• General
  • Development independence for the Legions game

Hi everyone,

Conscious that the Treasure project has now transitioned into a DAO, I believe we're all really excited to be able to participate in the governance and decision making for TreasureDAO. However, I also believe that there are situations where the core team should have defined boundaries within which they can operate freely and make executive decisions without DAO approval.

The development of the Legions game is, in my opinion, one of those situations.

As many of you may be aware, the initial premise of what drew many of us to the Treasure project was the concept of the Legions game: an environment which would bring together the plethora of PfP NFT projects and allow them to interact in various ways, including battling, crafting and building out dominance over what is shaping up to be a "MAGIC gigaverse".

Developing and designing such an environment is a complicated task which requires a long list of details to be worked out and iterated upon. Decisions will be made, many of which will likely need to be revised and amended as time goes by, and we see that as well in the likes of other successful blockchain games (you know which) where the parameters of the game need to be adjusted depending on the collective behaviour of players, all in the interests of ensuring an optimised gaming experience for all. These decisions need to be taken FAST, tested out and iterated again many times over.

My proposal is that TreasureDAO gives the development team full independence of decision making with regards to the design of the Legions gameplay, including the development of all art, content and in-game economics, as well as the freedom to amend these parameters without DAO approval, until such time as the initial roadmap for the game has been fully executed upon and delivered.

We can agree on a specific set of milestones that need to be accomplished, following which decision making on the governance of the game also gets handed over to DAO votes. This is in the interests of getting a game out that can adapt quickly to the rapidly changing conditions of the metaverse that is unfolding around us.

To be clear, this independence applies solely to game-related decisions. Decisions relating to the overall governance of the DAO e.g. spending treasury, emissions, rewards, partnerships etc are outside the scope of this proposal.

Would love to hear everyone's thoughts on this. I shall not presume to include a poll on this thread (yet) - think that honour should be reserved for the mods šŸ™‚ Just my two cents worth for now.

For clarity, perhaps devs could include a copy of the proposed Legions game roadmap here as a matter of record too.

Feedback very much welcome!

    Iā€™m in full agreement with this idea

    Fully support this Initiative. The team needs to take fast decision and the DAO needs to enable this structure. Good proposal @allyourcat !

    Agree. Game development requires a centralized structure and lots of iteration. One point to consider: in-game economics could have an impact (positively or negatively) on the DAO depending on how it is designed, how much value can be extracted out of the game, and what proceeds end up going toward the DAO. Perhaps a slight modification to the proposal would allow for the team to experiment and test different in-game economics until they find product market fit. And before deciding to implement the in-game economic model, they would bring that to the DAO for a vote.

      sammy I like this, agreed with both allyourcat and sammy.
      Largely a game has too many parts and require too fast of decisions to be directed by DAO but some central economic conditions within the game would be great to be decide by the DAO.

      Great to see everyone so supportive of this, and I'm sure the dev team appreciate the trust we're placing in them as well!

      Completely agree on the slight amendment to have the DAO ratify the in-game economics once it's ready for launch after all the iterative work has been done behind the scenes, it's definitely something that's important to have buy-in from everyone about.

      Not sure what next steps are but I suppose we let @Gaarp and team formalise this a little more if it's the appropriate thing to do now?

        allyourcat Great idea! Perhaps we let the current TIPs pass before we move this through governance. I am weary of swamping everyone with too many TIPs within a few weeks of moving to the DAO model!

        Please note that technically any of our DAO members can raise a TIP through governance if it meets the criteria outlined in the guidelines (newly added post) šŸ™‚