2026-01-22 23:00:59

To measure whether a public chain can exist long-term, I think there is a simple and straightforward method—see if it can make users want to use its applications every day, even without fully understanding blockchain.

Vanar's approach is actually derived from this question in reverse.

Carefully examining its operational logic reveals an interesting phenomenon: it doesn't treat blockchain technology itself as the main story. Instead, all attention is directed toward three already established entry points in the real world—games, entertainment, and brands. The whole strategy is like saying: rather than spending effort educating users about what Web3 is, it's better to optimize the product experience to the extreme, giving people a reason to open it every day. The role of the chain? To stably support this experience, nothing more.

This path is quite tough, with no fancy words, but it is the most sincere.

**Why is gaming the key entry point**

The magic of gaming lies in high-frequency interaction. High frequency has two direct consequences:

First, users cannot tolerate any delay. Even one additional confirmation step or one extra second of loading time will cause them to uninstall immediately. Second, once gameplay, social mechanisms, and achievement systems run smoothly, user stickiness will snowball.

Vanar chooses to focus on gaming as the core scenario, fundamentally selecting the "most accessible growth path for the masses." On this path, users' identities transform progressively: first as players → then as participants → finally as vested stakeholders.

What about public chains? They don't need to come out and boast about how awesome they are. As long as they reliably handle asset transfer, identity verification, reward distribution, and transaction settlement, that's enough.

This also explains why Vanar places such importance on game networks like VGN. Outwardly, it appears as an application window; inwardly, it resembles a foundational paradigm—used to tell developers and users: this isn't just playing with blockchain concepts; it's building real gaming infrastructure with blockchain.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

8 Likes

Reward
8
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SnapshotDayLaborer

· 12h ago

That's quite interesting, games are indeed the most engaging thing. But achieving a truly smooth experience isn't that simple. Vanar's approach is quite pragmatic—focusing less on hype and more on building products. We should have thought of public chains this way long ago, instead of constantly talking about revolutionizing the world. This kind of mindset feels like the way to have lasting vitality. I agree, I agree. You don't need to understand blockchain to play, now that's real stuff.

View OriginalReply0

hodl_therapist

· 12h ago

That's right. Instead of bragging about technology, it's better to focus on improving the user experience, and users will come naturally. Honestly, games are indeed the most sticky, and gradually they have accumulated a loyal user base. This approach is much more reliable than those projects that talk about decentralization every day, really. But it still depends on execution. No matter how good the concept is, if no one plays, it's all useless. The idea of a gaming network is feasible, but can the developer ecosystem keep up? That's the real bottleneck. Actually, there's no other way. The cost of educating users is too high, so it's better for the product itself to speak. I just like projects that get straight to the point and do more than talk—refreshing.

View OriginalReply0

MetaMisfit

· 12h ago

Well said, just don't get caught up in all that fancy stuff. Users just want to enjoy the game and earn a little, regardless of how your chain performs. People keep talking about the future of Web3 every day, but I'd rather just play a smooth half-hour game. Vanar's approach indeed turned things around—focus on the experience first. To put it simply, product first, the chain is just a tool—that's the right way.

View OriginalReply0

ForkThisDAO

· 12h ago

That's quite interesting, but can games really retain people? I see many blockchain games have already failed. I agree with this logic, but isn't the difficulty of execution underestimated? Vanar's approach sounds quite clear, but how many can actually implement it successfully? Not educating users? Forget it, in the end, you still have to teach them; there's no escape. The high frequency of gaming really hits the key point, but user stickiness has always depended on the product. People should open the game every day because it's genuinely fun, not just because the token can increase in value.

View OriginalReply0