Today is April 27, 2026, and it is the deadline. If you had assets on Myria’s Layer 2 blockchain — the gaming-focused Ethereum scaling solution that was supposed to be the future of Web3 gaming infrastructure — you had until today to bridge them back to Ethereum L1. After today, that infrastructure goes dark.
Myria did not get hacked. It did not run out of money (as far as anyone knows). It simply decided to pivot. The company announced via a tweet and an email on April 13 that it was terminating its L2 node operations entirely. Players and node operators got roughly two weeks to figure out how to rescue their assets. No comprehensive migration guide. No hand-holding. Just a terse message and a countdown clock.
This is the kind of thing that should make every crypto gamer stop and think about where they are actually playing.
TL;DR
- Myria, a gaming-focused Ethereum L2, is shutting down its node operations today (27 April 2026) and forcing users to bridge assets to L1
- Players and node operators got roughly two weeks’ notice via a tweet — no migration guide, no support
- Custom gaming blockchains introduce infrastructure risk that players never signed up for
- Satoshie builds on Base (Coinbase’s L2) specifically to avoid platform dependency — the chain will outlive any single game
- When your gaming platform can disappear, provable fairness is the least of your worries — you need provable permanence
The Custom Chain Trap
The crypto gaming industry went through a phase — and some would argue it is still in it — where every project thought it needed its own chain. Its own L2. Its own consensus mechanism. Its own node network. The pitch was always the same: “We need custom infrastructure to deliver the gaming experience players deserve.”
Myria was one of the more credible attempts. Built on StarkEx technology, backed by real money, with actual games in its ecosystem. It was not some fly-by-night operation. And yet here we are, watching it wind down its entire L2 while telling node operators to sort themselves out within a fortnight.
The problem is not that Myria failed. Pivots happen. The problem is that when a gaming-specific L2 decides to change direction, every player on that chain becomes collateral damage. Your NFTs, your tokens, your in-game assets — all suddenly sitting on infrastructure with an expiration date.
And Myria is not alone. Over the past two years, we have seen multiple gaming L2s and app-chains either shut down, merge, or quietly stop updating. The pattern is always the same: big launch, promises of custom-tailored gaming infrastructure, a period of modest activity, and then a strategic pivot that leaves players holding the bag.
Why Base Was Never a Compromise
When Satoshie chose to build on Base — Coinbase’s Ethereum L2 — some people in the crypto gaming space questioned it. Why not build your own chain? Why not use a gaming-specific L2 with lower fees and custom transaction types? Why settle for general-purpose infrastructure?
Because general-purpose infrastructure does not shut down when one game studio changes its mind.
Base is backed by Coinbase, a publicly traded company with every incentive to keep its L2 running indefinitely. It has hundreds of protocols building on it. Its existence does not depend on any single game or gaming ecosystem thriving. If Satoshie disappeared tomorrow (it will not), Base would keep running. Your on-chain records of every raffle, every coinflip, every VRF-verified outcome would still be there, verifiable, permanent.
That is the difference between building on infrastructure you control and building on infrastructure that will outlive you. One feels powerful. The other actually is.
Infrastructure Risk Is the Risk Nobody Talks About
The crypto gaming conversation is dominated by two topics: tokenomics and gameplay. Will the token pump? Is the game fun? These matter, obviously. But there is a third question that almost nobody asks: what happens to my assets if the platform behind this game makes a different business decision?
With traditional gaming, this question does not really apply. If a game studio shuts down a server, you lose access to a game you probably paid a fixed price for. Annoying, but the damage is contained.
With crypto gaming — especially games built on custom chains — the stakes are fundamentally different. Players have actual financial exposure. They have bought tokens, earned NFTs, sometimes invested in node licences (as Myria node operators did). When the chain pivots or shuts down, those assets do not just become inaccessible. They become a time-sensitive emergency. Bridge now or lose everything.
Myria at least gave people a window. Some projects have not been so generous.
Provable Fairness Needs Provable Permanence
At Satoshie, we talk a lot about provable fairness — and rightly so. Chainlink VRF ensures that every raffle draw and every coinflip outcome is verifiably random and tamper-proof. Nobody, not even us, can manipulate the results. That matters enormously.
But fairness without permanence is incomplete. What good is a provably fair game if the chain it runs on might not exist next year? What good is a verifiable outcome if the infrastructure storing that verification can be switched off by a startup’s board meeting?
This is why the choice of where to build is not just a technical decision. It is a trust decision. When a player enters a Satoshie raffle, they are not just trusting that the outcome will be fair. They are trusting that the record of that outcome will persist. That the smart contract will remain deployed and callable. That their winnings will be there tomorrow.
Building on Base — on Ethereum’s security model, with Coinbase’s institutional backing — is how we make that trust concrete rather than theoretical.
The Lesson Myria Is Teaching Everyone for Free
Myria’s shutdown is not a scandal. It is not a rug pull. By all accounts, they are trying to handle the transition responsibly (if a bit minimally). But it is a lesson that the entire crypto gaming industry needs to internalise:
Do not build your house on someone else’s science experiment.
If you are a player, ask where the game is deployed. Is it on a chain that exists independently of the game? Is it on infrastructure with multiple stakeholders, or infrastructure that lives and dies with one company’s roadmap?
If you are a builder, ask yourself whether your infrastructure choice serves your users or your ego. A custom chain looks impressive on a pitch deck. An established L2 looks impressive to players who have been burned before.
At Satoshie, we chose boring infrastructure on purpose. Base is not exciting. It is not novel. It is battle-tested, well-funded, and it is going to be here long after the latest gaming L2 pivots to AI.
And when you are building provably fair games where real money is on the line, boring infrastructure is the most exciting thing in the world.
📷 Photo by Hitesh Choudhary on Unsplash
