Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
antimo 🎩
@antimofm.eth
We complain about bad UX in web3 because we'd like it to improve, but having a tolerance for it is what allows us as users to try new products and founders to push the envelope
2 replies
1 recast
20 reactions
Zeronium
@zeronium
I think Web3 hyper-focuses on UX to its detriment in some ways. UX is important, but the core value proposition being clear is far greater. People will work through poor UX in both Web2 and Web3, if they want to be part of what the product offers.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Zenigame
@zeni.eth
Some people will, of course, but the masses wont. Web3 relies on network effects, so the masses are important.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Zeronium
@zeronium
I’ll posit this: in ‘21 when the market exploded, UX was worse. New users who came in were regular folk, not degens, not Web3 natives - the masses. The reason why it exploded - incredibly clear value prop. UX is important, but clear value is what’ll drive user acquisition.
3 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Zenigame
@zeni.eth
I wasn't around for that, but I believe you. People will put up with poor UX if there's clear value. Anecdotally, I can think of dozens of people I'd love to onboard but who can't be bothered to make it through the steps. Either increase the value or decrease the friction.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
antimo 🎩
@antimofm.eth
good point
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Father Morwen
@alditrus
Big agree with this take. If you want non-natives using your product, you need good UX, but if you don't have clear value prop, what's the point. FC has been pretty successful at balancing both of these.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
