Can B3 give birth to a Web3 gaming "super app store"?

Recently, many people have been asking me for my thoughts on B3, the new darling of the Base ecosystem. Under the helm of former Coinbase employees, can this L3 designed specifically for on-chain gaming truly break the "island" dilemma of Web3 gaming? Let's dive into the details:

Open Gaming: A New Web3 Philosophy

B3's concept of "open gaming" has a clear goal: to shatter the current fragmented state of Web3 gaming. The reality is that top blockchain games like Axie Infinity, StepN, and Parallel all operate within their own closed ecosystems. Users have to switch between different chains, deal with various tokens, and adapt to different wallets when playing different games, leading to an extremely disjointed 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 they can share liquidity and user incentives at the underlying level. This idea of "having your cake and eating it too" is quite idealistic, and the key is whether it can be implemented.

Here's the catch: For GameChains to truly achieve interoperability, game developers need to reach a consensus on technical standards, asset definitions, and economic models. This is not a technical issue, but rather a matter of利益分配 (interest distribution).

Fortunately, B3 has an inherent advantage by being backed by the Coinbase ecosystem. With Base's traffic entry point and regulatory endorsement, it can indeed attract many game developers to integrate proactively.

L3 Architecture + Chain Abstraction: A Technical One-Two Punch

From a technical architecture perspective, B3 has chosen a relatively conservative but distinctive path. As an L3 on Base, B3 has managed to keep the cost of a single transaction around $0.001, which is quite attractive for chain games.

B3's AnySpend technology allows users to access cross-chain assets through a single account instantly, without having to manually switch networks or bridge tokens.

In essence, this is a hybrid model of "sharding + cross-chain." Each GameChain maintains its own independent state, but atomic cross-chain operations are achieved through B3's unified settlement layer, avoiding the security risks and time delays associated with traditional bridging solutions.

To put it simply, B3 is in the business of game operations, not infrastructure construction.

However, the L3 track is highly competitive. While you have the Base ecosystem, 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, such as BSMNT.fun (please note that I encountered some issues while trying to parse this link. The problem might be related to the link itself or the network. If you need the content of this webpage, please check the validity of the link and try again).

Tokenomics Design and Business Model

B3's token allocation is relatively balanced: 34.2% is allocated to the community ecosystem, with only 19% released at TGE (Token Generation Event), and the remaining portion is locked for four years to avoid short-term selling pressure.

The use cases for $B3 include staking to earn GameChains rewards, funding game projects, and paying transaction fees, forming a relatively complete logic.

From a business model perspective, B3 adopts a "platform economy + network effect" model. Unlike traditional game publishers that take a 30-70% cut, B3 attracts ecosystem participants through a lower transaction fee rate (0.5%) and token incentives.

The key value flywheel is: more games on board → more players gathering → stronger network effect → higher demand for $B3 → more resources invested in the ecosystem.

What I'm 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 can B3 convince these projects to accept $B3 as a universal currency? From a valuation perspective, B3 resembles a "gaming version of the App Store," with value derived not only from technical fees but also from the scale effect of the ecosystem.

Conclusion

The biggest highlight of the B3 project is not technological innovation but its systematic attempt to solve the structural problems of the Web3 gaming industry. In terms of team background and resource integration capabilities, the Coinbase-affiliated team, Base ecosystem support, and $21 million in funding are all solid advantages. With 6 million active wallet users, over 80 integrated games, and 300 million cumulative transactions, B3 has indeed proven its capabilities in user acquisition and ecosystem building.

B3's differentiation lies in its middle path, which "does not rely entirely on a single game IP and is not purely a technical infrastructure." In theory, this approach offers more room for imagination, but it also faces the risk of being "neither fish nor fowl."

Of course, the Web3 gaming track is still in its early exploratory stage. Whether B3 can truly realize its vision of "open gaming" 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.

Can B3 give birth to a Web3 gaming "super app store"?

Recently, many people have been asking me for my thoughts on B3, the new darling of the Base ecosystem. Under the helm of former Coinbase employees, can this L3 designed specifically for on-chain gaming truly break the "island" dilemma of Web3 gaming? Let's dive into the details:

Open Gaming: A New Web3 Philosophy

B3's concept of "open gaming" has a clear goal: to shatter the current fragmented state of Web3 gaming. The reality is that top blockchain games like Axie Infinity, StepN, and Parallel all operate within their own closed ecosystems. Users have to switch between different chains, deal with various tokens, and adapt to different wallets when playing different games, leading to an extremely disjointed 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 they can share liquidity and user incentives at the underlying level. This idea of "having your cake and eating it too" is quite idealistic, and the key is whether it can be implemented.

Here's the catch: For GameChains to truly achieve interoperability, game developers need to reach a consensus on technical standards, asset definitions, and economic models. This is not a technical issue, but rather a matter of利益分配 (interest distribution).

Fortunately, B3 has an inherent advantage by being backed by the Coinbase ecosystem. With Base's traffic entry point and regulatory endorsement, it can indeed attract many game developers to integrate proactively.

L3 Architecture + Chain Abstraction: A Technical One-Two Punch

From a technical architecture perspective, B3 has chosen a relatively conservative but distinctive path. As an L3 on Base, B3 has managed to keep the cost of a single transaction around $0.001, which is quite attractive for chain games.

B3's AnySpend technology allows users to access cross-chain assets through a single account instantly, without having to manually switch networks or bridge tokens.

In essence, this is a hybrid model of "sharding + cross-chain." Each GameChain maintains its own independent state, but atomic cross-chain operations are achieved through B3's unified settlement layer, avoiding the security risks and time delays associated with traditional bridging solutions.

To put it simply, B3 is in the business of game operations, not infrastructure construction.

However, the L3 track is highly competitive. While you have the Base ecosystem, 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, such as BSMNT.fun (please note that I encountered some issues while trying to parse this link. The problem might be related to the link itself or the network. If you need the content of this webpage, please check the validity of the link and try again).

Tokenomics Design and Business Model

B3's token allocation is relatively balanced: 34.2% is allocated to the community ecosystem, with only 19% released at TGE (Token Generation Event), and the remaining portion is locked for four years to avoid short-term selling pressure.

The use cases for $B3 include staking to earn GameChains rewards, funding game projects, and paying transaction fees, forming a relatively complete logic.

From a business model perspective, B3 adopts a "platform economy + network effect" model. Unlike traditional game publishers that take a 30-70% cut, B3 attracts ecosystem participants through a lower transaction fee rate (0.5%) and token incentives.

The key value flywheel is: more games on board → more players gathering → stronger network effect → higher demand for $B3 → more resources invested in the ecosystem.

What I'm 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 can B3 convince these projects to accept $B3 as a universal currency? From a valuation perspective, B3 resembles a "gaming version of the App Store," with value derived not only from technical fees but also from the scale effect of the ecosystem.

Conclusion

The biggest highlight of the B3 project is not technological innovation but its systematic attempt to solve the structural problems of the Web3 gaming industry. In terms of team background and resource integration capabilities, the Coinbase-affiliated team, Base ecosystem support, and $21 million in funding are all solid advantages. With 6 million active wallet users, over 80 integrated games, and 300 million cumulative transactions, B3 has indeed proven its capabilities in user acquisition and ecosystem building.

B3's differentiation lies in its middle path, which "does not rely entirely on a single game IP and is not purely a technical infrastructure." In theory, this approach offers more room for imagination, but it also faces the risk of being "neither fish nor fowl."

Of course, the Web3 gaming track is still in its early exploratory stage. Whether B3 can truly realize its vision of "open gaming" 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.