Recently, many people have asked me how I view B3, the new rising star in the Base ecosystem. Under the management of former Coinbase employees, can this L3 designed specifically for on-chain games truly break the 'island' dilemma of Web3 games? Let me elaborate:
—— The new concept of open gaming in web3 The concept of 'open gaming' proposed by B3 has a clear goal: to break the current isolated state of Web3 games acting independently. This is indeed the case; take a look at leading chain games like Axie Infinity, StepN, and Parallel. Which one is not operating in a closed loop within its own ecosystem? Users have to switch between different chains, handle different tokens, and adapt to different wallets to play different games, resulting in a fragmented experience.
B3's solution is to enable interoperability while allowing each game to maintain its independence through the GameChains architecture. For example, Parallel's Prime chain and Infinigods' God chain can operate independently on B3 while sharing liquidity and user incentives at the underlying layer. This kind of 'wanting to have both' idea is quite ideal, but it mainly depends on whether it can be implemented.
The problem is that for GameChains to truly achieve interoperability, various game parties need to reach consensus on technical standards, asset definitions, economic models, and so on. This is not fundamentally a technical issue; it is a matter of profit distribution.
Fortunately, B3, backed by the Coinbase ecosystem, indeed has inherent advantages, with the traffic entry of Base and compliance endorsement, which can attract many game parties to actively join.
—— L3 architecture + chain abstraction technical combination From a technical architecture perspective, B3 has chosen a relatively safe yet distinctive path. As an L3 on Base, the cost of a single transaction is controlled at around $0.001, which is indeed attractive for chain games.
B3's AnySpend technology allows users to instantly access cross-chain assets through a single account without the need to manually switch networks or bridge tokens.
In other words, it is essentially a 'sharding + cross-chain' hybrid model where each GameChain maintains an independent state but achieves atomic cross-chain operations through B3's unified settlement layer, avoiding the security risks and time delays of traditional bridging solutions.
In simple terms, B3 is in the gaming operation business, not the infrastructure business of selling shovels.
However, the competition in the L3 track is fierce. You have the Base ecosystem, while others have Arbitrum's Orbit and Polygon's CDK. B3's differentiated moat may lie in its deep understanding of gaming scenarios and unified entry points like http://BSMNT.fun and other operational services.
—— Tokenomics design and business model B3's token distribution is relatively balanced: 34.2% is allocated to the community ecosystem, with only 19% released at TGE. The remaining portion has a 4-year lock-up plan to avoid short-term selling pressure.
$B3's application scenarios include staking for GameChains rewards, funding game projects, paying transaction fees, and so forth, which is logically quite complete.
From a business model perspective, B3 adopts a 'platform economy + network effects' model. Unlike traditional game publishers who take a 30-70% cut, B3 attracts ecosystem participants with a relatively low transaction fee (0.5%) and token incentives.
The key value flywheel lies in: more game access → more players gather → stronger network effects → higher demand for $B3 → more resources invested in the ecosystem.
What I am particularly concerned about is B3's positioning as 'the main circulating token of the full-chain gaming ecosystem'. Most chain games currently have their own token economies; how will B3 persuade these projects to accept $B3 as a universal currency? From a valuation perspective, B3 resembles an 'App Store for games', where its value comes not only from technology fees but also from ecosystem scale effects.
That's all.
The biggest highlight of the B3 project is not its technological innovation, but its systematic attempts to solve structural issues in the Web3 gaming industry. From the perspective of team background and resource integration capabilities, the Coinbase-affiliated team, Base ecosystem support, and $21 million in financing are all tangible advantages. With 6 million active wallet users, over 80 integrated games, and 300 million cumulative transactions, it shows that B3 indeed has a way in user acquisition and ecosystem building.
B3’s differentiation lies in its 'neither fully relying on a single game IP nor purely focusing on technical infrastructure' middle path. Theoretically, it has greater imaginative space but also faces the risk of being 'unsupported on both ends'.
Of course, the Web3 gaming track itself is still in the early exploration stage. Whether B3 can truly realize the vision of 'open gaming' depends on its ability to continuously attract quality game content and real users. After all, no matter how good the infrastructure is, its value ultimately relies on the prosperity of the application ecosystem.
