Solana Kept Building Games After the FTX Collapse: What Happened in 2026

In November 2022, the FTX exchange and its affiliated trading firm, Alameda Research, collapsed within days. Solana was hit harder than most networks because FTX and Alameda were large holders of its token, SOL, and had invested heavily in projects built on the chain. When customer withdrawals stopped and the scale of the trouble became clear, the market repriced SOL sharply.

Reports from the period describe SOL falling more than 50 percent in the weeks after the trouble became public, a steeper decline than many other network tokens saw. Market coverage in early 2023 also reported that SOL fell about 73 percent between early November and the end of 2022. Those figures describe a specific window, so treat them as history rather than a guide to future moves.

For the game sector, the shock was not only about price. Studios and funds that had planned projects around Solana had to reconsider their budgets, hiring plans and partnerships. Some projects slowed or closed, while others kept building with smaller teams. The lesson for readers is that a blockchain network's fortunes can change quickly when a major backer fails, so the health of any game depends on more than the chain it runs on.

Solana had attracted attention before 2022 for its high throughput and low transaction fees. Its founders and early supporters argued that a fast, inexpensive network could support consumer applications, including games where players make many small on-chain actions. Sam Bankman-Fried was one of the most visible backers of that view, and his public comments praised the network's ability to handle very large transaction volumes.

That endorsement became a liability when FTX failed. Because the exchange had been seen as a major funder, its collapse raised questions about whether the Solana ecosystem depended too heavily on a small number of companies. Commentary at the time noted that the network's token price, its developer grants and its project pipeline were all tied to a few large players.

The structural concern was real but narrower than some headlines suggested. A network with many independent validators, developers and users can survive the loss of one backer, yet the transition is painful. Projects that had relied on FTX-linked grants or investment needed new funding sources, and the ones with thinner products or weak communities were the most likely to fade. Readers evaluating any chain should ask how many separate groups fund and use it, not just how fast it is.

Despite the downturn, many teams kept building. Some of the reasons were practical. Development tools for Solana were already mature, and experienced engineers could reuse existing code. Low fees were still a draw for games that need frequent on-chain actions, such as trading items, claiming rewards or recording match results. Many developers also judged that a market downturn would thin out speculators, leaving a smaller group of players who cared about the games themselves.

The ecosystem did not recover in a single moment. Instead, it moved through a series of smaller phases: fewer announcements, more focus on shipping working products, and gradual rebuilding of trust with users and investors. Reporting from 2024 described Solana's partial recovery and renewed growth, and a 2026 retrospective described a return to strong standing after a period of outages, security incidents and the FTX-driven setback.

For a player, this matters because a recovering ecosystem is not automatically a healthy one. A chain can regain attention while individual games still struggle. The useful approach is to judge each project on its own record: whether it has shipped regular updates, whether its player base is active outside of token discussions, and whether its economics are understandable.

Developers building on Solana in the years after FTX focused on a few recurring themes. One was mobile play, where a game can reach casual users through familiar app stores and simpler onboarding. Another was collectible card and creature games, which have clear item systems that suit tradable assets. A third was social and competitive play, where the on-chain part is a feature rather than the entire game.

Some projects leaned on distribution partnerships to reach players. In 2025, for example, coverage from Decrypt described a Solana Game Pass sold as an NFT through the Magic Eden marketplace, offering promotions across a set of partnered games for a limited period. Programs like this can add discounts, early access or bonus items, but they are time-limited and depend on the partner games continuing to operate.

When you look at any game that uses a bundled pass, read the terms closely. Find out what the pass includes, how long it runs, whether it gives ongoing access or only one-off perks, and what happens to the pass if a partner game closes. A pass that promises access to many games is only as valuable as the games still running at the end of the promotion.

By 2026, coverage of Solana tended to describe a network that had survived serious problems and then regained a place in the market. Retrospectives marking the network's sixth year pointed to a mix of outages, exploits and an FTX-driven near-collapse of confidence, followed by a strong recovery and renewed interest from institutional investors. The phrasing varies by outlet, so it helps to read more than one account.

Recovery stories often mention several factors together: improvements to network reliability, growth in developer activity, and a wider range of applications beyond trading. They also tend to note that price rebounds can reverse, and that a strong chain does not guarantee that any particular game will succeed.

If you want to follow the current picture, look at primary sources. The network's own developer documentation and status information show uptime history and upgrades. Public developer activity trackers and independent research can show whether building is steady or fading. News coverage is useful for context, but check dates, because a story written during a rally or a crash can read very differently a few months later.

Any review of Solana-based games should weigh a set of recurring risks. Network outages have interrupted transactions during periods of heavy demand, which can affect time-sensitive game actions such as trades, marketplace purchases and reward claims. Exploits against applications or wallets have also caused losses across the ecosystem in the past.

Token and launch risk is a separate concern. Early in 2025, coverage of memecoin launches tied to prominent figures drew criticism over how they were promoted and how holders were affected. Games that issue their own tokens can face similar questions about distribution, insider holdings and whether the token has a real use inside the game.

Market risk applies to everything else. If a game rewards players in a token, your earnings may be worth far less when you sell than when you earned them. Some games also make it hard to withdraw assets quickly or to move them to another network. Read the withdrawal rules before you commit, and treat rewards as variable income rather than savings.

A simple checklist can help you compare Solana games or any blockchain game. Start with the game itself. Is it fun when you ignore the token? Does it have a clear progression loop, a playable build and regular updates? A game that only talks about earnings is a weak signal.

Next, check the economics. Write down what you would need to spend to start, which assets you must buy, and what you expect to earn. Ask whether earnings depend on new players joining, because that pattern is common in weak designs. Look for a published explanation of how tokens are created, distributed and used.

Then check the operational details. Confirm the network the game runs on, the wallet it supports, and whether you can see the contract address for its tokens and collectibles. Check whether the team has been transparent about security audits and how they responded to past incidents. Finally, look for community discussion that goes beyond price. Players who report bugs, fair and unfair decisions, and shifts in the design are more useful than promotional posts.

The safest first step is usually to spend a small amount, learn how the wallet and marketplace work, and expand only if the game keeps earning your attention.

Security is the part of blockchain gaming that most often goes wrong for individual players. Use a wallet you control, keep your recovery phrase offline and private, and never enter it into a website or give it to someone who messages you. Be wary of unexpected airdrop claims, urgent messages from people posing as support staff, and links that ask you to approve unlimited token permissions for a game you have not verified.

Before you approve a transaction, read what it does. A transaction can grant a contract the right to move your tokens, so check the request in your wallet and cancel anything that looks unrelated to the action you intended. Revoke old permissions you no longer need using a reputable permissions tool.

Keep your amounts small while you learn, and separate funds you use for gaming from larger holdings. If something feels rushed, it probably is. A legitimate project will still be there after you take a day to verify it.

Many numbers in this area change daily. Token prices, total value locked in applications, player counts, transaction volumes and reward rates all move. Any article that states them as fixed facts will be out of date soon after publication, so it is better to know where to look.

For price and market history, use a established market data service or your exchange's chart, and compare several time windows. For network health, check the chain's official status page and developer documentation for outage notes and upgrade announcements. For ecosystem activity, public developer and on-chain activity dashboards can show whether usage is rising or falling. For individual games, the studio's blog, release notes and official social channels are the most reliable sources for launches, shutdowns and token changes.

When you read a claim about a game's earnings or a token's future value, ask where the figure came from and what period it covers. Treat promotional numbers with caution, and treat any statement that guarantees returns as a warning sign.