LVL Zero founding partner Krish Anurag on selecting studios, equity-free funding and building India's global game pipeline

• Over 65% of LVL Zero's applicants were founded in the last two years.
• 58% of applicants are building for PC, 36% for console, not mobile.
• The program compressed 6 to 12 months of cold publisher outreach into a structured pipeline.
• LVL Zero went from 240+ applications to deep-dive calls with 70 teams before selecting 10.
• The $100k grant pool is fully equity-free across all 10 studios.

Over 65% of studios that applied to the LVL Zero accelerator were founded in the last two years. India's indie game scene is not emerging, it is already moving. The question now is whether the ecosystem around it can keep up.

We speak with LVL Zero founding partner Krish Anurag about selecting 10 studios from 240 applicants, the case for equity-free funding and why the accelerator's 100-day model is designed to outlast itself.

PocketGamer.biz: Out of over 240 applicants, you selected 10 studios. Walk us through that process and what were the most common reasons studios didn’t make the cut? 

Krish Anurag: We went from 240+ applications to 10 studios, so the bar had to be very real. The process was hands-on. We didn’t outsource it. We read every application, got into deep dive calls with 70 teams, and then narrowed it down through founder conversations. Along the way, we also took inputs from publishers and operators who’ve shipped games at a global level. 

What filtered most teams out wasn’t talent. That exists. It was clarity. Who is this game for, what’s the loop, and why does it win. A lot of teams were still figuring that out. The second filter was team strength. With most applicants being 3-4 member micro-studios, we were looking for teams that could handle pressure and iterate fast. The 100 days are short. What matters is who can keep going after it. 

Tell us about the publisher access that is mentioned as part of the program. What does that mean in practice? 

Publisher access at LVL Zero is not an endpoint, it’s part of the system. Publishers and partners like Google Play, Xbox and multiple global publishing houses have visibility into the ecosystem we’re building. Some of them have already engaged with the cohort at different stages. What that changes is intent. Founders are not building in isolation and then pitching to publishers at the end. 

They’re building along with them, as a few global publishers are also dedicated mentors to the cohort, and they’re building with a clear understanding of what the market expects. We’re essentially compressing what usually takes 6-12 months of cold outreach into a structured, warm pipeline. 

LVL Zero has been described as addressing a gap where resources existed but weren’t integrated. Why was that integration missing, and what makes this the right moment to fix it? 

Why now? Because the supply side is evolving fast in India. A surge of new studios with over 65% of our applicants were founded in the last 2 years, and these studios have access to significantly better tooling. But the infrastructure to convert that into outcomes hasn’t kept up. 

Moreover, investors didn’t have a consistent pipeline. Global publishers were not looking at India actively. Founders were building without structured feedback loops. LVL Zero brings those pieces into one place. That’s the timing. The ecosystem is ready; it just needed a platform, that’s LVL Zero. 

Talk to us about the $10k equity-free grant. How did you land on that figure? And is it intended to cover development costs, or is it more of a validation signal? 

It’s working capital, not validation. Most early-stage teams are operating at constraint. They’re choosing what’s affordable, not what’s optimal. This gives them room to test, hire short-term support, or run experiments they otherwise wouldn’t. 

Across the cohort, we’re backing 10 startups with $10K each as part of a $100K pool. Keeping it equity-free was deliberate. We wanted founders focused on building, not negotiating ownership on day one. 

What does a typical week inside the 100 days look like? And what support exists beyond the grant if a studio needs more capital during that period?  

The program runs in structured sprints, but what really defines a week inside LVL Zero is how close teams are to real feedback. Every team is building, testing, and iterating continuously. That includes dedicated QA support and targeted global playtesting, which is something most early-stage studios simply can’t afford on their own. 

We’ve invested heavily in enabling that layer because it’s the difference between guessing and knowing how your game performs. Alongside that, teams are in structured calls with mentors across areas where they’re focusing and need help. The conversations are focused on what’s actually happening in their builds that week. 

On capital, access is there through MIXI Global Investments, Nazara Technologies, ChimeraVC and the broader network. But we’re deliberate about not rushing it. In most cases, better data and a stronger build will unlock better outcomes than focusing on raising this early. 

From your perspective, what's unique about Indian studios compared to those from other regions? Is it a focus on certain genres, or something else entirely?  

It’s the combination of exposure and efficiency. A lot of founders here have worked on multiple titles in different capacities before starting up, so the baseline quality bar is understood. At the same time, they’re building in small teams with lower cost structures. That matters because it allows more iteration. You can test faster, fail cheaper, and take more swings. 

We’re also seeing interesting patterns. Over 58% of applicants are building for PC, and 36% for console, which shows ambition to go beyond mobile. The best teams aren’t building just for India. They’re building from India for players across the globe. 

LVL Zero is 100 days. Most accelerators run longer. What's the argument for compressing the timeline, and what do you lose by doing that? 

The 100 days are designed to build discipline. Everything is structured around tight sprints, clear milestones, and continuous iteration. Teams are expected to ship, test, learn and improve in short cycles. That rhythm forces clarity in both product and decision-making. 

The goal isn’t just what gets built in those 100 days. It’s to leave teams with a repeatable execution framework. How to run sprints, how to prioritise, how to use data from testing and QA to make product calls. That structure is what carries forward. The program ends, but the way they operate shouldn’t.

What does a successful cohort look like at day 100? Are there specific milestones you're tracking? 

We look at three core outcomes. One, meaningful product progress backed by data. Not just a better-looking game, but one that has gone through QA, playtesting, and shows real signals on engagement and retention. Two, growth of the team as operators. How they make decisions, how they handle trade-offs, how they work together. 

That’s something they carry with them long after the 100 days. Three, real, warm external conversations. By the time Demo Day happens, we want teams walking into discussions with publishers, partners and investors with context already built, not starting from scratch. If we get those three right, the outcomes should surely compound. 

After the cohort ends, what's the ongoing relationship between LVL Zero and the studios? Is there alumni infrastructure, follow-on support, or does the program's involvement effectively end at day 100?

The 100 days lead into Demo Day, which is a key moment for the cohort. It’s a curated showcase with investors, publishers, platforms and ecosystem partners, where teams are presenting not just an idea, but a tested product and a clear direction forward. It opens up real conversations around capital, publishing and distribution. 

After that, the relationship continues. Studios stay connected to the network for introductions, follow-on opportunities and access to mentors. We’re also building this as an alumni system over time. The idea remains simple: founders shouldn’t have to rebuild access every time they need something. You don’t really graduate out of LVL Zero. You just level up.