Almost everyone who writes about @Pixels talks about the token price. How much it rises. How much it falls.
I don’t want to discuss that. I want to discuss something much more interesting.
Why do Pixels need two tokens??
This question, if answered correctly, will open a new perspective.. How should the Web3 gaming economy actually be designed?
$PIXEL ama vPIXEL is 1:1. Like a betel nut split in two. The value is exactly the same.
Purchasing power is the same. Why would the team bother to create two?
The short answer: because humans can't be trusted not to sell something that can be sold. This is not an insult. This is design.
If you withdraw $PIXEL normally, you will incur aggressive fees. But you are free to sell. wrap. do anything. If you choose $vPIXEL there are no fees. You can only spend or stake. Cannot sell.
So Pixels create two types of players..
Players who want liquidity take pixel. Pay fees. Exit the ecosystem. They are short-term contributors. The fees are returned to stakers.
Players who want to stay?? take vpixel. There are no fees. but their tokens are locked. They become the foundation of the ecosystem. This is not two tokens. This is two life choices in one game.
CEO @Pixels Luke Barwikowski said directly. He said vPIXEL was designed to reward players who want to build the ecosystem.
There is no other Web3 game that I know does this in such a smooth way.
vpixel is created to solve problems in ERC-20. pixels are gaming tokens. They get dumped by whales within seconds after the ecosystem ends. Whales dump into exchanges. Bots are farming. Fortunately, now there is CAPS. This makes tokens have rules.
If you buy $PIXEL on Binance you can transfer freely to the game. If vpixel you can't.
Want to transfer vpixel to another wallet of yours? You can.
Want to transfer vpixel to your friend in the game? You can.
But if you transfer to the exchange? not allowed.
It's only natural. I understand why Luke created a system like this. Because devs in web 3 games only have 2 options.
Full token becomes liquidity.
Full token off-chain.
What are the advantages, bro?
If the first one you can audit but is susceptible to bot manipulation. If the second one, the dev has full control. It's safe. But you can't audit it. Luke feels that pixels can create a different system. The game is on-chain. You can audit it. Developers are involved in control through smart contracts.
Do you think this will succeed in the future?
Not necessarily.
But technically I see pixels becoming a structure for gaming in web3 in the future.