Tezos Doesn’t Have to Pick a Lane

From digital art to tokenized commodities, Tezos is finding itself associated with very different industries. But does a blockchain really need to be known for just one thing?

Over the years, Tezos has become known for quite a few things. Its on-chain governance, its approach to upgrades, its early adoption of Proof of Stake, and of course, its digital art ecosystem. Ask someone who has been around the crypto space for a while what they associate with Tezos, and there’s a good chance art will be among the first things they mention.

And for good reason. Tezos has been home to one of the most recognizable digital art communities in the blockchain space, with artists, collectors, and platforms that have helped build a culture of their own. At the same time, other areas like gaming have received considerable attention over the years, with different projects and initiatives exploring what blockchain technology could bring to games.

But lately, we’ve been seeing a very different side of Tezos getting attention too. Metals.io is bringing real-world commodities on-chain, from uranium and gold to nickel and cobalt, reaching audiences that probably have little interest in NFTs or digital collectibles.

Now, I’ve heard Tezos described as “the art chain” countless times over the years. I’ve also heard people question why resources are being spent on initiatives in other areas, especially when some haven’t worked out, instead of doubling down on art, where Tezos already has a strong reputation. And I understand where that sentiment comes from. Art has played a huge role in Tezos’ history, and there’s every reason to keep supporting it, as we’ve already seen through the many initiatives and efforts dedicated to that community.

But seeing new opportunities emerge in completely different industries makes me wonder why Tezos should have to be defined by one particular use case in the first place. Why shouldn’t it be able to build on its reputation in digital art while also becoming known for commodities, gaming, finance, or whatever else comes next?

Personally, I don’t think Tezos needs to pick a lane. And I think trying to fit it into one specific category could end up limiting how we see its potential.

The Art Identity

There’s no denying how important digital art has been for Tezos. From the early days of Hic et Nunc to platforms like objkt and Teia, the art community has played a huge role in bringing people into the ecosystem and giving Tezos an identity beyond its technology.

And the most interesting part to me is how organically much of that happened. Tezos wasn’t originally designed or marketed as a blockchain specifically for artists. Artists found a network that was affordable and accessible, started experimenting with it, and eventually built an entire culture around it. Even when platforms disappeared or market conditions changed, the community found ways to keep going.

That history matters, and I think it’s something Tezos should be proud of. It’s also one of the reasons we’ve seen so much attention and support directed toward digital art from different teams across the ecosystem. From initiatives supporting artists and creators to exhibitions, events, and collaborations, there’s been a real effort to nurture and promote this part of Tezos’ identity.

And rightly so. Even today, artists continue creating, collecting, organizing events, and bringing their work to galleries and museums around the world. But here’s the thing. Just because Tezos became a home for digital art doesn’t mean that was ever supposed to be its only purpose.

The technology was there for people to use, and artists found a way to make it their own. Other communities should be able to do the same.

A Very Different Kind of Adoption

Now look at what’s happening with real-world assets. With Metals.io, we’re seeing Tezos technology being used to tokenize physical commodities, opening up new ways for people to access markets that have traditionally been difficult to participate in. This is a completely different world from digital art. The audiences are different, the products are different, and the problems these projects are trying to solve are different too.

Someone collecting generative art on objkt probably isn’t thinking about tokenized cobalt. Likewise, someone interested in gaining exposure to physical uranium might have never heard of Hic et Nunc. And that’s perfectly fine. Neither of these groups needs to be interested in what the other is doing for their activity to be valuable to the ecosystem.

And we could bring gaming into this conversation too. Over the years, we’ve seen different efforts to attract game developers, introduce blockchain-powered experiences, and build gaming communities around Tezos. While gaming hasn’t established the same level of recognition as digital art, it has been another area where teams have invested time and resources, exploring a very different set of possibilities.

If anything, the fact that such different applications can find a place within Tezos should be seen as a positive. It means the technology has relevance beyond a single market or community.

The Problem With Picking a Lane

Now, I understand the argument for having a clear identity. From a marketing perspective, being known for something specific makes it easier to explain what a project does and why people should pay attention to it.

And honestly, there’s value in that. Tezos being associated with digital art has helped it attract artists and collectors who might otherwise never have considered using a blockchain. But I think there’s a difference between being known for something and deciding that’s all you should be.

After all, we don’t expect the internet to pick between online banking, entertainment, communication, or commerce. Different industries have built completely different experiences using the same underlying infrastructure. So why should we expect a general-purpose blockchain to work differently? Of course, simply being able to support different applications doesn’t automatically mean they’ll succeed. Tezos still needs to offer the tools, reliability, accessibility, and overall experience that make people want to build and use those applications. And I think that’s where the focus should be.

Instead of asking if Tezos should be the art chain or the RWA chain, maybe we should be asking how it can become a better platform for both, along with gaming, payments, DeFi, and whatever else people decide to build on it.

Making Room for More

None of this means Tezos should stop promoting the areas where it’s finding success. Quite the opposite. The art community deserves recognition for what it has built, and projects bringing real-world assets on-chain deserve attention for the opportunities they’re exploring.

There’s also no reason every part of the ecosystem needs to be marketed to the same audience. An artist discovering Tezos through objkt, a gamer trying out a blockchain game, and an investor discovering it through Metals.io can have completely different experiences, with different reasons to be there. What matters is that the infrastructure underneath can support those experiences and continue improving as their needs change.

Personally, when I think about what a complete Tezos ecosystem would look like, I don’t picture a blockchain that’s famous for just one thing. I picture an ecosystem where I can discover and collect art, play games, make payments, use DeFi applications, and interact with real-world assets, all while benefiting from the same underlying technology. And ideally, without having to worry too much about which part of the network I’m using or how everything works behind the scenes.

And that’s just what we can imagine today. Who knows what other use cases might emerge in the coming years, or what communities might find their own reasons to build on Tezos? We’ve already seen that happen with digital art. We’ve seen efforts in gaming, we’re seeing new opportunities around tokenized commodities, and there’s no reason to assume the next big use case will look anything like these.

So, should Tezos be known as the art chain, the RWA chain, the gaming chain, or something else entirely? I think we can let the people using it answer that question for themselves. There’s room for more than one story here, and no reason to close the door on the next one.

Tezos Doesn’t Have to Pick a Lane was originally published in Tezos Commons on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.