Being at such an early stage of its development, the state of the GameFi landscape is chaotic. Projects regularly enter the market, and it is difficult to discern whether they are worth one’s time and investment. XBorg’s vision is founded on the dedication to the evolution of gaming and esports 3.0. The empowerment of players is our top priority and we want to give our community all the tools necessary so that gamers from all backgrounds, crypto or non-crypto native, may extract the true value from the games they play. We have stayed true to this mission by providing weekly guides and tutorials from basic blockchain fundamentals, to NFT basics, and in-depth game analysis articles. In addition to our mission is our promise to full transparency with our community, therefore in this article, we will explore one of our key research areas, and break down exactly how we approach the analyses. This article will expand upon XBorg’s game analysis rating system.

Every game analyzed by our team is given an XBorg rating, this rating is the product of four categories, gameplay, esports potential, community, and investment potential. Each category is broken down into multiple subcategories of considerations. Our goal is that when the player sees the particular XBorg rating of a game, they can confidently make a decision about whether or not this is a game they will choose to support. Though we do not intend for this process to be one-sided. In addition to our researcher’s XBorg rating, players will be given the opportunity to share their views and ratings as well with the XPlorer rating. The growth of knowledge is a dynamic process, and we strongly believe that by combining a rating from our community and our team of researchers, players will be able to tread the GameFi landscape, cut through the chaos, and reach the heights they seek. The following section will break down each category our researchers use and the logic behind it so that we can solidify the foundation of our XBorg and XPlorer rating system.

Disclaimer

Firstly, the Xplorer rating system is currently in development and has not been officially released. We plan on making this official in the coming months. All mentions of the Xplorer rating system in this article are meant for clarity of its functionality for the day of its release. At its release, it will be aligned to the XBorg scale, with some slight alterations due to the fact that players may not have access to some areas such as community growth and corporate initiatives of inclusivity.

Secondly, the overtime the available XBorg analyses will be revamped to more coherently represent this scale.

Finally, we emphasize that none of the information we provide should be seen as financial and investment advice, and we are not liable for any damages that may occur from following our information. We analyze games and explore all angles, including the project’s finance, a paramount angle of GameFi projects. We stress this should not be interpreted as a call for investment.

The XBorg rating is dynamic, every new update to a game has the potential to scale it in any direction and therefore our judgment adjusts accordingly. We would like to emphasize that any major update that will cause us to change our rating, will be communicated in the form of an updated analysis or a follow-up video explaining exactly what has changed. In addition, the Xplorer rating is equally dynamic. Players have the opportunity to review, rate, and amend their opinions regularly as they experience the game.

Our rating system uses a scale from 0 to 10. Below you can find a general description of the various steps of the rating scale:

0: Unacceptable 1: Awful 2: Very poor 3: Bad 4: Below average 5: Average 6: Above average 7: Good 8: Very strong 9: Great 10: Excellent

If a game has a statistic that is unavailable, such as the ratio of bots to active members, we do research and give our best estimate.

We would like to strongly emphasize that XBorg’s analyses and ratings are completely objective and uninfluenced by any third party. We have not accepted sponsored reviews yet, and should the day come when a game’s team would be interested in our XBorg review, they will receive an objective of analysis as any other game in our library. This neutrality of our reviews is paramount to our mission.

The team conducting the analysis has a long history of research and will approach the subject from various perspectives, ensuring objectivity. In addition, the entire staff of XBorg has a voice in what they believe a game’s rating should be, in an effort to further strengthen the legitimacy of the rating system. Our staff is composed of genuine gamers from various backgrounds, lengthy discussions are at the core of the reviews.

The overall experience of a game is very important to user enjoyment and retention. At XBorg we are strong supporters of accessible, innovative, and high-quality games.

This subcategory represents how approachable a game is for a diverse audience. Some projects require a strong base knowledge of the game to perform, while others you can dive in and play. Then some games require an initial investment to play, while others are free to play. This category analyzes the various potential barriers to entry for players. We would like to clarify that we do not award games for being easy, a competitive game should be hard to master, we are considering ease of access.

This category builds on accessibility and considers factors such as whether the game in question is cross-platform or not, if the project requires a capable computer, or is a simple browser game. Not all players game on their computers, and not all have strong computers, this factor is crucial to a player's gaming experience.

This category can be difficult to approach, but it considers in a broad sense whether or not the project in question has a polished and unified design language, or if it is still unrefined. Elements such as the user interface and user experience (UX/UI) are very important to the enjoyment of a game, and they should not be taken for granted.

All game genres have a myriad of teams developing projects under the style. Whether it is a First Person Shooter (FPS), a Trading Card Game (TCG), or Massively Online Multiplayer (MOBA), there are countless options for a player to choose from. What set these games apart is the way they chose to tackle the genre, and what new elements they bring to it.

A common criticism of crypto games is that they at times do not compare to the quality of traditional gaming. This has truth to it since the GameFi landscape is still extremely young. This comparison is important to keep in mind since it does affect the playability of a game. In addition, this is an important category for non-crypto native players who are just starting to enter the world of GameFi, they need clarity as to what they can expect when supporting a game they are curious about.

The GameFi landscape not only allows players to enjoy games but also approaches them from an investment perspective as well. In this category, we aim to educate players about the economics of the game they are interested in. Important to note that XBorg does compete in traditional Esports and is interested in projects that are not founded in the GameFi landscape. Since we are critical of the power asymmetry of traditional gaming, we will consistently give below-average scores to traditional games when considering their investment potential.

** However we would like to remind the reader again of our disclaimer, none of the information we provide should be seen as financial advice, and we are not liable for any damages that may occur from following our information.**

Many GameFi projects do come from humble origins, and that is the beauty of the potential of GameFi. Though in an ecosystem where scams do occur, this is a consideration we give a lot of attention to.

Do the in-game Tokens and NFTs have value? Are they effective beyond the scope of the game? Key questions that aim to analyze the tokenomics of the game in question.

Building on the previous category, here we consider the intrinsic value of the in-game assets and how liquid they are on the in-game and secondary marketplaces. Some games approach their in-game assets as investments, while others do not ascribe as much value to the assets. This category considers the monetary value of in-game assets.

What are the statuses of the game’s financial support, and the deal flows at the disposal of the developing team and company.  A game can be promising, but without the proper investors and sufficient funding, it will not demonstrate strong longevity.

This category analyzes the blockchain and technology used to implement and deploy the game. This can be innovations such as liquidity protocols and layer 2 solutions.

At XBorg we are pioneering the future of Esports 3.0, and we have a community of competitive players, therefore this category is very important to consider. Games that do not have a competitive angle do not function in our ecosystem.

A mark of a game ready for an Esports stage is that it is approachable yet difficult to master, so that time, effort, and dedication are rewarded and individual/team skill is highlighted. Games that come to XBorg must have a competitive edge, and this category aims to analyze it.

This category particularly applies to crypto games and analyzes if a game is Pay to Win (P2W) and the meta is dynamic and balanced. Since many GameFi projects function with assets of value, the game should be designed in such a way that skill determines victory as opposed to the individual’s wealth.

Does the game have a thriving esports community? This is important for tournament organizers like XBorg, and also players. Our community consists of highly competitive players, climbing the leaderboard and striving to be at the top is the goal we aim for.

This builds on the previous category. Does the game have connections to organizers and platforms such as XBorg or Community Gaming? Deal flows and connection streams to various esports networks are an important consideration for us at XBorg and our community.

A game may have a strong Esports and competitive scene, but it may not have the technology for organizers like XBorg to facilitate engaging events. This technology can be elements such as game APIs that organizers can leverage to represent interesting data and statistics such as Kill/Death ratio (K/Dr) or a player's victory to loss ratio. Any technology that organizers can use to further players' and viewers' Esport experience.

Games are nothing without their player, and the most important is kept for last. This category aims to analyze the health of a game’s community. Are they all bots and yield farmers? Or genuine and motivated players? Some of the key considerations of this category.

This category analyzes the growth and popularity of a game over various periods. Is the game on the rise or decline?

This category builds on the previous and focuses more on the developer team. For a game to reach a large audience, it needs to expand its media streams. In this section, we analyze the extent to which a project works to branch out its media presence and increase its footprint in the community.

A very crucial aspect of a game is the type of players it attracts. At XBorg we are pioneering the future of Esports 3.0 and there are no rooms for bots and yield chasers. Our players share the same values. This category will make transparent to players what type of game they are to expect.

Is the project supported by players internationally? Or does it have a more localized and regional fanbase? At XBorg we aim to communicate and interact with citizens of the world and are critical of games that may limit regions and people from participating in the next generation of entertainment.

Below you will find a link to XBorg’s rating system template, and we will make an interactive version of this table available to our Xplorers. We aim to create a platform where players can start sharing their opinions and suggestions so that they can shape the landscape of GameFi the way they see it. This system is a step toward this vision.

Link to the rating system

Being at such an early stage of its development, the state of the GameFi landscape is chaotic. Projects regularly enter the market, and it is difficult to discern whether they are worth one’s time and investment. XBorg’s vision is founded on the dedication to the evolution of gaming and esports 3.0. The empowerment of players is our top priority and we want to give our community all the tools necessary so that gamers from all backgrounds, crypto or non-crypto native, may extract the true value from the games they play. We have stayed true to this mission by providing weekly guides and tutorials from basic blockchain fundamentals, to NFT basics, and in-depth game analysis articles. In addition to our mission is our promise to full transparency with our community, therefore in this article, we will explore one of our key research areas, and break down exactly how we approach the analyses. This article will expand upon XBorg’s game analysis rating system.

Every game analyzed by our team is given an XBorg rating, this rating is the product of four categories, gameplay, esports potential, community, and investment potential. Each category is broken down into multiple subcategories of considerations. Our goal is that when the player sees the particular XBorg rating of a game, they can confidently make a decision about whether or not this is a game they will choose to support. Though we do not intend for this process to be one-sided. In addition to our researcher’s XBorg rating, players will be given the opportunity to share their views and ratings as well with the XPlorer rating. The growth of knowledge is a dynamic process, and we strongly believe that by combining a rating from our community and our team of researchers, players will be able to tread the GameFi landscape, cut through the chaos, and reach the heights they seek. The following section will break down each category our researchers use and the logic behind it so that we can solidify the foundation of our XBorg and XPlorer rating system.

Disclaimer

Firstly, the Xplorer rating system is currently in development and has not been officially released. We plan on making this official in the coming months. All mentions of the Xplorer rating system in this article are meant for clarity of its functionality for the day of its release. At its release, it will be aligned to the XBorg scale, with some slight alterations due to the fact that players may not have access to some areas such as community growth and corporate initiatives of inclusivity.

Secondly, the overtime the available XBorg analyses will be revamped to more coherently represent this scale.

Finally, we emphasize that none of the information we provide should be seen as financial and investment advice, and we are not liable for any damages that may occur from following our information. We analyze games and explore all angles, including the project’s finance, a paramount angle of GameFi projects. We stress this should not be interpreted as a call for investment.

The XBorg rating is dynamic, every new update to a game has the potential to scale it in any direction and therefore our judgment adjusts accordingly. We would like to emphasize that any major update that will cause us to change our rating, will be communicated in the form of an updated analysis or a follow-up video explaining exactly what has changed. In addition, the Xplorer rating is equally dynamic. Players have the opportunity to review, rate, and amend their opinions regularly as they experience the game.

Our rating system uses a scale from 0 to 10. Below you can find a general description of the various steps of the rating scale:

0: Unacceptable 1: Awful 2: Very poor 3: Bad 4: Below average 5: Average 6: Above average 7: Good 8: Very strong 9: Great 10: Excellent

If a game has a statistic that is unavailable, such as the ratio of bots to active members, we do research and give our best estimate.

We would like to strongly emphasize that XBorg’s analyses and ratings are completely objective and uninfluenced by any third party. We have not accepted sponsored reviews yet, and should the day come when a game’s team would be interested in our XBorg review, they will receive an objective of analysis as any other game in our library. This neutrality of our reviews is paramount to our mission.

The team conducting the analysis has a long history of research and will approach the subject from various perspectives, ensuring objectivity. In addition, the entire staff of XBorg has a voice in what they believe a game’s rating should be, in an effort to further strengthen the legitimacy of the rating system. Our staff is composed of genuine gamers from various backgrounds, lengthy discussions are at the core of the reviews.

The overall experience of a game is very important to user enjoyment and retention. At XBorg we are strong supporters of accessible, innovative, and high-quality games.

This subcategory represents how approachable a game is for a diverse audience. Some projects require a strong base knowledge of the game to perform, while others you can dive in and play. Then some games require an initial investment to play, while others are free to play. This category analyzes the various potential barriers to entry for players. We would like to clarify that we do not award games for being easy, a competitive game should be hard to master, we are considering ease of access.

This category builds on accessibility and considers factors such as whether the game in question is cross-platform or not, if the project requires a capable computer, or is a simple browser game. Not all players game on their computers, and not all have strong computers, this factor is crucial to a player's gaming experience.

This category can be difficult to approach, but it considers in a broad sense whether or not the project in question has a polished and unified design language, or if it is still unrefined. Elements such as the user interface and user experience (UX/UI) are very important to the enjoyment of a game, and they should not be taken for granted.

All game genres have a myriad of teams developing projects under the style. Whether it is a First Person Shooter (FPS), a Trading Card Game (TCG), or Massively Online Multiplayer (MOBA), there are countless options for a player to choose from. What set these games apart is the way they chose to tackle the genre, and what new elements they bring to it.

A common criticism of crypto games is that they at times do not compare to the quality of traditional gaming. This has truth to it since the GameFi landscape is still extremely young. This comparison is important to keep in mind since it does affect the playability of a game. In addition, this is an important category for non-crypto native players who are just starting to enter the world of GameFi, they need clarity as to what they can expect when supporting a game they are curious about.

The GameFi landscape not only allows players to enjoy games but also approaches them from an investment perspective as well. In this category, we aim to educate players about the economics of the game they are interested in. Important to note that XBorg does compete in traditional Esports and is interested in projects that are not founded in the GameFi landscape. Since we are critical of the power asymmetry of traditional gaming, we will consistently give below-average scores to traditional games when considering their investment potential.

** However we would like to remind the reader again of our disclaimer, none of the information we provide should be seen as financial advice, and we are not liable for any damages that may occur from following our information.**

Many GameFi projects do come from humble origins, and that is the beauty of the potential of GameFi. Though in an ecosystem where scams do occur, this is a consideration we give a lot of attention to.

Do the in-game Tokens and NFTs have value? Are they effective beyond the scope of the game? Key questions that aim to analyze the tokenomics of the game in question.

Building on the previous category, here we consider the intrinsic value of the in-game assets and how liquid they are on the in-game and secondary marketplaces. Some games approach their in-game assets as investments, while others do not ascribe as much value to the assets. This category considers the monetary value of in-game assets.

What are the statuses of the game’s financial support, and the deal flows at the disposal of the developing team and company.  A game can be promising, but without the proper investors and sufficient funding, it will not demonstrate strong longevity.

This category analyzes the blockchain and technology used to implement and deploy the game. This can be innovations such as liquidity protocols and layer 2 solutions.

At XBorg we are pioneering the future of Esports 3.0, and we have a community of competitive players, therefore this category is very important to consider. Games that do not have a competitive angle do not function in our ecosystem.

A mark of a game ready for an Esports stage is that it is approachable yet difficult to master, so that time, effort, and dedication are rewarded and individual/team skill is highlighted. Games that come to XBorg must have a competitive edge, and this category aims to analyze it.

This category particularly applies to crypto games and analyzes if a game is Pay to Win (P2W) and the meta is dynamic and balanced. Since many GameFi projects function with assets of value, the game should be designed in such a way that skill determines victory as opposed to the individual’s wealth.

Does the game have a thriving esports community? This is important for tournament organizers like XBorg, and also players. Our community consists of highly competitive players, climbing the leaderboard and striving to be at the top is the goal we aim for.

This builds on the previous category. Does the game have connections to organizers and platforms such as XBorg or Community Gaming? Deal flows and connection streams to various esports networks are an important consideration for us at XBorg and our community.

A game may have a strong Esports and competitive scene, but it may not have the technology for organizers like XBorg to facilitate engaging events. This technology can be elements such as game APIs that organizers can leverage to represent interesting data and statistics such as Kill/Death ratio (K/Dr) or a player's victory to loss ratio. Any technology that organizers can use to further players' and viewers' Esport experience.

Games are nothing without their player, and the most important is kept for last. This category aims to analyze the health of a game’s community. Are they all bots and yield farmers? Or genuine and motivated players? Some of the key considerations of this category.

This category analyzes the growth and popularity of a game over various periods. Is the game on the rise or decline?

This category builds on the previous and focuses more on the developer team. For a game to reach a large audience, it needs to expand its media streams. In this section, we analyze the extent to which a project works to branch out its media presence and increase its footprint in the community.

A very crucial aspect of a game is the type of players it attracts. At XBorg we are pioneering the future of Esports 3.0 and there are no rooms for bots and yield chasers. Our players share the same values. This category will make transparent to players what type of game they are to expect.

Is the project supported by players internationally? Or does it have a more localized and regional fanbase? At XBorg we aim to communicate and interact with citizens of the world and are critical of games that may limit regions and people from participating in the next generation of entertainment.

Below you will find a link to XBorg’s rating system template, and we will make an interactive version of this table available to our Xplorers. We aim to create a platform where players can start sharing their opinions and suggestions so that they can shape the landscape of GameFi the way they see it. This system is a step toward this vision.

Link to the rating system