Details
| Founded: | 2010 |
|---|---|
| Hourly Rates: | N/A |
| Employees: | N/A |
| Avg. Project Cost: | $25,000+ |
| Ratings: |
4.1
8 Reviews
|
Industries Served
About
With their vast experience of working in this industry where mobile app perception is high, they know the importance of growing demand for a mobile app. They offer a combined way to web design and development that scales technical difficulties with user experience, business needs with creativity, target businesses with the competing view. One of the famous app development company in Las Vegas.
Once Interactive LLC Reviews
Test automation got adopted by developers as a genuine tool, not a box-ticking exercise
Soo-Ah Yoon / Director of Platform | May 27, 2026This was our fourth agency in three years, and I say that with some embarrassment. Every previous engagement had looked promising on paper and fallen apart somewhere in delivery. What was different here was the sequencing: they spent real time understanding the actual problem before proposing anything, rather than pattern-matching to a solution they already knew how to sell. The build ran to schedule, our own engineers had genuinely positive things to say during handover, and four months into live operation we haven't had a single critical incident. We're already talking about the next phase with them.
Project summary
Years of incremental patches had left us with a platform that technically worked but was quietly holding the business back strategically. A proper rebuild was the agreed way forward.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 3.5 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Quality Assurance & Testing |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $10,000 to $49,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jun 2025 - Feb 2026 |
| Business Type: | Aerospace & Defense |
|---|---|
| Location: | Daegu, South Korea |
Questions & Answers
Started as a single project and earned a permanent spot on our preferred vendor list
Alexis Faraday / Chief Digital Officer | May 07, 2026We had proposals in hand ranging from roughly half to well over double what we eventually paid this team. What set their proposal apart wasn't the price — it was that the number matched what they actually delivered, almost line for line. I've been burned before by proposals that were really just opening offers in a negotiation that continues throughout the project. That wasn't the case here, and I don't say that lightly.
Project summary
Our internal engineering capacity was fully committed to keeping existing systems running, with no room for a build of this size. An outside partner with the right depth was really our only option.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 5.0 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Industry-Specific Solutions |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $10,000 to $49,999 |
| Project Duration: | Sep 2025 - Apr 2026 |
| Business Type: | Events & Event Management |
|---|---|
| Location: | Miami, USA |
Questions & Answers
Their architecture review steered us away from a vendor decision we would have regretted
Preston Locke / Director of Technology | Apr 19, 2026This was our fourth agency in three years, and I say that with some embarrassment. Every previous engagement had looked promising on paper and fallen apart somewhere in delivery. What was different here was the sequencing: they spent real time understanding the actual problem before proposing anything, rather than pattern-matching to a solution they already knew how to sell. The build ran to schedule, our own engineers had genuinely positive things to say during handover, and four months into live operation we haven't had a single critical incident. We're already talking about the next phase with them.
Project summary
This project had a board-facing deadline tied to a wider strategic push. We needed a partner who'd treat that date like it was their own problem, not just ours.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 3.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | IT Consulting |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | Aug 2025 - Feb 2026 |
| Business Type: | Mining & Metals |
|---|---|
| Location: | Philadelphia, USA |
Questions & Answers
Delivered the sales visibility we'd been requesting internally for three years, in fourteen weeks
Rashid Al-Marzouqi / Chief Technology Officer | Apr 05, 2026The easiest thing to praise is the technical output itself — solid test coverage, a deployment pipeline that just works, documentation that people actually reference instead of ignoring. But what I keep coming back to is the number of conversations we haven't had to have since launch. No 2am incident calls. No emergency patches. No post-mortems about what went sideways. That absence is really the whole pitch, if you ask me.
Project summary
Our product thinking internally was solid, but our execution depth in this particular technical domain wasn't. We needed real specialists, not another generalist team.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 3.5 Schedule |
| 3.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | CRM Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $10,000 to $49,999 |
| Project Duration: | Oct 2025 - Mar 2026 |
| Business Type: | Nonprofit & NGO |
|---|---|
| Location: | Sharjah, UAE |
Questions & Answers
Launched at a 4.6 store rating with no critical bugs reported in the first two weeks
Marc-Antoine Girard / VP of Innovation | Apr 01, 2026I went into this engagement genuinely skeptical. A previous vendor had left us with a system that technically worked but that nobody trusted, and I wasn't interested in repeating that experience. This team earned trust the slow way — solid discovery documentation, technical proposals that held up under scrutiny, sprints that landed when promised, and ultimately a production system that has simply behaved. I don't open conversations about them with caveats anymore.
Project summary
Years of incremental patches had left us with a platform that technically worked but was quietly holding the business back strategically. A proper rebuild was the agreed way forward.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 3.5 Schedule |
| 3.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Game Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $10,000 to $49,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jun 2025 - Mar 2026 |
| Business Type: | Agriculture |
|---|---|
| Location: | Montreal, Canada |
Questions & Answers
Turned years of siloed spreadsheets into one dataset people actually trust
Femke Visser / Head of Platform Engineering | Mar 28, 2026We handed this team an aggressive deadline, a genuinely complicated scope, and a client-side team on our end that was stretched thin and slow to respond at times. They handled all of it without complaint. When they needed something from us they asked precisely and on time. When they didn't, they just kept moving. The project still landed on schedule despite our side being the weaker link for a good chunk of it, which tells you something about how they operate under pressure.
Project summary
Multi-touch attribution across our media mix was the single most requested capability from clients across our whole portfolio, and we couldn't deliver it without rebuilding the data layer underneath.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Data & Analytics |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | Less than $10,000 |
| Project Duration: | Oct 2025 - Feb 2026 |
| Business Type: | Advertising & Marketing |
|---|---|
| Location: | The Hague, Netherlands |
Questions & Answers
Went live on the date we agreed to, which anyone who's done an ERP rollout knows is rare
Hamish Bellamy / GM of Technology | Mar 25, 2026Our stakeholder list for this project included board members, operations leads, compliance, and end users, all with wildly different levels of technical fluency and different definitions of success. Managing that mix well is genuinely hard, and this team did it better than any vendor we've worked with. They shifted register depending on who they were talking to without ever dumbing down the substance, kept expectations honest the whole way through, and delivered something each group could point to as meeting their own bar. That range is rare.
Project summary
A previous project had worked fine in staging and fallen apart in production. We approached vendor selection this time with a lot more scrutiny as a direct result.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | ERP Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $150,000 to $499,999 |
| Project Duration: | Mar 2025 - Dec 2025 |
| Business Type: | Sports & Fitness |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, Australia |
Questions & Answers
Delivered with the change management and documentation a project this size actually needs
Kenji Watanabe / Director of IT Strategy | Mar 06, 2026Our stakeholder list for this project included board members, operations leads, compliance, and end users, all with wildly different levels of technical fluency and different definitions of success. Managing that mix well is genuinely hard, and this team did it better than any vendor we've worked with. They shifted register depending on who they were talking to without ever dumbing down the substance, kept expectations honest the whole way through, and delivered something each group could point to as meeting their own bar. That range is rare.
Project summary
Portal usability complaints were showing up disproportionately among the B2B accounts we were about to lose at renewal. The self-service experience needed a full rebuild before that cycle hit.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | ERP Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | May 2025 - Jan 2026 |
| Business Type: | Telecommunications |
|---|---|
| Location: | Yokohama, Japan |
Questions & Answers
Frequently Asked Questions
Got questions about our specialized technology solutions? We have the answers to help you make informed decisions.

