In the realm of video games, few genres capture the essence of persistence, adaptability, and the relentless pursuit of victory like roguelikes. These games, inspired by the classic game Rogue, thrust players into unforgiving dungeons. Each attempt is a dance with death, where a single misstep can spell the end. But with each demise, a resurrection follows — not in the form of the same character, but as a wiser version, armed with knowledge from past failures.

Similarly, the web3 ecosystem mirrors this roguelike paradigm. In this digital arena, countless projects are birthed, only to face challenges that test their mettle, adaptability, and resilience. Many fall, but each failure is not a dead end but a stepping stone.

In roguelikes, the dungeon — whether it’s an actual subterranean labyrinth or an expansive outer space — is a relentless adversary. It’s riddled with traps, adversaries, and challenges that require skill, strategy, and sometimes, sheer luck to overcome. Yet, the true beauty of these games is not in the battle itself but in the aftermath of defeat. When a player falls, they’re reborn. They retain the knowledge of enemy tactics, trap locations, and the invaluable experiences from their previous run. This knowledge accumulation allows players to progress further with each attempt, getting closer to their ultimate goal.

Likewise, in the web3 space, projects face their own set of unique challenges. Whether it’s technical hurdles, regulatory pressures, or market dynamics, many projects succumb to these adversities. However, very few truly “die.” Their legacies, lessons, and sometimes even their codebases live on. New projects emerge, learning from the mistakes of their predecessors, adapting and evolving to navigate the digital landscape better.


We can reflect on some classic “deaths” from the early days to see how they shaped the ecosystem with their “respawns”.


In 2016, the blockchain space witnessed an ambitious endeavor known as The DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization). The DAO was a complex smart contract on the Ethereum platform, designed to operate as a venture capital fund without a centralized authority. Within weeks of its launch, it managed to raise over $150 million in Ether, making it one of the most significant crowdfunding campaigns in history. The premise was simple yet revolutionary: DAO token holders could propose and vote on investment opportunities, with the collective decisions driving the allocation of the pooled funds.

However, the euphoria was short-lived. A vulnerability in The DAO’s code was exploited by an anonymous (kind of) entity, enabling them to siphon off around a third of the invested funds, amounting to over $50 million. The exploit involved a recursive function that allowed the attacker to repeatedly withdraw funds before the balance could update. This event sent shockwaves throughout the Ethereum community, leading to intense debates on how to address the situation.

The aftermath resulted in a contentious decision: a hard fork of the Ethereum blockchain to effectively reverse the malicious transactions and return the stolen funds. This decision wasn’t universally accepted, leading to a split in the Ethereum community. The original, unforked chain persisted as Ethereum Classic (ETC), while the new chain continued as Ethereum (ETH). The DAO incident, while a setback and a notable death, underscored the importance of rigorous smart contract auditing and highlighted the challenges of blockchain governance.

Shanghai Attacks

In 2016, not long after the DAO incident, Ethereum faced another series of challenges, commonly referred to as the Shanghai attacks. Over a period of several months, attackers exploited vulnerabilities in Ethereum’s protocol, primarily targeting its gas mechanism with specially crafted transactions that would bloat the blockchain and consume excessive computational resources. These attacks were designed to slow down the network, cause disruptions, and in some cases, even force nodes offline due to out-of-memory issues.

The Ethereum community responded swiftly. Developers from various Ethereum client teams collaborated to diagnose the vulnerabilities and deploy countermeasures. However, one key observation from the attacks was the advantage of client diversity. Ethereum operates on multiple client software implementations. During the Shanghai attacks, when one client would become vulnerable or face issues, others would remain operational, ensuring the network’s continuity. For instance, when Geth nodes were struggling due to an attack, Parity nodes often remained unaffected.

The importance of client diversity became abundantly clear. A diverse client ecosystem means that even if one client faces a vulnerability, not all nodes on the network are compromised, ensuring resilience against potential threats. This diversity acts as a form of decentralized defense, distributing risk and preventing single points of failure. The Shanghai attacks, while challenging, proved to be an important death and reinforced the value of a multifaceted infrastructure in maintaining the stability and security of a blockchain network.

Parity Multisig Lock

In 2017, the Ethereum community faced another significant challenge when a vulnerability was discovered in the Parity multi-signature (multisig) wallet. A flaw in its code allowed an anonymous user to exploit a function inadvertently left unprotected. The user effectively froze over 500,000 Ether (worth around $150 million at the time) from various projects across all implementations of the multisig wallet. A vast amount of funds had suddenly became inaccessible to their rightful owners, with no straightforward means of recovery.

In the wake of this incident, discussions arose about potential solutions, including Ethereum protocol upgrades or even another hard fork. However, no consensus was reached on a recovery method, and the frozen funds remain inaccessible to this day. Gavin Wood, Parity’s founder, therefore shifted his focus to a new blockchain project - Polkadot. While Polkadot’s inception wasn’t solely a result of the Parity multisig issue, the incident undeniably influenced its design principles, emphasizing flexibility, security, and on-chain governance to address and adapt to challenges in a more streamlined manner.

The Parity multisig issue was a notable death which served as a stark reminder of the complexities and potential pitfalls in smart contract design. From its lessons emerged innovative projects like Polkadot, highlighting the web3 ecosystem’s ability to learn, adapt, and evolve in the face of adversity.

One might argue that the stakes in web3 are higher. After all, real investments, reputations, and sometimes entire life’s work are on the line. But just like in roguelikes, every setback, every project that doesn’t make it, enriches the ecosystem. Teams that once helmed a fallen project often return, equipped with insights from their past experiences. They build better, more resilient, and more innovative platforms. And even if the original team doesn’t return, the broader web3 community learns. It’s an iterative process of building, learning, failing, and rebuilding.

A striking resemblance can be drawn with the movie Edge of Tomorrow. The protagonist, caught in a time loop, faces the same daunting adversaries repeatedly. Each encounter ends in defeat, but every resurrection carries the knowledge of the past. Over time, strategies are refined, tactics are honed, and the once insurmountable challenge becomes surmountable. Similarly, while individual web3 projects may face setbacks, the collective memory of the ecosystem ensures that the same mistakes are not repeated. The community moves forward, inching closer to its goals.

It’s essential to understand that this cycle — this life-and-death loop — is not a sign of weakness but one of strength. Just as roguelike players embrace the challenge, knowing that each failure is a step towards victory, the web3 community celebrates its iterative progress. Each project, whether it stands the test of time or becomes a lesson for others, contributes to the ecosystem’s growth. Each failure is a new respawn.

Web3 is not just a technological revolution; it’s a testament to human perseverance, adaptability, and the relentless pursuit of innovation. Like a roguelike player throwing their ever-more competent avatar into the fray, the web3 community is determined to overcome challenges, learn from setbacks, and march towards a decentralized, equitable digital future. The endgame might still be a way off, but with each iteration, victory becomes not just a possibility but an inevitability.