He tried to build original games himself, then THIS happened!

It was Guido van Rossum who invented Python in the late 1980s, and it was early 2026 when some iGaming people fell in love with the idea of making everything themselves. The consequences? Pretty much tragic for everyone. Why naively trying to create a proper RGS and front-end for games yourself¹ leads nowhere, and what’s the cheapest, most efficient way around?

Abundant evidence from the last month unequivocally tells us: AI has become too serious. Attempts to blindly use it to resolve traditional tasks circulating around the iGaming world followed shortly after. There are people trying to build iGaming casino platforms “themselves.” There are people trying to build iGaming RGS “themselves.” Usually, and it is important to note, very young people. Not to mention the funnels, chatbots, trackers, and so on. The vision of doing so became more energizing and dopamine-stimulating for them than actually playing the games for seasoned gamblers. While AI has undoubtedly shaped the digital world, and things have become as fast as they could possibly be, a core question remains open. Have we really entered a world where game and platform developers are no longer needed?

To answer properly, let’s look at a recent case. An average crypto casino owner put in the work to give birth to his own RGS. He was ambitious and hardworking. It took him less than a few weeks of sleepless nights to execute, and boom! At that moment, he thought it was finally over. No more reports, no more invoices, no more support chats with a gaming studio. Freedom! He even put in the effort to, so to speak, “optimize” the RGS and game maths to satisfy those socially less "responsible" casinos. Did he make it?

What likely didn’t come to his mind is the basic logic of the cyclical nature of competition. The founding fathers of microeconomics teach us that when a good suddenly becomes available to everyone at a cheap price (input), it affects output dynamics in a determined way. First, expect everyone to do the same thing (we are already there, with cheap content pushed to the market for the last two years). Abundant supply over limited demand pushes the price down. But which price is that? It’s the marginal² income on your newly built RGS. You can expect to make less and less of it over time. No hard feelings, just pure neoclassical economics.

Figure 1. What happens when you think you can do it all yourself. Source: YoGames

But that was just step t. It becomes way more interesting at t+1. At the next step, what becomes significant is not the price, but the quality. With overwhelming supply, only the highest-quality content survives, taking a much bigger piece of the cake. "Caky logic" is ruthless. t+2 signals that it is time to either rapidly increase quality above what everyone else has, or your piece of the cake will become a mere pittance.

The story has, however, a happy ending. The young developer was smart enough to realize it is probably not a good idea to try to replicate something that everyone has now, but others have had for decades (branded slots, advanced Plinko, Limbo and all sorts of derived unique original games) spending years testing and improving in practice. That being said, Adam Smith and the division of labour have yet again won. He (not Adam Smith) came back and asked for branded originals. Upon delivery: no shortage of fat GGR, happiness, and surging total bets.

Wanna learn more insights on game development and original, branded iGaming content? Subscribe now and check our YoGames open RGS technology. Dividing the labour for a big piece of cake has never been so easy.