Short answer
We moved from case-by-case to categorically out because in two years not one Web3 brief passed the test we set in 2022: a specific property of a distributed ledger that the use case genuinely requires and cannot get from a traditional system. The vocabulary has grown more sophisticated, with "Web3 infrastructure", "onchain identity", and "tokenized assets" replacing NFTs and tokens, but the underlying pattern has not changed. It is still a business problem with a better, simpler solution being channeled through blockchain architecture for reasons the brief cannot articulate technically. The attention that would have gone into that work now goes into AI solutions, business automation, and the operational software layer.
In early 2022 we wrote about declining Web3 project briefs because the blockchain component in each case was not doing real work - it was decorative. That post drew a few responses from builders who thought we were being too conservative. We said we were open to genuine use cases.
Two years later, the picture is clearer. We have moved from skeptical-to-declining to categorically out.
What Changed
The NFT market correction happened. The high-profile failures accumulated. The projects that were going to revolutionize supply chain, gaming, and digital identity mostly did not. This is not a statement about blockchain technology as a whole; it is a statement about the gap between what was promised in 2021 and 2022 and what the actual delivery record shows.
More relevant to our decision: we have not seen a Web3 project brief in two years that passed the test we articulated in 2022 - a specific property of a distributed ledger that the use case genuinely requires and cannot get from a traditional system. The briefs have continued to arrive. They follow the same pattern they did two years ago: a product concept with a blockchain element attached for reasons that are marketing rather than technical.
What the Briefs Look Like Now
The framing has shifted slightly. In 2022, briefs were framed around NFTs, tokens, and decentralization. In 2024, we are seeing more briefs framed around "Web3 infrastructure" or "onchain identity" or "tokenized assets." The vocabulary is more sophisticated. The underlying pattern is the same: a business problem that has a better, simpler solution being channeled through blockchain architecture for reasons the brief cannot articulate technically.
We are also seeing briefs where the blockchain component is required by an investor or partnership agreement rather than by the product requirements. The product team knows the chain is not necessary. The business context requires it anyway. We have sympathy for that situation but we are not the right studio for it.
Why a Hard Line Rather Than Case-by-Case
We gave case-by-case a genuine try. Two years of case-by-case produced a lot of conversations with clients who had invested significant time and emotional energy in their concept. When the technical review concluded the blockchain component was not justified, those conversations were difficult and often unproductive. The client had arrived committed to an architecture; our assessment that the architecture was wrong created a dynamic that was rarely useful for anyone.
A stated position saves everyone time. Clients who genuinely need blockchain expertise know immediately to look elsewhere. Clients who are uncertain about whether they need blockchain have a clear starting point for a more useful conversation about what they are actually trying to solve.
We are not the only studio that has landed here. Several studios that positioned aggressively around Web3 work in 2021 and 2022 have quietly shifted positioning. We prefer to be direct about it.
What We Are Focused On Instead
The attention and energy that would have gone into blockchain-adjacent work is going into AI solutions, business automation, and the operational software layer that actually moves businesses forward. These are areas where we are shipping things that work and where the client outcomes are measurable.
There are real problems in the Philippine business landscape that good software solves - workflow automation, data visibility, customer experience, operational efficiency. We would rather work on those.
If you have a brief that touches blockchain and want an honest read on whether it actually needs the chain, we are happy to have that conversation. We will tell you what we think.
Questions · 04
Frequently asked questions
Is this a claim that blockchain technology does not work?
It is not. It is a statement about the gap between what was promised in 2021 and 2022 and what the actual delivery record shows, and about the specific briefs that reach us. Clients who genuinely need blockchain expertise should go to a studio that has it, which is part of why we state the position publicly.
Why a blanket policy instead of judging each brief on its merits?
We gave case-by-case a genuine try for two years. It produced a lot of difficult conversations with clients who had already invested significant time and emotional energy in a concept and arrived committed to an architecture, and our assessment that the architecture was wrong created a dynamic that was rarely useful for anyone. A stated position saves everyone that, and gives an uncertain client a clearer starting point for a conversation about what they are actually trying to solve.
What if our investor or partnership agreement requires a blockchain component?
We see those briefs. Usually the product team already knows the chain is not necessary and the business context requires it anyway. We have sympathy for that situation, but we are not the right studio for it.
What do you work on instead?
AI solutions, business automation, and the operational software layer, which in practice means workflow automation, data visibility, customer experience, and operational efficiency. Those are areas where we are shipping things that work and where the client outcomes are measurable. If you have a brief that touches blockchain and want an honest read on whether it actually needs the chain, we are still happy to have that conversation.
