Skip to content

Category: Business

The biggest lie in modern tech

Published by Paolo on 28/10/2025

It’s time we look at reality. That quote that rules your strategic meetings? The one that says, “If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it”?

Peter Drucker REALLY said the exact opposite:

“By the time it can be captured in numbers, it’s too late.” — ‘The Effective Executive’, page 17

Let’s talk about the Big Lie that’s ruining your creative game.

The Glitch in the Matrix

The whole mess started long before Drucker was dragged in. It began with V. F. Ridgway in 1956, who said:

“What gets measured gets managed—even when it’s pointless to measure and manage it, and even if it harms the purpose of the organisation to do so.”

Ridgway was telling us metrics are a bug, not a feature. Yet, somehow, this became the metric gospel we use to justify every pointless KPI.

And Drucker? He was advocating for perceptual thinking, for capturing the OPPORTUNITY (the “Rare Dot”) before it becomes a measurable fact. Because, just like when your competitor releases the perfect game before you do, once it’s a fact, it’s already too late.

The McKinsey Gold Rush and the Final Boss
Then came the 1980s. IT systems made everything measurable, and consulting firms smelled money. It was a Gold Rush in the form of selling software and services. They needed an authority to market their new Surveillance Manuals.

Their move was an act of pure intellectual dishonesty. Drucker’s real ideas were too nuanced, too complex. So, too uncommercializable. They needed a punchy, two-button slogan.

Their solution?

REENGINEER DRUCKER!

Take his wisdom, strip away the subtlety, simplify it into a powerful tool that justifies their entire business model: “If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it.”

It’s like using a quote from Orwell’s 1984 to sell the very surveillance system it warns against. A brilliant, deceptive move that made the modern business model bulletproof, but creatively soulless.

Your Trojan Horse
Look around your industry. This Big Lie is the system that’s deceiving everyone into playing the wrong game.

Consultants see it. Risk managers see it. Even some economists see it. But few people stop playing pretend. They think the whole system—their career, their salary, their social validation—will collapse if they dare point out the obvious.

IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE THAT WAY.

You don’t need to “burn the boats.” You just need to stop chasing past facts and start focusing on Rare Dots.

Build a small Trojan Horse: a deeply personal, perceptually driven project or strategy, that the metric-driven system itself cannot play pretend with. Find your own “why” and let the metrics follow, not lead.

Vision and commitment

Published by Paolo on 24/10/2025

In my experience, there are two kinds of teams that achieve success with games.

The first kind is absolutely sure they will make it. They put all their energy and effort into finishing the project. They crunch a lot, and often they don’t respect local labor laws. But they are certain their vision is great, and they may eventually be right.

The second kind believes in a vision as well, but they are aware that the odds are low. They still go for it, adopting the philosophy: “We can fail, so what?” They know they would pursue the project anyway. Life is short, so why not try?

These, in my experience, are the teams that might succeed. Conversely, the people who think like: “Let’s see how it goes,” “Let’s make a game with this new tech because it can be a goldmine,” or “Let’s make a game for this platform because someone else made money,” never, ever succeed.

Motivation and performance

Published by Paolo on 20/10/2025

I was at a conference a couple of weeks ago, and I noticed the absence of a couple of friends. I met one of them on Saturday, and he’d been laid off from the company where he used to work. He explained it was due to a low score on his performance review, and then he was out in the next round of layoffs. Now he’s going to take a break; he got a decent severance and can take the time to reflect on what to do next. He looked tired and somehow older.

His partner was with him, and she was worried about the instability of the games industry. She told me that she doesn’t know what he should do. Her eyes, though, suggested that the answer lies outside of the industry. And yes, if you look for stability, games are probably one of the worst fields in tech nowadays.

Performance reviews are fundamentally biased. First of all, I’ve always noticed certain affinities within companies that inevitably lead to better reviews. Second, we are not cyborgs (at least, not yet). You join a company for a specific project, and then you are moved to another one you don’t really like. But a job is a job, and you have to go on. Then you witness questionable choices or no choices at all being made. And you are expected to stay there, with energy and motivation, performing.

Well, to me, it just doesn’t work like that. Performance reviews should be normalized by taking into account the real motivation of teams toward a project. Very often, especially big companies embark on odysseys to basically copy existing success stories. That is something that brings entire teams down, and of course, there are casualties—people who simply cannot continue working as before on something they clearly don’t believe in.

This friend was one of them. I know it because last year he told me something like, “The project is clearly going nowhere, but you know: it’s a job.” Which is the normal thing to think when they put you to work on something you don’t believe. You cannot just refuse to employ your mind on that game that is going nowhere. You have to push, but if the forces abandon you it’s not your fault.

I believe in bootstrapping

Published by Paolo on 17/10/2025

Investors will look for 2x, 5x, 10x, 50x, or maybe 100x returns on their investments. So, if you want to secure funding for your game, you should aim for big revenue numbers, or at least make investors believe that your game can make $500M to $1B or more.

On the other hand, when you build a team, it’s better to start step-by-step, gradually building up your skills by releasing small games and then becoming big. But this sustainable model is hard to sell to investors.

So, we have a paradox: you need money to pay your people and make games, but by promising a billion dollars, you put yourself in a position that’s hard to sustain. Furthermore, if you pitch a billion-dollar game, you need to convince your team to make the best possible game, but with an unimaginable objective.

I personally prefer bootstrapping, but the struggle there is finding the right believers. Because, in any case, you need them.

The Console Business Has an Accessibility Problem

Published by Paolo on 13/10/2025

When I started playing games, the controller was a simple D-pad and two buttons, A and B. As I grew, the industry added more buttons and sticks. Today, we have at least 21 buttons, two sticks, and a D-pad.

What if you’re a kid just starting to play video games? Today, you have to choose between a complex controller or a mobile game like Roblox, where your friends probably already are. Maybe they’re on Fortnite, in which case you’ll still have to learn how to use the controller.

But let’s face it: it’s harder than before. On top of that, add all the time you “lose” by waiting for your game to appear. It wasn’t like that before; you inserted the cartridge and got the game immediately on screen. No need for loading, connecting, updates, and so on.

In my opinion, the console business needs to understand and fix this accessibility issue if they truly want to improve their market reach.

Regulatory missteps

Published by Paolo on 11/10/2025

I recently read the New European Consumer Protection Guidelines for Virtual Currencies in Video Games after days of discussion on the topic. On one hand, I feel proud to live on a continent that prioritizes consumer protection, but on the other, I’m worried that regulators fundamentally misunderstand our industry.

I’ve worked mostly in casual mobile free-to-play (F2P). Development usually involves at least six months for the first version, followed by a ‘soft launch’ period of 5 to 15 months, where we figure out metrics, tune the performance marketing strategy, and tweak the economy—often without making any profit.

Successful F2P games operate somewhat like luxury goods. The business is primarily sustained by superfans (call them whales or big spenders). Crucially, even in games where the typical player might be a parent or older adult, these superfans are generally heavy gamers who also buy and play many console and PC titles. For example, the biggest spender in Royal Kingdom is likely an Elden Ring player, not a grandmother saving money for her grandkids.

Regarding the new regulations, three points are particularly worrisome:

  1. Clear and Transparent Price Indication: The price of in-game content or services must be shown in both in-game currency and real-world money, ensuring players can make informed decisions about their purchases.
  2. Avoiding Practices That Obscure Pricing: Game developers should not engage in tactics that obscure the true cost of digital content. This includes practices like mixing different in-game currencies or requiring multiple exchanges to make purchases.
  3. No Forced Purchases: Developers should not design games that force consumers to spend more money on in-game currencies than necessary. Players should be able to choose the exact amount of currency they wish to purchase.

I understand the underlying goal, but these rules reveal a fundamental ignorance of game design and development:

  1. Inflation and Value: Virtual items and currencies constantly change their actual value during a game’s live operations due to in-game inflation and economic adjustments. Forcing us to show the real-money equivalent at all times will quickly become nonsensical.
  2. Multiple Currencies: F2P game systems rely on multiple gameplay loops to be effective. To support these loops and give players meaningful choices, multiple currencies are essential. Without them, balancing becomes hellish, and the player experience suffers—a genuine lose-lose scenario.
  3. Purchase Flexibility: When a game is published, you set specific, pre-defined prices for all in-app purchases on stores like Google Play. Implementing the option to purchase something like “23 gems” would either require rounding that purchase to the nearest predefined value (which violates the rule) or registering a huge number of specific values. That is frankly crazy.

I am genuinely worried that these measures will negatively impact Europe as a total addressable market for F2P games. Knowing the spending habits of superfans, they will simply go elsewhere. And regarding the promised protection for children, let’s be serious: social media is far more dangerous for kids. F2P games require interaction and can develop useful life skills. Infinite-scrolling video feeds are pure fentanyl. The problem isn’t games.

Wolves in a Fairy Tale

Published by Paolo on 09/10/2025

The CEO of Supercell, Ilkka Paananen, released a message yesterday asking European legislators to consider European free-to-play game developers before approving new player safety measures.

I currently work mostly in free-to-play (F2P), and I’ve worked in gambling games in the past. I must admit that I see many common practices between these two sectors of the gaming industry. The F2P high-spending players are called whales, a term that actually comes from casinos. And these players are fundamental to the profitability of a game you give away for free.

Certain practices, often called dark patterns, surely influence people’s decision-making. Vulnerable people, like children, can be induced to spend too much. That’s why the regulator often comes in with an axe and suddenly cuts off everything. The same thing happened with the web; nowadays, the experience is completely ruined, and I have to close endless pop-ups for policies I will never read.

I don’t like to be treated like a child. My daughter will never have access to a connected smartphone as a child, full stop. It’s about responsibility. I am aware that many parents don’t have that responsibility, or aren’t capable of facing their children, though. That’s why we need regulations, but to me, it’s important to include everybody in the discussion and not treat developers like wolves in a fairy tale.

Rock Band vs. Sports Team

Published by Paolo on 05/10/2025

There’s a fundamental difference between teams working on new game conceptualization and teams focused on production and updates. The first kind works more like a rock band; the latter, like a sports team.

To conceptualize new games, you need people capable of genuinely wrestling with an idea for a sufficient amount of time. You need people who help each other and cover each other’s limitations. These are people willing to find new formulas and to create art.

Once you have it—once you have the formula—you need the resilience and technique to produce it. This is where you need top talent; you can’t afford to lose time and compromise the whole team.

Both types of talent are hard to find, but selection processes only spot (and often badly) the latter group: the sports team. That’s why people like me, the rockers, are sometimes needed.

Heroes of Gaming

Published by Paolo on 04/10/2025

I want to invite you today to reflect on the power of outsourcing. I’ve been thinking about this all week, especially since I’m picking up an old project to work on while I don’t have another gig.

All top games rely on the contribution of outsourcers, yet we don’t celebrate them enough. Maybe I’m saying this because I’m a freelancer and part of the outsourcing world myself. Sorry for this ego moment.

Salvador Dalí once said something along the lines of, “No one will talk well about you, so you have to do it yourself.” I’m not sure I completely agree, but today I feel this urge to celebrate outsourcers.

Without us, there would be no games industry—at least not at this level. You can be more ambitious and go further thanks to outsourcing companies. It is a fundamental and irreplaceable part of the business.

Saudi deal doesn’t add up

Published by Paolo on 03/10/2025

I was writing notes for an upcoming podcast on Saudi Arabia’s rumored operation to purchase EA. I’m a little worried, because I believe there are mostly geopolitical reasons behind all of this. The math is crazy, and even with 2,000 layoffs, the move just doesn’t make financial sense.

What’s at stake for me is creative freedom. Too many games from EA contain messages that would be hardly accepted by that regime. They may ignore them, of course, if they adopt a purely practical mentality, but I’m skeptical. I mean, soft power is clearly the goal here.

In my view, EA needs to better focus on sports games, and perhaps a conversion to more scalable business models—like free-to-play—would benefit them. But from a creative perspective, they are in danger.

Powered by