elPimps

💀@lepimpos 💀 What I am building and what I am making 100% FREE available to all Los Pimpos (my private discord) are analysis tools that I am integrating with Machine Learning and Neural Network. In recent weeks, these are some of the results achieved. Still fading AI anon?

I've owned @Pixelmon assets since day one, and I've been through pretty much every phase of this project: the original disaster, the takeover, the rebuild, the token launch, the casual games, the anime announcements, the new gaming initiatives and the constant attempts to redefine what Pixelmon was supposed to become. I stayed through all of it because I understood that building something ambitious is difficult and that failure is part of the process. Products fail, games fail, strategies fail and markets change. None of that, by itself, is something I find unacceptable. What I do find unacceptable is what happened next. A few days ago, the community was informed that Pixelmon had decided to discontinue all game development efforts, that the gaming team had been given notice and that, once the games are taken offline, the underlying systems would be dismantled. After years of development, multiple gaming initiatives, an anime project, token launches and a very significant amount of capital flowing through this ecosystem, I thought it was perfectly reasonable to ask how we had reached this point and, above all, what the actual numbers behind these decisions looked like. So I asked. How much was spent on each initiative? What were the acquisition costs, retention figures and ROAS of the casual games? What budgets were allocated to @pixelmonwont , @PixelmonTCG and the other projects that appeared over the years? How much has been invested in the anime? Which KPIs were defined before those investments were approved, and how did the final results compare with those targets? More generally, what worked, what failed, how much did each failure cost, what was learned from it and how much capital remains available today? These are not hostile questions, and they are certainly not "FUD". They are basic questions that any company should expect to answer after allocating millions of dollars across several products and experiments. I never expected every initiative to succeed. In fact, I would have been perfectly fine with an honest post-mortem saying that a product failed, the assumptions were wrong, retention was poor, customer acquisition was unsustainable or the market simply wasn't there. That is how real companies learn. What matters is whether failure produces data, accountability and better decisions. Instead, I never received meaningful answers, and today I was removed from the Pixelmon Discord by a server moderator. At this point, however, Pixelmon is almost secondary to the broader issue, because this is exactly what has made me increasingly cynical about Web3 gaming as a whole. For years, this industry has talked endlessly about transparency, decentralization, community ownership and revolutionary new business models, while too many projects have operated without the kind of discipline that would be considered completely normal in any serious company: clear unit economics, realistic product-market fit, measurable KPIs, disciplined capital allocation, honest post-mortems and a coherent long-term product strategy. Too often, a treasury seems to become an endless experimentation budget. A roadmap is announced, money is spent, attention shifts, another initiative appears, another partnership is announced, another token utility is proposed, another trailer is released and the community is expected to move on to the next narrative without ever receiving a serious explanation of what happened to the previous one. At the same time, that same community is expected to provide capital, liquidity, attention, testing, promotion, content and patience. Apparently, in parts of Web3, "community" is a very important word right up until someone asks to see the spreadsheet. This is also why I make an exception for @AxieInfinity when I talk about Web3 gaming. Not because Axie has done everything right, because it obviously hasn't. It has made major mistakes, suffered economic failures and lived through one of the most violent boom-and-bust cycles in the space. But it kept building, kept operating games, kept running seasons and tournaments, kept changing systems that were not working and, most importantly, kept behaving like a company that still believes it has a product to build. That should be normal. In Web3 gaming, unfortunately, it has become almost exceptional. I supported Pixelmon for years. I did not expect perfection, and I never expected every investment to work. What I did expect, eventually, was serious accountability about where the money went, what generated value, what failed and why. I can accept losing money on a bad investment. I can accept a game failing. I can even accept that a strategy which looked promising three years ago no longer works today. What I won't accept is an industry that spent years preaching transparency while apparently believing that transparency ends exactly where the uncomfortable questions begin. If Web3 gaming wants to be treated as a serious industry, it should start behaving like one. That means being accountable not only when things go well, but especially when tens of millions of dollars, years of development and the trust of a community lead to this. Removing the people asking those questions doesn't make them disappear. #NFT #PIXELMON

Big W!

Against all nuts! Ready for reveal day #2? @finalbosuX

LOOOOOOOL

The new 4o model is EXTREMELY powerful! 😍