"Business model and platform transitions are extinction events for companies"

• Michael Rubinelli discusses how new companies built for industry shifts - like Supercell in the early mobile F2P era - are well-positioned to take advantage of new trends.
• Large companies can suffer from a fear of failure when it comes to adapting to new trends.

Business model and platform transitions in the games industry are “extinction events” for companies, says Tyranno Studios chief gaming officer Michael Rubinelli.

Rubinelli has substantial experience in the sector, having worked for decades at firms including EA, Disney, Mattel and others. In that time, he’s been through many of the major industry transitions, from 2D to 3D to online, multiplayer, free-to-play, mobile, web3, live ops and more.

These days he’s working at Tyranno Studios as chief gaming officer. The studio, which rebranded from Wax Studios a few years back, has just launched its latest title, PvP strategy game Spin Tycoon, on mobile and desktop.

That title itself looks to build on popular design trends as seen in games like Coin Master - and adapted to mega hit Monopoly Go - as well as take cues from the hybridcasual market following hypercasual’s demise.

Given his vast experience in working through industry shifts - and trying a few out himself, including browser social, free-to-play, and web3 - we caught up with Rubinelli for a video interview, which you can see below.

“Exctinction events”

Some big names in gaming have come and gone over the years, particularly as platform transitions played out.

Even mobile developers and publishers like Zynga and Rovio, which continue operating, struggled with the shift from browser free-to-play (Zynga) and premium mobile (Rovio) to mobile free-to-play.

Both companies went through painful years of restructuring and layoffs before getting back to growth. Zynga and Rovio eventually got acquired by Take-Two and Sega.

“Failure or fear of loss is a huge motivator and extinction events like business model transitions are scary,” says Rubinelli.

“And if you can't handle that, you're not going to take the risk ... a lot of times these shifts keep people on the sidelines and it ends up costing them.”

He recalls a time when, after explaining the early free-to-play business model to an industry colleague, they thought he was “crazy” for getting involved. He became part of the early leadership at social games developer Playdom, later acquired by Disney for $763.2 million.

“It takes somebody to lead the way,” he says. “So if you look at free-to-play, what companies were born out of it? Zynga, Scopley, King. Some of the biggest brands in the world. ... Not because they were better at it, but because they were built for it.”

He adds: “Then once they saw that it worked, everybody else shifted.”

First mover and second mover advantage

In tech, there are various examples of first-mover advantage - such as those early F2P movers that were able to scale - and second movers that built upon what worked. We ask Rubinelli what he thinks can lead to the best results, given the risks associated with investing in a new trend that might not become widely accepted.

Rubinelli says risk appetite depends on scale. Small companies can take their shot in the hope of the upside down the road, with a lot less to lose than larger firms. At those bigger companies, Rubinelli says, the fear of loss motivates them to be a second mover.

He highlights the example of Supercell which saw the opportunity in mobile F2P after the failed Gunshine. Inspired by Zynga’s FarmVille and Kixeye’s Backyard Monsters, it built Hay Day and Clash of Clans for mobile. Kixeye was unable to follow that shift, with Supercell reaping the rewards.

When trends don’t work out

On the Web3 trend - which has risen and fallen, though companies remain working on how the tech can be integrated into games - Rubinelli remains optimistic. Use-cases, like NFTs, have yet to achieve mass scale in the industry, while even the term NFTs has become toxic for some consumers.

Rubinelli still believes in consumers being able to own their digital purchases. When starting at Wax, he felt all publishers should embrace the tech - but criticised some implementations of it in recent years.

He said some publishers were still motivated by fear of loss in embracing the tech. He says one area the trend fell apart for games was the influx of people “who were website makers” effectively getting into game development and building experiences that weren’t enjoyable.

“I still believe in Web3 very much. I still believe that players should own certain things.”

He adds: “There was no North Star, which is what really helped free-to-play.”

AI buzz

On the topic of AI, Rubinelli is bullish about the opportunities. He claims AI tech allows developers to compress the grunt work, meaning employees can work on the things that have the most return on investment for their time.

As potential examples of AI in use, he says that programmers don’t have to do low-level scripting, while artists don’t have to do concept sketches - they can instead focus on feature implementation and the final aesthetics.

It doesn’t mean, he says, that studios need less staff. It means they can do better things sooner.

Rubinelli says AI is “without question” a trend that’s actually proving useful. But he offers some words of warning.

“AI is great at certain things and terrible at other things,” he says, adding: “It can’t tell you how good your idea is … it’s not an arbiter of quality.”

Check out the video interview for Rubinelli’s full insights on how developers can adapt to new industry trends.

Learn about the latest games industry trends at Pocket Gamer Connects London 2026 on January 19th to 20th.