Interviews
Roundtable: Keeping games studios competitive
In this panel discussion, we ask four of the leading games studios what direction games studios are heading in and the trends they are keeping on top of in what is a fast-developing space
Panellists:
Vigen Safaryan, CPO, Galaxsys
Danielle Calafato, CCO, Gaming Corps
Anna Vikmane, Director, BETER Live
Julian Borg-Barthet, CCO, Lady Luck Games
How has your content given you cut-through and how has it developed since you first came to market?
Galaxsys: Our content has given us cut-through by offering unique and engaging gaming experiences to our partners. From the moment we entered the market, we have continually invested in research and development to create innovative and high-quality games that appeal to a wide range of players.
Our games are designed with the latest technologies and we also leverage customer data and feedback to refine our games and ensure they meet the evolving preferences of our audience.
Since entering the market, our content has evolved to offer a wider range of games, including crash-type games, turbo games, card games, and new, cutting-edge titles.
Overall, our focus on quality, innovation, and responsible gaming has enabled us to stand out in a competitive market and gain a loyal customer base. By continually investing in our content, we remain committed to delivering exceptional gaming experiences to our players.
GC: We started out in mainstream gaming, although that was some time ago now. We applied for our MGA license in 2019, which was approved in 2020. We then started by making slot games, pivoting briefly to instant win content like Mine and Crash games, where we knew there was a gap in the market and we could be competitive while we looked to bring in more experienced people as part of our longer-term strategy. We also produced table games that allowed customisation, from skin tone options on the 3D hand animation through to customer branding.
With the success of Jet Lucky 2 and Coin Miner, we were then able to action the goal of bringing in new people and had an influx of high-calibre staff who had a wealth of gaming industry experience under the guidance of Alex Lorimer, our Chief Operating Officer. Ultimately, this brought us almost full circle and back to the development of competitive slot development, with what has so far proven to be great results.
BETER: As a new company, we have been able to build our product from the ground up and this has been a huge advantage. It has enabled us to use cutting-edge technologies and the latest code, combined with the team’s incredible knowledge and experience, to build the foundation of our portfolio with core table games such as blackjack and roulette. We have also added innovations and new product verticals such as gameshows to our roadmap. Our strong technical base gives us the platform to do this while ensuring the quality of our games is second to none.
Our recently-launched Gravity Blackjack is a great example of how we have taken a classic live table game and given it the BETER twist. We placed multipliers on side bets to add more intrigue to each round. The player never knows where the desired multiplier will be and can try different combinations of bets to see what their luck will bring them.
LLG: We have always aimed to strike the balance between different while also developing games that players want to play. As a team, we are passionate and imaginative, and have always pushed the envelope when it comes to creativity and not being afraid to try something new. This approach has worked well and the feedback we have received from operators and players has been positive to a degree that we simply did not expect.
Of course, we have evolved a lot since our first game release and each title is better than the last. This is only possible because we listen to the feedback we receive from our partners and their players, and ensure it is implemented across our product roadmap. For example, this has seen us add ‘buy bonus’ options to our latest titles. But part of our job as a developer is to bring new ideas and concepts to the market that take players by surprise, so we are always trying to seek conformity while at the same time trying to break it.
To what extent has seasonal content helped improve your offering and what long-term value do these games offer?
GC: As a supplier, it is imperative we are tuned into current trends and can read into player appetites at any given time. For example, Christmas music works on games in December in countries where it is a celebrated occasion. It’s about tapping into a feeling or emotion and ensuring you have content to fit.
From a studio’s perspective, you’re always looking to serve content when the audience is most receptive; making sure the day and date a game is released is something that is considered with your audience in mind. There are multiple games on offer for special occasions, but fewer than there are general releases, so your competition is arguably lessened. If your content is good, the chances are by having seasonal content, you and your customer can see better rewards over these periods.
BETER: Seasonal content is important and always generates great results – both in terms of acquisition and retention – for operators. For BETER Live, we spent year one of operations being focused on putting the technical foundations in place and producing our portfolio of core live titles. Now we have moved into year two, seasonal content is very much included in our product roadmap. We have worked with a couple of operator partners already to customise tables around certain events. This includes a collaboration with our partners for the World Cup, where we changed the UI on our Top Card title to be all things football fever, with the dealer also encouraged to chat to players about the tournament. It was a huge success for both our partner and BETER LIVE.
It was actually a straightforward project for us to launch. Our cutting-edge platform and tech stack allows us to offer a personalised UI to all operators – even on our network tables – so it was a case of deploying this with Parimatch as well as making a few changes to the studio and of course briefing the dealer. It is certainly something we are now looking to do with more operators, as well as launching seasonal tables and games over the coming months.
Where do you think casino games/live casino can improve and what kind of innovations do you think we will see in this space in the coming years?
Galaxsys: First, I think by incorporating more gamification elements into casino games and live casino, we can increase engagement and loyalty.
Second, VR and AR technologies offer a highly-immersive gaming experience. We expect to see more VR and AR-powered casino games and live casino features.
Then there is social gaming, which is becoming increasingly popular. We are likely to see more social gaming features incorporated into casino games and live casinos.
Finally, responsible gaming is becoming more important, and we anticipate more features and tools introduced to help players manage their gaming habits and promote responsible gaming.
GC: I believe there is finally a consensus from providers and operators that there is real value in offering alternative types of product. When you look at the slots space and put the most innovative product of today next to a game from 15 years ago, how much has truly changed beyond the game aesthetically looking a lot more modern and polished?
If we look at mobile gaming, we can see a big trend over the last five years where social elements are becoming increasingly popular; things like sharing your wins or communicating in a live channel. Live casino has begun to take shape recently to include this, but casino games are only just moving in that direction.
BETER: When it comes to live content, the sky really is not the limit and I think we will see great strides taken with the gameshow format. Of course, such is the scope of what can be done with live content, I think we could ultimately see new formats land in operator lobbies, including live crash games.
LL: The problem with innovation is it always leaves a portion of the market behind. Just because I can afford to play and want to play does not mean I can access a live dealer studio on the go; even in the UK, mobile infrastructure is limited and not consistent. Socially, I want to play on my own terms and that is fast and discreetly on my phone.
Also, disabilities are wide-ranging, and sight impairment is something we need to be aware of, so this means everything should be crystal clear, easy to find, and highly entertaining. This might not be the sort of innovation we often talk about, but for me, it’s just as important as new pay ways, crazy mechanics and big bonuses.
Powered by WPeMatico
apuestas deportivas
¿Son las casas de apuestas las culpables o la arquitectura económica construida por Brasil en los últimos 35 años?
Esta es la pregunta central planteada por Carlos Akira Sato en su análisis sobre el creciente endeudamiento de los hogares en Brasil.
En lugar de atribuir el sobreendeudamiento a las plataformas de apuestas deportivas, sostiene que el problema tiene sus raíces en décadas de transformación económica marcadas por la expansión del crédito, la financiarización y sistemas cada vez más sofisticados de estimulación del consumo en múltiples sectores.
El debate sobre el endeudamiento de las familias brasileñas ha ganado un nuevo objetivo preferente: las plataformas de apuestas deportivas.
Las llamadas “bets” han pasado a ocupar un lugar central en los medios, el discurso político y las discusiones regulatorias, frecuentemente asociadas al aumento de la morosidad y la compulsividad financiera.
Pero quizá la pregunta correcta sea otra: ¿el sobreendeudamiento de las familias brasileñas realmente nació con las bets?
La respuesta, desde un análisis histórico riguroso, es negativa.
El fenómeno es mucho anterior a la regulación de las apuestas deportivas y está vinculado a una profunda transformación económica, cultural y tecnológica iniciada en los años 90, cuando Brasil abandonó gradualmente una economía cerrada e inflacionaria para entrar en una lógica moderna de consumo, crédito y financiarización de la vida cotidiana.
La apertura económica promovida durante el gobierno de Collor cambió el patrón de consumo del país.
Pocos años después, el Plan Real trajo estabilidad monetaria y transformó la propia psicología económica de la población.
Por primera vez, millones de brasileños comenzaron a financiar bienes, usar tarjetas de crédito, pagar en cuotas e incorporar el endeudamiento como parte normal de la vida económica.
Este proceso representó un avance y una inclusión financiera.
Pero también consolidó un nuevo modelo económico basado en la anticipación del ingreso futuro de los hogares. El crédito dejó de ser una excepción y se convirtió en infraestructura permanente de sostén del consumo nacional.
Bancos, minoristas y entidades financieras comprendieron rápidamente este cambio. Grandes cadenas dejaron de actuar únicamente como distribuidoras de productos para convertirse en plataformas financieras.
Las tarjetas private label, los sistemas de financiación sofisticados y los mecanismos permanentes de crédito pasaron a integrar la vida cotidiana del consumidor. En muchos casos, el margen financiero se volvió tan relevante como la propia venta del producto.
A lo largo de los años 2000, el modelo se profundizó.
La expansión de la bancarización, de los medios electrónicos de pago y de las fintech aceleró la financiarización de la vida cotidiana.
A partir de 2013, con la apertura regulatoria impulsada por la Ley nº 12.865, el celular pasó a funcionar simultáneamente como banco, billetera digital, plataforma de crédito, marketplace y entorno permanente de monetización del comportamiento.
El crédito se volvió instantáneo, invisible e integrado a la experiencia digital.
El consumidor pasó a contratar financiación en pocos clics, muchas veces dentro del propio flujo de compra. Brasil entró definitivamente en la era de la hiperestimulación conductual del consumo.
Y aquí es donde el debate contemporáneo comienza a revelar una contradicción importante.
Mientras el país construyó durante décadas una sofisticada arquitectura económica basada en expansión del crédito, publicidad emocional, gamificación, captura de la atención y monetización del ingreso futuro, la inversión estructural en educación financiera siguió siendo insuficiente.
Brasil enseñó a su población a consumir antes de enseñarle a construir patrimonio.
Hoy, prácticamente todos los sectores relevantes de la economía operan mecanismos avanzados de estímulo conductual: retail digital, aplicaciones, streaming, delivery, marketplaces, bancos, fintechs y redes sociales.
La publicidad dejó de ser meramente informativa y pasó a ser algorítmica, personalizada y emocional.
El consumidor moderno compite por su atención y autocontrol contra sistemas diseñados para maximizar el engagement y el consumo continuo.
Este fenómeno aparece incluso en sectores raramente asociados al debate regulatorio.
El comercio alimentario, por ejemplo, utiliza técnicas sofisticadas de neuromarketing para impulsar el consumo de productos ultraprocesados, bebidas alcohólicas e ítems de compra impulsiva. Sin embargo, pocos segmentos han enfrentado un nivel de monitoreo similar al impuesto a las apuestas deportivas.
El sector regulado de las bets surgió en Brasil bajo uno de los marcos más estrictos de la economía digital.
Las plataformas deben identificar usuarios biométricamente, monitorear el comportamiento, rastrear operaciones, comunicar movimientos sospechosos al COAF, implementar políticas de juego responsable e impedir apuestas financiadas con crédito.
Es decir: el regulador entendió correctamente que la combinación entre compulsividad y crédito podía ser socialmente explosiva.
Pero aquí surge una pregunta inevitable: ¿por qué sectores históricamente asociados al sobreendeudamiento de las familias brasileñas operaron durante décadas bajo niveles significativamente menores de monitoreo conductual?
Datos de la CNC muestran que el porcentaje de familias endeudadas alcanzó el 80,2% en febrero de 2026 — el nivel más alto de la serie histórica.
Este escenario no nació con las bets. Es el resultado de décadas de expansión agresiva del crédito, financiarización de la vida cotidiana, hiperestimulación del consumo y ausencia estructural de educación económica de la población.
Marco comparativo : obligaciones regulatorias y conductuales
| Tema / Obligación | Bets | Bancos | Retail / Alimentos |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identificación formal del cliente (KYC) | Obligatoria, robusta, con biometría | Obligatoria | Limitada |
| Validación de titularidad de cuenta | Obligatoria | Generalmente obligatoria | Normalmente inexistente |
| Monitoreo conductual | Alto | Enfocado en fraude y crédito | Bajo |
| Prohibición del uso de crédito | Sí | No | No |
| Publicidad emocional | Con restricciones crecientes | Permitida con límites | Ampliamente utilizada |
| Protección contra compulsividad | Obligatoria | Muy limitada | Prácticamente inexistente |
| Herramientas de autoexclusión | Obligatorias | Inexistentes | Inexistentes |
| Obligación de reporte al COAF | Sí | Sí | Limitada |
| Control del origen de fondos | Obligatorio | Obligatorio | Generalmente inexistente |
| Fiscalización conductual | Intensa | Moderada | Baja |
| Políticas de consumo responsable | Obligatorias | Parciales | Generalmente inexistentes |
El punto más provocador quizá sea justamente la asimetría regulatoria que este debate revela.
Varios sectores históricamente asociados a la compulsividad, el hiperconsumo y la dependencia han operado durante décadas bajo una lógica regulatoria menos intervencionista que la actualmente aplicada a las apuestas deportivas.
Al final, el verdadero debate tal vez no sea solo “cómo regular las apuestas”, sino cómo preparar a la sociedad para vivir en una economía digital, hiperinanciarizada y permanentemente orientada a la captura de la atención, el consumo y la monetización conductual.
Carlos Akira Sato
Co-Founder de Fenynx Digital Assets y especialista en Mercados Regulados, Infraestructura Financiera, Gobernanza e Innovación. Vicepresidente de Relaciones Institucionales de PAGOS (Asociación de Gestión de Medios de Pagos Electrónicos).
The post ¿Son las casas de apuestas las culpables o la arquitectura económica construida por Brasil en los últimos 35 años? appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
Betting Companies
Are betting operators to blame, or is it Brazil’s economic framework of the last 35 years?
Are betting companies to blame or is it Brazil’s economic framework of the last 35 years?
This is the central question raised by Carlos Akira Sato in his analysis of Brazil’s rising household debt.
Rather than attributing over-indebtedness to sports betting platforms, he argues that the issue is rooted in decades of economic transformation shaped by credit expansion, financialization, and increasingly sophisticated systems of consumer stimulation across multiple sectors.
The debate surrounding Brazilian household debt has gained a new preferred target: sports betting platforms.
The so-called “bets” have taken center stage in the news, political discourse, and regulatory discussions, often associated with rising default rates and financial compulsiveness.
But perhaps the correct question is another one: did the over-indebtedness of Brazilian families really begin with bets?
The answer, under a serious historical analysis, is no.
The phenomenon predates the regulation of sports betting by decades and is linked to a profound economic, cultural, and technological transformation that began in the 1990s, when Brazil gradually abandoned a closed and inflationary economy to enter a modern logic of consumption, credit, and the financialization of everyday life.
The economic opening promoted during the Collor administration changed the country’s consumption patterns.
A few years later, the Real Plan brought monetary stability and transformed the population’s economic psychology itself.
For the first time, millions of Brazilians began financing goods, using credit cards, paying in installments, and incorporating debt as a normal part of economic life.
This process represented progress and financial inclusion.
But it also consolidated a new economic model based on the anticipation of families’ future income. Credit ceased to be an exception and became permanent infrastructure supporting national consumption.
Banks, retailers, and financial institutions quickly understood this change. Large retail chains stopped acting solely as product distributors and became financial platforms.
Private-label cards, sophisticated installment plans, and permanent financing mechanisms became part of consumers’ daily lives. In many cases, financial margins became just as relevant as the sale of the products themselves.
Throughout the 2000s, the model deepened.
The expansion of banking access, electronic payment methods, and fintechs accelerated the financialization of everyday life.
From 2013 onward, with the regulatory opening promoted by Law No. 12,865, mobile phones simultaneously became banks, digital wallets, credit platforms, marketplaces, and permanent environments for behavioral monetization.
Credit became instant, invisible, and integrated into the digital experience. Consumers started obtaining financing in just a few clicks, often within the purchasing flow itself. Brazil definitively entered the era of behavioral hyperstimulation of consumption.
And this is where the contemporary debate begins to reveal an important contradiction.
While the country spent decades building a sophisticated economic architecture based on credit expansion, emotional advertising, gamification, attention capture, and monetization of future income, structural investment in financial education remained insufficient.
Brazil taught its population how to consume before teaching them how to build wealth.
Today, virtually every relevant sector of the economy operates advanced behavioral stimulation mechanisms: digital retail, apps, streaming platforms, delivery services, marketplaces, banks, fintechs, and social networks.
Advertising is no longer merely informative; it has become algorithmic, personalized, and emotional. The modern consumer competes for attention and self-control against systems designed to maximize engagement and continuous consumption.
This phenomenon appears even in sectors rarely associated with regulatory debates.
The food retail industry, for example, uses sophisticated neuromarketing techniques to boost the consumption of ultra-processed foods, alcoholic beverages, and impulse-buy products. Yet few segments have faced a level of monitoring similar to that imposed on sports betting.
Brazil’s regulated betting sector emerged under one of the strictest frameworks in the digital economy.
Platforms are required to biometrically identify users, monitor behavior, track transactions, report suspicious activity to COAF, implement responsible gaming policies, and prevent bets financed through credit.
The Brazilian model requires prior deposits and prohibits “uncovered” betting.
In other words, regulators correctly understood that the combination of compulsiveness and credit could become socially explosive.
But here an inevitable question arises: why have sectors historically associated with the over-indebtedness of Brazilian families operated for decades under significantly lower levels of behavioral monitoring?
Data from CNC show that the percentage of indebted families reached 80.2% in February 2026 — the highest level in the historical series.
This scenario did not begin with bets. It is the result of decades of aggressive credit expansion, financialization of daily life, hyperstimulation of consumption, and the structural absence of economic education for the population.
Comparative framework: regulatory and behavioral obligations
| Topic / Obligation | Betting operators | Banks | Retail / Food |
|---|---|---|---|
| Formal customer identification (KYC) | Mandatory, robust, biometric | Mandatory | Limited |
| Account ownership validation | Mandatory | Generally mandatory | Usually nonexistent |
| Behavioral monitoring | High | Focused on fraud and credit | Low |
| Prohibition of credit use | Yes | No | No |
| Emotional advertising | Under increasing restrictions | Permitted with limits | Widely used |
| Protection against compulsiveness | Mandatory | Very limited | Practically nonexistent |
| Self-exclusion tools | Mandatory | Nonexistent | Nonexistent |
| Obligation to report to COAF | Yes | Yes | Limited |
| Source-of-funds control | Mandatory | Mandatory | Generally nonexistent |
| Behavioral oversight | Intense | Moderate | Low |
| Formal responsible consumption policies | Mandatory | Partial | Generally nonexistent |
Perhaps the most provocative point is precisely the regulatory asymmetry revealed by this debate.
Several sectors historically associated with compulsiveness, hyperconsumption, and dependency have operated for decades under a less interventionist regulatory logic than the one currently applied to sports betting.
In the end, the real debate may not simply be “how should betting be regulated?”, but rather how to prepare society to live in a digital, hyper-financialized economy permanently driven by attention capture, consumption, and behavioral monetization.
Carlos Akira Sato
Co-Founder of Fenynx Digital Assets and specialist in Regulated Markets, Financial Infrastructure, Governance, and Innovation. Vice President of Institutional Relations at PAGOS (Association for Electronic Payment Management).
The post Are betting operators to blame, or is it Brazil’s economic framework of the last 35 years? appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.
Following his appointment as CEO of BC.Game in March, Kar Kheng Giam (KK) speaks about the strategic priorities shaping the company’s next phase, from strengthening operational foundations to navigating the evolving role of crypto within regulated gaming markets.
You’ve stepped into the CEO role at a pivotal time for the industry. How do you assess the current position of BC.Game?
BC.Game enters this stage from a position of strength in terms of product, user engagement and global reach.
At the same time, the broader industry is evolving. Expectations around governance, regulatory alignment and operational maturity are increasing, particularly for businesses operating across multiple jurisdictions.
So while the foundation is strong, there is a clear opportunity to further strengthen the structure of the business to support long-term, sustainable growth.
That foundation is reflected in the scale of the business today, with more than 9 million registered users and over 500,000 monthly active players, and in the progress we’ve made across licensed markets such as Anjouan, Kenya, Nigeria and Mexico.
How would you define the strategic focus for BC.Game over the next 12 to 24 months?
It comes down to three interconnected areas. First, reinforcing the operational and governance framework of the business, ensuring we are well aligned with the expectations of more established regulatory environments.
Second, continuing to invest in the product – not just in terms of content, but in the overall user experience and platform reliability.
And third, taking a disciplined approach to market expansion, focusing on jurisdictions where we can build a sustainable and compliant presence.
It’s about evolving the business in a structured and deliberate way.
You’ve highlighted governance and structure. What does that mean in practical terms?
It means putting in place the systems, processes and organisational clarity needed to operate at scale.
As companies grow internationally, complexity increases – across regulation, payments, technology and operations. Strengthening governance is about ensuring those elements are well coordinated and consistently managed.
This is not about changing what BC.Game is, but about building the framework that allows it to grow more effectively.
Why has trust become so important at this stage?
At BC.GAME’s scale, trust is no longer just about brand but increasingly becomes a business issue – it affects retention, partnerships, market entry and long-term growth.
And trust is built in very practical ways. People judge a platform by whether the rules are clear, whether communication is smooth, and whether issues actually get resolved. That’s why growth on its own is no longer enough.
Where is the most immediate trust pressure on BC.GAME showing up today?
The pressure shows up most clearly in user experience and issue handling because that’s where people feel it first.
Some of the feedback does point to response times and cases where issues stay in the same entry point for too long. When that happens often enough, it becomes bigger than a service issue, it starts to shape trust.
What changes is BC.GAME putting in place in response to these issues?
We’ve already started making changes. That includes upgrading how user issues are handled, bringing cross-functional teams in earlier, and improving how issues are identified and coordinated internally.
As the business has grown, relying too heavily on a single customer support entry point is no longer enough. The focus now is to make issue handling clearer, more stable, and better suited to the scale of the platform.
What role does organisational development play in this next phase?
As the business grows, it’s important to ensure that the organisation evolves alongside it. That includes strengthening leadership structures, clarifying roles and responsibilities, and building capabilities in key areas such as compliance and market operations.
Ultimately, strategy is only as effective as the organisation delivering it.
From a leadership perspective, how do you approach guiding a globally distributed business?
In a global organisation, alignment is critical – everyone needs to understand the strategic direction and how their role contributes to it. At the same time, there needs to be flexibility to adapt to local market dynamics.
My role is to create that balance – providing clear direction while enabling teams to execute effectively within their markets.
Finally, what does success look like for BC.Game over the next few years?
Success is about building a more structured, resilient and trusted business.
That means strengthening our position in regulated markets, continuing to evolve the product, and ensuring the organisation is equipped to operate at scale. This current period is a crucial one for us as we introduce multiple product rollouts at BC.GAME, with several key updates scheduled to go live. These include BC Engine, along with a broader upgrade to the bonus system and, of course, the World Cup.
If we can achieve that through consistent, incremental progress, then we will be well positioned for the long term.
The post BC.Game’s new CEO Kar Kheng Giam on strategy, structure and growth appeared first on Eastern European Gaming | Global iGaming & Tech Intelligence Hub.
-
AGCO6 days agoAGCO Takes Enforcement Action Against Two Companies for Allowing Their Games on Unregulated Gaming Websites
-
Apple5 days agoIBJR hails App Store approval as a milestone in the fight against illegal betting in Brazil
-
Caleta Gaming6 days ago
Caleta Gaming launches Cluster Cup high-volatility football-themed slot
-
AB Trav och Galopp6 days ago
Richard Woodbridge Elected to ATG Board of Directors
-
apuestas deportivas5 days ago
¿Por qué Pix es central en la lucha contra el mercado ilegal de apuestas?
-
Brazil5 days ago
Esportes da Sorte campaign celebrates fans’ resilience in support of Brazil
-
game release6 days ago
Spinomenal adds Desperado Drifter Hold & Hit 3×3 to slot portfolio
-
Africa5 days ago
Broadway Platform Partners with Ghanaian Operator Afrinova
