Removing the '1 asset per experience' requirement

📁 Proposals SIP Ideas
1

What

Currently, every minted asset that you own can only be used in 1 published experience.
e.g if you own 1 xx table and use it in a single published experience, you cannot use the same table on another experience.

You’ll have to purchase a similar one again to use in another published experience

This SIP idea is to propose removing this requirement.

Why

Allowing builders to use whatever minted assets that they have purchased/minted on all their experiences:

  1. Saves time and resources in recreating similar assets
  2. Removes the risk of having to anticipate how many they should purchase
  3. Allows other builders to also purchase similar assets

I’d like to open to the community to discuss on this. :slight_smile:

6 Likes
2

Are you active in the Creator’s Forum? I haven’t seen you there, at least not under this name. Feels like a good Feature Request to post there as well. This way it could skip the monthlong process of discussion and voting.

3

Pardon my ignorance but I didn’t know there’s a Creator’s Forum. Been building for awhile though. May I have the link?

4

@DAO (this isn’t showing on my end as though this was a reply so editing my post to tag you so you don’t miss this)

It’s a wonderful site, in my opinion. A lot more direct interaction with the team in there as composed to the million other sources of communication lol. Trust me, I fully understand there’s a lot since I try to keep up with every single one of them :laughing:

The link is https://forum.sandbox.game/ or the channel for Game Maker Feature Requests is the one in the box in the post you replied to. It’s a Discourse Forum like this one but specific to creators. And since I always say not to trust random links, you can verify it in the main Announcements channel on TSB’s Main Discord posted on May 2nd. :blue_heart:

1 Like
5

Also, not saying anything against having it here as well. If the devs don’t react to the idea or like the idea when you post it there then you can have a second chance of having it implemented by keeping it here as well and hoping the DAO has the ability to do something in regards to it!

1 Like
6

I like the idea.

….what if Adidas and Snoop publishes a activation and make much Promo for that Land and later it is used for a nee publishee experience…

Wouldnt be all the marketing and given informations on the internet still show all the Adidas and Snoop Promotion even if its now a Nike experience …?

So like having no risk of a bad reputation later on for the first published experience ?

1 Like
7

I can’t tell if you aren’t reading these, don’t understand how creating in The Sandbox works like at all or are literally just trying to troll everyone :thinking:

8

Hey @James, I believe you might have been mistaken for what the proposal is about.
Let me give u an actual scenario of what the current situation is for builders rn

If you have minted/bought a 1 x ‘Beautiful Table’, you can only use that asset in 1 published experience. So the issue comes when the builder needs to use a similar asset in a different experience, he/she will have to purchase another similar ‘Beautiful Table’ to use in a second experience, thereby having 2 of the same asset.

This proposal is to remove that cap, i.e if you own 1 x ‘Beautiful Table’, you can use it in 2 or more experiences that you publish.

The rationale is:

  1. To allow more people to own the same variation of the asset.

  2. For rare items that are either expensive or rare, builders will not need to keep purchasing said items, adding to their cost of production.
    An example will be legendary ‘character’ assets that cost upwards of 150 SAND

3 Likes
9

Amazing Topic, @DAO
Welcome! Make yourself at home!
This is definitely a topic for the DAO. It involves the marketplace, Land, GM, the platform as a whole, and needs to be discussed.

1 Like
10

I like the idea but think it is impractical. If you only need one of the asset to publish to unlimited lands, this creates an incentive to centralize production.

For example, I am a rich person who buys a ton of LAND and ASSETS. I then show these LAND and ASSETS to game creators. They create games using only the ASSETS that I have, and I can publish this game on one of my LANDs for no extra cost. This will be attractive to game creators because they can get an experience published for free (or a small fee relative to buying LAND and ASSETS) and they will still be able to monetize by selling their own assets (eventually).

If this scenario was somehow stopped, I would be in favor, but I am worried it is too gameable.

11

As the original policy intends to protect artists who make the NFTs, I would never take this rule off.

So I want to propose instead to change this project into a lazy-cloning feature in sandbox dashboard: You have 1 NFT, then you can clone it several times to use it in all your experiences. This clone will not be a copy NFT but instead a permit to use it as many times you want. Cheaper of course and maybe these should not be able to be sold.

Its like any copyright law everywhere. You want to use and reuse something, pay the creator who deserves the recognition and money for the awesome work.

As a result: all earnings of each lazy mint of the NFTclone will go to the artist, and a part to Sandbox I guess. dont know exactly how are the current royalties shared.

12

Diplo can you help me understand what you think is unfair about this scenario? Isn’t buying a ton of land and marketplace assets for builders to use in creating an experience okay to do?

13

It’s unfair because it defeats the purpose of assets. Ideally every individual has to buy one copy to use it. In this scenario only one person buys one of each of the assets which lowers artist earnings.

I would be fine with giving a little wiggle room like 2 experiences allowed or something, but unlimited breaks the value of assets.

14

How is that different than buying a sword NFT and being able to use that sword in infinite experiences as a player?

15

Lanzer, avatar wearables are not the same as experience props. The utility difference is huge.
Creators will be monetizing their experiences. The better looking these experiences are, the more we should assume they will monetize. So they sever a direct purpose.
Players buy wearables for vanity, not for profit.

16

This topic was brought up by me in the Creators’ Forum, and I will put it here in its entirety to further foster the discussion raised here.
Reference: [CATALYSTs update and feedback request - #19 by Dankoyy - 🌐 News - The Sandbox - Creators]

"
:fire: ONE NFT PER EXPERIENCE ISSUE

I am concerned about a very important situation associated with Catalysts, which is the use of only one NFT per Experience. I believe this should be reviewed and very well communicated to the community, given that the community now has the potential to create their own projects and collections using Catalysts.

Now that the Catalyst is active, allowing only one NFT per Experience puts a lot of scarcity pressure and turns the NFT into a usage permission rather than ownership. This functionality does not allow for the scaling of game production using Marketplace assets and contributes to the continuation of the system using Voxel Artists in a freelance mode.

It is important to highlight that, although the idea for “one NFT per experience” seems very good.

TSB: “Wow, how about we limit it to one NFT per Land, so people have to buy 10 times the amount of NFTs to place them on their 10 LANDs.”

In reality, it becomes:

UGC: “Oops, I am not going to buy 10 NFTs to place them on my 10 LANDs, I will hire a Voxel Artist, and besides sending me the voxel file, I can place it on as many Lands as I want.”

In other words, it is a solution that generates more problems.

One NFT per experience is a gear blocker for the community today. I have made more than 25 purchases of community NFTs and my own collection of Numpads. It is a complete chaos to manage these assets with this limitation. Basically, there is no reason for me to buy more LANDs if I don’t have assets to use.

Eagerly awaiting the response regarding this important issue.
"

Thank you!
Dankoyy

17

@DAO @dankoyy has this topic been discussed in the Creator’s forum? Could you update the community with an outcome?

1 Like
18

Despite the important situation for TSB Creators and Marketplace, my comments in the catalyst feedback 19 days ago, where the situation with “1 NTF per experience” is exposed and detailed, still have no response or update from TSB Staff.

Thank you!

19

I believe there’s been no progress made on this front in respect to changing the limitations

1 Like
20

Seems unnecessary since you can copy the asset, 1 for minting and the other stays in your workshop to be used on as many experiences as you want.

1 Like