Beta 2

£250/3 months or £100/seat/month · live-service & Early Access studios.Join waitlist→
GameDataCoreGameDataCore
HomeBetaProductPricingCompanyManifestoNewsContact
LoginJoin waitlist

For Decision Makers carrying one or more live games

Not more dashboards.Fewer bad decisions.

You are buried in player feedback and cannot see what actually matters. GameDataCore surfaces the patterns a generic tool misses, because we understand what your team is trying to build and who's really behind the audience providing the feedback.

Join waitlistSee how it works

Evidence informs.

Creativity decides.

CoreDatabase — simplified view of the Game Database surfaceGame catalogueMANAGED GAMESGame 01CasualGame 02RPGGame 03StrategyTRACKED GAMES+GAME DATABASE196,941 titlesFiltersHomeAll · 196,941RecentFlaggedStrategy gameAction RPGHorrorQuick AnalyzeNarrative gameOpen worldSurvivalIndie puzzleRoguelikeSci-fi shooterDating simSports simDriving sim
CoreProfile — simplified view of the platformGame catalogueMANAGED GAMESGame 01CasualGame 02RPGGame 03StrategyTRACKED GAMES+AUDIENCE INTELLIGENCEGame 01SummaryOverlapEngagementProfileBenchmarkTASTE & OVERLAPWhat else does this audience play?Affinity coverage 76%Linked titles 50 / 66TOP GENRESTOP TAGSRPGAdventureIndieStrategySingleplayerStory richAtmosphericSci-fi
Workspace overview — simplified game catalogue and action consoleWorkspace homeYour gamesMonitor owned titles, tracked competitors, and every action waiting for review.Search games, teams, and signalsDead DiscoDoomForzaHelldiversInvincibleProject ZomboidContinue: refine the next product decisionAction consoleWhat needs attentionRisksDifficulty spikes appearing in early reviews.InsightsPlayers praise depth but need clearer onboarding.Hot jobsNew clusters need triage before sprint planning.Core asksCompare audience overlap with adjacent titles.24 open signals · 8 decisions ready
CoreFeedback — simplified view of the clusters surfaceGame catalogueMANAGED GAMESGame 01CasualGame 02RPGGame 03StrategyTRACKED GAMES+COREFEEDBACK | CLUSTERSGame 01InboxSnippetsClustersSurfaceInsightsCLUSTERS73CLUSTERED SNIPPETS420SENTIMENT35%positiveACTIVE CLUSTERS — RANKED BY IMPACTDifficulty spike — Act 2Accepted347 snippetsPacing — opening hoursSuggested182 snippetsUI clarity — inventorySuggested96 snippetsSoundtrack — atmospheric praiseSuggested64 snippetsNegativePositiveNeutral
Decision Hub — simplified priority decision modalGDCPriority listRanked by decision impactDifficulty spikePriority 96Onboarding gapPriority 82UI clarityPriority 64Build pacingPriority 41Decision HubPlayers praise depthbut hit steep early friction.A high-impact product decision assembled from player quotes, theme clusters,sentiment movement, and retention risk. Evidence stays attached to the call.Difficulty curveOnboardingRetention riskAct 2Evidence attached to the decisionPlayer evidence"The world is brilliant, but the second boss arrives before the systems click."Design signalDepth is landing. Early challenge is filtering motivated players too soon.Recommended moveSmooth the first difficulty spike, then measure retention and review tone.Recommended decisionTune earlydifficultyConfidence91%strongEvidence mix184 quotes · 7 themes · 3 cohorts
Evidence-grounded decisions◆Auditable outputs◆Psychographic baselines◆Community signals unified◆No black-box scoring◆Comparative context built in◆CoreFeedback · CoreProfile · CoreBrain◆Decision intelligence · Not dashboards◆Evidence-grounded decisions◆Auditable outputs◆Psychographic baselines◆Community signals unified◆No black-box scoring◆Comparative context built in◆CoreFeedback · CoreProfile · CoreBrain◆Decision intelligence · Not dashboards◆

×The problem

Decisions without evidence.Teams without alignment.

Every studio is making expensive decisions in the dark. They can see fragments — but when the high-stakes call comes, nobody in the room shares a calibrated picture they can defend.

The noise

001

Feedback isn't evidence.

Raw community signal arrives as a wall of noise — hard to parse, easy to avoid. Teams wall themselves off, and the loudest voice wins by default. The problem isn't emotional fragility. It's signal with no structure.

The vacuum

002

Ego fills the gap.

Three weeks arguing in Slack. Six years on a project with blank checks and no milestone markers. Different scale — same failure mode: calls made without evidence the room can trust.

Black box

003

Confident output. No audit trail.

Teams dump player feedback into a generic LLM and get summaries that sound decisive — hallucinations and guesswork parading as facts. You can't trace a claim to a review, a snippet, or a source. Decisions built on that carry risk you can't defend, and outcomes you can't audit.

The split

004

No layer the whole studio shares.

It's not bad execs versus emotional creatives. Leadership, design, and community each work from a different fragment — feedback in one tool, alignment in another — so no one shares the same evidence base when it counts.

×The disconnect

Five signals.No system connects them.

Every studio sees fragments — reviews, player counts, community posts, financials, wishlists — but no tool connects what players say, feel, and do with what teams intend and markets expect into one calibrated picture.

CoreFeedback Beta

Say

What players say — in reviews, discussions, forums, and across social media.

Feel

What players feel — emotional tone, motivation, needs, and intent.

Coming soon

Do

What players do — behaviour, retention, purchases, and advocacy.

Intent

What studios intend — pillars, vision, design direction, and budgets.

Expect

What markets expect — genre trends, cross-game communities, and benchmarks.

The result: years and hundreds of millions spent on games that better evidence would have redirected in months.

✓CoreFeedback — the First Core in the Decision OS

Getting feedback was neverthe hard part.

Audience feedback is scattered across reviews, Discord, forums, support and social. The hard part is knowing which signal deserves your next decision, and getting the team to agree on it before the patch ships.

◎The "who said it" difference

If two players both say they hate the combat, do you weight them the same?

Same signal

Both players say they hate the combat mechanics.

Player one

01
Playtime
2 hours
Emotional state
Frustrated
Library & history
Their Steam library and gameplay history show they don't usually play games like this.

Player two

02
Playtime
100 hours
Emotional state
Boredom
Library & patterns
Their library and play patterns show many similar games — and they've left similar reviews on other titles in the genre.

The solution — and how a team prioritises what to do next — are very different. Binary sentiment has no answers.

◎CoreFeedback

From Audience Feedbackto Decisions you can defend.

Discover what matters, prioritise what ships next, align on evidence — then measure outcomes and learn what moved the needle.

Beta

Alpha

beta

01

Discover

See the patterns in the noise, weighted by who is actually saying it, not a flat sentiment score.

beta

02

Prioritise

Turn signal into a ranked decision queue: what to fix, build or measure next, and why.

alpha

03

Align

Hand the team evidence they can challenge, so the call is made on evidence, not just the loudest or most confident voice in the room.

alpha

04

Measure

Track the decision after it ships, and learn what actually moved the player experience.

alpha

05

Learn

Did the decision have the desired outcome? Did it move the needle as expected — and if not, why?

◎Our approach

Streamlined. Automated.Built to shrink TTD and TTA.

Time to Decision and Time to Alignment are where momentum dies. Our flow compresses both — from signal to aligned action without another deck, another three-week thread, or another gut call where ego fills the gap.

TTD · Time to Decision

Signal enters the engine as soon as the game is added.

✓In practice

Evidence teamscan stand behind.

“GameDataCore helped us understand our audience with clarity and conviction — evidence we could use to reposition the game, refine our messaging, and articulate our studio track record with confidence.”
Mark Backler

Founder · Sketchbook Games

✓Beta 2 waitlist

Three months of access for the price of one standard month.

Bring one live game and a real decision, and reach your first evidence-backed call inside the week.

Join waitlist

✓The future

The future of decision intelligencefor games.

CoreFeedback is the first Core — connecting what players say and feel into decisions you can defend. The full Decision OS connects every signal a studio touches: behaviour, intent, market context, and the evidence that survives the room.

Capability01

All Five Signals. One Calibrated Picture.

Say and Feel are live in CoreFeedback Beta. Behaviour, studio intent, and market expectation follow — disconnected fragments become one evidence layer studios can reason from.

Capability02

Player Psychology Decoded.

Understand why players engage, disengage, or churn, not just what they say or do. Behaviour translated into motivation, expectation, and decision-relevant evidence your whole team can act on.

Capability03

Community Signals, Unified.

Track emotion, topic, and expectation shifts across platforms — not a single sentiment dial. See backlash, tone, and narrative risk with context. Separate vocal minorities from material risk. Understand who is reacting, why, and what it means for your decisions.

Capability04

Integrated Evidence, Causal Insight.

Combine feedback, behavioural signals, and commercial outcomes into a single evidence layer. Move beyond disconnected metrics to understand what is actually driving outcomes across the player journey.

Capability05

Alignment Across Your Studio.

Give design, production, marketing, and leadership one evidence base they can trust — so alignment is measured, not assumed, and the call isn't won by whoever spoke loudest. Teams challenge outputs where they already work; that conversation feeds back into the decision.

Capability06

One Shared Pipeline.

Every Core is a different entry point into the same underlying system. As more studios use it, behavioural baselines sharpen, archetypes stabilise, and the model improves. Shared intelligence, not isolated analytics.

Capability07

Any Game, Not Just Yours.

Analyse your own titles, a close comparator, or any released game with sufficient data. Comparative context is not optional. It is foundational.

Capability08

Confidence, Not Answers.

GameDataCore does not tell you what to do. It shows you what the evidence says, how strong it is, and where uncertainty remains. Creative judgment stays in the loop.

Capability09

Built to Compound.

Every decision logged alongside its evidence creates an auditable history your team can revisit. When outcomes validate a call, confidence sharpens for the next one — practitioner-built intelligence that gets harder to replace over time.

Capability10

Practitioner-Built.

Sixty years of combined studio and publishing experience shaped every workflow — not reverse-engineered from data by people who have never had to defend a greenlight call.

CoreFeedback is where we start. The Decision OS is where this is going.

Product
  • Overview
  • How it compounds
  • What's inside
  • Product FAQ
Pricing
  • Pricing overview
  • Seat tiers
  • How pricing works
  • What uses credits
  • Pricing FAQ
Company
  • Our story
  • Origin
  • Beliefs
  • Team
  • Investors
Manifesto
  • The Decision OS
  • The 12 Laws
  • From the founder
News
  • News & insights
  • Substack
Beta
  • Beta 2 waitlist
  • Join waitlist
  • Support (Discord)
Contact
  • Get in touch
  • Book a demo
Legal
  • Privacy
  • Terms
Social
  • Discord
  • LinkedIn
  • Bluesky
  • Instagram
GameDataCore logoGameDataCore logo© 2026 GameDataCore. All rights reserved.