GameMakers

Epic spent five years and over $100M breaking the platforms' 30% tax — then cut V-Bucks by 20% to "pay the bills." If the company that won the fee war still gets squeezed, what does that say about everyone else?
The answer isn't about fees. When AI makes content infinite and attention stays finite, the only asset that appreciates is the direct relationship with your players — the one distribution channel that gets cheaper the stronger it gets. And a nearly invisible economy of community-run game servers has been proving its dollar value for fifteen years.
I sit down with Liam Wiltshire, GM of Tebex — the merchant-of-record platform behind direct payments for Rockstar, Take-Two, Hytale, and FiveM — to unpack it.
In this episode:
Why "is 30% dead?" is the wrong question
Creator codes: how trust drives 50–227% more spend
The BNPL and crypto data that surprised even Tebex
Why 35% of desktop game purchases happen on a phone
How Hytale launched off Steam and secured two years of runway from pre-orders alone
The £20, 16-year-old origin story behind a company that's processed $1.5B
Read the full breakdown and subscribe at gamemakers.com.
Chapters
00:00 — Epic cut V-Bucks: why it's really a margin story
03:47 — When content is infinite, what's actually scarce?
07:38 — The shadow games industry: Hypixel, FiveM & a $1.5B economy
10:13 — The data: creator codes, BNPL & buying on a second screen
13:33 — Liam Wiltshire joins: the state of the industry
16:35 — Why every player purchase is a "CapEx decision"
18:50 — Is the 30% platform fee dead?
21:00 — Who really owns the player relationship?
23:27 — D2C across mobile, web, PC & console
34:59 — Treating the platform as an acquisition channel
42:57 — UGC servers & what a "merchant of record" actually does
1:00:40 — Creator codes: how trust drives more spend
1:19:04 — BNPL & crypto: the numbers that surprised Tebex
1:31:20 — Payment optimization & one-click checkout
1:40:43 — The £20 origin story & the $29M exit

AI is making it cheaper to build games. It's doing nothing for the cost of building the right game. That distinction is about to crush more studios than any technology shift in the past decade.                                   
Ran Mo is the CEO of Proxima and creator of Suck Up — arguably the first commercially successful game to use AI at runtime. The game generated over 100 million YouTube views with zero marketing spend. Before founding Proxima, Ran led product teams at EA on The Sims franchise and spent time at YouTube and BCG. 

In this episode, Ran live demos AI-assisted coding in Unity, breaks down his "trunk and leaves" framework for where AI helps (and where it destroys your codebase), and makes the contrarian case that AI in actual gameplay is overhyped — even though he built the first game to prove it works.                                  

We go deep on: why vibe-coded games are architecturally unusable at scale, the power law that's about to eliminate mid-tier studios, why Ran hired a marketer with 1M TikTok followers, and the Taoist philosophy that keeps him sane while Silicon Valley burns out around him                                                                        

Whether you're a game dev, studio head, or just trying to understand where AI actually moves the needle in creative industries, this conversation will sharpen your thinking.

🔗 Ran Mo's newsletter: newsletter.ranmo.me                                              🔗 Proxima: proxima.gg                                                                                  

Outline:
0:00 Intro
1:15 Ran Mo's background and founding Proxima
4:38 How Suck Up actually uses AI                                                                     
8:49 Why Proxima won't use AI for art or design                                     
12:32 Live demo: AI coding in Unity                                                                   
22:33 Vibe coding gone wrong — the Stardew Valley test
25:14 The trunk and leaves framework
29:24 Real productivity numbers (not Twitter hype)
34:57 The technically capable designer                                                  
38:58 Power law distribution is coming for games                                
43:48 Suck Up's $0 marketing playbook
46:04 The Courage to Do Nothing
52:35 The velocity trap                                                                                 
58:13 Hot take: AI in gameplay is overhyped
61:01 Ran's personal story                                                                              
66:15 Go your own way                                                                                   
69:15 Final advice: slow down to speed up

Last month, I sat on a panel about where the gaming industry is headed. The conversation was good — but there was one thing I didn't say out loud.
In this episode, I break down the key trends I think will define gaming in 2026:
The noise problem is about to get much, much worse — and it's hitting from both sides
Small teams aren't an anomaly. They're the new default.
"Nobody codes anymore" — what AI-or-die actually means for studios right now
Why the industry is losing its moat and most people don't see it yet
 Plus: the progression compression paradox that nobody's solving — why the attention economy is forcing games to speed up in ways that might break long-term engagement.
Whether you're running a studio, building a game, or trying to figure out where this industry is going — this one's for you.
📩 Subscribe to the Gamemakers newsletter: gamemakers.com

AppLovin just crossed $250 billion in market cap. Stock up 127% YTD. EBITDA margins at 82%. Is this the beginning—or the top?

We assembled the most qualified panel possible to break it down: an operator running millions through AppLovin's platform, a gaming-focused financial analyst, and an institutional investor who's seen these cycles before.

What emerged isn't your typical bull-bear debate. It's a breakdown of how dominance actually works in ad tech—and what could break it.

IN THIS EPISODE

→ Why AppLovin doesn't need to be better than competitors—just 95% as good
→ The MAX/Axon lock-in that keeps publishers captive
→ E-commerce expansion: AppLovin is beating Google on Android
→ The SEC investigation and deplatforming risk (how worried should you be?)
→ What one operator's portfolio data reveals about where the cracks are forming
→ Each panelist's prediction for AppLovin in 2026

SPEAKERS

Josh Chandley — President & CEO, WildCard Games
Matthew Kanterman, CFA — Director of Research, Blue River Financial Group
Brian Peganoff — Former TMT Investor, Founder Timber Advisors
Joseph Kim — CEO, Lila Games

TIMESTAMPS

[00:00] Introduction & Panel Overview
[01:22] AppLovin Financial Recap: 127% YTD, 82% Margins
[04:52] Valuation Analysis: Is Growth Priced In?
[07:15] The Bull Case: Infrastructure Lock-In
[10:30] How MAX & Axon Create Publisher Dependency
[15:45] E-Commerce Expansion: Beating Google on Android
[22:10] Why Meta & Google Can't Compete on iOS
[28:40] The Bear Case: Five Risks
[35:20] SEC Investigation & Deplatforming Risk
[42:15] The Infrastructure Risk Nobody Discusses
[48:30] Competitive Landscape: Unity, Moloco, Meta
[58:20] Connected TV: Wild Card or Dead End?
[1:05:40] Panel Predictions for 2026
[1:15:30] Key Takeaways

LINKS

Newsletter: https://www.gamemakers.com
Full article: https://www.gamemakers.com/p/applovin-bull-bear-case

Pixels & Profits is a GameMakers series covering the business and investing side of the gaming industry.

Most game studios either skip validation entirely or waste hundreds of thousands on academic testing that doesn't move the needle. Both approaches kill products.
In this episode, we discuss why product validation is the difference between success and years of wasted development—and introduces two frameworks to fix your process.
You'll discover:
The Pyramid Decision Model: When to trust tastemaker vision vs. player data
Why the "wrong tastemaker problem" is your biggest invisible risk
5 critical validation failures (and how to avoid each one)
The signal vs. noise problem: When player feedback actually hurts your game
Stage-specific validation: Pre-production → Production → Soft Launch → Hard Launch
Why expensive user motivation studies and persona research rarely work

This matters if:
Your team debates "vision" vs. "data-driven" design endlessly
You've hired consultants who delivered fancy reports but no results
Your validation tests keep pointing in different directions
You're burning runway without knowing if your core concept works
You need a framework to match methodology to development stage

The uncomfortable truth: It's nearly impossible to evaluate a "right tastemaker" without historical success—and even then, they might fail in a new genre. Meanwhile, over-intellectualized academic approaches sound impressive but rarely translate to product gains.
Bottom line: Product velocity = speed × direction. Validation should steer your direction, not justify executive forecasts or create someone to blame. This episode gives you the frameworks to validate what matters, when it matters.
Read the full breakdown with detailed frameworks:https://www.gamemakers.com/p/your-validation-passed-your-players
Timestamps:
(00:00:00) Why This Might Be the Most Important Topic Yet
(00:01:07) The Two Extremes: No Testing vs. Testing Theater
(00:05:28) The Pyramid Decision Model: Top vs. Bottom
(00:09:52) Problem #1: The Wrong Tastemaker Problem
(00:12:08) Problem #2: Validation Tests Are Often Flawed
(00:14:08) Problem #3: Over-Intellectualization (Why Academic Models Fail)
(00:17:14) Problem #4: Misinterpreting Validation Results
(00:20:02) Problem #5: The Signal vs. Noise Problem
(00:22:17) The What, When, and How Framework by Development Stage
(00:25:33) Final Thoughts: Why This Is Really, Really Hard
#gamedev #productvalidation #gamedevelopment #productmanagement #gamedevelopmenttips