Catizen players criticise Pluto Studio over surprise airdrop changes

The upcoming launch of Catizen’s CATI token on September 20 has hit another roadblock, as players express frustration over unexpected changes to the airdrop criteria by developer Pluto Studio. 

The latest controversy erupted after the studio disclosed the token allocation details, revealing significant shifts that were not previously communicated.

On Saturday, Pluto Studio informed players about their expected token allocation once CATI goes live on The Open Network. 

However, many were disappointed to find their rewards far lower than anticipated. 

One player, who ranked 6,054 out of 36 million, reported receiving only 39 CATI tokens and questioned the fairness of the distribution. 

This sentiment was echoed by others on social media, sparking the hashtag “#catizenscam” to trend.

The backlash centers not just on the number of tokens allocated, but also on the modified criteria for the airdrop. 

Originally, Pluto announced that 43% of the token supply would go to the community. 

However, it later clarified that only 30% would be in circulation at launch. 

The remainder includes 9% of the total supply earmarked for Binance customers who stake coins through a new Launchpool rewards campaign, announced just a day before the airdrop details.

Moreover, only 15% of the total token supply—about 150 million CATI—will be part of the initial airdrop, with more to be earned as play-to-earn rewards in future in-game seasons. 

Previously, the allocation was said to be primarily based on players' in-game vKitty earning rate, boosted by playing the cat-matching puzzle game. 

However, Pluto altered the criteria, citing issues with bot accounts exploiting the original rules to gain an unfair advantage.

Pluto explained the decision, stating, “Following the original airdrop criterion would significantly undermine the benefits of genuine players and community supporters.” 

Instead, the new criteria focus on factors like on-chain interactions, task completions, and in-game purchases, which has led to accusations of favoring paying players over those who invested time.