adminVideo game funding can be difficult to secure even for original projects with passionate teams. A workshop at the 2026 Madeira Games Summit highlighted one reason: developers and investors often assess opportunities using very different criteria. When industry leaders switched roles in a practical exercise, many discovered that the funds they designed would not have backed the creative projects they had just pitched.
Image credit: Engin Akyurt on Unsplash
Hosted by Vivrato founder Adam Boyes, formerly co-CEO of Iron Galaxy Studios and VP of third-party relations at PlayStation, the roundtable brought together executives and studio leaders who spoke anonymously. The exercise moved through four steps: participants pitched game concepts, designed investment funds, created a hypothetical portfolio together, and then revised their original pitches.
Adam Boyes
Why video game funding can miss original projects
When participants were given $1 million to invest, almost none designed a fund focused on video games. Instead, many favored tools, infrastructure, platform technology, and Roblox creator ecosystems. Across the proposed funds, less than half of the total capital was allocated to traditional game content.
The contrast revealed a gap in perspective. Developers tended to present creative vision, gameplay, and emotional conviction. In the investor role, however, participants asked for measurable returns, a clear timeframe, and protection against losses. One attendee summed up the contradiction: “I literally built an investment firm that wouldn’t have funded my own pitch.”
GamesIndustry.biz editorial director Jon Hicks interviews Bethesda’s Angela Browder at the Madeira Games Summit. | Image credit: DevGAMM Madeira Games Summit
Participants also noted that investors who have previously lost money in games may now be more cautious. That can leave developers with a greater responsibility to explain how a project could reach an audience and generate returns, alongside explaining why it is creatively compelling.
“As a developer I’d say take more risks. As an investor I’d only email the ones already succeeding.”
Although no one cited returns in their initial pitches, every participant designing a fund included return targets and timelines. The lesson is not to remove the creative vision from a pitch, but to connect it to a credible commercial case. Demos and playtesting platforms can help test audience response, while local payment options may help studios reach emerging markets.
How developers can improve a funding pitch
Workshop participants offered practical steps for making funding conversations more focused and useful:
- State the expected return and timeframe. Explain what success could look like and when an investor might see a return, using assumptions the team can support.
- Match the funding type to the need. Consider whether the project requires a publisher advance, equity investment, or a revenue-share arrangement.
- Research the fund before approaching it. Check whether it invests in game content, tools, technology, or another area. A strong project can still be a poor fit for a fund with a different remit.
- Ask fund managers how their model works. Even a short conversation can clarify what information they need and help a studio prepare relevant answers.
- Use evidence where possible. A playable demo or structured playtesting can provide useful signals about audience interest, although it cannot guarantee commercial success.
Adam Boyes at Madeira Games Summit 2026. | Image credit: DevGAMM Madeira Games Summit
Build pitch experience before approaching priority investors
Rather than starting with the most important potential backers, participants recommended a deliberate sequence. Developers can first practice with friends and industry contacts, then approach likely rejections to gather candid feedback. After that, they can try long-shot funders and publishers before pitching their priority targets.
This process takes time, but repeated presentations can help teams refine their message. The workshop suggested allowing 9-12 months to develop and improve a pitch through multiple conversations. For studios, a useful habit is to record recurring questions and revise the pitch materials to address them clearly.
Funding structures built around game development
Participants also discussed industry-wide changes, including forums where developers can practice thinking from an investor’s perspective. Another proposal was to create game-focused funds with revenue-share terms that better reflect development timelines than traditional fund cycles.
A three-game deal structure was raised as one possible approach. Its advocates argued that funding multiple projects could improve portfolio math—the frameworks investors use to assess returns—and give developers more runway. These ideas were discussed as proposals, not established solutions, and any arrangement would need terms suited to both the studio and the investor.
The workshop’s central message was that money and original games both exist, but the two sides need a clearer way to assess one another. Better video game funding conversations connect creative ambition to a specific funding model, evidence of audience interest, and realistic financial expectations. Developers who prepare for the investor’s questions—not just their own creative pitch—can make it easier for suitable backers to understand the opportunity.
