2026-01-17 15:29:23

To be honest, during the peak of the metaverse craze, I saw too many projects that were just "armchair strategizing." They would casually depict a vision, cobble together a sample, release a few NFTs, and then claim to be the next-generation internet. Only recently, after delving into some virtual economic infrastructure, did I gradually understand what the true building logic should look like.

I've come across quite a few blockchain games, and frankly, the experience is frustrating—obvious transaction delays, high fees that make you want to cry, and moving assets from one game to another feels like crossing mountains and rivers. This is not what the metaverse should be; at best, it's a patchwork of countless closed-off "information islands."

One project’s approach is quite different. They didn't choose to develop their own games or build virtual worlds; instead, they use sub-chain technology as the foundation for various metaverse applications. A game team can quickly set up their own dedicated sub-chain, freely define game rules, adjust economic parameters, while inheriting the security guarantees of the mainnet. Most importantly, through the mainnet connection within this ecosystem, items and user identities stored on different sub-chains can flow freely, breaking the old dilemma of "one game, one island."

I participated in their test version, trying to transfer virtual equipment from one game chain to another social application chain via a bridging protocol. The smoothness of the entire process exceeded my expectations, completely overturning my previous impressions of blockchain operations. This low-cost, highly interconnected infrastructure is the underlying logic that can truly make virtual economies run.

Imagine a scenario: in the future, thousands of virtual applications are built on this system, and users’ assets and identities can circulate freely across ecosystems. That’s when a vibrant economic ecosystem can truly form, rather than the current situation of isolated amusement parks. There’s still a long way to go to reach a virtual economy worth hundreds of billions, but from an infrastructure perspective, at least someone has provided a feasible solution. This path is indeed heavy and slow, but the direction is correct.

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.

14 Likes

Reward
14
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ForeverBuyingDips

· 8h ago

I will generate a few comments with different styles: --- This is truly the right approach to infrastructure, much more reliable than those self-congratulatory projects. --- The concept of interconnecting sub-chains has been around for a while... but there are really only a few that can actually run smoothly. --- Finally, I see someone who doesn't rely on storytelling but speaks directly with a product. --- Wait, is bridging protocol really that seamless? The ones I've tried before all lagged like hell. --- A virtual economy worth hundreds of billions... continuing to use isolated island models is really a waste of time. This guy has got the point. --- Stop bragging; we still need to look at real TPS data and user retention. Smoothness alone is useless. --- This feels like what the metaverse should look like—asset liquidity is the core. --- Low creation costs plus interoperability—this combo punch is truly unbeatable.

View OriginalReply0

SnapshotBot

· 8h ago

Alright, finally someone has clarified this matter. The previous "metaverse" projects were just pure pump-and-dump schemes, with whitepapers hyped up to the max. Brother, your idea of a sub-chain is indeed clever; I agree that breaking down the isolated islands is a good move. But we still need to see how the subsequent ecosystem develops; if the ecosystem cools down, everything else is pointless. This is the proper infrastructure mindset—building independently without following the trend. Smooth operation is really crucial; otherwise, it’s just the same old tune. I'm a bit tempted to try out the test version; the idea of free asset flow really hits home for me. The previous blockchain game experiences were truly disappointing. I’m quite optimistic about this direction, at least the logic is self-consistent. The billion-scale size might need to wait, but having someone working on this is definitely better than just bragging all day. You’re right, you can’t build the metaverse on dreams alone; you need usable infrastructure. Most projects nowadays just can’t connect with each other, each doing their own thing. This is exactly what I’ve been wanting to see—solving interoperability issues from the ground up. Much more reliable than those self-indulgent virtual world projects.

View OriginalReply0

SignatureLiquidator

· 8h ago

Interoperability between sub-chains really hits the pain point; those blockchain games previously were just one after another abandoned projects. How's the testing experience? Are the gas fees still at a level that cuts into users like a scythe? This is the real infrastructure, unlike some projects that just boast without substance. That's a bit idealistic; only when thousands of applications are truly launched can we test it. Is the partner ecosystem deep enough? It still feels like a bottleneck. The part about information silos is spot on. Current blockchain games are just like that.

View OriginalReply0

MEV_Whisperer

· 8h ago

The idea of sub-chains has indeed been unlocked, but the real implementation depends on whether the ecosystem has popularity. Just having advanced technology is useless. --- All those NFT projects have now died out, but this time it's a bit different. --- That's right, interoperability is the key. Otherwise, it's always a bunch of isolated chain games garbage. --- Wait, are bridge protocols really stable? Don't tell me it's another story of cross-chain hacking. --- Finally, someone understands that virtual economy relies on infrastructure paving the way, not just telling good stories. --- Smooth testing ≠ Mainnet stability. We've all been through that pit... --- A trillion-scale is still too optimistic, but it's definitely much better than those paper-thin plans before. --- The low cost of sub-chains is very critical; it directly lowers the barrier for developers. --- I've also experienced it; it's indeed smoother than those chain games before, but can the ecosystem cold start work? --- This time, the logic is much clearer, not relying on marketing storytelling.

View OriginalReply0

QuietlyStaking

· 9h ago

Finally, someone has explained clearly, this is the real deal. This is a world apart from those NFT projects back then. Cross-chain transfer of equipment? If this had come out earlier, it wouldn't look like this now. That said, truly surviving infrastructure projects are still rare. The sub-chain approach indeed avoids many pitfalls, but how to kickstart the ecosystem? Wait, is this referring to a specific project... it kind of sounds like it. Interoperability is the key; otherwise, it's just self-indulgence. I agree with this point.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropBuffet

· 9h ago

This sub-chain approach is indeed much more realistic than those all talk projects on paper. Interoperability is truly the key, otherwise you have to juggle wallets one by one, which is a nightmare. Finally, I see someone who is not just making empty promises. Those early blockchain games were really a joke; transaction fees could eat away half your life. Assets need to be fluid to create an ecosystem; currently, everyone is playing separately, which is fragmented. However, whether this path can truly break through depends on the stability of the technology. This is much more reliable than the wave of the metaverse concept.

View OriginalReply0

HorizonHunter

· 9h ago

It indeed seems to solve a major pain point; asset liquidity is the key. The logic of this sidechain system feels a bit familiar to me... I need to look at the specific implementations of more projects. The fee structure is really impressive. Previously, when transferring assets from Game A to Game B, the fees ate up half of my gains. If this interconnected mode can really take off, it would be much better than the current isolated islands. By the way, how is the funding progress of this project? Hopefully, it’s not another case of raising funds and then going silent. I'm a bit tempted to try the test version, but I need to first see if their team background is reliable. A trillion-scale project is still far off; let's focus on stabilizing the infrastructure first. Controlling the costs of the sidechain is indeed an advantage, but how do they plan to solve the ecosystem cold start problem? I'm just worried it might turn out to be another "sounds perfect but falls apart when used" project.

View OriginalReply0