The Abyss

The Abyss is a next-generation digital distribution platform, delivering all types of video games to the fast-growing global game community.

About The Abyss

The Abyss is a gaming platform that allows gamers to earn ABYSS tokens by participating in in-game events, social activities, and other forms of engagement (reviews, guides, commentary), as well as referrals. The Abyss aims to compete with other digital distribution platforms by offering new advertising strategies and ways for users to engage with content.

Token Sale Use of Blockchain

Product

1.8
Product
Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nothing yet, just an idea.
Appeal

How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

4.0
N/A
4 - Large audience / wide market.
Competition

Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?

1.0
N/A
1 - Many / much better competitors.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.

Product

The sector that The Abyss wishes to enter is notably competitive. The contribution to the blockchain ecosystem is quite mediocre and The Abyss does not introduce any compelling features that make the platform stand out among its competition. Thus far, the development roadmap indicates that The Abyss is still in initial stages of development. The GitHub page can be found through the website and shows very low levels of activity.

Product Whitepaper

Use of Blockchain

1.6
Use of Blockchain
Blockchain Development

Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some smart contract functionality.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but not much.
Need for a Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, just fundraising.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?

1.0
N/A
1 - Essentially centralized.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.

Use of Blockchain

ABYSS is an ERC20 compliant token. It is used as a means of exchange on The Abyss platform and does not possess any other major functionality. Hence, the need for a custom token is questionable. The token seems to be mainly a source of funding for the platform. The platform is essentially centralized.

Use of Blockchain Roadmap

Whitepaper

3.0
Whitepaper
Comprehensiveness

Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?

3.0
N/A
3 - Covers most key issues; a few holes.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

4.0
N/A
4 - Easy to read and understand.
Transparency

Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?

3.0
N/A
3 - Basic honesty with some hype.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required.
Technology Presentation

Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?

2.0
N/A
2 - Missing critical information.

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is a moderate length of 27 pages. The technology plan is lacking in detail – technological aspects of the platform are presented on a logistical level, without specifics of the platform or how it will effectively use blockchain technology. The business plan is presented in satisfactory detail – market research is presented in the document along with a discussion of how the platform benefits gamers as well as game developers. Overall, the whitepaper contains a fair amount of discussion regarding the proposed features of the platform, but there is little specific technical information. Much of the discussion throughout the document is presented using bullet-points.

Whitepaper Compliance

Roadmap

2.4
Roadmap
Concreteness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

3.0
N/A
3 - An overall plan, major milestones stated.
Feasibility

Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

2.0
N/A
2 - Riding the current wave.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?

3.0
N/A
3 - Imperfect but available, or using substitutes.
Current Position

Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nowhere yet.

Roadmap

The roadmap spans from Q3 2008 to Q4 2020 and has moderately low levels of detail. Major milestones are listed, sometimes with short descriptions. The milestones reached thus far include the conceptualization of the product and team formation. Overall, the roadmap contains low levels of technical detail with regards to the development of the platform. The first version of the platform with the startup game package is planned to launch in Q1 2019.

Roadmap Company and Team

Compliance

1.8
Compliance
Token Utility (value through usage)

How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal or contrived.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?

2.0
N/A
2 - Primarily, with few additional rights.
Token/Smart-Contract Readiness

Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Attention to Compliance Issues

How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal, superficial or hackneyed.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?

1.0
N/A
1 - None available.

Compliance

The whitepaper contains a disclaimer section that discusses the limited liability of the organization and that “there is no point in this document that has any legal force nor any obligation to be materialized before the company’s board of directors makes a decision on the realization of such an entity”. It is not explicitly stated whether ABYSS tokens should be considered securities. However, it is stated that “the minimum share of payments by users of the platform for developers is 70%”. The language is somewhat professional, although quite short (only 3 sentences). KYC/AML will be used for the token sale.

Compliance Token Sale

Company and Team

3.0
Company and Team
Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

3.0
N/A
3 - Company structure in place.
Background of Lead Team Members

Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?

3.0
N/A
3 - Minimally sufficient.
Team Assembly and Commitment

Is a solid, fully committed core team in place? Do they have online (e.g. LinkedIn) profiles showing sufficient relevant experience? Is their participation transparent?

3.0
N/A
3 - Mostly assembled and committed.
Team Skill Set Relevance

Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?

3.0
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance

Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?

3.0
N/A
3 - Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.

Company and Team

The team of 12 individuals is listed in the whitepaper, along with their profile pictures and short background descriptions. The team’s skill set is geared towards technology, as opposed to business. Most of the team members were previous employees at Destiny.Games (no relation to Destiny from Bungie). LinkedIn profiles of the developers indicate that the development team does not have extensive professional experience developing in a blockchain-related ecosystem.

Company and Team Product

Token Sale

2.6
Token Sale
Raise Amount Max

Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Somewhat greedy or unrelated to plans.
Raise Amount Min

Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

3.0
N/A
3 - Rough estimates, but sensible.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Media Presence and Following

Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minor exposure and interest, or ambivalent reception.

Token Sale

The total number of ABYSS tokens is 603.75 million (60% is for sale, 21% for the company and advisors, 18% is reserved, and 1% is for the bounty program). The allocation of funds is described in fair detail. The soft cap is $6MM USD and the hard cap is $40MM USD ($20MM USD for US residents), where 1 ABYSS = $0.24 USD. It is stated that the token sale will follow a modified version of the DAICO fundraising model. Users will have the option to vote for a refund of the remaining contributed funds if the token sale fails to reach the soft cap. The token sale takes place from March 7, 2018 to April 7, 2018.

Product

The sector that The Abyss wishes to enter is notably competitive. The contribution to the blockchain ecosystem is quite mediocre and The Abyss does not introduce any compelling features that make the platform stand out among its competition. Thus far, the development roadmap indicates that The Abyss is still in initial stages of development. The GitHub page can be found through the website and shows very low levels of activity.

Category Breakdown
Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nothing yet, just an idea.
Appeal

How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

4.0
N/A
4 - Large audience / wide market.
Competition

Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?

1.0
N/A
1 - Many / much better competitors.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or indeterminate.
Product Score:
1.8

Use of Blockchain

ABYSS is an ERC20 compliant token. It is used as a means of exchange on The Abyss platform and does not possess any other major functionality. Hence, the need for a custom token is questionable. The token seems to be mainly a source of funding for the platform. The platform is essentially centralized.

Category Breakdown
Blockchain Development

Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some smart contract functionality.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but not much.
Need for a Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, just fundraising.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?

1.0
N/A
1 - Essentially centralized.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
Use of Blockchain Score:
1.6

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is a moderate length of 27 pages. The technology plan is lacking in detail – technological aspects of the platform are presented on a logistical level, without specifics of the platform or how it will effectively use blockchain technology. The business plan is presented in satisfactory detail – market research is presented in the document along with a discussion of how the platform benefits gamers as well as game developers. Overall, the whitepaper contains a fair amount of discussion regarding the proposed features of the platform, but there is little specific technical information. Much of the discussion throughout the document is presented using bullet-points.

Category Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?

3.0
N/A
3 - Covers most key issues; a few holes.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

4.0
N/A
4 - Easy to read and understand.
Transparency

Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?

3.0
N/A
3 - Basic honesty with some hype.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required.
Technology Presentation

Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?

2.0
N/A
2 - Missing critical information.
Whitepaper Score:
3.0

Roadmap

The roadmap spans from Q3 2008 to Q4 2020 and has moderately low levels of detail. Major milestones are listed, sometimes with short descriptions. The milestones reached thus far include the conceptualization of the product and team formation. Overall, the roadmap contains low levels of technical detail with regards to the development of the platform. The first version of the platform with the startup game package is planned to launch in Q1 2019.

Category Breakdown
Concreteness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

3.0
N/A
3 - An overall plan, major milestones stated.
Feasibility

Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

2.0
N/A
2 - Riding the current wave.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?

3.0
N/A
3 - Imperfect but available, or using substitutes.
Current Position

Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nowhere yet.
Roadmap Score:
2.4

Compliance

The whitepaper contains a disclaimer section that discusses the limited liability of the organization and that “there is no point in this document that has any legal force nor any obligation to be materialized before the company’s board of directors makes a decision on the realization of such an entity”. It is not explicitly stated whether ABYSS tokens should be considered securities. However, it is stated that “the minimum share of payments by users of the platform for developers is 70%”. The language is somewhat professional, although quite short (only 3 sentences). KYC/AML will be used for the token sale.

Category Breakdown
Token Utility (value through usage)

How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal or contrived.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?

2.0
N/A
2 - Primarily, with few additional rights.
Token/Smart-Contract Readiness

Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Attention to Compliance Issues

How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal, superficial or hackneyed.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?

1.0
N/A
1 - None available.
Compliance Score:
1.8

Company and Team

The team of 12 individuals is listed in the whitepaper, along with their profile pictures and short background descriptions. The team’s skill set is geared towards technology, as opposed to business. Most of the team members were previous employees at Destiny.Games (no relation to Destiny from Bungie). LinkedIn profiles of the developers indicate that the development team does not have extensive professional experience developing in a blockchain-related ecosystem.

Category Breakdown
Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

3.0
N/A
3 - Company structure in place.
Background of Lead Team Members

Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?

3.0
N/A
3 - Minimally sufficient.
Team Assembly and Commitment

Is a solid, fully committed core team in place? Do they have online (e.g. LinkedIn) profiles showing sufficient relevant experience? Is their participation transparent?

3.0
N/A
3 - Mostly assembled and committed.
Team Skill Set Relevance

Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?

3.0
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance

Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?

3.0
N/A
3 - Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.
Company and Team Score:
3.0

Token Sale

The total number of ABYSS tokens is 603.75 million (60% is for sale, 21% for the company and advisors, 18% is reserved, and 1% is for the bounty program). The allocation of funds is described in fair detail. The soft cap is $6MM USD and the hard cap is $40MM USD ($20MM USD for US residents), where 1 ABYSS = $0.24 USD. It is stated that the token sale will follow a modified version of the DAICO fundraising model. Users will have the option to vote for a refund of the remaining contributed funds if the token sale fails to reach the soft cap. The token sale takes place from March 7, 2018 to April 7, 2018.

Category Breakdown
Raise Amount Max

Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Somewhat greedy or unrelated to plans.
Raise Amount Min

Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

3.0
N/A
3 - Rough estimates, but sensible.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Media Presence and Following

Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minor exposure and interest, or ambivalent reception.
Token Sale Score:
2.6

Use this code to share the ratings on your website