For the first ten years of Rockbite Games’ existence, we never seriously considered working with a publisher. We received offers regularly, but we simply didn’t see the point. The studio was operating independently, and we already had a hit. That changed in 2023, when the question became much more fundamental: survival. At that point, we were forced to consider every possible option. 

Our collaboration with AppQuantum started as an experiment — one of many scenarios we were evaluating at the time. But in the end, it led not only to our most successful and profitable project, but to what became the strongest title in its niche.

That said, we don’t believe studios should agree to publishing just for the sake of it. In our case, the key factor was simple: this wasn’t just a publisher.

How we made the decision

By the summer of 2023, Rockbite Games was at a crossroads. We were operating at a loss, and the options were blunt: either we secured funding, or we shut the studio down. In that situation, we naturally started looking at everything — including what publishers had to offer.

When conversations with AppQuantum began, it became clear early on that they were willing to invest directly in the studio. That alone could have saved us. To be honest, this was the decisive factor. Only later did it become clear that we could actually build a new game together. We were planning to make a new project anyway, why not do it with a partner who’s willing to take risks alongside us?

Of course, our concerns didn’t disappear overnight. Like many developers, we feared a scenario where a cold, profit-driven corporation would step in and either remain detached or, worse, start exerting control over the studio, especially if things went south. From the very first conversation, we chose complete transparency. We didn’t sugarcoat anything: the burn rate was too high, marketing was operating at a loss, and the outlook was uncertain. We didn’t even know whether publishing would help — or whether the studio would close regardless.

But we also understood something important: if we weren’t fully open, the publisher simply wouldn’t be able to help. You can’t fix problems you don’t know exist.

So we made a conscious decision to put all the cards on the table. The alternative was worse. We didn’t have the time or resources to build another hit on our own. And in hindsight, even with a publisher, things didn’t come together immediately — doing it solo would have been impossible.

Pure financial investment without publishing support isn’t an ideal solution either. Real value appears when money and expertise come together.

In the classic publishing model where the publisher doesn’t invest in the studio itself, their motivation is limited. Projects are shuffled until one succeeds. External producers are often salaried and carry little personal risk. From a developer’s perspective, this setup brings very little value. The only exception might be hyper-casual games, where projects are launched and killed quickly.

But when you move into casual or mid-core territory, everything changes. These games require deeper design, long-term retention strategies, and carefully built monetization. That demands time, involvement, and hands-on support from a publisher.

The ideal scenario is when a partner invests not only money, but also experience — and takes real risks alongside you. That’s when interests align, responsibility is shared, and both sides are committed to long-term success.

What to look for when choosing a publisher

It all starts with communication — but good conversations alone don’t reveal the full picture.

Some publishers are entirely metrics-driven and expect a ready-made hit. Others talk about a “personal approach,” but in practice everything still boils down to KPIs. And then there are those who demonstrate a personal approach both in words and in actions. That’s who we would bet on. The difference becomes clear when you look at their actual contribution.

From a purely business standpoint, many publishers operate on volume: they sign dozens of studios, knowing some will succeed and others won’t. Instead of deeply developing a small number of teams, they test many and wait to see who breaks through.

This leads to a situation where dozens of studios all know how to make games, but only on the surface. Everyone experiments randomly. One team guesses the right setting, another stumbles into the right mechanics. From the publisher’s perspective, that’s acceptable. From the studio’s perspective, it’s a dead end, especially if you were close to success but lacked specific expertise or external perspective.

That’s why the first thing we recommend evaluating is the financial and resource commitment. How much is the partner actually investing, and how meaningful is that investment for them? In other words: who is risking what? If a partner isn’t taking risks — or is only taking minimal ones — their approach is already clear. But if they’re investing serious resources, both financial and intellectual, they’re prepared to walk the full path with you.

During Idle Outpost’s development, we could call the publisher, including the founder, at any hour if an idea came up. We worked together on multi-page GDDs, even after exceeding the initial budget. That level of belief and involvement is incredibly motivating. That’s what we call a real studio level-up.

Yes, in theory, there’s always a risk that a stronger investor could take control. That’s why it’s critical for a studio to understand its own maturity and independence.

Rockbite operated independently for ten years. We know how to ship games, we have a team, and we can deliver. When we lack specific expertise, we bring in partners to strengthen those areas, not to replace us. Publishers understand this. A studio that has survived and shipped for years doesn’t need micromanagement. It needs time and support.

For younger studios, the situation is different. If a team lacks experience and requires significant guidance, it can be beneficial to let the publisher into internal processes. Sometimes the right approach is simply: “Here’s the wheel. We’ll build the game. You help us bring it to market.”

On the value of long-term collaboration

Long-term collaboration shouldn’t be just a phrase. Would a publisher be willing to share deep expertise if they believed the partnership would end quickly? Would they invest serious capital if they expected the studio to walk away as soon as things improved? We don’t think so.

The right investor is personally invested in your long-term success and interested in building future projects together.

That’s why we remain skeptical of classic publishing models focused solely on user acquisition. Without shared risk, without mutual commitment, the overall impact will always be limited.

In the end, the real value of a publisher comes down to two things: A) effective user acquisition, B) leveling up the studio through external expertise. And neither of those is just about the product itself.

*****

Related articles: AppQuantum VC launches $10M mobile gaming strategic investing fund