CoinClear

Beam

4.0/10

Gaming subnet on Avalanche with multiple pivots from Merit Circle — infrastructure is there but games are not

Updated: February 16, 2026AI Model: claude-4-opusVersion 1

Overview

Beam is a gaming-focused blockchain built as an Avalanche subnet, operated by what was formerly the Merit Circle DAO. The project's history is a case study in crypto pivot culture: it began as a yield farming protocol in 2021, pivoted to a gaming guild (managing Axie Infinity scholarships), then evolved into a gaming investment DAO, and most recently rebranded from Merit Circle to Beam while launching its own blockchain for gaming. Each pivot was arguably rational given market conditions, but the serial reinvention raises legitimate questions about long-term conviction and focus.

The Beam chain launched in 2023 as an Avalanche subnet using a proof-of-authority consensus mechanism. It offers low transaction costs, fast finality, and gaming-specific features including an NFT marketplace, a gaming SDK, and wallet infrastructure. The DAO treasury — accumulated during the earlier phases — funded the chain's development and continues to support gaming studio partnerships.

The core thesis is that gaming needs dedicated blockchain infrastructure optimized for game-specific use cases, and that Beam's subnet model provides the right balance of performance, customization, and connection to the broader Avalanche ecosystem. The challenge is that dozens of chains make similar claims, and Beam's game catalog remains sparse compared to competitors like Immutable and Ronin.

Gameplay

Game Quality

This is Beam's most significant weakness. Despite the infrastructure investment, the chain hosts very few games with meaningful production quality. Most titles in the Beam ecosystem are early-stage indie games, casual web3 experiences, or pre-alpha demos. There is no flagship game that demonstrates the chain's potential or drives sustained player engagement. The contrast with Ronin (Axie, Pixels) or Immutable (Gods Unchained) is stark — Beam lacks a killer app.

Player Retention

Player retention data on Beam is limited because there are few games generating sufficient engagement to measure. On-chain activity on the Beam subnet is modest, with daily active addresses in the low thousands — and much of this activity relates to NFT trading and DeFi rather than actual gameplay. The absence of compelling games means there is little to retain players around.

Content Depth

The Beam ecosystem includes a handful of announced or in-development titles across various genres. The DAO has invested in multiple gaming studios and projects. However, the gap between announced partnerships and playable content is wide. Most "ecosystem games" are months or years from meaningful release. Content depth is aspirational rather than actual.

Technology

Blockchain Integration

The Beam subnet provides a customized EVM-compatible environment tuned for gaming. It uses $BEAM as the gas token, enabling the DAO to control the chain's economic parameters. The subnet architecture allows Beam to set its own validator set, gas parameters, and consensus rules while maintaining interoperability with the broader Avalanche network via Avalanche Warp Messaging. This is technically sound gaming infrastructure.

Infrastructure

Beam offers a comprehensive SDK (Beam SDK) for game developers, including wallet integration, NFT minting tools, marketplace APIs, and player authentication. The Sphere marketplace serves as the chain's NFT trading hub. A custom bridge connects Beam to Avalanche C-Chain and other networks. The developer tooling is competitive with other gaming chains, though less mature than Immutable's offering.

User Experience

The onboarding experience includes social login options and abstracted wallets to reduce crypto-native friction. Gas fees on the subnet are low (fractions of a cent). However, the user experience is only as good as the games available — and with limited game selection, most users interact with Beam through DeFi, NFT trading, or speculative activity rather than actual gaming.

Economy

In-Game Economy

Individual game economies on Beam are nascent. The Sphere NFT marketplace provides cross-game trading infrastructure, but without major game launches, trading volume is limited. The DAO has explored gaming-specific economic primitives like achievement-based rewards and cross-game asset standards, but these remain largely theoretical without a robust game catalog to implement them.

Sustainability

Beam's economic model relies on the DAO treasury (which holds significant assets from earlier fundraising and investment returns) and future fee revenue from on-chain gaming activity. The treasury provides a long runway, but sustainability depends on eventually attracting games that generate meaningful transaction volume. The current burn rate of treasury funds on ecosystem development without proportional adoption is a concern.

NFT Market

NFT trading on the Beam subnet exists primarily through the Sphere marketplace. Volume is modest, dominated by profile pictures and speculative collections rather than in-game assets. Without compelling games generating genuine in-game NFT demand, the NFT market on Beam resembles a typical low-activity chain rather than a gaming-specific economy.

Adoption

Player Count

Daily active addresses on the Beam subnet number in the low thousands, with gaming-specific activity representing only a fraction of that. There is no publicly available game on Beam with meaningful DAU figures. The chain's activity is more reflective of a general-purpose low-activity L1 than a gaming hub. Compared to Ronin's hundreds of thousands of gaming DAU, Beam's adoption is negligible.

Revenue

The DAO generates revenue from treasury investments, NFT marketplace fees, and chain transaction fees. Gaming-specific revenue is minimal. The Merit Circle/Beam DAO treasury is substantial (estimated in the hundreds of millions), providing financial runway but masking the lack of organic protocol revenue from gaming activity.

Community

The Beam community is active on Discord and social media, though it skews heavily toward investors and speculators rather than gamers. The Merit Circle community transitioned into the Beam brand with mixed enthusiasm. Community engagement around actual game content is low; most discussion centers on tokenomics, partnerships, and chain activity metrics.

Tokenomics

Token Overview

The BEAM token (migrated from the MC/Merit Circle token) serves as the gas token for the Beam subnet and the governance token for the DAO. Total supply is approximately 62.8 billion tokens (post-migration ratio). Distribution includes DAO treasury, community allocations, and legacy Merit Circle holder conversions. The large token supply creates a low unit price that is cosmetically different from but economically equivalent to smaller-supply alternatives.

Play-to-Earn Model

Beam does not have a unified play-to-earn model. Individual games on the chain may implement their own reward mechanisms. The DAO has discussed ecosystem-level reward programs tied to gaming activity, but no comprehensive earning framework exists. This is arguably wise — avoiding premature P2E tokenomics before games are established — but it means there is no economic pull for players.

Value Capture

BEAM captures value through gas fees on the subnet (which are minimal given low activity) and through the DAO treasury's investment portfolio. The token's value proposition is primarily a bet on future gaming activity on the chain and governance over the DAO treasury. Without significant on-chain gaming revenue, the token is valued on speculative potential rather than current fundamentals.

Risk Factors

  • Pivot fatigue: The Merit Circle-to-Beam journey involves multiple dramatic pivots. Each pivot was arguably rational, but the pattern suggests reactive rather than visionary strategy.
  • No killer app: Without a flagship game driving player adoption, Beam is infrastructure without demand — a blockchain searching for its reason to exist.
  • Gaming chain competition: Immutable, Ronin, Treasure, Xai, and general-purpose L2s all compete for game developers. Beam's differentiation is unclear beyond "another EVM gaming chain."
  • Treasury dependency: The project's financial stability depends on a treasury accumulated in previous market cycles. If treasury assets depreciate or are spent without generating returns, the project's viability is at risk.
  • Adoption risk: If major game launches continue to be delayed or fail to attract players, Beam risks becoming a ghost chain — technically functional but economically dead.
  • Governance risk: DAO governance over a large treasury and chain operation introduces complex coordination and incentive alignment challenges.

Conclusion

Beam represents an ambitious attempt to build gaming-specific blockchain infrastructure, backed by a substantial treasury and a team that has shown adaptability (perhaps too much adaptability) through multiple pivots. The Avalanche subnet technology is sound, the developer tooling is reasonable, and the DAO has the financial resources to sustain operations for years.

The fundamental problem is simple: there are no games worth playing on Beam. All the infrastructure, SDKs, and marketplace technology in the world means nothing without compelling content. Immutable has Gods Unchained, Ronin has Pixels, but Beam has a collection of early-stage projects and partnerships that have not yet translated into playable experiences.

The scores reflect this reality: decent technology and tokenomics (relative to gaming projects), but rock-bottom gameplay and adoption scores because there is effectively nothing to play. Beam's future depends entirely on whether its ecosystem investments and developer partnerships eventually produce games that attract real players. Until then, it remains a well-funded chain in search of its purpose.

Sources