What does the project lifecycle depend on? Often, it comes down to whether the design logic is feasible.
Look at different crypto projects—entry barriers vary, target user groups differ, and how value is delivered to users also varies. These seemingly subtle differences actually directly determine how far the project can go in the end.
The problem lies here—when a project's design concept and its core competitiveness are completely unrelated, no matter how much you tinker, it’s hard to sustain long-term. Those disconnected attempts often stall after one or two cycles. So instead of blindly innovating, it’s better to first master what you’re good at.
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.
13 Likes
Reward
13
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
pvt_key_collector
· 01-09 22:17
You're so right. I've seen too many projects where the core design logic itself has bugs, and they keep adding features on top of it, only to fail quickly in the end.
View OriginalReply0
MerkleTreeHugger
· 01-09 16:11
Basically, it's that you don't know who you are and you're still thinking about Bitcoin. Having seen too many projects, some rise quickly and die just as fast. The fundamental reason is that you haven't figured out your position.
View OriginalReply0
ApyWhisperer
· 01-07 07:58
That's right. Many projects overestimate their capabilities, thinking whatever they want, but end up losing their advantages.
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainBouncer
· 01-07 07:55
That's so true. Right now, many projects are just trying to overtake on the bend, but end up going off track.
The initial positioning was wrong, and no matter how they optimize later, it's all in vain.
The projects that truly last a long time are actually very "boring" — they just focus on perfecting one thing to the extreme.
View OriginalReply0
MiningDisasterSurvivor
· 01-07 07:54
Sounds good, but I heard this set of theories back in 2018. And the result? Those projects that claimed to have "perfect design logic" still ran away and turned into Ponzi schemes. The key is whether the project team is genuinely committed; no matter how beautiful the design is, it can't stop human greed.
What does the project lifecycle depend on? Often, it comes down to whether the design logic is feasible.
Look at different crypto projects—entry barriers vary, target user groups differ, and how value is delivered to users also varies. These seemingly subtle differences actually directly determine how far the project can go in the end.
The problem lies here—when a project's design concept and its core competitiveness are completely unrelated, no matter how much you tinker, it’s hard to sustain long-term. Those disconnected attempts often stall after one or two cycles. So instead of blindly innovating, it’s better to first master what you’re good at.