Game aggregation

What an aggregator actually does, how it differs from contracting studios directly, and the trade-offs an operator is making when they pick one.

What sits between a studio and your lobby

Four layers, and most operators only ever deal with two of them.

  1. The studioBuilds the game — the art, the mechanics and the mathematics — and holds the certificate for the model as built.
  2. The remote game serverExecutes rounds. It is the studio’s or their host’s, it holds the outcome logic, and it is where the round actually happens rather than in your product.
  3. The aggregatorBundles many studios behind one API and one contract, and translates between what each studio expects and what you send. This is us on both routes.
  4. Your platformHolds the wallet, the currency distinction and the player. On the API integration that is your system; on the managed platform it is ours.

Aggregator or direct

The same six questions, answered honestly in both columns.
Through an aggregator Direct with studios
Integration effort. One, and it does not grow with the catalogue.Integration effort. One per studio, each with its own quirks.
Adding a studio. A catalogue change upstream; nothing for your engineers.Adding a studio. A contract, an integration and a test cycle.
Commercial terms. Set upstream. You get a rate, not a negotiation.Commercial terms. Yours to negotiate, and yours to be good at.
Escalation. One number to call, and one layer of translation before it reaches whoever can fix it.Escalation. Straight to the people who wrote the game.
Currency logic. Solved once at the boundary, the same way for every studio.Currency logic. Negotiated and implemented per supplier.
Catalogue growth. Happens without you, and in a direction you do not set.Catalogue growth. Entirely yours, at the pace you can fund.

There is no answer to this that is right for everyone, and an operator with engineers and a content strategy may reasonably go direct for the studios that matter most and aggregate the long tail.

What one integration is worth

  • One integration instead of one per studio, and one contract instead of one per studio.
  • A catalogue that grows without an engineering project on your side.
  • One escalation path when a title misbehaves, rather than a search for whose fault it is.
  • Currency handling solved once, at the boundary, rather than negotiated per supplier.

What you give up

An aggregation page that lists only advantages is a brochure. These are real, they apply to us, and an operator who has not thought about them will meet them later.

  • A layer between you and whoever built the game. When a title behaves oddly you are describing it to somebody who is also describing it to somebody else.
  • Commercial terms you did not negotiate directly with the studio, and cannot see.
  • A roadmap that is not yours. Which studios get integrated next, and how quickly, is our decision informed by many operators rather than your requirements.
  • The knowledge of why a studio is absent. A studio missing from an aggregator’s catalogue may have declined, may be mid-negotiation, or may never have been approached — and from the outside those look identical.

We are not publishing our commercial terms with studios, and no aggregator will. What we can tell you is which of those four costs you are actually exposed to in your case, which is a more useful conversation than a rate card.

Adding a studio after launch

Bringing a new studio onto the platform is work on our side rather than an integration your team schedules — the contract, the technical connection and the certification checks are ours. That is true on both routes.

What is not ours is the last step. A newly available title does not appear in your lobby by itself: which titles you surface, in what order, in which currency contexts, is your product decision on both routes. An operator who expects a studio to “just appear” is expecting us to make a merchandising decision on their behalf, and we do not.

Questions to ask any aggregator

Eight questions, and they are pointed at us too

Written to be asked of casinoapi.tech, not only of the other bidder. If our answer to one of these is worse than a competitor’s, that is information you should have before you sign rather than after.

  1. Who holds the certificate for the titles you are offering me — you, or the studio?
  2. When a title misbehaves in production, who do I describe it to, and who do they describe it to?
  3. What happens to a player mid-round if your service goes down?
  4. Which studios are in your catalogue because you integrated them, and which are there because another aggregator did?
  5. How long does a new studio actually take to reach my lobby, measured from your side, not theirs?
  6. Does the same title behave identically in both currency contexts, and can you show me that it does?
  7. If a studio leaves your catalogue, what notice do I get and what happens to titles my players are using?
  8. What can you tell me about your commercial terms with studios, and what can you not?

Weighing the models side by side: aggregator versus direct, and what the API integration includes.

Comparing us against an aggregator rather than a platform? The questions on this page are written to be asked of us too. Ask them.