Dear all
As some of you know, we are all about games with GameDAO, forming a gaming collective across the most relevant ecos, bringing more utility to $ASTR and beyond.
To make gaming projects visible in dAppStaking, I propose to add the gaming category to the project settings and dashboard.
Please let me know your thoughts!
If there is enough interest, I will set up a governance proposal in AstarGov.
Cheers!
Marco
Actually I am wondering if this is the right category or if I should directly create a proposal on AstarGov, maybe @0xRamz or anyone in the know can shed some light on it? Thanks!
Sounds like a great idea! I don’t see why not to execute it.
I support it and I know it is easy for the core team to achieve.
Hi @2075
Thank you for your proposal.
I understand your request, and the community council is also organizing the categories. I’d like to delve a little deeper into the discussion on this proposal.
Recently released, the dApp Staking Code of Conduct classifies games under Entertainment. (Apologies for any typos in the document)
Given the wide range of use cases for dApps, there is a concern that over-categorization could lead to excessive granularity and complexity. Therefore, we have initially classified them this way.
We believe we can start organizing existing dApps using this classification, including those under the old categories. What are your thoughts on this approach?
Please note that updating the UI will incur development costs, so it will likely proceed based on prioritization.
Hey @tksarah
Thanks for the feedback, yes, you are right about the Entertainment section.
The goal from GameDAO perspective is, to maximise visibility for everything games and related.
I agree with the granularity topic. Entertainment seems just a bit broad as an umbrella, including content, streaming, esports, virtual worlds, music, art and so much more, compared to the other categories, e.g. why is socialFi there and not bundled within Finance? Would gaming as a > 200bn market deserve its own category?
Idea: add another dimension with tags, so there can be few categories, eventually curated and if creators need more granularity, they would add more tags (similar to what we have now?).
I understand the rationale behind development cost, we are happy to contribute development time. Also I believe, more “low key” implementation topics like these could easily be realised through bounties?
I am also happy with the Entertainment category, are there any other pov/opinions?
WDYT?
This is a simple, quick and meaningful request.
I think it needs to be done and it involves no loss.
I support it.
I understand your point, and I agree that it would be better to classify appropriately if possible. As you may have noticed, currently the information registered as a category in dApps does not match the information classified in the portal UI. This actually confuses users.
Personally, I think it is ideal not to assign a single “category” to dApps but to use “tags.” For example, if a game has finance elements and item NFT collection elements, the main category would be Gaming, and it would be tagged with Defi and NFT.
Hoge: Gaming, Defi, NFT
I believe that having a format similar to the ecosystem display on Astar’s homepage for dApps listed on dAppStaking would be beneficial, after appropriately determining the main classification.
Therefore, I agree that it is ideal to make improvements as you suggested, and the question is who can do it and when.
Regarding development resources, you are correct. As far as I know, there are still UI update tasks presented on Github for Agents, as shown below: growth-program/ui-dao.md at main · AstarNetwork/growth-program · GitHub
First, it is necessary to organize the existing dApps, determine the main classification for each dApp, and then update the UI. Updating the UI should be the last step, so the first step should be to consider what kind of classification is appropriate to define with tags. The survey information we started recently will be helpful for this purpose.
At this point, as the community council, this will be recorded as a backlog since it is an issue that is not limited to gaming.
This approach of @tksarah’s seems to me to be extremely successful and well thought out, tags can become a good classification point for dApps.
But in part I am also in favor of @2075’ approach, because it is true, we cannot classify everything he describes here under the same category, it would be wrong because of its level of importance (using games as an example).
My two cents:
We definitely do need to open new categories, at least two more (Gaming and SocialFi) that occupy a high level of relevance in the ecosystem currently, added to this include new tags and new ways to display information to users.
Personally, when I look for a new dApp I look for it by its category and not by its tags.
Technical cost:
Actually the cost of adding new categories is not high at all and is within the monthly budgets of each development, surely each category must be a section with cards inside them written in JavaScript or TypeScript so, I don’t think this is a relevant point.
Hey all,
Maybe this can be solved in an easy way, by making the tags accessible in the UI (facette search) and extend these, then the categories would be obsolete in a way, unless you distinguish between e.g. different qualities, like “pro”, “indie”, “starter” or something similar. otherwise categories and tags do mostly the same?
In my concept yes, category and tag does exactly the same thing, the difference is in how each is displayed:
Category: groups by default different projects so for the user it is but to scroll to their favorite category and search.
Tag: typically used for filtering, so there must be an additional step (filtering the desired information) to find the desired projects.
The problem I see is that, for the user a project referring to NFT should be under the NFT category or with NFT tags but, what happens if we happen to place it under the entertainment tags? It would be more difficult to find them.
Exactly, so i would simply let the user decide, as there aren’t that many categories and tags anyway. the only topics would be
a. how to properly do UX (e.g. facette search) and
b. properly curate the tags (e.g. a simple voting)
With this, we could also sort by conviction, supporters, marketcap, etc.
But of course all of this will make dAppStaking a bit more “important”, and I am not so sure if this is what the team and community aims for.
I really like the idea of being able to sort dApp by TVL, supporters on top of their categories. The current UI do not allow any kind of sorting except by main category (DeFi, NFT, Utilisties etc…) which is a pain in the neck to look for dApp when you do not know their name.
IMO dApp should have the possibility to selecte at 2 to 3 category to help user sort them
ex :
Arthswap => DeFi, Dex
SiO2 => DeFi, Lending
Sonova => NFT, Marketplace
Talisman => Utility, wallet
MoonFit => NFT, HealthFi
Astar Degen => NFT, Dao, VC
All thoses category could be given as a Tags to each dApp which would help to sort them easly and more accuratly. Even if some tag would only cover 1 or 2 dApp at most (nich market), it would greatly help user and show how diversify Astar dApp Ecosystem is
Yeah, exactly!
Totally in favor on this!
It would be great if the gaming tag would see the light in the portal to identify the projects, although it belongs to the entertainment area is a category that should be highlighted separately.
