Introduction
GameSwift Chain is an advanced blockchain ecosystem optimized explicitly for the gaming industry. As the ‘Polkadot for web3 gaming ecosystem with zkEVM parachains,’ it offers a unique fusion of blockchain technology, gaming compatibility, and user-oriented features that set a new standard for web3 gaming.
Innovation
GameSwift Chain stands out in the industry with its highly innovative features. These include a gaming-optimized blockchain, zkEVM Scalability, and cross-chain interoperability that allow seamless transactions across multiple networks. It receives a high score of 10 out of 11 in innovation, highlighting its unique proposition in the blockchain-gaming field.
Architecture
The architecture of GameSwift Chain earns an impressive 11 out of 12 scores. It is simple, with a clear, well-laid-out whitepaper detailing the underlying structure. The system is resilient against known attacks, ensuring user assets and data remain secure.
Code Quality
Regarding code quality, GameSwift Chain scores 11 out of 15. Its codebase, though not open source, exhibits robust programming using reliable languages such as C, C++, Rust, Erlang, and Ruby. The project shows high activity on Github with regular commits, extensive lines of code, well-commented code, and excellent test coverage.
Product Roadmap
The product roadmap of GameSwift Chain is promising. The upcoming launch of the GameSwift Chain Mainnet and the zkEVM L2 Integration in Q2 2023 indicate solid planning for its future development, poised to enhance its offerings and potential in the gaming industry.
Usability
The GameSwift Chain presents high usability with a perfect score of 5 out of 5. It emphasizes the user experience, offering various tools such as GameSwift ID, GameSwift SDK, GameSwift Analytics, and GameSwift Studio. These products and services aim to create a smooth, streamlined experience for gamers and developers alike.
GameSwift Team
The GameSwift Chain team boasts of experienced developers with an average Git background at the senior level, earning it a high score of 6 out of 7. Their solid coding style and active participation underscore the professional and committed approach to the project.
Conclusion
In summary, GameSwift Chain presents a robust and innovative approach to blockchain gaming. Its high-speed transactions, low gas fees, cross-chain interoperability, and gaming-focused optimizations underscore its commitment to providing seamless and efficient gaming experiences. The project’s innovative features, excellent code quality, promising roadmap, high usability, and skilled team solidify its potential and viability in the blockchain gaming industry.
Tech Score
GameSwift Chain’s overall tech score, combining innovation, architecture, code quality, mainnet release, usability, and the team, amounts to 78.18%. This rating showcases its strength and potential in the burgeoning blockchain gaming ecosystem.
| Initial Screening | |||
| Keep researching | |||
| Does this project need to use blockchain technology? | Yes | ||
| Can this project be realized? | Yes | ||
| Is there a viable use case for this project? | Yes | ||
| Is the project protected from commonly known attacks? | Yes | ||
| Are there no careless errors in the whitepaper? | Yes | ||
| Project Technology Score | |||
| Description | Scorecard | ||
| Innovation (Out Of 11) | 10 | ||
| How have similar projects performed? | Good | 2 | |
| Are there too many innovations? | Medium | 1 | |
| Percentage of crypto users that will use the project? | Over 11% | 5 | |
| Is the project unique? | Yes | 2 | |
| Architecture (Out of 12) | 11 | ||
| Overall feeling after reading whitepaper? | Good | 2 | |
| Resistance to possible attacks? | Good | 2 | |
| Complexity of the architecture? | Not too complex | 2 | |
| Time taken to understand the architecture? | 20-50 min | 1 | |
| Overall feeling about the architecture after deeper research? | Good | 4 | |
| Has the project been hacked? | No | 0 | |
| Code Quality (out of 15) | 11 | ||
| Is the project open source? | No | 0 | |
| Does the project use good code like C,C++, Rust, Erlang, Ruby, etc? | Yes | 2 | |
| Could the project use better programming languages? | No | 0 | |
| Github number of lines? | More than 10K | 1 | |
| Github commits per month? | More than 10 | 2 | |
| What is the quality of the code? | Good | 2 | |
| How well is the code commented? | Good | 1 | |
| Overall quality of the test coverage? | Good | 1 | |
| Overall quality of the maintainability index? | Outstanding | 2 | |
| When Mainnet (out of 5) | 5 | ||
| When does the mainnet come out? | Mainnet Ready | 5 | |
| Usability for Infrastructure Projects (out of 5) | 5 | ||
| Is it easy to use for the end customer? | Yes | 5 | |
| Team (out of 7) | 6 | ||
| Number of active developers? | 5+ | 2 | |
| Developers average Git Background? | Senior | 2 | |
| Developers coding style? | Solid | 2 | |
| Total Score (out of 55) | 48 | ||
| Percentage Score | |||
| Innovation | 18.18% | ||
| Architecture | 20.00% | ||
| Code Quality | 20.00% | ||
| Mainnet | 9.09% | ||
| Usability | 9.09% | ||
| Team | 10.91% | ||
| Total | 87.27% |
