@FingerLickingI appreciate the responses, but the info that you...

@FingerLicking

I appreciate the responses, but the info that you provide only adds substance to my points. You seem to fall for all the marketing spin and ignore the remote chances of any game being a huge financial success. This is not specific to ICI, but an acceptance of the brutal facts of the high failure rates in the gaming industry. ICI's track record is a perfect illustration of developing money burning games.

The Flying Sheep engine might be useful, but it is far from cutting-edge. Many studios build their own engines to serve specific purposes. If Flying Sheep had cutting-edge tech, it would've raised funds from VCs at US$20m seed valuation.

You regurgitate the meaningless marketing material as if it demonstrates that Star Girl has a valuable USP. Of course brands are welcome, but have any brands been signed-up? If a load of brands were being signed-up, then it'd be reasonable to infer that something potentially interesting is being developed. Companies have been building metaverse platforms for the past 5 years. Shops, exhibits, games, land, avatars etc is hardly novel. There's the big metaverses that everybody is aware of, but there is 100+ others that all offer these standard metaverse experiences. Thus far, none have been able to attract, sustain and grow a reasonable user base. Most are digital wastelands because there's not enough fun user experiences. That's why Star Life needs a much stronger value proposition.

The one-click is misleading, as users are still required to register otherwise they are unable to communicate with any other avatars, which is the whole purpose of the platform. Also, the monetisation challenge remains. How do you get Web2 users comfortable with crypto purchases? KYC, connecting credit cards etc remain significant points of friction, even with a fiat on-ramp.

Star Life could be huge, but the odds are remote because: 1) there's several well-resourced platforms that have a 3-5 year head start 2) all Web3 metaverses are in decline (hopefully not terminal) 3) majority of the 100+ metaverses will be complete failures 4) thus far Star Life has nothing of substance to attract and retain users 5) four out of every five games are commercial disasters.

The odds are remote, is not about opinions, it's just an industry fact. The same applies to MG, Engineers, Kyo etc. Lots of holders don't seem to appreciate the difference between what is possible and what is probable.

Kin's $1b valuation was possible, but it was never probable. The same goes for holders expecting 5-10x gains this year, when the likelihood was extremely remote given the bearish Web3 conditions and basic knowledge about the time it takes to develop games.

If you want a reasonable insight into what Kin expects is probable between 2023-25, just look at the hurdles for his performance shares (which were fortunately pulled).