Tell a hellish industry joke: those token economy models that remain in the white paper have not been proven by Web3 games, but have been run through by a Web2 game. The dual currency economy system, extremely high daily activity, derivative off exchange trading, and the ability of zero spending players to make money are likely to only appear in the dreams of many blockchain game track project parties. A FPS game produced by Tencent - "Delta Action" has exceeded 12 million daily active users in less than half a year since its launch. If you are a gamer and have not heard of Delta Action, it only means that you have not played a game for a long time, and its popularity is comparable to the emergence of PUBG in the past. Why would I know? To be honest, it's so popular that all male friends around me frequently mention it, such as Running Knife, Big Red, Top Secret Aerospace, and even spawned industries like playmates and liver replacements. But every time this phenomenal game is born in the Web2 world, I think of our blockchain gaming track. FPS games also exist in the gaming track, but why can't they break through? You should know how to copy homework, right? I've also thought about what would happen if the Delta operation moved to the chain? I believe most blockchain game players have also considered this question, and the only one that can be benchmarked in front of me is most likely GUNZ. Yes, that's right. It was the FPS game @ GUNbyGUNZ that made Binance break the long-standing rule of not being on the blockchain recently, and suddenly announced its launch. Like most people, I was also confused at the time. Later, I realized that I had been following it for 22 years. I watched the trailer and in-game testing, and I didn't mention anything about blockchain games. I also sighed that the quality of this game is so high that I probably wouldn't come to the blockchain to make it. They recently announced that they will land on Solana on July 10th and re-enter my field of vision. Unlike the traditional chain game testing mainnet coin issuance route, they issued coins and put them into use in the early stages, but spent a long time polishing the product during the testing stage, and chose the compliance route differently. Perhaps we can find a new way out for the chain game track, let's learn about it together. Project Fundamentals: Integration of Game, Chain, and Asset Layers Gunzilla is an independent studio founded by Warface (with a cumulative revenue of over 1 billion US dollars). The team has a background in game development, not traditional encryption projects. Gunzilla spent 5 years developing two core products: *3A level tactical shooting game 'Off The Grid' (abbreviated as OTD) *Self developed Layer1 blockchain GUNZ Network GUNZ Network uses GUN as its gas fuel and covers modules such as on chain browsers, NFT minting machines, wallets, and trading markets, providing a complete infrastructure for the operation of OTD. Test website data shows that there have been over 670 million transactions and over 11 million NFTs have been minted. GUN's positioning is clear: it is not a financial derivative, but an ecological token GUN is a universal token for gaming economy, with core uses including: *Purchase of game assets (skins, season passes, etc.) *HEX loot box opening fee *Gas and Pledge Mechanism of GUNZ Chain *The right to use virtual real estate and social spaces GUNZ does not directly sell any props, and its main function is to serve the operation of the entire P2P trading system, allowing players to trade NFTs more freely. Why are tokens stagnating? It's actually a strategic issue GUN was launched on Binance as early as March 31st. In the past, the main resources of the team were invested in games, compliance, and infrastructure, and there was no rush to hype up tokens. But with the maturity of the ecosystem and the completion of channel deployment, the team has clearly switched to the rhythm of "activating token value" - starting to focus on price now is "following the trend", not being forced to sell. Why is the main network slow to go live? The reason is compliance The core reason is that before the VASP (Virtual Asset Service Provider) license is in place, it is inconvenient to open up the real trading market. GUNZ does not directly sell any props, and all 11 million NFTs are "mined" by players through game "decoding HEX runes". Their goal is to establish a system that supports the purchase of equipment in fiat currency, directly benchmarking the CSGO trading market and unlocking massive Web2 buying opportunities. To achieve this, they must follow a compliant path. Now, the main network has been launched, and 21000 test users are migrating to the main network. After the VASP license is officially in place, the remaining 16 million test network wallets will also be gradually migrated to the main network. The launch of Steam will also be on the agenda. Steam has 130 million monthly active players, and being able to enter the perspective of Steam players is the real beginning for many games. Blockchain technology should be a driving force for game user growth rather than a hindrance, and coin issuance should be a pathway rather than an endpoint. Games are primarily consumer goods, and only when there are enough and popular players can they generate opportunities for arbitrage and financial management. The first thing to consider in blockchain gaming should be to make the product good and be accepted by a wider range of players, rather than focusing on researching an economic system that provides a rate of return for users at every level.