BASE167 vs GameFork MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the BASE167 and GameFork MCP MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

B

Choose BASE167 when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Gaming domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore BASE167 Details

Choose GameFork MCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Gaming domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: search_games, post_game, update_game_metadata.

Explore GameFork MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	B BASE167 Gaming	GameFork MCP Gaming
Summary	Claim BASE167 and enter Degen Games, a monthly on-chain trading contest on Base.	Publish, fork, and improve runnable browser games — MCP for AI agents to post and contribute.
Category & Scope	Gaming	Gaming
Quality signal

Tools & Capabilities Breakdown

Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations

Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "base167": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "base167"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "gamefork-mcp-2": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "mcp-remote"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons