AllenZ(hobo)

Excited to back @3f_xyz! Bringing leverage to institutional onchain RWA yield product unlocks a huge market in DeFi, beta is live!

There has been a lot of discussion around OTG over the past few days. First, I want to say this clearly: I have deep respect for what OTG has achieved. Without question, it is one of the most complete and most playable games in the Web3 gaming industry today. Getting a game to this level is already incredibly difficult. But the problems they are facing right now are also very real. For most people on the outside, before they truly understand a game’s core loop or what makes it special, visuals are always one of the easiest things to recognize. That is why so many games are pulled toward the same direction: better graphics, bigger production, more visual spectacle. But the tradeoff is brutal. The more you push visual quality, the more you usually sacrifice hardware accessibility. And once that happens, most players can no longer truly participate. They can only watch from the outside, comment on the graphics, comment on the concept, comment on the hype — but never really enter the game itself. This is one of the deadlocks Web3 gaming has been trapped in for a long time. Small games and pixel-style games have low barriers to entry, and sometimes they spread quickly. But they often struggle to sustain enough depth, enough content, and enough ecosystem complexity over the long term. Big games and AAA-style productions look much closer to what people imagine as “the future.” But they also come with much higher technical demands, much harder optimization problems, much longer development cycles, and far larger capital requirements. And the truth is: strong visuals alone can never guarantee a game’s success. At the end of the day, a successful game still depends on two things. First: is it actually fun enough? Does it make players want to spend more time in it because the gameplay itself is enjoyable? Second: does it have a successful monetization system? Can it effectively convert player time and engagement into revenue, and then use that revenue to support the development of better and more continuous content? If you cannot do both, then great graphics only make you a product people notice — not a game people stay in. And Web3 raises the bar even further. Because a Web3 game is not only required to be a good game. It is also required to be an economically balanced and sustainable game. That means it is not enough to simply make something fun. You also have to solve whether the in-game economy can hold, whether asset values can be supported, whether players actually create value for one another, and whether different roles in the system can find a meaningful place. A traditional AAA game has a much simpler victory condition. You sell the copy. The user pays. You have already won a large part of the battle. But Web3 games do not work that way. You cannot say a game has won just because it operated for a while and generated some revenue. If the economic system cannot sustain itself, asset prices fall. If asset prices fall, expectations collapse. And once expectations collapse, the entire ecosystem becomes unstable. So a real Web3 game is not only about getting players to play. It is about creating a system where players provide value to one another — through trading, cooperation, competition, support, specialization, and participation — until an actual ecosystem forms. That is also why we have seen many small games succeed in the short run, including some with genuinely decent gameplay. But the core pleasure of many small games is usually narrow: they present a challenge, then ask you to solve it, or pay to accelerate the solution. At the core, that model is usually still based on selling stats, selling shortcuts, or selling numerical progression. And any game whose core monetization depends on selling power or selling numbers will struggle to build a truly healthy ecosystem. Because the economy has not truly formed a supply-demand ecosystem. And once assets that lack a complete supply-demand relationship begin to circulate, the death spiral arrives quickly. If you want to build a real Web3 game ecosystem, you need several difficult things to exist at the same time: You need a large number of users. You need players to naturally form trade and ecosystem activity inside the rules of the game. You need interaction, conflict, cooperation, and support between players. You cannot rely on selling raw numerical power as the core business model. You cannot just be a single-player copy-selling game. And at the same time, you also cannot make the hardware barrier so high that most players never get in. That is when you realize how difficult this balance really is. You need to balance visuals. You need to balance user experience. You need to balance hardware accessibility. You need to balance gameplay depth. You need to balance economic design. You need to balance monetization. And once all of these are placed on the table together, compromise becomes unavoidable. That is exactly why we eventually made one of the most painful but, to this day, one of the most important decisions in Bladerite: we gave up the PC-first direction and fully switched to mobile-first. And this was not because our early numbers were weak. In fact, our initial distribution test was very strong: 20k players 45% D1 retention 40% D3 38.3% D7 13.3% D14 These numbers told us very clearly that the game had real appeal. Which is exactly why the switch was painful. But over time, several things became increasingly clear to us. First, the PC / console route naturally limits entry. The higher the hardware requirement, the smaller the accessible audience. And once you enter that arena, players immediately compare you to the best games in the category — not to other Web3 games. They will not lower their expectations just because you are a Web3 project. Second, cheating and scripting are far more destructive than many people think. We spent two months fighting cheats and scripts, and in the end we had to admit something difficult: for a young team building a competitive PvP game on PC, anti-cheat can become almost a second product you are forced to build. And what it consumes is not only engineering time. It consumes player trust. It consumes retention. It consumes community morale. It consumes the quality of the competitive environment itself. Third, after deeper market analysis, we realized that more than 85% of the audience we truly wanted to serve was on mobile. And not only on flagship devices. It also includes mid- to low-end hardware. At that point, the question became very simple: if these are the players we truly want to serve, then we cannot just build a game that looks more impressive. We have to build a game they can actually enter, actually run, actually enjoy, and actually stay in. That is why we chose mobile-first. Not because we lowered our ambition. But because we moved our ambition back to reality. Real ambition is not pushing visuals to the maximum. Real ambition is delivering a great experience, deep gameplay, and a functioning economy under real-world hardware constraints and low barriers to entry. At the end of the day, games are not made for spectators. They are made for players. And a Web3 game will never succeed simply because it looks exciting from the outside. It succeeds only if players can get in, want to stay, form relationships with one another, and participate in a system that can sustain itself over time. That path is extremely hard. But that is the path we chose. #gamefi #Web3‌‌

Few understood

2 weeks of @useMonarch's Marina Liquidity Module incentivising $ZAMA/USDC on @HyperliquidX Since pre-campaign: - Spreads: -48% - Depth at 1%: +48% - Depth at 2%: +24% Week 2 introduced tighter boosted quoting, the book got meaningfully deeper while spreads held steady at 40 bps. Today we're launching our biggest change yet - opening Marina rewards to all market makers. Stay tuned! 🔔 app.monarch.fast/marina

Target locked. Route unstable. Extraction isn’t about escape— it’s about control. #Bladerite

Week 2 of @useMonarch's Marina Earn USDC vault is now open on @HyperliquidX Week 1 exceeded expectations, delivering +166% APY Deposit USDC & earn yield from transparent, verifiable strategies: app.monarch.fast/marina/earn Vault terms: - Deposits are locked for 1 week - $50K vault cap - $5K max deposit per wallet

$EDGE TGE and Listing Scheduled for March 31.

📈 @edgeX_exchange is seeing active price discovery on Aspecta Pre-Market Trading. Over the past 24 hours, its FDV reached an all-time high of $1.1B and now stands at $920M+. 🔗 trade.aspecta.ai/projects/usdt/…

For a top perp platform like @edgeX_exchange ($800B+ in cumulative volume), design freedom is critical to long-term scale. With EDGE Chain being powered by Arbitrum, they can: - run a high-performance trading engine - maintain reliability during volatility - extend the trading system without rebuilding (FlashLane, parallel execution) - stay connected to deep liquidity + Ethereum settlement All without compromising performance or liquidity. This is how sophisticated markets scale onchain.

Now, anyone providing liquidity can earn rewards for quoting on @zama $ZAMA/USDC. Our Marina Liquidity Module handles reward distribution automatically, see all incentivised markets here: app.monarch.fast/marina Market making is now available to all users and markets!

First of many markets to run incentivised DMM campaigns! For projects, reach out if you’d like to meaningfully increase the liquidity of your HL markets Huge opportunity for retail MMs to earn good yield and support the @HyperliquidX eco

🥧

@AzFlin Absolutely, game before economy, not the other way round

@Hobocrypt it has to start with a good game first and foremost

The recent debate between @hosseeb and @cdixon about crypto’s real use cases got me thinking. If speculation isn’t enough, what kind of product actually deserves an on-chain economy? That question led me down a rabbit hole on games. This piece is the result. A few notes before you read: • It’s long • Gaming isn’t exactly the hottest topic right now — everyone is chasing AI — but I still think gaming may be one of the most natural environments for real digital economies • Full disclosure: I have personal interests in Bladerite, the game explored in the article The essay looks at: – why the first generation of GameFi failed – what the most successful game genres already solved about economies – and what a game that actually deserves an economy might look like Link below 👇

Solana Blitz v1 just wrapped 30 projects built with MagicBlock in a single weekend (again) Which one catches your eye? 👀

Shipping

Introducing Private Swaps Powered by @vanishtrade, Titan Private Swaps let you trade anonymously on @solana through a shielded wallet. Your trade. Your privacy. Currently available for swaps involving SOL.

@TGweb3333 polymarketscan.org

我让 ChatGPT 帮我找 Polymarket 上最赚钱的钱包 它说：“我访问不了实时区块链数据。” 行吧，转头问 Claude 结果它花了 4 分钟 写了个 Python 脚本 扫了 20 万个钱包 按 ROI 排了个序 还专门过滤了最近 30 天活跃的 然后我看到了排第一的那个钱包 RN1 盈利：5,317,622 美元 预测次数：36,298 上线时间：2024 年 12 月 → 钱包：@RN1?via=Tgweb3" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">polymarket.com/zh/@RN1?via=Tg… 530 万美元 14 个月 所有体育项目，全包 CS2 比赛：TheMongolz 打 B8，单场赚 15 万美元。 网球，NFL，德甲，意甲，英超，同时押。 36,298 次下注，横跨所有联赛和项目。 已经被 62.4 万人围观过。 我干了件蠢事。 我让 Claude 帮我把这个钱包的策略「逆向工程」出来。 它分析了 200 个仓位，最后总结成一句话： 这个钱包专门买市场里被低估的冷门，只要市场普遍高估了热门。 我问：那你能写个机器人吗？ Claude：逻辑我可以写，你需要 API 密钥和本金。 14 行 Python 代码。 一个提示。 一个下午。 我没部署。 我还在盯着那 14 行代码，盯着那 530 万美元。 这个钱包不关心球队，不看比赛，不看新闻。 它只找那些现在 36 美分、但应该值 65 美分的地方，然后买进去。 我又问了 Claude 最后一个问题： 「那为什么没人这么干？」 Claude 回：他们只是还没问而已。

Get in touch with @useMonarch to launch and own permissionless market for your asset