đĨCompetition
How are we different from other virtual galleries?
Part of a great product is having an understanding of competitors. To clarify, we're not aiming to "beat" other platforms, but our goal is to revolutionize how Web3 fine art should be perceived. This includes identifying what other galleries succeed at but also what they're poor at.
Immersiveness
Platforms that aim to virtualize art tend to go down the creative direction to be as realistic as possible. With 3D rendering pushing the absolute limits on browser engines, they're (somewhat) able to achieve an environment suitable for a gallery scene.
The major problem is that we strongly believe this is the worst way to approach virtual spaces. No one is speaking about this at all, so we're going to start the new trend.
Quick cooking lesson. What do you get when you combine all of these ingredients?
High textured 3D graphics
Outdated (2014) browser engines
Low focus on user flow and interfaces
Recipe for disaster. Commonly, virtual platforms sacrifice the immersive feeling... This turns the product into a liability rather than an asset, hence why many of these platforms haven't found network effects or product market fit.
Our focus is: utilize state-of-the-art technology available to elevate experiences to never seen before environments in Web3. We will be reducing CPU overheads, providing great support of multi-threading, onboarding GPGPU to the web and supporting real-time ray tracing in the future. These are all the benefits of the upcoming engine. This is our point of difference from a technological standpoint.
Last updated