with Anton Slashcev
Game advisor, ex-producer at Playrix and Belka Games
Voices of Mobile Gaming:
LiveOps Wins in a Tougher Market
Welcome to a new edition of Voices of Mobile Gaming!
Today, we’re speaking with Anton Slashcev, an experienced game producer and advisor with a strong background in mobile games. Anton has worked with leading studios such as Playrix and Belka Games, and is also the co-founder of Unlock Games, a studio behind multiple hybrid casual titles with tens of millions of downloads.
With hands-on experience across hit-driven casual games, LiveOps systems, and today’s more mature mobile market, Anton brings a practical perspective on what it really takes to build games that last beyond the gold rush.
Hi Anton!
We’re really happy to have you with us today and excited to dive into your experience, insights, and thoughts on how the mobile market is evolving.
1. Many people say the mobile “gold rush” is over. From your perspective, what fundamentally changed in the market compared to 5–7 years ago?
2. In today’s post–gold rush market, what actually separates games that survive for years from those that quietly disappear after launch?
The “gold rush” is genuinely over. After the 2022 decline, total mobile market revenue never fully recovered and now mostly drifts with only modest growth. Each year, a smaller share of games reaches meaningful commercial success (for example, crossing $1M lifetime gross revenue). Supercell CEO Ilkka Paananen has also written about this shift, and I’d recommend reading his perspective.
There are a few reasons behind it. First, the boom was fueled by an abnormal global situation. COVID drove consumer demand up, increased the overall need for advertising across products (including in games), and came with “cheap money” plus unusually high investment into gaming. Later that environment disappeared. At the same time, mobile UA became much harder after IDFA changes, organic traffic is limited for most new games, and consumer demand softened a bit. Meanwhile, supply keeps growing. More releases each year, more competition. Put together, that mix is why the gold rush faded.
Most long-lasting winners combine three things.
First, they deliver a twist inside a proven genre. Ideally that twist also connects to something intuitive and “real” so players instantly get it. For example, pouring liquids feels grounded and satisfying in games like Magic Sort.
Second, they run strong LiveOps. Frequent updates, regular events, and continuous A/B testing of improvements.
Third, they execute a powerful UA strategy. Big budgets, relentless iteration, and testing a massive volume of creatives until they find scalable angles.
3. You’ve worked a lot with casual and hybrid casual games. How has the role of LiveOps evolved in these genres over the last few years?
LiveOps moved from “optional” to mandatory. Payback horizons shifted further out. That means a strong core alone is not enough. You need to operate the product continuously.
Studios also became more systematic about LiveOps because they have to be. A second noticeable trend is unification and copying, sometimes without much thinking. Core gameplay can vary, but in LiveOps approaches, many teams copy what works in top titles like Royal Match and MONOPOLY GO!. Not always successfully.
I’m all for learning best practices, but it has to be deliberate. Ask, “Why is it designed this way,” and “Does it actually fit our product and our players,” instead of copying 1:1.
4. You often hear teams say “we’ll fix it with LiveOps.” Why is LiveOps not just content drops, but a system that needs to be designed early?
First, it helps to define LiveOps clearly because different teams mean different things by it. Broadly, LiveOps falls into three buckets:
1. New content
New levels, worlds, skins, and other additions that sit on top of the core game



2. Time limited events
Designing, testing, and running features that are available only for a limited time on a schedule. Usually two subtypes: engagement events (win streaks, competitions, etc) and monetization events (offers, etc)
3. Improving existing features
Everything that changes what you already have. FTUE changes, balance tuning, bug fixes, UI/UX improvements, and so on.
LiveOps is basically juggling these three balls. You cannot “hold” all of them at the same time. There is never enough focus and resources.
That’s why you should not push every product problem into “we’ll solve it later with LiveOps.” LiveOps will already have plenty of its own work.
5. What are the most common LiveOps mistakes you see teams make when the market gets tougher and growth slows down?
The most common mistake is greed. Trying to squeeze “something right now” instead of providing value and building long-term retention.
A typical reaction to low LTV is to tighten balance harder, push offers more aggressively, show ads every 30 seconds, etc. Sometimes it can lift short-term numbers a bit, yes. But if you overdo it, you kill long-term potential.
If you look at the most successful casual and hybrid casual games in the top charts, they usually feel generous. You can play, progress, and have fun without paying, and it still feels fine. Paying should make the experience even better and faster, but it stays optional. The game must be enjoyable for non-payers, and for payers it should be twice as fun.
6. How should producers think about LiveOps differently when UA is expensive and scaling fast is no longer guaranteed?
Producers need to rely more on a data-driven approach. Calculate your hypotheses before you run a test. Be clear which metrics should move, by how much, and how that should translate into revenue. Do not run tests purely on your “gut feeling”.
7. In your experience, what signals tell you early on that a game’s LiveOps system will not scale long-term?
A low sticky factor (DAU/MAU) is almost always a signal that something is off in LiveOps.
Even if retention is decent and players return occasionally, low stickiness means the game did not become a habit. You need to address that. Most often, that means adding stronger time-limited engagement events. Sometimes the root cause can also be balance, UX, or content pacing.
8. How do strong LiveOps systems change the way teams prioritize features, updates, and roadmap decisions?
You always prioritize based on expected impact on metrics and based on which metrics are currently in focus.
Typically, studios set a 6 to 12 month strategy, identify 3 to 5 key product directions, and assign KPIs to each direction. From there, prioritization becomes straightforward. Work first on the tasks most likely to move the KPI for the chosen direction.
9. Looking at today’s market, what skills or mindset do producers need now that weren’t as critical during the mobile boom years?
The same data-driven mindset, but with much higher standards.
During the stronger years, you could “shoot for the stars” and still hit something occasionally. Today, if you do not run LiveOps with strict data-driven discipline, the chances of building successful, scalable LiveOps are close to zero.
10. For studios launching or operating games today, what’s one hard truth about the current mobile market that teams often avoid facing?
Mobile is no longer about “launch fast and earn quickly.” It’s a long game with high risk. Even with a promising product, it can take years to reach real profit. Teams have to accept this early, plan runway accordingly, and understand how they will finance development and operations for the long haul.
If you want help with LiveOps or improving mid-to-long-term retention, you can DM me on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/aslashcev/
