Recently, many people have asked me about my thoughts on B3, the new game in the Base ecosystem. Under the operation of former Coinbase employees, can this L3 designed specifically for on-chain games truly solve the "island" problem of Web3 games? Let's discuss in detail:
—— Open Game Web3 New Concept B3's "open game" concept has a clear goal: breaking the current isolated state of Web3 games. The current situation is indeed like this. Look at Axie Infinity, STEPN, Parallel, and other top chain games - which one is not creating a closed loop in its own ecosystem? Users have to switch different chains, handle different tokens, and adapt to different wallets to play different games, with an extremely fragmented experience.
B3's solution is to use the GameChains architecture to maintain the independence of each game while achieving interoperability. For example, Parallel's Prime chain and Infinigods' God chain can run independently on B3, but can share liquidity and user incentives at the underlying level. This "having it both ways" idea sounds good, mainly depending on whether it can be implemented.
The problem is that for GameChains to truly achieve interoperability, various game parties need to reach a consensus on technical standards, asset definitions, and economic models. This is not a technical issue, but an interest distribution issue.
Fortunately, B3's backing in the Coinbase ecosystem does have an inherent advantage, with Base's traffic entry and compliance endorsement, which can indeed attract many game parties to actively access.
—— L3 Architecture + Chain Abstraction Technical Combination From the technical architecture perspective, B3 has chosen a relatively stable but distinctive route. As an L3 on Base, the single transaction cost is controlled at around $0.001, which is indeed very attractive for chain games.
B3's AnySpend technology allows users to instantly access cross-chain assets through a single account without manually switching networks or bridging tokens.
In other words, its essence is a hybrid mode of "sharding + cross-chain", with each GameChain maintaining an independent state, but achieving atomic cross-chain operations through B3's unified settlement layer, avoiding the security risks and time delays of traditional bridging solutions.
Put simply, B3 is doing the game operation business, not the infrastructure business of selling pickaxes.
However, the L3 track is fiercely competitive. You have the Base ecosystem, others have Arbitrum's Orbit, Polygon's CDK. B3's differentiated moat may lie in its deep understanding of game scenarios and unified entry services like BSMNT.fun.
—— Tokenomics Design and Business Model B3's token allocation is relatively balanced: 34.2% goes to the community ecosystem, with only 19% released at TGE, and the remaining part has a 4-year lock-up plan, avoiding short-term selling pressure.
$B3's application scenarios include staking to obtain GameChains rewards, funding game projects, paying transaction fees, etc., with a relatively complete logic.
From a business model perspective, B3 adopts a "platform economy + network effect" model. Unlike traditional game publishers' 30-70% commission, B3 attracts ecosystem participants through lower transaction fees (0.5%) and token incentives.
The key value flywheel is: more games access → more players gather → stronger network effect → higher $B3 demand → more resources invested in the ecosystem.
What I'm more concerned about is B3's positioning as the "main circulation token for cross-chain games". Currently, most chain games have their own token economics. How will B3 convince these projects to accept $B3 as a universal currency? From a valuation perspective, B3 looks more like a "game version of App Store", with value coming not just from technical fees, but more from ecosystem scale effects.
That's it.
The most interesting aspect of B3 is not technological innovation, but its systematic attempt to solve structural problems in the Web3 game industry. From the team background and resource integration capabilities, the Coinbase system team, Base ecosystem support, and $21 million in financing are all tangible advantages. 6 million active wallet users, over 80 integrated games, and 300 million cumulative transactions show that B3 indeed has a set of strategies for user acquisition and ecosystem building.
B3's differentiation lies in its middle route of "neither completely relying on a single game IP nor doing pure technical infrastructure", which theoretically has more imagination space, but also faces the risk of "not leaning on either side".
Of course, the Web3 game track itself is still in the early exploration stage. Whether B3 can truly implement the "open game" vision depends on its ability to continuously attract high-quality game content and real users. After all, no matter how good the infrastructure is, its value ultimately depends on the prosperity of the application ecosystem.
