As we all know, Yuga is planning to create a metaverse game that relies heavily on frequent NFT transactions. However, the high gas fees on the Ethereum network make it difficult for game-related NFTs to achieve frequent trading. Yuga once considered creating its own public chain to solve the problem of high transaction fees, but it was ultimately abandoned because most community members did not want to leave the Ethereum ecosystem. With the rapid development of Ethereum L2 solutions today, is Yuga reconsidering building its own Ethereum L2 public chain to achieve its grand vision for the metaverse game? This would not only allow them to stay in the Ethereum ecosystem but also solve the problem of high transaction fees.
If anyone has insider information or more interesting ideas, they are welcome to discuss them here.
Proposals submitted to the AIP Ideas category can be vague, incomplete ideas. Topics submitted here are not required to be submitted as a formal AIP Draft Template, however, you may still use the template if you wish.
Welcome to the DAO, doge!
Usually in this situation companies would keep key assets on Eth and everyday transactions/assets on L2.
ps: this should be in General, not “AIP Ideas”. Not sure if you can change, tagging @vulkan.admin to fix real quick.
Please confirm if you would like this post to be in the
AIP Ideas or
I’m sorry, but the system says I don’t have permission to do this
I’m not sure which category this topic should belong to. If possible, please help me change it.
Here is an overview on each category:
AIP Ideas: Do you have an idea? Bring it to the forum. You can also submit a formal AIP Draft or drop your thoughts and suggestions, no matter how vague.
General: General discussion about ApeCoin DAO amongst community members.
In a year or two, loads of inefficiencies with the system will be fixed. After the implementation of sharding, gas fees for all kinds of txns will fall rapidly. Also if we go for an L2 we’d circumvent that issue
Creating an L2 of it’s own would be a long and tedious process. We’d have to ask ourselves, is it viable ?
I support an RnD wing which constantly looks into improvements and possible ways to tie it all together
This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
Given that most of the big players in web3 are opting for their L2 solution I don’t see building an L2 as such a bad idea. There’s no guarantee sharding will be implemented in the next two years. ETH is already being lauded as an “execution layer.” We could be stuck with high has fees for a very long time.
If Ethereum can’t implement sharding fast enough, neither will Yuga. So the best Yuga can do is Polygon-like chain, which we already have in, well, Polygon. Not to mention Arbitrum, Optimism, Immutable.
I heard Polygon head speak to roll-ups being done and them allowing setup of “custom” Polygons, i.e. Polygon clones run by big 3rd parties. I guess that’s also an option. Then some $ape holders could run validators maybe.
Curious to know if you think Yuga needs sharding to scale.
Lens Protocol had to migrate to their own chain due to scalability issues on Polygon-which is meant to scale Ethereum. Could be what you’re referring to. Looks like in the near term, it’s either a custom L2 for Yuga or an L3.
I also think an own L2 isn’t needed, there are a bunch of established ones, even though I would prefer Arbitrum or Optimism over Polygon at this stage.
yes, this was likely (without looking it up) before recent developments. zk rollups and chain cloning are only now available and afaik only to a few trial/big partners. Things change fast, but overall yes, Polygon had perf issues (I remember it during Cool Cats game rollout) and also afaik they’re all resolved.
To some, Polygon issues are a reason to develop own L2. To me, they’re proof that developing own L2 is super hard and complicated and, thus, silly. Polygon has many, many capable devs who had been working on this for years. Yuga is great, but Yuga can’t bend laws of physics. A friend of mine was early at NEAR chain, another friend is C-level at Sui. Another - at Bitcoin L2, Stacks. All took years. This is a very hard task and with so many great chains popping up, seems redundant for Yuga to take on. (My 2 cents!)
I just want to provide some clarity on the distinction between Yuga Labs and the DAO, and the history of the proposals to migrate APE to another chain, sidechain, or L2.
The DAO is independent from Yuga Labs. Yuga Labs is a community member in the DAO, but it does not give direction to the DAO.
In late April of last year, Yuga encouraged the DAO to explore migrating ApeCoin to its own chain.
A number of AIP ideas were posted following that tweet from Yuga, including proposals from Avalanche and Immutable X. The first AIP to actually go to vote on the matter however was AIP-41, which proposed to keep APE on Ethereum and not migrate to any other L1 chain or sidechain. This AIP was voted in favour, which meant that for 3 months, no AIPs could go to vote which proposed moving APE off of Ethereum or onto a sidechain.
Since then, there has been little to no discussion of this topic on this forum. Neither of the Avalanche nor Immutable-X AIPs were re-opened once the 3 month term of AIP-41 expired.
Yuga has not publicly expressed any views on this topic since that tweet. We can only assume that their views have not changed.
It is my view that the DAO needs to continue this conversation. Not only so that Yuga can effectively integrate APE into the Otherside and its other games, but also so that other web3 gaming projects can integrate APE into their products and offerings, while efficiently utilizing on-chain transactions.
Hi @doge and welcome to the forums! Thank you for bringing up this discussion. I think it’s an important one. As @Waabam said, the DAO is independent from Yuga, so we have no information about what they may or may not be doing other than what has been made public. This is from the website:
Like Waabam, I would also suggest that we continue the conversation. ApeCoin needs to be usable in gaming and small transactions in order to be truly useful. I have heard people talk about it here and there, but there’s no real plan or consensus on the direction to take. Maybe the first step is to have a conversation about what direction the community would like to go in whether that be building it’s own blockchain, migrating to another (there’s been little appetite for that in the past, but should still be up for discussion imo), or using a layer 2 solution.
Thanks again for starting this conversation!
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.