Kada se govori o poslovnoj strani gejming industrije, malo ljudi ima iskustvo koje obuhvata gotovo svaki njen segment: od razvoja igara i kreativne produkcije do izdavaštva, monetizacije i globalnih strategija. Na pitanja za naš portal odgovorio je Chris Hewish, predsednik kompanije Xsolla i jedan od najiskusnijih ljudi u industriji, sa više od dve decenije rada u svetu video igara i interaktivne zabave.
Njegov ulazak u industriju počeo je na nesvakidašnji način, slanjem izmišljene preporuke kompaniji Games Workshop napisane iz ugla Ork Warbossa. Ono što je počelo kao kreativan potez pretvorilo se u impresivnu karijeru koja uključuje 13 godina rada u Activisionu, kao i vodeće pozicije u kompanijama poput DreamWorks Animation, Survios i Skydance.
Danas, kao predsednik Xsolle, Hewish radi na razvoju tehnologija i rešenja koja pomažu razvojnim timovima i izdavačima da unaprede distribuciju, monetizaciju i odnose sa igračima širom sveta. U razgovoru koji sledi govorili smo o budućnosti gejming industrije, veštačkoj inteligenciji, promenama poslovnih modela i izazovima koji očekuju studije u godinama koje dolaze.
Mnoge rasprave o veštačkoj inteligenciji u igrama fokusiraju se na kreiranje sadržaja, ali manje na njen uticaj na to kako se igre prave i kako funkcionišu na duge staze. Gde vidite da AI zapravo pravi najveću razliku u industriji danas: u razvojnim procesima (pipeline), live ops ili poslovnim modelima?
Chris Hewish: Dosta pažnje je posvećeno kreiranju sadržaja i tu zaista postoji veliki potencijal. Međutim, neki od najvrednijih procesa dešavaju se iza kulisa, u načinu na koji se igre prave i vode. Kada bih morao da ih rangiram, razvojni procesi danas beleže najveći napredak, dok su live ops prostor gde leži dugoročna prilika.
U razvoju, AI je već moćna alatka za produktivnost. Studiji ga koriste za pomoć pri kodiranju, automatizovano testiranje, izradu prototipova, lokalizaciju i optimizaciju toka posla. To oslobađa kreativne timove da provode više vremena na samom kreativnom radu koji je i najvažniji, dok istovremeno skraćuje vreme iteracije i olakšava pritisak na budžete i rasporede, koje je svake godine sve teže kontrolisati. Igrači možda ne vide te dobitke direktno, ali se oni manifestuju kroz bolje igre koje brže izlaze na tržište.
Live operations su segment gde vidim najuzbudljiviji dugoročni potencijal. Kako sve više igara funkcioniše kao live service, AI može pomoći studijima da razumeju svoje igrače, predvide probleme i efikasnije posluju tokom životnog ciklusa igre. Tu se ujedno povezuje i ono što radimo u Xsolla-i, jer se veliki deo toga svodi na razumevanje ponašanja igrača i donošenje pravih odluka na osnovu toga.
Prilika kojoj se stalno vraćam je ona koja donosi kumulativni efekat. Tehnologije koje olakšavaju pravljenje i vođenje sjajnih igara imaju tendenciju da stvore najtrajniju vrednost, a AI spada upravo u tu kategoriju. To je deo u vezi sa kojim sam najveći optimista.
Tradicionalni izdavački model ugrožen je strategijama direktne prodaje potrošačima (direct-to-consumer) i kros-platformskim ekosistemima. Da li mislite da se industrija kreće ka fragmentiranijem, ali fleksibilnijem pejzažu distribucije, i šta pokreće tu promenu?
Chris Hewish: Da, i to je upravo promena oko koje je Xsolla izgrađena. Stari model, u kome su vlasnici platformi, maloprodajni lanci i izdavači kontrolisali vidljivost, distribuciju i monetizaciju, ustupa mesto nečemu raznovrsnijem. Ne bih to nazvao potpuno decentralizovanim sistemom. To je hibrid sa više puteva do igrača nego što ih je bilo pre jedne decenije.
Nekoliko stvari pokreće ovaj trend. Najveći faktor je to što izdavači žele da poseduju direktan odnos sa korisnikom. Dugo su podaci o igračima, kupovnim navikama i mogućnost komunikacije bili isključivo u rukama platformi. Studiji sada investiraju u kanale direktne prodaje jer na taj način ponovo uspostavljaju kontrolu nad svojim zajednicama, marketingom i ekonomijom. Smanjenje naknada za prodavnice (storefront fees) je deo toga, ali iskreno, to je manji deo priče. Prava nagrada je posedovanje tog odnosa, umesto iznajmljivanja pristupa njemu.
Kao drugo, igre su postale dugoročni biznis, a ne jednokratni proizvodi. Franšize koje opstaju, izgrađene su tako da zadrže angažovanje igrača na PC-ju, konzolama, mobilnim uređajima i cloud-u, kao i da prenose identitet i istoriju igrača dok se kreću između tih platformi. Taj kontinuitet produžava životni vek i vrednost intelektualne svojine (IP) naslova.
Kao treće, digitalna distribucija je spustila barijere. Programeru više nije potrebna fizička maloprodaja ili tradicionalni izdavački ugovor da bi došao do publike. Između više prodavnica, pretplatničkih usluga, platformi za kreatore i regionalnih kanala, danas postoji daleko više načina da se igra predstavi igračima nego ranije.
Dakle, smer kretanja nije fragmentacija sama po sebi. To je fleksibilnost, vođena željom studija da poseduju odnos sa svojim igračima i sretnu ih tamo gde se oni zapravo nalaze. Strateški pomak je napravljen sa pukog prodavanja igre na upravljanje biznisom koji direktno dopire do igrača i održava taj odnos tokom vremena.
U ovakvom evoluirajućem okruženju, monetizacija je postala sve složenija, posebno za studije koji posluju na globalnom nivou. Koje su najveće strukturalne promene koje vidite u načinu na koji igre danas ostvaruju prihod?
Chris Hewish: Najveća strukturalna promena je prelazak sa modela vođenog premijerom igre (launch-driven) na model vođen životnim ciklusom (lifecycle-driven). Tokom najvećeg dela istorije ove industrije, igra je zarađivala većinu novca u prvih nekoliko nedelja, a zatim je prodaja opadala po predvidivoj krivi. Sada live service igre, battle pass-ovi, ekspanzije i kupovine unutar igre znače da igra može da zarađuje godinama, a zadržavanje angažovanih igrača tokom vremena važno je koliko i inicijalna prodaja.
Prihodi su takođe postali diversifikovaniji. Premium prodaja sada stoji rame uz rame sa pretplatama, kupovinama unutar igre, oglašavanjem i licenciranjem, što znači da studio ne stavlja sve na jednu kartu i jedan izvor prihoda.
Druga velika promena, i ona koju najdirektnije vidimo u Xsolla-i, jeste to što je monetizacija postala lokalizovanija. Studiji prilagođavaju cene, načine plaćanja, pa čak i sadržaj regionalnim preferencijama i propisima, umesto da svuda primenjuju jedinstvenu globalnu cenu. Cena koja funkcioniše na jednom tržištu može biti prava prepreka na drugom, a način plaćanja kojem igrač veruje u Brazilu nije onaj koji se koristi u Nemačkoj. Pogoditi to kako treba čini razliku između ostvarene prodaje i gubitka korisnika.
Ispod svega toga leži isti pomak: od tretiranja igre kao proizvoda koji prodate jednom, do tretiranja igre kao odnosa koji održavate. Privlačenje igrača je i dalje važno. Njihovo zadržavanje je ono što određuje da li matematika na kraju zapravo funkcioniše.
Sa sve strožim propisima o podacima, privatnosti i digitalnoj trgovini, kako studiji mogu da usklade poštovanje zakona sa glatkim, besprekornim iskustvom za igrače na različitim tržištima?
Chris Hewish: Izazov je ispuniti regulatorne zahteve bez pogoršanja iskustva za igrača. Kako su pravila o privatnosti podataka, digitalnoj trgovini i zaštiti potrošača postala složenija, studiji koji se dobro snalaze tretiraju usklađenost (compliance) kao osnovnu operativnu sposobnost, a ne kao nešto što pravni tim naknadno pridoda na kraju.
Pristup koji funkcioniše jeste ugradnja usklađenosti u samu infrastrukturu. Kada su kontrole privatnosti, verifikacija starosne dobi, upravljanje saglasnošću i lokalizovani sistemi plaćanja deo platforme, možete se prilagoditi zahtevima različitih tržišta bez stvaranja novih prepreka svaki put kada igrač pokuša nešto da uradi. Plaćanja i identitet su upravo tačke gde se susreću usklađenost sa propisima i korisničko iskustvo, i to je ono na šta se fokusiramo u Xsolla-i.
Ono što bih naglasio jeste da poverenje i praktičnost nisu odvojeni ciljevi. Igrači očekuju da se sa njihovim podacima postupa odgovorno i da njihove transakcije funkcionišu, a studio koji pruža i jedno i drugo je u daleko jačoj poziciji na fragmentiranom globalnom tržištu od onog koji usklađenost tretira kao trošak koji treba minimizirati. Prema mom iskustvu, operativna disciplina koja vas drži usklađenim sa zakonom obično je ista ona disciplina koja uopšte i zavređuje poverenje igrača.
Neki programeri i dalje posmatraju pristupačnost (accessibility) kao dodatnu opciju, a ne kao osnovni princip dizajna. Da li je industrija konačno stigla do tačke u kojoj pristupačnost postaje konkurentska prednost?
Chris Hewish: Da, i mislim da se kontekst zaista promenio. Pristupačnost je nekada bila skup funkcija koje su studiji dodavali kasno, ako su ih uopšte i dodavali. Bolji studiji je sada uvode u proces dizajna mnogo ranije, vođeni kombinacijom očekivanja igrača, regulative i jednostavne spoznaje: pristupačan dizajn proširuje krug ljudi koji zapravo mogu da igraju vašu igru.
Ta poslednja tačka je mesto gde to postaje poslovno pitanje, a ne samo etičko. Prilagodljive kontrole, titlovi, skalabilni korisnički interfejs, modovi za jasnije raspoznavanje boja i opcije asistencije pomažu igračima sa invaliditetom, ali takođe poboljšavaju iskustvo za mnogo širu publiku. Oni imaju tendenciju da poboljšaju upotrebljivost za sve. Studiji koji to ozbiljno shvataju stiču istinsku naklonost svojih zajednica, što je važno na tržištu gde je zadržavanje igrača jednako važno kao i njihovo privlačenje.
Ja na to gledam isto kao što gledamo na naš deo posla u Xsolla-i: uklanjanje barijera između igre i ljudi koji žele da je igraju i plate za nju. Pristupačnost je dizajnerska strana te iste ideje. Uklanjanje barijere za igranje se ne razlikuje mnogo od uklanjanja barijere za kupovinu. I jedno i drugo proširuje publiku, i oba donose rezultate tokom vremena.
Gledajući unapred, šta mislite da će definisati uspeh gejming studija u narednih 3 do 5 godina: inovacija sadržaja, kontrola distribucije ili sposobnost prilagođavanja poslovnom i regulatornom okruženju koje se brzo menja?
Chris Hewish: Neće se svesti na samo jednu od tih stvari. Ako bih morao da izaberem jednu reč, to bi bila prilagodljivost. Kvalitet sadržaja i kontrola distribucije su i dalje važni, ali pobediće oni studiji koji mogu brzo da reaguju dok se poslovni modeli, propisi i očekivanja igrača stalno menjaju.
Rekao bih da se industrija pomera sa nagrađivanja veličine (scale) na nagrađivanje prilagodljivosti. A stvar koja studio čini prilagodljivim, prema mom iskustvu, jeste posedovanje temelja na kome biznis počiva. Odnos sa igračem, trgovina, podaci. Studio koji poseduje te elemente može da promeni svoj model, uđe na nova tržišta i apsorbuje promenu platforme ili regulative bez potrebe da počinje ispočetka. Studio koji sve to iznajmljuje od nekog drugog prepušten je na milost i nemilost odlukama koje ne kontroliše.
Tako da će u narednih nekoliko godina pobednici biti oni koji mogu da nastave da prave sjajne igre i posluju u složenijem okruženju, a da pritom ne izgube odnos sa igračima. To je opklada koju smo napravili u Xsolla-i: da je posedovanje tog temelja ono što omogućava studiju da se prilagodi svemu što sledi. Kompanije koje ga izgrade prenose svoju prednost iz jednog ciklusa u sledeći. One koje to ne učine, nastavljaju da grade od nule.
Originalni intervju na engleskom jeziku možete pročitati u nastavku.
(The original English interview follows below)
When discussing the business side of the gaming industry, few people have experience spanning nearly every part of it: from game development and creative production to publishing, monetization, and global strategy. Answering our questions is Chris Hewish, President of Xsolla and one of the industry’s most experienced executives, with more than two decades of experience across gaming and interactive entertainment.
His journey into the industry began in an unusual way, by sending a fictional recommendation letter to Games Workshop written from the perspective of an Ork Warboss. What started as a creative move eventually turned into an impressive career that includes a 13-year tenure at Activision, as well as leadership positions at companies such as DreamWorks Animation, Survios, and Skydance.
Today, as President of Xsolla, Hewish focuses on developing technologies and solutions that help developers and publishers improve distribution, monetization, and player engagement on a global scale. In the interview below, we discussed the future of gaming, artificial intelligence, changing business models, and the challenges studios will face in the years ahead.
Many discussions around AI in games focus on content creation, but less on its impact on how games are built and operated long-term. Where do you see AI actually making the biggest difference in the industry today: development pipelines, live operations, or business models?
Chris Hewish: A lot of the attention has been on content creation, and there is real promise there. But some of the most valuable work is happening behind the scenes, in the way games are built and operated. If I had to rank them, development pipelines are seeing the biggest gains today, and live operations are where the long-term opportunity is.
In development, AI is already a powerful productivity tool. Studios are using it for coding assistance, automated testing, prototyping, localization, and workflow smoothing. It frees creative teams to spend more time on the creative work that matters most, while cutting iteration time and easing the burden on budgets and schedules that have grown harder to manage every year. Players may not see those gains directly, but they show up in better games delivered faster.
Live operations is where I see the most exciting long-term potential. As more games run as ongoing services, AI can help studios understand their players, anticipate problems, and operate more efficiently throughout a game’s life cycle. That is also where it connects to what we do at Xsolla, because so much of it comes down to understanding player behavior and acting on it well.
The opportunity I keep coming back to is the one that compounds. The technologies that make it easier to build and operate great games tend to create the most lasting value, and AI is squarely in that category. That is the part I am most optimistic about.
The traditional publishing model is being challenged by direct-to-consumer strategies and cross-platform ecosystems. Do you think the industry is moving toward a more fragmented but flexible distribution landscape, and what is driving that shift?
Chris Hewish: Yes, and it is the shift Xsolla is built around. The old model, where platform holders, retailers, and publishers controlled discovery, distribution, and monetization, is giving way to something more varied. I would not call it fully decentralized. It is a hybrid with more paths to reach players than there were a decade ago.
A few things are driving it. The biggest is that publishers want to own the customer relationship. For a long time, the player data, purchasing behavior, and the ability to communicate it all sat with the platform. Studios are investing in direct-to-consumer channels now because that is how they regain control over their communities, marketing, and economics. Reducing storefront fees is part of it, but honestly, that is the smaller part. The real prize is owning the relationship instead of renting access to it.
Second, games have become long-running businesses rather than one-time products. The franchises that last are built to keep players engaged across PC, console, mobile, and cloud, and to carry a player’s identity and history with them as they move between those. That continuity extends the life and value of the IP.
Third, digital distribution lowered the barriers. A developer no longer needs physical retail or a traditional publishing deal to reach an audience. Between multiple storefronts, subscription services, creator platforms, and regional channels, there are far more ways to get a game in front of players than there used to be.
So the direction is not fragmentation for its own sake. It is flexibility, driven by studios wanting to own their player relationships and meet players wherever they actually are. The strategic shift is away from just selling a game and toward operating a business that reaches players directly and keeps that relationship over time.
In this evolving landscape, monetization has become increasingly complex, especially for studios operating globally. What are the biggest structural changes you’re seeing in how games generate revenue today?
Chris Hewish: The biggest structural change is the move from a launch-driven model to a lifecycle-driven one. For most of the industry’s history, a game made the bulk of its money in the first few weeks and then declined on a predictable curve. Now live services, battle passes, expansions, and in-game purchases mean a game can earn across years, and keeping players engaged over time matters as much as the initial sale.
Revenue has also gotten more diversified. Premium sales now sit alongside subscriptions, in-game purchases, advertising, and licensing, which means a studio is not betting everything on one source of income.
The other big change, and the one we see most directly at Xsolla, is that monetization has gotten more local. Studios are tailoring pricing, payment methods, and even content to regional preferences and regulations rather than applying a single global price everywhere. A price that works in one market can be a real barrier in another, and the payment method a player trusts in Brazil is not the one they use in Germany. Getting that right is the difference between converting a sale and losing it.
Underneath all of it is the same shift: from treating a game as a product you sell once to treating it as a relationship you maintain. Acquiring players still matters. Keeping them is what determines whether the economics actually work.
With increasing regulation around data, privacy, and digital commerce, how can studios maintain both compliance and a smooth, frictionless experience for players across different markets?
Chris Hewish: The challenge is meeting the regulatory requirements without making the experience worse for the player. As the rules around data privacy, digital commerce, and consumer protection have gotten more complex, the studios handling it well treat compliance as a core operational capability, not something the legal team bolts on at the end.
The approach that works is building compliance into the infrastructure itself. When privacy controls, age verification, consent management, and localized payment systems are part of the platform, you can adapt to different markets’ requirements without adding friction every time a player tries to do something. Payments and identity are exactly where compliance and player experience meet, and that is where we focus at Xsolla.
The thing I would emphasize is that trust and convenience are not separate goals. Players expect their data to be handled responsibly and their transactions to work, and a studio that delivers both is in a far stronger position across a fragmented global market than one that treats compliance as a cost to minimize. In my experience, the operating discipline that keeps you compliant is usually the same discipline that earns player trust in the first place.
Some developers still view accessibility as a feature rather than a core design principle. Has the industry finally reached a point where accessibility is becoming a competitive advantage?
Chris Hewish: Yes, and I think the framing has genuinely changed. Accessibility used to be a set of features studios added late, if they added them at all. The better studios now bring it into the design process much earlier, driven by a mix of player expectations, regulation, and a simple realization: accessible design expands who can actually play your game.
That last point is where it becomes a business question and not just an ethical one. Customizable controls, subtitles, a scalable UI, colorblind modes, and assistive options help players with disabilities, but they also enhance the experience for a much wider audience. They tend to improve usability for everyone. And studios that take it seriously earn real goodwill from their communities, which matters in a market where keeping players is as important as acquiring them.
I look at it the same way we look at our part of the business at Xsolla: removing the barriers between a game and the people who want to play and pay for it. Accessibility is the design side of that same idea. Removing a barrier to play is not so different from removing a barrier to purchase. Both expand the audience, and both tend to pay off over time.
Looking ahead, what do you think will define success for game studios over the next 3 to 5 years: content innovation, distribution control, or the ability to adapt to rapidly changing business and regulatory environments?
Chris Hewish: It will not come down to any one of those. If I had to pick a single word, it would be adaptability. Content quality and distribution control both still matter, but the studios that win will be the ones that can respond quickly as business models, regulations, and player expectations keep shifting.
The way I would put it is that the industry is moving from rewarding scale to rewarding adaptability. And the thing that makes a studio adaptable, in my experience, is owning the foundation underneath the business. The relationship with the player, the commerce, the data. A studio that owns those can change its model, enter new markets, and absorb a platform or regulatory change without starting over. A studio that rents all of it from someone else is at the mercy of decisions it does not control.
So over the next few years, the winners will be those who can keep making great games and operate across a more complex landscape without losing the player relationship in the process. That is the bet we have made at Xsolla, that owning that foundation is what lets a studio adapt to whatever comes next. The companies that build it carry their advantage from one cycle to the next. The ones that do not keep rebuilding from zero.
We would like to thank Mr. Hewish and the Xsolla team for taking the time to share these insights with our readers.
Autor: VideoGame Arena