Game Dev Outsourcing Directory vs Codealive MCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the Game Dev Outsourcing Directory and Codealive 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?

G

Choose Game Dev Outsourcing Directory when:

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

Explore Game Dev Outsourcing Directory Details

Choose Codealive MCP when:

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

Explore Codealive MCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	G Game Dev Outsourcing Directory Developer Tools	Codealive MCP Developer Tools
Summary	Search 438 game outsourcing studios by service, country, engine and platform. No API key.	Semantic code search and analysis from CodeAlive for AI assistants and agents.
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools

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": {
    "game-dev-outsourcing-directory": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "game-dev-outsourcing-directory"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "codealive-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "skills"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons