of a common currency and certain features are easier to build when using it.

Hmm not sure what you mean but this is the way I will approach it as a developer.

Have my game on the Google Play store charging $2.00 for an in-app purchase.
I can make a non intrusive info button in the in-app shop that lets players know if they reinstall my game from the GPlay store, they can purchase the same item for $1.80. The game will exist on both stores but anyone who switches over to GPlay will be earning me an extra 10c per item sold. Since publishing on the GPlay store will require little to no extra effort, that is huge. I imagine many whales who spend hundreds/thousands (hopefully) on in-app purchases will go for this.

Additionally, I can have a hidden prize in my game worth $100 or so that people can hunt for in the GPlay version. This would get more people to use that version and buy the in-game items through there to earn me more money.

As for the wagering, that is totally separate, doesn't require GPlay and purely an extra feature to make my games more interesting for people who may want to wager on their games. Even 10c wagers between friends can make them pretty fun.

In the end, yeah of course I have to wait to see how it works. But if it is as claimed, then this is really good news. Regardless, automatic publishing to GPlay doesn't cost me a thing but could earn me more money.

 

Because you're tying everything to an exchange like this you do realise that you're going to be subject to gambling laws, right?

Right?

 

The GPlay store is just an alternate store. Doesn't relate to gambling at all. Maybe the hidden money might but that's a small thing I don't really care about. The main thing is, trying to get extra profit by migrating players to the other store.

Meanwhile, wagering on games of skill doesn't fall under gambling laws AFAIK. And they are getting the necessary licenses where they can so there's no risk from my end.

 

I'm not buying this argument.

If the cryptocurrency is decentralized, then there's no need for a central store either. Allow anyone to run their own. It would make more sense to have a non-profit community opensource project with implementation freely available to anyone. With no transaction fees. This is something I'd understand. A decentralized self-regulating system with no central authority. By being part of it, and using it, you do some work of the system (verifying transactions, etc), but otherwise there are no fees involved.

When a currency has transaction fees built into it, this means that the primary motivation for creating the currency was purely financial. Meaning "crypto" part is simply an excuse to launch one more store with slightly different terms.

 

This is a fair point. And such stores may arise. But they do take a lot of effort and it's not easy for a decentralised company to accept credit card payments to buy crypto. There's also a need for support teams. Server costs. Bandwidth costs.

What's wrong with trying to launch a competitive store though? People always try to find way of undercutting competition. If it becomes popular, maybe Google will be forced to only take 20% commissions to keep up. If this is what greed looks like then please, gimme more.

I'm really not sure why there's so much skepticism. It will cost us nothing to publish a game to the store to begin with. If someone wants, they can incentivise their players to use it. Otherwise, it's pretty much invisible to you. Other devs can choose to implement wagering. Again no issue if you don't.

I for one am very excited about this. Let's at least wait for more details before we slam the project so much.

 

Yeah, what's actually going to happen is that nobody's going to install this alternative store because the Play store is more convenient and already installed on virtually every Android device. And I've still yet to see a single compelling reason to involve cryptocurrencies in this at all, aside from "this market is so loosely regulated that we can get away with nearly anything."

 

Because the world has learned to treat bold claims with scepticism.

 

Well, I'm pretty sure they don't expect to explode right away. However, with extra features like wagering, tournaments and marketplaces it could become interesting in time. In the short term, sure, most won't install the store. But there are many people who would love a discount. Many people don't have much money so saving a few dollars across their games would be worth it. And as a developer, I like the idea of playing with new tech and getting extra profits from the people who do install the other store. Having crypto currencies in it doesn't make it unregulated. Most countries already regulate crypto to an extent.

Another thing is that outside of America, especially in China, people are used to 3rd party stores (no Google). So that's another potential.

Plus the wagering shouldn't take much time to implement into games that already have 1v1 multiplayer. So again, I'd love to play with that.

Nothing wrong with starting small.

 

I agree fully with you. This is usually the case when someone tries to sell you something with a big promised benefit. In this case, there's no cost to me of implementing any of this. I have nothing to lose and much to gain. And it's not even out yet. I prefer to take a optimistic wait-and-see approach.

 

Again, all these wagering things you're talking about? That's the lack of regulation I've brought up. That doesn't fly on normal stores because we have justifiably strict laws on real-money gambling. The minute any government gets wind of that is the same minute there's a giant crackdown on the whole market. And most people won't care about the "saved money" (if there'd even be any) because the convenience factor is a bigger deal.

 

Considering they are getting licenses to do this, why would it suddenly get banned?

And the GPlay store will give me extra profit without any regulatory issues. Again, no cost to me.

 

Are you affiliated with GPlay, GNation or GameCredits in any way?

 

It's not just the market that needs to get licenses to do so. It's literally anyone providing this sort of thing as a service.

 

Well, to be blunt I find a lot of stuff related to cryptocurrencies dishonest.

Basically, promises/expectations - "be free from chains of normal currencies, do transaction easily, blahblahblah".
Reality - "We built a new money system to get rich from inflating value and taking a cut off every transaction".

That's not right.

And getting back to the store...
"We wanna make new store/item trading platform with lower commissions" - Ok. cool. Good luck. You'll need it.
"We wanna make new store using decentralized cryptocurrency that utilizes modern state of the art technology that offers endless possibilities!" - that's bullshiting me with buzzwords. And that's not cool.

Basically, I have nothing against someone trying to create their own company and make it successful, but when they're painting picture that is too good to be true, there's a problem. When they start throwing "decentralization", "cryptocurrency", you look at the system and see that it doesn't need it, and doesn't utilize it to full extent, there's another problem.

That's the gist of it.

 

I will have to read the whitepaper today, I heard about this yesterday and could see it competeing with Enjin. Although they dont really go head to head.

Not sure if this is directed at me, but No. I am not affiliated with either Enjin or Gamecredits

"Well, to be blunt I find a lot of stuff related to cryptocurrencies dishonest." This is true, considering 99% of ICO's will fail.

"Basically, promises/expectations - "be free from chains of normal currencies, do transaction easily, blahblahblah"." If we are still talking about Enjin, I dont think they are trying to compete with currencies.

 

I'm not affiliated with the company no. I am just really interested in this and i have kept up with updates.

I don't know the legal aspects but this isn't a bunch of 5 guys building some harebrained scheme. They have offices in 3 different countries and over 100 employees. They have lawyers and they would have looked into licensing issues already. I'm certain that when they applied for their licenses they disclosed their plans so if they were on the fringes then they wouldn't have received them.

Unity wouldn't partner with them if they thought it was some dumb unworkable idea on the fringes of the law. They have unity devs working at their offices to help create these integrations as we speak.

I also agree that a lot of these crypto projects will fail. That's the nature of new ventures. I think this one actually brings something new to the table and I'm keeping an open mind.

I want to use it and help me improve my future games. If it did fail then no harm done to me.

 

You're right. It's two companies backing a harebrained scheme. I'm honestly interested in why Unity choose this rather than the actual benefits because it seems very weird for a large company to suddenly partner up with a company that has only been in business for only a few months with very little to show for it.

There have to be other larger companies interested in this. Why GameCredits? What's special about them?

 

This company, they've been around for at least a year building their products in the bakground and plan to release working versions in the next few months. Perhaps Unity chose them because they are closest to having a real product and offering something new like wagering. Perhaps they want to give their devs an option of another store that pays out more. Seems normal to me. And Unity is just one of many companies experimenting with these new technologies. Partnering with a startup and working together is normal too. And they probably showed them internal builds of upcoming products so there is something to show for it.

Why are you so unhappy about this? There's nothing for you or any developer to lose through this partnership. It's just another option in the SDK. Are you concerned that this store is a scam that will keep all your revenue and run away? Really not sure.