Publishing a mobile game involves much more than getting it into the app stores. From evaluating a studio’s potential to navigating soft launch, preparing for scale, and building a long-term growth strategy, publishers play a role at every stage of a game’s journey. But how does that process actually work, and what should studios understand before entering a publishing partnership?
In this edition of AdTech Leaders’ Insights, we speak with Ankush Madad, Publishing Lead at Miniclip, about the decisions, responsibilities, and collaboration that shape successful publishing partnerships. Drawing on his experience across mobile gaming, Ankush shares what publishers look for beyond the game itself, where they can make the biggest difference, and how studios and publishers can work together to build games with lasting growth potential.
What do publishers look for?
Studios might think of publishing as something that happens once a game is “ready.” But from a publisher’s perspective, the decision can happen much earlier. When you evaluate a game or studio as a potential publishing partner, what do you look for beyond the game itself? How do you assess the strength of the studio and whether the team is set up to work effectively with a publisher as the game grows?
Ankush Madad: For us, the game is only one part of the decision. We are also looking at whether the studio can become a strong long-term partner.
At Miniclip, for a finished game, we focus on the strength of the core loop, retention, monetization, marketability, differentiation, and how much room there is to scale. We also look at how well the team understands its data and how quickly it can identify and solve product problems.
With hybrid casual, that evaluation can start much earlier. We may work with a studio when there is only a prototype, or even around an initial concept. A prototype does not need to be polished, but we want to see a promising core mechanic, fast iteration, strong execution, and a team that can learn quickly from marketability and retention tests.
Ultimately, we are looking for both product potential and team potential: a studio that can build, test, learn, communicate well, and work collaboratively with a publisher as the game grows.
Where does a publisher actually add value?
One of the biggest questions for studios considering a publishing deal is understanding what the publisher will actually bring to the table. Where do you think a strong publisher can create the most value today, like UA and creative, product strategy, monetization, LiveOps or something else? And on the other side, what should studios remain closely involved in rather than expecting the publisher to handle for them?
Ankush Madad: A strong publisher adds the most value where scale, expertise and market visibility matter most.
That usually means areas like UA, creative testing, product strategy, monetization, analytics and LiveOps. A publisher like Miniclip can bring broader market benchmarks, faster testing infrastructure, specialist teams and experience from working across multiple games and studios. That can help a team make better decisions earlier and scale a game more efficiently.
At the same time, studios should stay closely involved in the product itself. The best results usually come when the studio owns the creative vision and development execution, while the publisher brings data, commercial expertise and external perspective.
The strongest partnerships are not about handing the game over. They are about combining the studio’s product knowledge with the publisher’s ability to test, optimize and scale.
“The strongest partnerships are not about handing the game over. They are about combining the studio’s product knowledge with the publisher’s ability to test, optimize and scale.”
Ankush Madad, Publishing Lead at Miniclip
What happens during soft launch?
Once a publisher and studio decide to take a game forward, soft launch is often where the biggest product and commercial decisions start to take shape. From a publishing perspective, what do you think about the balance between letting the data guide the game and giving the development team room to follow its own product vision?
Ankush Madad: This can vary from Publisher to Publisher, but Soft launch for Miniclip is ultimately about understanding whether the game can reach sustainable ROAS at scale.
Retention, engagement, CPI, monetization and player behaviour all feed into that question. We look at whether players stay long enough, monetize strongly enough and can be acquired efficiently enough to build a healthy LTV-to-CAC relationship.
That does not mean chasing every metric in isolation. The role of the data is to show where the game is falling short of its ROAS goals, while the development team uses product judgement to decide how to solve those problems without losing the core vision.
The goal is to leave soft launch with a clear path to profitable scaling.
What changes when a game starts to scale?
Getting a game to work is one challenge; building something that can keep growing is another. Once a title moves towards scaling, how does the publisher’s role change? What becomes important at that point, whether that’s LiveOps, monetization, creative iteration? And where do you most often see studios struggle as they make that transition?
Ankush Madad: Once a game has passed its initial soft-launch metrics, the focus shifts from validation to preparing for scale.
At that point, the publisher is looking at whether the game can maintain strong ROAS as budgets increase. That means expanding UA gradually, increasing creative testing, improving monetization and retention, and making sure the content and LiveOps pipeline can support a much larger player base.
The challenge for studios is that the pace changes quickly. It is no longer just about improving the core game; the team also needs to build enough content, operational capacity and testing velocity to be ready for launch.
The publisher’s role is to help manage that transition and make sure the game is not only performing well at small scale, but is structurally ready for a global launch.
How does the relationship evolve after launch?
A publishing partnership can look very different once a game is live and the initial launch phase is behind you. How does the relationship between the publisher and studio evolve over time? What needs to change in the way both sides communicate, make decisions and divide responsibilities as the game moves into ongoing growth?
Ankush Madad: After launch, responsibilities usually become more specialized and structured.
During development and soft launch, the studio and publisher may work very closely on product decisions and validation. Once the game is live, ownership becomes clearer: the studio increasingly leads development, content and LiveOps execution, while the publisher focuses more heavily on UA scaling, creative strategy, monetization, analytics and identifying new growth opportunities.
Over time, the relationship also moves from frequent tactical decisions to a more established operating rhythm, with both sides aligned around shared KPIs, ROAS targets and the long-term roadmap.
The goal is not for either side to step back, but for each team to lean more into the areas where it can create the most value as the game matures.
