The main idea of the Games bounty which was later overridden by the Dot Play bounty was to have an all encompassing framework for Polkadot to work with and within the gaming industry and to develop titles, tools, etc. with it. Fragmenting the gaming effort into small pieces without much certainty of what happens next is possibly the main reason why these gaming referenda have been declined for the time being.
In short, there is not much certainty of a continuation or a path moving forward.
We would like to see a better and more structured way for all gaming efforts within Polkadot to move forward in order for us to vote positively on all these Gaming development referenda.

Dear Proposer,

Thank you for your proposal. Our first vote on this proposal is AYE.

The Medium Spender track requires 50% quorum and simple majority of non-abstain voters according to our voting policy v0.2, and any referendum in which the majority of members vote abstain receives an abstain vote. This proposal has received six aye and one nay votes from ten available members, with three members abstaining. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

Opinions varied among voters regarding a proposal from a development team. Some expressed concerns about its focus on internal projects rather than broader community benefits, while others acknowledged the team's proven track record and potential to support junior game developers. Several voters highlighted the importance of community feedback and the necessity for the tool to provide utility beyond its immediate context. Ultimately, while some supported the proposal, others chose to abstain due to uncertainty about its impact on the ecosystem.

The full discussion can be found in our internal voting.

Please feel free to contact us through the links below for further discussion.

Kind regards,
Permanence DAO
Decentralized Voices Cohort IV Delegate

📅 Book Office Hours
💬 Public Telegram
🌐️ Web
🐦 Twitter
🗳️ Delegate