Valve has added a new rule to its “What you shouldn’t publish on Steam” list that prohibits the distribution of games that use blockchain technology or allow users to exchange non-fungible tokens (NFTs) or cryptocurrencies.
The change was noticed by SpacePirate, a developer working on an NFT-based game, who explained that the change was made because the company does not allow game items that have real-world value.
However, MoonNation has come to the rescue. @MoonNation0 has said that it is open for all games to use the native token Moon Nation Bridge, or MNB, and it will be the largest platform used by crypto gamers with their API, blockchain tech and P2E, allowing crypto enthusiasts to create games and so much more.
MoonNation, which promised that the Moon Nation Bridge will have its API for game developers, is now ready to be the “Steam of Cryptocurrency.” Reportedly, they are now fast-tracking the development of MNB to be the actual player in online gaming — bridging cryptocurrency, play-to-earn & gaming in the metaverse.
The Moon Nation Bridge allows users to access the MNG balance directly by connecting the user’s wallet to the platform. Users may exchange their MNG token into MNB, the local currency, and then spend that money to purchase games, use spent points to play games on an hourly basis, in-game exchange currency, and many more.
ADVERTISEMENT
Moon Nation is the biggest space-based role-playing game ever created on the Binance Smart Chain. MNG is the entry point into this space adventure, and it is a rock-solid utility token with reflections and burns on every transaction. Users holding MNG tokens are considered native residents of Moon Nation. To travel to other countries or other planets, players require a passport that may be acquired by collecting tokens or by participating in events like pre-sales.
The passport is in the form of NFTs. These NFTs are the determinants of a user’s rank in the game. The reward system is intended to maintain the game competitively and make it possible to explore other worlds, even for those players who are not particularly active. Sometimes, conflict may break out between various groups in the game. The winning community receives advantages from the homeless community. In this manner, it looks more like an online virtual casino where the in-game currency acts as chips, and MNG functions as the fiat money. Talking about visuals, MoonNation’s drawings and the animation looks pretty genuine, which immerses the player in the game, drifting in the infinite space aboard an alien spacecraft.
ADVERTISEMENT
The MNG token has been meticulously constructed to be an excellent investment vehicle that will grow for decades rather than days while acquiring additional usefulness over time due to ongoing growth and improvement.
Transaction fees for MNG will be critical to its success and sustainability over the long term. The payments collected will result in price stability, consistent deflation, and token holders receiving incentives. The total quantity of tokens will be a whopping 384 million. Its value is the distance between the earth and the moon. To ensure stability and functioning, a total of 10% of the transaction fees will be paid to the liquidity pool. These costs will apply anytime tokens are purchased, sold or transferred between players and holders.
It is also stated that an additional 3% of the tokens would be dispersed to all token holders. Another 3% will be burned down and delivered to a burn location to induce deflation. A 2% portion will be spent on marketing and development, and the remaining 2% will be put into the project’s growth and improvement.
Ben Todar (IG & Twitter: @bentodar) expressed his belief in the crypto gamifying project long before this incident and started MoonNation to provide better options to users who wanted to explore the gamification of cryptocurrencies. With such good opportunities for MNG, the project is currently on a very promising track and is likely to grow even further.
Business
WeWork is closing its enormous office in Spinningfields, with tenants told to move out
Daisy Jackson
Co-working giant WeWork has announced the shock closure of its flagship space in Manchester, an enormous unit in the heart of Spinningfields.
Those who rent desks or offices within the space have been served notice to move out by the end of the month.
It’s understood that WeWork’s three remaining locations in Manchester are unaffected.
The US-based workspace company first moved into the 60,000sq ft unit at No.1 Spinningfields in 2017, offering flexible solutions to businesses of varying sizes.
But in the last few years it’s faced major financial difficulties, with WeWork eventually filing for bankruptcy in the States.
It was previously valued at $47 billion before its bankruptcy overseas.
On the closure of its huge Manchester office, a WeWork spokesperson said: “As part of WeWork’s efforts to achieve a sustainable capital structure and profitable business to serve our members for the long term, we have made the decision to stop operating at No1 Spinningfields in Manchester.
“We look forward to continuing to provide our members with flexible space solutions across our other locations in the city and the rest of the UK, which remains a key market for us.”
An email sent to tenants said: “After carefully evaluating our offerings in Manchester, we have made the decision to stop operating at WeWork No 1 Spinningfields… the move out will occur by 31 May 2024.
“We understand this may cause disruption to your business and are very sorry for any inconvenience this may cause.”
Have you been affected by WeWork’s Manchester closure? Email [email protected] who can help with central, flexible office spaces.
Business
Premier League agrees new spending cap after ‘majority of clubs’ vote in favour
Danny Jones
The Premier League has reached an agreement in principle on a new spending cap for all teams as the English top flight looks to replace the current Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR).
Set to be installed from the 2025/26 season onwards once fully ratified, revised spending limits will placed on teams in the first division, the number for which will be calculated in relation to a multiple of the money earned in prize money and TV rights by the lowest-earning club in the Premier League.
If approved at the AGM (annual general meeting) this June, the new model will replace the existing PSR system under which multiple clubs have broken FFP and been charged with other breaches over recent years, with Everton and Nottingham Forest having already been deducted points this season.
Although 16 of the 20 Premier League clubs reportedly agreed to the newly proposed regulations, four clubs were not in favour, with Manchester City, Man United and Aston Villa all said to have voted against the decision, while Chelsea chose to abstain.
The new max-spending model is being referred to as ‘anchoring’ or ‘tethering’, which will take into account total amounts spent on buying players, weekly wages, agents’ fees and more.
If successful following a final vote in June and brought through the season after next, the aim is to curb the increasing financial gap between the top and bottom of the table by preventing things like big sponsorships which may otherwise see clubs assert massive spending power during transfer windows.
According to the Independent, cost controls will now “limit club expenditure on salaries, signing and fees to 85 per cent of total revenue” for those not competing in European competitions.
This comes after Premier League teams previously the latest UEFA rules that will see those playing in the likes of the Champions, Europa and Conference League only allowed to spend 70% of that revenue, given the added financial uplift from qualifying for these tournaments.
While 16 yeas were enough to see the initial vote move forward, it will only require 14 out of 20 clubs to agree to the rule change in June for the motion to be fully passed.
A Professional Footballers’ Association (PFA) spokesperson said: “We will obviously wait to see further details of these specific proposals, but we have always been clear that we would oppose any measure that would place a ‘hard’ cap on player wages.
“There is an established process in place to ensure that proposals like this, which would directly impact our members, have to be properly consulted on.”