Can B3, operated by a former Coinbase employee, solve the dilemma of Web3 games?

Author: Haotian

Recently, many people have asked me what I think of B3, a new game in the Base ecosystem? Under the management of the "old subordinates" of former Coinbase employees, can L3, which is designed for on-chain games, really break the "isolated island" dilemma of Web3 games? Let me talk about it in detail:

Open game web3 new concept

The concept of "open game" proposed by B3 has a clear goal: to break the current isolated state of Web3 games. This is indeed the case. Look at the top chain games such as Axie Infinity, StepN, and Parallel. Which one is not 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, and the experience is fragmented.

B3's solution is to use the GameChains architecture to allow each game to maintain independence while achieving interoperability. For example, Parallel's Prime chain and Infinigods' God chain can both run independently on B3, but the underlying layer can share liquidity and user incentives. This "both" idea is ideal, and it depends on whether it can be implemented.

The problem is that for GameChains to truly achieve interoperability, all game parties need to reach consensus on technical standards, asset definitions, economic models, etc. This is not a technical problem at all, but a problem of interest distribution.

Fortunately, B3 does have an inherent advantage backed by the Coinbase ecosystem. With Base's traffic entrance and compliance endorsement, it can indeed attract many game parties to actively join.

L3 architecture + chain abstraction technology combination

From the perspective of technical architecture, B3 has chosen a relatively safe but distinctive route. As an L3 on Base, the cost of a single transaction 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, it is essentially a hybrid mode of "sharding + cross-chain". Each GameChain maintains an independent state, but atomic cross-chain operations are achieved through the B3 unified settlement layer, avoiding the security risks and time delays of traditional bridging solutions.

To put it bluntly, B3 is in the game 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 game scenarios and unified entry BSMNT.fun and other operational services.

Tokenomics design and business model

B3's token distribution is relatively balanced: 34.2% is given to the community ecosystem, TGE only releases 19%, and the remaining part has a 4-year lock-up plan to avoid short-term selling pressure.

$B3's application scenarios include staking to obtain GameChains rewards, funding game projects, paying transaction fees, etc., and the logic is relatively complete.

From the business model point of view, B3 adopts the "platform economy + network effect" model. Unlike traditional game publishers who take 30-70% commission, B3 attracts ecological participants through lower transaction fees (0.5%) and token incentives.

The key value flywheel lies in: more game access → more players gather → stronger network effect → higher $B3 demand → more resources invested in the ecosystem.

What I am more concerned about is the positioning of B3 as the "main circulation token of the whole chain game ecosystem". Now most chain games have their own token economy. How can B3 convince these projects to accept $B3 as a universal currency? From a valuation perspective, B3 is more like a "game version of App Store". The value comes not only from technical charges, but also from the ecological scale effect.

The above.

The biggest attraction of the B3 project is not the technological innovation, but the systematic attempt to solve the structural problems of the Web3 game industry. From the perspective of team background and resource integration capabilities, the Coinbase team, Base ecological support, and $21 million in financing are all real advantages. 6 million active wallet users, more than 80 connected games, and 300 million cumulative transactions show that B3 does have a set of methods in user acquisition and ecological construction.

B3's differentiation lies in the middle route of "neither completely relying on a single game IP nor doing pure technical infrastructure". In theory, there is greater room for imagination, but it also faces the risk of "not relying on either end".

Of course, the Web3 game track itself is still in the early stage of exploration. Whether B3 can truly realize the vision of "open games" depends on whether it can continue to attract high-quality game content and real users. After all, no matter how good the infrastructure is, it ultimately depends on the prosperity of the application ecosystem to reflect its value.