🇺🇸English
Performance Notes
- Take your time to do this thoroughly
- Quality is more important than speed
- Do not skip validation steps
Review Game
Analyze an existing game codebase and provide a structured review. This is the final step in the pipeline — it checks everything is wired up correctly and gives you a quality score.
Instructions
Analyze the game at $ARGUMENTS (or the current directory if no path given).
Step 1: Identify the game
- Detect the engine (Three.js, Phaser, or other)
- Read
package.json for dependencies and scripts
- Read the main entry point and index.html
- Identify the game concept/genre
Step 2: Architecture Review
Check for these required patterns and report compliance:
- EventBus : Is there a centralized event system? Are modules decoupled?
- GameState : Is there a centralized state singleton?
- Constants : Are config values centralized or scattered as magic numbers?
- Orchestrator : Is there a main Game class that initializes everything?
- Directory Structure : Is code organized into core/systems/gameplay/ui/level layers?
- Event Constants : Are events defined as named constants or raw strings?
Step 3: Performance Review
Check for common issues:
- Delta time capping : Is
getDelta() capped to prevent death spirals?
- Object pooling : Are temp objects reused in hot loops?
- Resource disposal : Are Three.js geometries/materials/textures disposed?
- Event cleanup : Are event listeners cleaned up on scene transitions?
- Asset loading : Are assets preloaded with progress feedback?
Step 4: Code Quality
- No circular dependencies : Modules flow one direction
- Single responsibility : Each module has one clear job
- Error handling : Event handlers wrapped in try/catch
- Consistent naming : Events use
domain:action, files use PascalCase
Step 5: Monetization Readiness
- Points system : Is there a scoring/points mechanism?
- Session tracking : Can game sessions be identified?
- Anti-cheat potential : Is score validation server-side or at least structured for it?
- Play.fun integration : Any existing SDK integration?
Output Format
Provide a structured report with:
- Game Overview - What the game is, tech stack, game loop
- Architecture Score (out of 6 checks)
- Performance Score (out of 5 checks)
- Code Quality Score (out of 4 checks)
- Monetization Readiness (out of 4 checks)
- Top Recommendations - Prioritized list of improvements with plain-English explanations
- What's Working Well - Positive findings
Example Usage
/review-game examples/flappy-bird
Result: Architecture 6/6, Performance 4/5, Code Quality 4/4, Monetization 2/4 → Top recommendations: add Play.fun SDK, add object pooling for pipes, add delta time capping. Positive findings: clean EventBus usage, proper GameState reset, well-organized directory structure.
Next Step
Tell the user:
Your game has been through the full pipeline! Here's what you have:
- Scaffolded architecture (
/make-game)
- Visual polish (
/design-game)
- Music and sound effects (
/add-audio)
- Automated tests (
/qa-game)
- Architecture review (
/review-game)
What's next?
- Add new gameplay features with
/game-creator:add-feature [description]
- Deploy to the web — run
npm run build && ~/.agents/skills/here-now/scripts/publish.sh dist/ for instant hosting, or use GitHub Pages, Vercel, Netlify, itch.io
- Keep iterating! Run
/design-game, /add-audio, or /review-game again anytime after making changes.
Weekly Installs
97
Repository
opusgamelabs/ga…-creator
GitHub Stars
32
First Seen
Feb 21, 2026
Security Audits
Gen Agent Trust HubPassSocketPassSnykPass
Installed on
claude-code82
opencode50
kimi-cli48
gemini-cli48
amp48
github-copilot48
