Ethereum has achieved what many critics thought was unattainable. Transaction costs are now just a few cents, block capacity is growing and the basic layer is practical for everyday use again. Early 2026, Vitalik Buterine acknowledged this progress and said the original sum-oriented roadmap no longer reflects how the ecosystem actually works.
Some people saw this as a sign that Layer 2 is becoming less and less important. Others thought it quietly supported an “L1-first” future. Both views miss the more complex reality.
Vitalik did not refuse Low 2s. Instead, he urged them to have a clear purpose rather than just existing by default. This difference is especially important for blockchain gaming.
What Vitalik’s criticism of Layer 2s really means
Vitalik’s argument focused on results, not ideology. Many Layer 2 systems were expected to evolve into highly decentralized, interoperable systems almost completely secured by Ethereum. That progress slowed. Some teams opted for faster iteration, a cleaner user experience, or regulatory clarity rather than pushing decentralization to the limit.
Meanwhile, Ethereum Layer 1 improved faster than expected. Transaction costs have fallen significantly and the planned increases in gas limits will allow even more activity. This change challenges the old idea that L2s are mainly needed to reduce congestion.
Rather than clinging to an old view, Vitalik described Layer 2s as a spectrum. Each chain has its own guarantees, performance and considerations. Users and developers now make choices based on what they need, instead of assuming that all Layer 2s are the same.
Why Ethereum Layer 1 still falls short for gaming
Lower costs alone don’t make a network good for gaming. On-chain games bring constant changes to movement, combat, crafting, trading, and social features. Even small transaction fees quickly add up as players take many actions every minute.
Transit is an even greater challenge. Ethereum’s base layer can only process a limited number of transactions per second. One popular multiplayer game may exceed this limit during busy times, such as launches or live events.
Latency is another problem. Games need fast feedback. Delays of even a few seconds can ruin the experience and annoy players. Shared blockspace also introduces uncertainty that developers cannot fully control.
Why Blockchain Gaming Needs Specialized Execution
Games require features that financial applications rarely require. High, stable throughput is more important than dealing with occasional peaks. Predictable timing is more important than average costs. Fast response times are more important than complete decentralization at every level.
Tier 1s focus on fairness and shared access. All apps compete for the same block space under the same rules. This setup keeps the network secure, but does not work well for real-time interactive software.
Games don’t want to compete with DeFi or NFTs for space. They must run separately, process actions in parallel, and have performance guarantees that shared environments cannot easily provide.
This gap is why gaming has turned to custom layers instead of waiting for improvements to the base layer.
How gaming-focused Layer 2s address these limits
Gaming Layer 2s give games their own block space. This means that gameplay does not compete with other activities in the ecosystem. Developers get stable performance and players have fewer interruptions during busy times.
Many of these networks use custom sequencing or sharded execution. Actions can take place in parallel in competitions, regions or instances. This reduces latency and increases throughput, while still keeping things controllable.
The compensation structures are also different. Games create thousands of small actions that would be too expensive for a general chain. Prices that understand the needs of games keep these promotions affordable in the long term, without being dependent on temporary subsidies.
Networks like Base show this in action. They support fast games with many transactions and stable user activity.
Layer 3s and the Studio-Led scale model
As games become more complex, some studios are moving further into specialization. Low 3sbuilt on Layer 2 infrastructure, it gives developers complete control over how their games run, while still relying on Ethereum for security.
This setup is similar to how large software systems develop. Shared layers manage trust and settlement, while application layers focus on performance and user experience.
Major publishers have already tried this approach. Atari and Nexon have both expressed interest in using multi-layered blockchain setups that keep security and execution separate.
Usage data supports specialization
Tier 2 user numbers fell at the end of 2025, while activity on Ethereum Tier 1 increased. Some said this meant L2s became less important, but the whole story is more complex.
Most of the growth in Tier 1 came from speculation and simple transfers, made possible by low fees. Gaming followed a different path, with activities focused on networks designed for fast, real-time interactions.
Tokenized in-game assets continued to rise in value. Studios integrated faster and entire ecosystems grew around gaming-focused chains.
If Layer 2s weren’t necessary, developers wouldn’t continue to choose them for their most demanding projects.
The future is layered, not competitive
Ethereum’s role is now clearer. Layer 1 deals with security and settlement value. Tier 2s focus on execution and performance. Layer 3s are tailored for specific uses, such as games.
Vitalik’s comments do not weaken this intent. They support it. Each layer does what it does best.
Blockchain gaming shows the limits of trying to scale everything the same way. It also proves why specialized Layer 2s are still essential.
As Ethereum grows, Layer 2s are not going away. They are becoming more focused and even more important for making blockchains places where people want to play games.