SIP-24: Chrysalis Quest, The Sandbox Communities Platform

🚀 SIP: Active 🗳️ In Voting
21

Hi Hismad,

Of course! Let us clarify your doubts:

  1. a. As mentioned in our previous response, the funds are to scale all Web2 technology solutions. The Web3 integration is already quite advanced in our MVP, and the beauty of Web3 solutions is that the responsibility lies with the network—in this case, Polygon, which is prepared to handle millions of requests. Additionally, we use thirdweb as a framework, which has all its contracts audited.

    Regarding costs, our Latin American economy is very competitive. We have senior developers in the market starting at $1,500 USD per month, which is why our budget proposes salaries even more competitive than the minimum. This is why Latin American startups like Globant are globally renowned for their lower development costs. This budget is based on the costs already incurred in the platform’s development since June of last year, during which we’ve continuously delivered new functionalities. You can test it on our platform, which receives weekly updates: https://asharastudios.com/.

    b. There may be a misunderstanding regarding technological infrastructure. Digital Ocean is one of the most robust and competitive solutions on the market, lacking only specialized AI and Machine Learning modules that AWS offers—features not relevant to this proposal. If needed, integrating them with our current infrastructure would not be a challenge. On the other hand, Mongo Atlas is the cloud service of the world’s most important non-relational database system. In fact, both AWS and Digital Ocean offer pre-configured nodes for direct connection to their services.

  2. a. We’ve met with almost all Web3 questing solutions: Zealy, Soulbound, G3, Kgen, Ola.gg, and Earn Alliance. None have any integration with The Sandbox in their roadmap, nor are they prepared for the platform’s current requirements. Additionally, The Sandbox’s roadmap doesn’t include these functionalities either, except for achievements. If there were any possibility of integration with these platforms, we wouldn’t have invested so much time in creating this platform.

    b. Perhaps the following public data, showing the number of users and average time, can help clarify doubts, contrasted with the functionalities launched in each period:

    In this article, you can see the strategies used, highlighting how daily missions boosted engagement: https://x.com/compose/articles/edit/1843833135638949888. Additionally, in our proposal, our goal is to achieve at least a 50% increase in engagement, as we know not all studios will reach the same numbers. Even with this percentage, the impact on the platform will be incredibly significant.

    This BC3 has been no exception. Although there’s no public data yet, our private engagement data compared to BC2 shows we’ve surpassed the maximum legitimate engagement by 6.32% with just one experience and achieved a 54.41% consolidated studio engagement, demonstrating the incredible potential of managing multiple games on the platform.

  3. a. The projections are based on the Diffusion of Innovation Model, a global standard for startups, along with official data from The Sandbox. In 3 years, we expect to reach only the number of early adopters (13.5%) of the users registered in the last AS4: https://x.com/arthurmadrid/status/1869440879632806337. We’re not accounting for player growth over 3 years, so this is far from optimistic.

    On the other hand, for creators, we have a significant growth projection, made possible by the current BC3 model, which removes the earnings cap and competition between studios. This strategy, focused on real player engagement—the core purpose of the program—moves us away from crypto volatility and into the gaming realm, where projects like Hytale and Roblox demonstrate the incredible interest in UGC gaming platforms. Finally, the platform includes a contingency plan to extend to other UGC platforms if The Sandbox struggles to grow its studios.

    b. This point is important to clarify—perhaps it’s a translation issue. For us, revenue is the difference between money earned and money spent. Therefore, maintenance costs and team salaries must first be covered.

3 Likes
22

it’s super interesting to have several tools available.
Despite everything, this proposal is made before we have even been able to see what the UGC platform can offer us.
I am not against this SIP, but:
1- isn’t it a little early (let’s see what the ugc plateform bring to us first , no ? )
2- if we have several platforms then there should be compatibility between them. what is your plan?
3- open source?

4 Likes
23

Hi Seb,

Don’t worry at all, we don’t see your comments as negative. On the contrary, thanks to all your questions, we believe we’ve significantly strengthened our value proposition. To address your questions:

  1. After reviewing the UGC platform document, we found that none of the functionalities specified here are part of the roadmap or the scope being funded by the DAO. Therefore, we believe these tools, not being addressed by external or internal initiatives, hold significant relevance due to their impact on the creator community.

  2. Regarding the interconnection of tools, we’re already making progress in this area. A SIP is being prepared to request that The Sandbox enable endpoints allowing external tools like Chrysalis Quest to connect. Similarly, our functionalities and services are built so that The Sandbox can integrate with them in the future if desired.

  3. Open source poses a significant risk, as our platform handles rewards, opening the door to vulnerabilities. The correct approach should be dedicated endpoints, which can be worked on in the future but are not within the scope of this proposal.

5 Likes
24

Yes, this exactly. I 100% agree about player retention KOC.

2 Likes
25

I think it’s clear that Yuel and Ashara have put in a significant amount of time and effort to become experts at their craft. I believe they will accomplish this and exceed our expectations.

3 Likes
26

So Chrysalis is in-game whereas Wakeup Labs is external website?

1 Like
27

One last question: To help me make an informed decision, could you outline the advantages and disadvantages of open-sourcing this project?

1 Like
28

Join us on X Spaces to discuss this SIP further on Wednesday at 9am PST

2 Likes
29

Hey thank you for this SIPs. I see this tool as complementary to the UGC platform to be developped by Wake-up labs. The proposal of The council was a mix between the UGC and some features. Now it looks like we can have the UGC on 1 side and the features on this SIPs in a cost efficient way.
All the season pass, the missions are really features that speeks to me as a gamer. I am positive on this proposal and looking forward to here more on the AMA live or in replay if I cannot connect.

4 Likes
30

No, both are external platforms, but Chrysalis focuses on expanding how we interact with The Sandbox experiences through a gamified platform that offers missions and achievements for players.

2 Likes
31

Open-sourcing Chrysalis Quest comes with both advantages and disadvantages.

Advantages of Open-Sourcing

:white_check_mark: Community Collaboration & Innovation – Developers from The Sandbox ecosystem and beyond could contribute, improving features, fixing bugs, and expanding the platform.

:white_check_mark: Faster Adoption & Ecosystem Growth – Open-source software can be integrated more easily by other projects, increasing Chrysalis Quest’s reach and establishing it as a standard mission system in The Sandbox.

:white_check_mark: Transparency & Trust – Open-source code reassures users that the platform is secure, free of hidden risks, and designed for fair mission tracking and reward distribution.

Disadvantages of Open-Sourcing

:warning: Loss of Competitive Advantage – Making the code publicly available allows competitors to replicate or modify Chrysalis Quest, potentially diluting its unique value proposition.

:warning: Security Risks – While transparency is beneficial, exposing the codebase can make it easier for bad actors to find and exploit vulnerabilities, requiring ongoing security audits.

:warning: Monetization Challenges – If completely open-source, maintaining exclusivity for premium features or revenue streams (e.g., paid mission packages) could be difficult unless a strong business model is in place.

:warning: Maintenance Responsibility – Open-source projects require proper documentation, issue tracking, and community moderation, adding overhead to project management.

:warning: Potential Forking & Fragmentation – Without clear governance, different versions of the platform could emerge, creating competing variations that could split the user base.

In conclusion, open-source projects can bring significant advantages, but due to the nature of this proposal and its business model, handling it this way would pose a high risk. We believe that gradually releasing some of its features, ensuring they don’t negatively impact the platform, is a viable approach.

3 Likes
32

Thank you very much, KCL. This is a project created not only by game developers but by gamers for gamers. We believe that, as creators within the ecosystem, our responsibility is to reach a state where the gameplay experience in The Sandbox feels as natural as possible for traditional gamers as soon as possible.

With the NFT rewards system and achievements, we address part of the progression problem—one of the most common pain points identified in our user interviews. Additionally, we help stimulate the catalyst and marketplace economy, which urgently needs models focused on the playable value of digital assets.

2 Likes
33

Awesome. Thanks for clarifying. I support this SIP. I think it’s important for us to develop multiple robust platforms instead of centralizing all of our efforts into only one. If TSB Game Company were the ones doing it, then I’d be in support of only one.

But with many different SandFam or external partners at it, I think diversifying our options is the best strategy.

I’m on board @yuelwolf ! I may ask you to clarify again if we end up on an X spaces together. :slightly_smiling_face:

3 Likes
34

@yuelwolf
I appreciate you taking the time to answer all my inquiries. I am in support of this SIP for the following reasons: First, it aligns with the SandboxDAO’s vision and mission. Second, it offers users valuable alternative choices. And third, it introduces features that differentiate it from existing solutions.

6 Likes
35

We’ve yet to see results from our previous platform funding initiative, and now we’re already discussing another one. How many more platforms do Sandbox players need to jump through just to enjoy a 10-minute game?

Looking at this proposal, there are quite a few vague details, or maybe I’m not understanding it correctly. From what I gather, the platform still requires builders to manually verify the validity of some tasks. On top of that, the types of missions are barely explained. The proposal only mentions ‘creating events and defining missions,’ but what exactly does that mean? What kinds of missions are we talking about? And what metrics will the platform automatically calculate?

Speaking of metrics, is any of the required data even available through the Sandbox API? Do we know if Sandbox can—or will—provide this data? And will this affect Sandbox’s existing operations or pull resources away from other priorities?

Then there’s the reward distribution system. If I’m understanding it correctly, creators will be charged $20/month to distribute rewards to 300 players. How is this any different from tools like Multisender or Disperse that already handle similar tasks?

The assumption that 1,500 players will each pay $7 a month for an entire year feels overly optimistic. But even if that happens—who’s funding the rewards? The 100 builders? Are we really expecting builders, who are often struggling to generate income as it is, to contribute just to justify this $7 pass? Especially when the pass doesn’t even offer meaningful in-game perks like enhanced features or faster progression—it’s literally just to get more than $7 back.

Ultimately, we’re once again jumping into something without first assessing whether there’s even a need for it or how it should be implemented. Do we know what builders actually want? I believe more features and tools are needed for builders, but I think they should be integrated within Sandbox itself.

I hope this won’t be like the last proposal, where we were asked to choose between executors rather than deciding if the platform itself was necessary in the first place.

But if the goal of the DAO is simply to fund projects for the sake of claiming accomplishments, I’ve got a fridge magnet proposal you might like.

2 Likes
36

I just spoke with @yuelwolf from Ashara Studios on X…

We addressed:

  • an overview of the SIP
  • questions from Forum
  • other possible reasons people may have reservations or doubts about this SIP

https://x.com/TheSandboxDAO/status/1898796279460774256 :backhand_index_pointing_left:t4:

4 Likes
37

TwitterSpaceGPT link for those who can read but sometimes aren’t in a place to have sound on (like me)
https://www.twitterspacegpt.com/results/1lDxLzDyQnvGm

3 Likes
38

Hi Cryptokoosha,

I think your first comment hit the nail on the head—increasing a player’s session by 10 minutes can significantly boost a studio’s revenue, and this is exactly what Chrysalis Quest aims to solve by maximizing user engagement. This is very different from the other platform. Here’s a comparative table for reference:

We’re happy to expand on this information. Chrysalis Quest allows the creation of multiple types of missions. In our MVP, we’ve launched daily missions, one-time missions, and social missions. Manual validation is tied to in-game missions in The Sandbox, where the creator must verify that the user has indeed completed the mission. A separate SIP is being prepared to request direct integration with The Sandbox API, eliminating this manual review and improving the creator experience.

The platform calculates metrics associated with these missions and events, such as:

  • Number of active users in an event.
  • Number of users who have completed a mission.
  • Number of users who have completed missions by type (e.g., daily or one-time missions).
  • Missions completed per user and/or experience.

These metrics have been crucial in identifying which missions have the highest engagement.

None of this data is provided by The Sandbox, as there is no public API available at the moment. The Sandbox’s roadmap for this year does not include any of these metrics. The request for this API is being handled directly by the DAO, and they will define the resource specifications and priorities.

Multisender and Disperse are excellent tools for asset distribution—in fact, we used Multisender in our first pre-season before BC1. However, these tools don’t fully address the need to automate rewards based on user performance in a season or mission. The manual process involves multiple steps: saving user wallets, creating spreadsheets to track reward criteria, validating rewards, minting rewards, and verifying delivery. This requires multiple applications and has a high chance of failure at some point. Managing rewards is much more than just sending NFTs, and Chrysalis Quest significantly automates and simplifies this process for creators.

For user calculations,

In the first year, we aim to reach only 2.5% of the total user base, with just 10% of those purchasing a season pass. These rewards will come not only from creators participating in a season but also from other sponsors, as mentioned in the space. We’ve already been working with various crypto collections and memecoins to make these reward pools increasingly attractive and to connect us with audiences across the Web3 space. For example, our recent partnership with Ronke (https://x.com/AsharaStudios/status/1898161359801794883), a memecoin in the Ronin ecosystem, allowed us to reach a much broader player base, and the event was fully sponsored by the Ronke team.

This platform is backed by two Design Thinking studies, including interviews and surveys with players (private data). Public data on the results of each feature implemented during Builder Challenge 2 can be found here:

showcasing the incredible growth in engagement. We’ve also tracked the top 20 studios in recent BCs and the tools and needs they’ve had during each season, as outlined in other SIPs. Additionally, there’s a 60-page document peer-reviewed by PhD-level academics, revealing important insights into the development process.

We understand that, in an ideal world, The Sandbox should develop these functionalities, but they are not currently on their roadmap, as we’ve clarified multiple times in this forum.

The voting criteria for this proposal are defined in the first post of this forum. In this case, you can vote No if you believe the proposal is unnecessary, which is a different criterion from the UGC platform.

The entire process of ideation and construction of this proposal has taken over a year. This proposal was first discussed in this SIP, where we gathered feedback from @Delegates and creators. It then underwent an exhaustive review by the DAO’s internal team before being presented in this forum. This has involved the work of many professionals from both internal and external teams, and we are always open to respectful discussions. If you have a proposal on your fridge, take it out and put it in a SIP—the community will surely be happy to review it.

4 Likes
39

Hi Yuelwolf,

Thank you for taking the time to provide such a detailed response. While I appreciate the effort that’s gone into developing Chrysalis Quest, I’m still a bit confused about some key points.

You mentioned that increasing a player’s session time by 10 minutes can significantly boost a studio’s revenue — does this assume that The Sandbox will continue funding builders indefinitely? If so, wouldn’t that mean this platform is essentially designed to accelerate the depletion of The Sandbox’s treasury?

Regarding mission verification, I’m struggling to understand what the platform is truly automating at this stage. As you mentioned, in-game missions are verified manually — whether it’s completing a Game Maker quest or taking a photo with an assigned asset. If builders are required to manually confirm each completion, then calculating metrics like active users, mission completions, or mission types sounds like little more than an enhanced spreadsheet — the manual workload still falls on the builder.

Since an API integration with The Sandbox seems crucial for this platform to function efficiently, wouldn’t it make sense to postpone this SIP until that integration is confirmed? Otherwise, it feels like moving forward without a key piece of the puzzle — like planning a wedding before getting a “yes.”

On the reward distribution side, I agree that an integrated platform can simplify the process better than tools like Multisender and Disperse, especially when builders are already juggling manual verification tasks.

In the end, I do believe such features are valuable, but I’m still not convinced that this platform will deliver the intended results without significant reliance on manual processes. Perhaps we should convince the Sandbox to implement this on their roadmap, as i’m sure a lot can change in 9 months.

3 Likes
40

Thank you very much to the council for the feedback to address the recommendation points. We have requested an update to the SIP to add the following points:

  1. Add a comparative table of Chrysalis Quest functionalities not only with the UGC platform from SIP-19 but also with The Sandbox itself, showing that we are building completely distinct functionalities.
  2. Regarding the manual review of missions, we have been developing a computer vision module, which yesterday yielded results. We will add this new feature, which will automate mission approval without the need for The Sandbox’s API. You can already see a demo example in this tweet, where we validate the username and date in a mission screenshot from The Sandbox: https://x.com/Grumysh/status/1900385597883138414.

We hope that with these points clarified, you can see the incredible potential of this proposal and, with it, reconsider the decision.

3 Likes