---
name: review-game
description: Review an existing game codebase for architecture, performance, and best practices
argument-hint: "[path-to-game]"
disable-model-invocation: true
---

# 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:
1. **Game Overview** - What the game is, tech stack, game loop
2. **Architecture Score** (out of 6 checks)
3. **Performance Score** (out of 5 checks)
4. **Code Quality Score** (out of 4 checks)
5. **Monetization Readiness** (out of 4 checks)
6. **Top Recommendations** - Prioritized list of improvements with plain-English explanations
7. **What's Working Well** - Positive findings

## 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` then host the `dist/` folder on GitHub Pages, Vercel, Netlify, or itch.io
> - Keep iterating! Run `/design-game`, `/add-audio`, or `/review-game` again anytime after making changes.