taa888💫

It's been almost a month since I launched Computers RH. My first project. My first game. And probably one of the biggest learning experiences of my life. I've wanted to write this for a while. I did some things right. I did a lot of things wrong. I made decisions I'm proud of, and others I genuinely regret. I tried my best to manage everything, but the reality is that I was inexperienced. Sometimes I reacted too slowly. Sometimes I made the wrong calls. And sometimes I didn't realize something was a mistake until I saw the consequences. I want to talk about all of it. The good, the bad, what I learned, and what I'd do differently if I could start over. Maybe this will also help someone preparing to launch their first game. ━━━━━━━━━━ 🖥️ HOW COMPUTERS RH STARTED The idea actually came from something very simple. I built a PC in real life. I enjoyed choosing the components, putting everything together, and seeing the final result so much that I thought: why not make a game out of this? That's how Computers RH was born. I wanted to create something different from the usual P2E games. Look around the space. Most projects follow one of the same few concepts: mining, farming, or some kind of RPG/combat game. There's nothing wrong with those genres, but I wanted something that felt different. A cozy, pixel-style 3D world where you could build your own computers, choose individual components, manage electricity, cooling, efficiency, and earn tokens through your setups. I genuinely don't know of another game, even in Web2, that combines this particular visual style and detailed PC-building gameplay in quite the same way. I believed in the concept from the beginning. And it turned out that a lot of people liked it too. ━━━━━━━━━━ 🚀 THE LAUNCH, AND MY BIGGEST MISTAKES Let's start with the biggest one. I shared the token contract address 13 minutes late. There's no excuse for this. It was a serious mistake. On launch day, I ran into server issues while deploying the game. I couldn't get everything working properly, and I was struggling to connect the token to the live game. Instead of publishing the CA immediately after creating the token, I focused on fixing the game. That was completely the wrong decision. I had also made a roughly 2–3 ETH purchase from the dev wallet. Snipers noticed the transaction and started buying. By the time I finally shared the contract address, the token had already reached around $300K market cap. People who were waiting for the official announcement had lost the opportunity to enter at the beginning. I understand exactly why this created distrust. The game not working should never have been a reason to delay sharing the CA. Those are two completely separate things. I should have published it the moment the token was created, regardless of whether the game was ready. If I ever launch another token, the CA will be public immediately. Not 13 minutes later. Not one minute later. Not even five seconds later. That's one lesson I'll never forget. Unfortunately, it wasn't the only launch mistake. Before launch, the documentation included $1 and $5 PCs. But one day before launch, I decided to remove them. Looking back, changing something that important right before launch, without properly communicating it, was a terrible decision. When the game finally launched, players first encountered a bug on the opening screen that prevented them from entering for around 10–15 minutes. Once I fixed that, they discovered there was a $2 entry fee. And after paying, they found out that the $1 and $5 PCs they had seen in the documentation were gone, and the cheapest PC now cost $25. Imagine experiencing all of that as a new player. Of course people were upset. I created unnecessary FUD myself, simply because I hadn't prepared and communicated things properly. I reacted quickly afterward. I removed the entry fee, refunded everyone who paid the $2, and brought back the $1 and $5 PCs. But fixing something afterward doesn't erase the damage to the first impression. A good launch isn't just about having a good game. It's about being prepared, communicating clearly, and making sure players know exactly what they're getting into. And I learned that the hard way. ━━━━━━━━━━ ⚖️ GAME BALANCE AND COMMUNICATION Another major mistake involved the $25 PC. Computers RH has detailed mechanics for temperature, efficiency, maintenance, electricity consumption, and component performance. All of these are based on formulas. In general, more expensive setups were designed to be more efficient. But I eventually noticed that the $25 PC didn't fit the balance I had intended. So I changed its hashrate. The problem? More than 90% of players owned this PC, and I made the change without announcing it beforehand. That was a huge mistake. Even if I believed the change was justified mathematically, players had already spent money based on the original values. I should have explained the problem, announced the proposed change, and given everyone time to understand what was happening. Instead, players saw their earnings change unexpectedly. Naturally, that created another wave of FUD. I eventually reverted the hashrate to its previous value. This taught me something that seems obvious now: When players spend real money on your game, you cannot treat balance changes like you're adjusting numbers in a private test environment. Communication is just as important as the balance itself. I also received a lot of feedback about upgrade and construction times being too long. I shortened them, and the response was immediately positive. Sometimes a relatively small change can make the entire experience feel better. The important thing is listening before frustration builds up. ━━━━━━━━━━ 🧩 THE GAME WAS TOO COMPLICATED FOR MANY PLAYERS This is another lesson I want to share. I spent a lot of time building detailed systems. Different motherboards, CPUs, GPUs, RAM, coolers, cases, power requirements, temperatures, efficiency calculations, maintenance, and so on. As someone who loves technology and PC building, I thought all of this depth was amazing. And for players who understood PC hardware, it was. But I underestimated how overwhelming it would be for everyone else. Players could buy components that weren't compatible with their existing setups. And initially, there wasn't a good way to exchange those components if they made a mistake. I eventually introduced a trade-in system, allowing players to exchange components while accounting for their previous purchase. But that should have existed from the beginning. I could also have implemented a PC-building wizard, compatibility warnings before purchases, or a much simpler upgrade experience for players who didn't want to learn every technical detail. Looking at the data, over 90% of players preferred buying prebuilt PCs rather than building everything component by component. That tells me a lot. I was building the game around something I personally enjoyed, without fully understanding how most players wanted to experience it. More mechanics don't automatically mean more fun. A game can have incredible depth, but the basic experience still needs to be simple, intuitive, and enjoyable. If I ever build another game, I'd keep the depth for people who enjoy it without forcing everyone else to deal with unnecessary complexity. ━━━━━━━━━━ ⏳ THE SYSTEMS I INTRODUCED TOO LATE Over time, I added a lot of features. Overclocking, GPU upgrades, gacha packs, staking, new claim rules, and more. Some of these made the game significantly better. But looking back, I made another important mistake: I focused too much on adding mechanics after launch instead of making sure all the essential systems were ready before launch. One example was the Social Pot. One of the biggest challenges for any P2E game is consistently attracting new players. A system that rewards people for creating content and talking about the game can help bring new attention to the project every day. I implemented this much later. It should have been ready from day one. The same applies to the feedback system. For most of the early period, I was trying to collect feedback through DMs, while receiving more messages than I could realistically handle. Eventually, I added an in-game feedback system. But by then, I had already missed a lot of valuable feedback. I also didn't create a Discord or Telegram community before launch. This was a major weakness. Computers RH grew almost entirely through my personal X account and the project's account. That worked surprisingly well for generating attention, but it wasn't enough to manage a growing player base. There was no dedicated place for players to communicate, ask questions, report problems, or easily receive updates. And I was trying to handle almost everything myself. If there's ever a next time, I'd want a proper community before launch, an experienced community manager, and clear communication channels from the very beginning. ━━━━━━━━━━ 💰 THE ECONOMY I also made mistakes with the game's economy. Initially, claiming rewards had almost no restrictions. Later, I introduced claim taxes and other rules to help manage token emissions. Those systems should have been designed and communicated before launch, not introduced reactively. I also eventually implemented better incentives for players to keep tokens circulating inside the game instead of immediately claiming and selling them. For example, encouraging in-game spending by removing certain claim-related costs. Again, something that should have existed from the beginning. The bigger lesson is that adding new features and token sinks after launch cannot completely replace a well-designed economy. I learned how important it is to think about emissions, player incentives, retention, and long-term sustainability as one connected system. Not as separate problems to fix later. ━━━━━━━━━━ 🎨 NFTS: ANOTHER DECISION I REGRET This is one of the biggest things I would change. I made the NFT mint free. And I scheduled it after the game launched. Looking back, I believe both were mistakes. Several experienced founders in the space reached out before launch and told me I was approaching the NFT release the wrong way. I didn't listen. Maybe I was too attached to my original plan. Maybe it was pride. Maybe I simply didn't have enough experience to understand their reasoning. Probably a combination of all three. What I understand now is that a reasonably priced NFT mint before launch, with transparent funding and delivery plans, could have given the project a proper budget. A budget for better infrastructure, professional testing, community management, additional developers, and a much smoother launch. Instead, I chose to make the NFTs free and release them after much of the initial hype had already disappeared. And despite all of that, the NFTs still generated over $20K in secondary trading volume. Some rare NFTs sold for more than $100. Even though the mint was free, and even though the token's market cap had already fallen significantly. Imagine what the NFT launch could have looked like if it had happened at the right time, with the right preparation, while interest was at its peak. Of course, charging for an NFT isn't automatically the right decision for every game. But in my situation, I genuinely believe a properly planned pre-launch mint could have made a big difference. And I ignored that opportunity. ━━━━━━━━━━ ✅ WHAT DID COMPUTERS RH DO RIGHT? After all these mistakes, it might sound like I did everything wrong. But that's not true. I'm genuinely proud of what I built. Computers RH was different. It had its own identity, its own visual style, and gameplay that stood out from most projects in the space. And I think that's one of the biggest reasons it attracted attention so quickly. My first tweet about the game received around 250K impressions. The Early Access application tweet reached almost one million impressions. More than 30,000 people applied for Early Access. Think about that. It was my first project, built around an idea I got after assembling a PC in real life. And tens of thousands of people wanted to try it. That's something I'll always be proud of. We also reached #2 on PlayToEarn and gained a lot of attention across the space. Some players even purchased PCs worth $15,000 in-game. I doubt some of them have PCs that expensive in real life. 😂 And many players who got into Early Access immediately managed to recover their initial spending and make a profit. Some people spent only a few minutes filling out an application form, got access on the first day, and benefited enormously from being early. But I also know that not everyone had that experience. Players who entered later faced a very different situation. I don't want to celebrate the people who made money while ignoring those who lost money or were disappointed. Both are part of the story. ━━━━━━━━━━ 📣 MARKETING AND COLLABORATIONS Another thing I'm happy with was how we approached marketing. I didn't want the project to become a constant stream of random giveaways. We only ran around two or three Twitter giveaways. I preferred selective collaborations, especially with other gaming projects and communities that were actually interested in what we were building. We also rewarded people who submitted content about Computers RH through our platform with whitelist allocations for the NFT launch. And we received a lot of support from creators and communities. Looking back, I think the project's strongest marketing asset was simply that it looked and felt different. People wanted to share it because the game itself was interesting. That's much more valuable than trying to manufacture attention around something that isn't ready. ━━━━━━━━━━ 📌 ONE THING I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR I've seen projects in this space raise hundreds of thousands of dollars from NFT mints, sometimes months before releasing a game. I've also seen projects launch with barely functional gameplay, little testing, or economies designed almost entirely around extracting as much value as possible. I never wanted Computers RH to be that kind of project. For every token spent inside the game: • 20% was burned. • 20% went to the treasury. • 60% returned to the reward pool the following day. I never sold a single token from the treasury. The NFTs were free. Apart from the Pons-related fees, I didn't generate revenue by selling the game's token or NFTs. I wanted the value generated inside the game to support the game's economy. That doesn't mean the economy was perfect. Clearly, it wasn't. And it doesn't mean the project was successful for every player. But I think it's important to distinguish between making mistakes while genuinely trying to build something and deliberately launching something with no intention of delivering. I made plenty of mistakes. But I actually built and delivered the game. And when something went wrong, I tried to fix it. ━━━━━━━━━━ 🧠 WHAT THIS EXPERIENCE GAVE ME Before Computers RH, I had never launched a project like this. I did almost all the testing myself. There was no proper external testing team, no experienced launch team, and no established community infrastructure. Just me, trying to build and manage something much bigger than I had ever handled before. That was a mistake in itself. But things are different now. There's a group of players who genuinely enjoyed Computers RH and have told me they'd be willing to test anything I might build in the future. People who understand the product, know what can go wrong, and aren't afraid to give honest feedback. If I build something again one day, I wouldn't do it alone. I'd want proper testing, more people involved in development, a community manager, a Discord established before launch, clearer announcements, and much better preparation. I also had opportunities I never expected. I applied to the Pons Builder program and got selected. I met founders, creators, and people who have been building in this industry much longer than I have. I presented my project to people from different parts of the world, doing my best with my English. Every conversation taught me something. Every mistake taught me something. Even dealing with FUD, criticism, angry messages, and difficult decisions taught me things I couldn't have learned by simply reading about them. And most importantly, I now have real experience. Not theories. Not hypothetical simulations. Real experience from launching a game, attracting thousands of players, handling real money, dealing with unexpected problems, and seeing how people actually behave. ━━━━━━━━━━ 🔭 IF I EVER BUILD AGAIN If there's one thing I've learned, it's that having a great idea isn't enough. Execution matters. Testing matters. Communication matters. Timing matters. And trust matters more than anything else. I can't promise that I'll never make another mistake. Anyone who builds something new will make mistakes. But if I ever start another project, I won't approach it with the same lack of experience I had when I started Computers RH. I know what went wrong. I know what should have been ready before launch. I know which systems mattered most, which mechanics were unnecessary, and how important the player experience really is. And I know how much it matters to have people around you who can help make the whole process better. I don't know when, or if, I'll build another game. But if I do, I'd want it to be better in every meaningful way. Better gameplay. Better visuals. Better economy. Better testing. Better communication. Better launch execution. I used to think about reaching $5M. Today I'd aim for something that deserves to reach $15M, maybe even $30M. Who knows? But none of those numbers matter if the product isn't good enough to earn people's trust. I wouldn't want to repeat Computers RH. I'd want to take everything it taught me and build something far beyond it. ━━━━━━━━━━ 🙏 AND FINALLY, THANK YOU To everyone who played Computers RH, supported it, shared it, applied for Early Access, created content, gave feedback, or simply believed in the idea. Thank you. And to those who had a bad experience, lost money, or felt disappointed by some of my decisions: I understand the criticism. There are things I should have handled differently, and I take responsibility for them. Computers RH was my first project. It wasn't perfect. Far from it. But it was real, it was different, and it taught me more than I could have imagined. And to me, that experience is worth more than money. If you're building your first game, I hope you can learn something from my mistakes without having to experience all of them yourself. Whatever I do next, I'll carry this with me. — 0xArtix