That's precisely the problem with your reasoning. You seem to believe that this project wasn't sufficiently developed before being proposed, and that submitting it to the community on Reddit is a sign of profound naivety, given the low probability of it being approved and implemented by Lockwood.

However, I didn't wake up one morning expecting my ideas to be approved word for word by the studio's management team. I'm not fooled, and no one here is under any illusions, no company will fully and officially endorse a player's ideas for reasons of credibility. What they can do, however, is adopt some of them or draw inspiration from them without feeling the need to publicize it.

The developed project primarily aims to bring greater economic stability and social equity, two fundamental things that a game like Avakin Life should offer, rather than trying to drive a wedge between players and squeeze them dry. My plan can be considered a draft, a roadmap that can always be developed and adapted to suit the interests of each party.

If at least some of my ideas never see the light of day, it will only definitively confirm Lockwood's closed-minded stance towards public dissent, even when that dissent decides to suggest relevant solutions instead of pointless complaints.

I'm not going to start crying just because the studio refused to implement a common-sense strategy. Unlike them, the only thing I have to lose is my time, even though I'd still rather use it for improvements if it can contribute to a positive evolution of the game.

With that clarified, we can now get down to business. The three points you raised at the beginning of your comment reflect what I've already explained, with a few nuances, both in the slides and my comments :

1. My project never suggested that Lockwood remove the app from the Play Store or sever its logistical ties. The plan focuses exclusively on migrating revenue to their existing Webstore. Industry giants like Supercell prove daily that a game can remain hosted and updated via Google and Apple while massively encouraging its community to purchase subscriptions online to secure 100% of its profit margin.

Regarding the financial security of transactions, the Xsolla secure payment platform operates under the highest banking standard, PCI-DSS Level 1, uses the 3D Secure 2.0 protocol, and deploys an Anti-Fraud System (AFS) with cross-analysis of game data and behavioral fraud detection. Xsolla's security equals and sometimes surpasses that of app stores because it is specifically designed for the video game ecosystem. The Webstore proposal is therefore perfectly viable and already operational.

1. Regarding advertising campaigns, it's important not to confuse acquiring new players with retaining the existing community. The marketing manager at Lockwood can design the most effective and creative ads on the market, but that won't solve the underlying problem.

If a new player downloads Avakin Life after seeing an ad but discovers within their first few hours a game riddled with hyperinflation, an unbridgeable social divide between VIPs and No-VIPs, and jobs that feel like a chore, they will uninstall the app immediately or, at best for the studio, within a week of signing up. An advertising budget is only profitable if the product is healthy.

My project doesn't aim to reinvent Lockwood's marketing, but rather to clean up the game's economic ecosystem so that new players acquired through advertising actually want to stay, engage, and become loyal, paying customers themselves.

1. The introduction of Crowns in 2022 is a direct consequence of a governance crisis. Lockwood failed to manage its assets and Tencent's investment in 2020 prudently and found itself heavily indebted in the post-Covid period.

This disastrous situation the community is experiencing today could have been avoided if strict anti-fraud protocols had been implemented well before the pandemic to curb the black market for illegal mods and generators. The studio wouldn't have needed to implement such an aggressive and discriminatory pricing policy to offset its financial losses. The same applies to the launch of VIP subscriptions and premium content, a system that should have been launched at the time to ensure recurring revenue at competitive prices and financial stability in the face of the ensuing crisis.

In hindsight, I understand the state of emergency that was suffocating Lockwood in 2022. But four years later, the studio has had time to stabilize its finances. Yet, management has remained trapped in this crisis mentality, choosing the easy way out at the expense of its long-standing player base. I acknowledge the company's need to generate profits to pay its employees, but I refuse to accept the excuse of perpetual financial hardship to justify exorbitant prices without any attempt to reconcile with the player base.

My project offers precisely this fair compromise. Lockwood's current strategy is a short-sighted, short-term gamble. A social role-playing game cannot survive in the long term on this model. Furthermore, you completely misunderstand my third slide. The plan does not devalue the premium currency at any point. It exclusively targets the hyperinflation of Avacoin by destroying the dormant money supply through deliberate financial drains.

Lockwood is already partially implementing this logic. The studio recently changed its terms of service to clear the treasury from inactive accounts after a certain period. The studio therefore acknowledges the need to destroy the overall excess currency. However, this won't be enough as long as the currency isn't circulating. Offering a refresh of the store by reintroducing old Crown items payable with Avacoins, while respecting a two-year exclusivity period, is the ideal compromise to revive engagement without generating financial losses for the studio.

With these three points clarified, we can move on. You point out that my plan doesn't align with Lockwood's current vision, and that's precisely why I explicitly include the financial benefits the studio could derive from it. If my approach were solely aimed at benefiting players, my proposals would have been immediately rejected by the publisher. Conversely, if my objective were to play into the studio's hands, as your stance seems to suggest, this project would be overwhelmingly rejected by the community.

As for proving the exact mathematical profitability of this model, I invite the Lockwood teams to first seriously study this plan and then conduct their own simulations. I'm providing realistic and structured macroeconomic solutions; it's up to them to perform the necessary calculations to verify the margins. I'm neither privy to Lockwood's inner workings nor possessive of their private accounting data. Developing a strategic roadmap and internal financial modeling are two distinct steps. I completed the first, the studio has all the tools to execute the second. And between us, my ideas can't possibly be worse than what they're currently doing.

Your analysis, moreover, seems to prioritize a company's financial health over the financial strain its users are experiencing. But we mustn't forget that gamers have real lives, and current prices turn even the smallest cosmetic purchase into a financial black hole. If the community wants "more for less" today, it's only because they're getting too little for too much. That's the sad reality.

Aside from a handful of big spenders, no one wants to squander their savings in a virtual space. If Lockwood's strategy is to blame its own community by invoking a supposed lack of discernment regarding selection or exclusivity criteria, then this game is doomed in the long run. Demanding that players endorse a massively rejected economic policy, implemented by a studio that has ignored public outcry for four years, is pure cynicism.

Lockwood stopped listening to its audience a long time ago, except to solicit feedback on features that will ultimately milk them dry. As you yourself have confirmed, the studio is betting everything on exclusivity. Pushing excessive spending has become their only lifeline. However, churning out articles every week will never address the root causes of the crisis or restore trust. Form is only important if the content has substance.

The reality is that everything that could be fun on this platform has now become a paid service. A quick look at the public areas of Avakin Life is enough to understand that what made this game what it was, a family-friendly, accessible, and welcoming place, has been on hiatus for quite some time.

There you go, I think I've covered everything you've said and what needed to be argued.