Skip to main content

Metacade

Metacade — a reference card for a crypto project: what the product does and how verifiable the project’s key claims are; also — alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis (DecAI Fit).

Metacade — the “home for gaming on Base” (per their GitBook); token: MCADE (Base, ERC‑20).

Disclaimer

Important: this page is a reference overview of the project. Within DecAIHub, we separately record a verification based on open sources within the AI thesis (what is real AI/onchain/why a token, and which sources this is based on).
This is not financial advice and not a recommendation to buy/sell/hold any asset. We do not assess price, returns, or entry/exit timing.
Conclusions are based on publicly available materials found as of the verification date. The absence of confirmation does not imply the absence of the technology.

TL;DR (for readers who are not into AI)

  • What it is: an ecosystem of “onchain games on Base” with games/tournaments/an NFT section and the MCADE token.
  • Who it’s for: players, game/app developers, the community of token holders.
  • Why onchain/token: the token is used as the ecosystem asset (per the docs — reward pools/staking and utility around the product); the blockchain — for the token and part of the game/NFT mechanics (the details of the onchain logic are described in the docs only to a limited extent).

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: enters the Metacade ecosystem (product/website) and participates in games/activities.
  2. The system does: provides games/tournaments/ecosystem sections; runs the MCADE token economy and the claimed reward mechanics.
  3. The user gets: game content and (depending on the mechanics) holder rewards/perks.
  4. Where the blockchain is: the MCADE token — onchain on the Base network; part of the ecosystem is tied to onchain infrastructure (the exact list of contracts is not confirmed by Tier‑1 sources).
  5. Token role: MCADE — the ecosystem token (tokenomics/ reward pools/staking — per the docs).

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name Metacade
Also known as (aliases) $MCADE; Metacadia
Logo (logo) ../assets/161_metacade_logo.webp
Token symbol (ticker) MCADE
Category AI/Agents | Gaming | Infra
Primary chain (chain) Base
Type EVM
Network status mainnet
Consensus (consensus) L2 (Optimistic Rollup, Base on Ethereum)
Launch date (launch_date) 2022 (in the docs: “launched in late 2022”)
Project status (status) active
Token (standard) ERC-20
Token contract 0xc48823ec67720a04a9dfd8c7d109b2c3d6622094
Token model (token_type) utility (governance)
Max supply 1,699,462,471.337561017969524354 MCADE (Max Total Supply on BaseScan)
Issuance bridge-mintable (mint/burn via the bridge; OptimismMintableERC20)
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) supply parameters — see BaseScan; the numerical values in the docs require reconciliation with onchain.
Governance — (no explicit governance mechanics are described in Tier‑1 sources)
Admins/keys —
Audit — (CertiK is listed as an external link, which is Tier‑2)
Bug bounty —
Team (team) see the “Metacade Team” section in the docs (without retelling)
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) voice-enabled AI agents
Use‑case (use_case) on-chain games/tournaments/NFT activities on Base
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 3/6 — medium alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
DecAI Fit component summary 1 / 1 / 0 / 3
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

Metacade describes itself as the “home for gaming on Base”, with a space for players, builders and token holders. The GitBook mentions games, tournaments, an NFT section and a separate section about AI.

Regarding the token, the migration of the token to Base (with the new contract specified) and the basic supply parameters are documented.

Features/modules

  • Gaming ecosystem on Base (the “home for gaming on Base” positioning).
  • Tournaments (the Play section).
  • Dropzone (NFTs) (the Dropzone section).
  • Earn block: token purchases, tokenomics, reward pools/staking (including the “staking closed” status in the docs).
  • AI section: “voice-enabled AI agents” (in its current form, described in very general terms).

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1: a user participates in games/tournaments → gets a gaming experience and (depending on the mechanics) rewards/perks.
  • Scenario 2: a token holder follows the reward pools/staking programs → participates when pools open (per the docs: there were previously 6‑month pools; new ones are promised after the launch of “Level Up”).

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: an EVM wallet (for example, MetaMask) for the token on Base.
  • Network/chain: Base mainnet (the token contract is on Base).
  • Fees: gas on the Base network for token/contract operations.

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components: the MCADE token on Base; product web modules (games/tournaments/NFT sections — per the GitBook structure).
  • Where logic runs: the token and its accounting — onchain (Base); game services/content — mostly offchain.
  • Dependencies: Base RPC/wallets.

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • Token utility: the docs have sections on reward pools/staking and “utilities”, but the full list of utilities is not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Protocol necessity drivers: in the reviewed Tier‑1 sources, the token is shown as an ecosystem asset; the necessity in the sense of “it does not work without it” is not proven.
  • Issuance/burn: the tokenomics page provides Total/Burned/Max supply; the onchain values on BaseScan partially diverge from the tabular figures — reconciliation is required.
  • Staking: the reward pools page states that staking is closed to new participants, and describes past pools/plans for a new pool.

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: no explicit governance scheme (DAO/snapshot) is recorded in the reviewed Tier‑1 sources.

Security and incidents

  • Audits: the card’s links_* include a link to CertiK (this is Tier‑2; for Tier‑1, the report itself/the repository/an official publication by the project is needed).
  • Bug bounty: not found.
  • Threat model (brief): the risks are typical for tokens/smart contracts and for offchain gaming infrastructure.

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: active; the token is on Base; there was previously a token migration process from Ethereum to Base.
  • Roadmap: https://docs.metacade.co/archive/q2-roadmap-2025

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations: Base, Uniswap (for buying the token), Superbridge (token migration — per the docs).

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? The official docs have an “AI with Metacade” section that claims “voice-enabled AI agents” and “talk to play gaming experiences”, but without technical details.
  • What is truly onchain? The MCADE token on Base; the rest of the product is mostly described as an ecosystem/applications.
  • Why is a token needed? The docs feature reward pools/staking for holders and a general tokenomics context; a mandatory role of the token for access to the games is not proven.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): AI‑washing (AI is claimed in general terms); onchain‑washing (the gaming experience may be offchain); token‑washing (the utility may boil down to “hold the token → bonuses”). Double‑check: the specific AI modules and how to test them; which contracts other than the token are actually used; the current onchain supply parameters and the burn/staking logic.

DecAI Fit component summary

  • DecAI Fit: 3/6 — medium alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
Component Level Score
AI reality low 1
Onchain necessity low 1
Token necessity low 0
Evidence Tier‑1 present 3
Details

AI reality

AI_0 — AI intent (Tier‑1 roadmap) (1/0)

  • AI_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): the AI section describes “agents” as part of the product (albeit in general terms), not as a future roadmap item without functionality.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.metacade.co/ai/ai-with-metacade
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): we do not apply AI_0 when there is a described “working” module (even without details).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): voice‑enabled AI agents are claimed for “real-time insights” and “talk to play” interactions.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.metacade.co/ai/ai-with-metacade
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the purpose of the AI agents is described at the product level, albeit without technical details.
  • Conflict note (if any): the wording is marketing; there is no technical verification.

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): a demo where the AI agent’s operation can be checked (input/voice → response/action) was not found in the reviewed Tier‑1 sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.metacade.co/ai/ai-with-metacade
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the page is descriptive; there are no links to an available demo/product screen.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

  • AI_3 (decision): 0
  • Metrics: —
  • Context (version/date/how measured): —
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): no quality/accuracy/latency metrics for the AI agents were found in the docs.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_4 — tech description/architecture/versions (1/0)

  • AI_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): there is no technical description of the models/architecture of the AI agents.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.metacade.co/ai/ai-with-metacade
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): AI_4 requires the model architecture/versions; the page has none.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

OC_1 — contracts/addresses/chain (1/0)

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Base
  • Addresses/identifiers: token contract 0xc48823ec67720a04a9dfd8c7d109b2c3d6622094
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.metacade.co/earn/where-to-buy-usdmcade ; https://basescan.org/token/0xc48823ec67720a04a9dfd8c7d109b2c3d6622094
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the contract is published in the official docs and verifiable via the explorer.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_2 — onchain beyond just a token (1/0)

  • OC_2 (decision): 0
  • What useful logic is onchain: the reviewed Tier‑1 sources contain no list/addresses of the ecosystem’s smart contracts (other than the token) confirming “useful logic” (tournaments/NFT/game economy) onchain.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.metacade.co/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there are descriptions of the ecosystem, but no onchain artifacts/addresses beyond the token are recorded in the reviewed Tier‑1 sources.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 0
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: the gaming platform and many of its functions can work in a centralized way; no strict “without the blockchain it breaks down” argument was found in Tier‑1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.metacade.co/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the absence of an explicit justification of trustless necessity.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): the project has a token, MCADE, on Base.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.metacade.co/earn/where-to-buy-usdmcade
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the token address is specified in the official docs.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_1..TK_4 (1/0)

TK_1 — payment for the service (1/0)

  • TK_1 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): mandatory payments in MCADE for a key service are not recorded in the reviewed Tier‑1 sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.metacade.co/earn/earn-with-metacade
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the “Earn” section describes tokenomics sections but does not give a specific “what is paid for with the token” on the reviewed pages.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_2 — incentives/collateral/penalties (1/0)

  • TK_2 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): reward pools/staking mechanics for MCADE holders are described in the docs (including the fact of two past pools and plans for a new pool).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.metacade.co/token-quarter/usdmcade-reward-pools
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): reward pools/staking are incentives for token holders.
  • Conflict note (if any): the docs state that staking is closed to new participants at the time of the description.

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): no explicit Tier‑1 description of governance via the token was found in the reviewed sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is no description of voting/DAO processes on the available pages.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)

  • TK_4 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): reward pools/holder perks and the platform economy could theoretically be built around another asset as well (for example, a stablecoin/points) had the project chosen so.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://docs.metacade.co/token-quarter/usdmcade-reward-pools
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Tier‑1 does not show a property that requires specifically the own token (rather than another asset).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 https://docs.metacade.co/ the “home for gaming on Base” positioning; launch in “late 2022”
Tier‑1 https://docs.metacade.co/earn/where-to-buy-usdmcade the official token contract on Base
Tier‑1 https://docs.metacade.co/token-quarter/usdmcade-tokenomics the claimed supply parameters (Total/Burned/Max) and the old/new contract
Tier‑1 https://docs.metacade.co/migration-to-base/migration-information description of the token migration to Base and the “official date”
Tier‑1 https://docs.metacade.co/ai/ai-with-metacade the claim about “voice-enabled AI agents”
Tier‑1 https://docs.metacade.co/token-quarter/usdmcade-reward-pools description of reward pools/staking (including the “staking closed” status)
Tier‑2 https://basescan.org/token/0xc48823ec67720a04a9dfd8c7d109b2c3d6622094 onchain token data (including Max Total Supply; may diverge from the tabular data)
Tier‑2 https://www.certik.com/projects/metacade external audit/scoring (not Tier‑1 proof of technology)

No comments to display

Back to top