Game funding in 2026: what publishers and investors now demand

By Amara Osei

Cassia Curran, founder of Curran Games Agency, said an average publisher receives about 2,000 pitches a year but publishes about 10 games. The arithmetic is not generous for independent developers.

At the October 23 Game Republic Investment Summit at MCM Comic Con in London, GamesIndustry.biz editorial director Jon Hicks asked Curran, Transcend Fund principal Lirui Ding and Creative UK senior portfolio manager Nick Cavander how developers should finance games in 2026.

Where is the funding now?

Ding said development money remains available, although access has become harder than in the past. His recommendation was a mix-and-match financing plan rather than dependence on one backer.

• Kickstarter and government grants can provide part of the mix. Nicholas Lovell used that approach for Spilt Milk’s Trash Goblin.
• Cavander also identified the BFI Global Screen Fund and UK Games Content Fund, along with angels and informal groups of high-net-worth individuals or families. Combining pots may be more attractive than going all in with a publisher because publisher terms are currently poor.
• Barclays Eagle Labs, an incubator for creative and media companies, offers a place to network with potential investors.
• Curran pointed to VC project finance and successful independent developers with surplus cash, naming Outersloth and Evil Landfall. The indie scene tends to help when one developer breaks through.

What are investors looking for?

Curran said publisher strategies now concentrate on specific genres rather than every house chasing the genre of the moment. Incremental idle games and tidy-up games are current hot trends, though she warned developers not to rush into an idle game merely because it is hot.

Traction increasingly shapes decisions. “A lot of publishers prefer it if you have announced and you've shown that you already have a certain audience,” Curran said. Projects with an established audience may suit project finance better than a traditional publishing deal.

Ding said the VC case rests on economics: investors seek potential 10x returns within roughly 10 years, while funds commonly run for seven to 10 years and must return money to limited partners. A plan to build the first game in five years, the second in 10 and the third in 15 would turn off many VCs.

Companies can improve that pitch with a recouping mechanism that returns capital sooner, Ding said, instead of waiting for a liquidation event such as an acquisition, merger or stock-market listing.

The slowdown in games M&A makes that exit less dependable. Curran highlighted Griffin Gaming Partners’ $100 million project-finance fund and said more than one VC she knows has pivoted, or is pivoting, from equity toward project finance.

What belongs in the pitch?

Curran separated equity and project-finance pitches. An equity pitch should sell the team, not only the project. A project-finance pitch needs a detailed go-to-market plan covering marketing, release platforms, pricing and evidence that the team can deliver games to market.

A publisher pitch should still identify target platforms, but not include a complete marketing-strategy section; publishers intend to build their own go-to-market plan. For both publisher and project-finance reviews, Curran ranked the vertical slice and demo as the most important evidence.

Creative UK offers venture debt financing, essentially long-term loans, so Cavander first examines whether the business can remain solvent. His team then looks for confidence in the people, followed by the project, sensible forecasts and realistic projections. Cavander rejected promises of taking over the world within three years as not credible.

“It’s good to be confident and it’s good to be ambitious, but just blend that with some realism and practicality,” Cavander said. The final plan must show how investors receive a return: Creative UK expects its loan repaid, while VCs seek 10x.

Ding said early-stage VC pitches need only two things: the team and the game idea. Hard evidence is not always necessary at that point, though a large raise remains unlikely.

For projects further along, Ding said investors will examine:

• Wishlist totals and their history, including the causes of spikes such as viral videos
• Discord communities and YouTube followers
• Playtime metrics
• A geographic breakdown of wishlists

How much do Steam wishlists matter?

Curran said wishlists can be inflated or fail to convert. Ding said the numbers alone remain unreliable and should accompany Steam followers or other evidence of an active, passionate community willing to pay. A Kickstarter campaign can provide that evidence before the game exists.

Ding relayed that one top-10 publisher would speak only with companies appearing in Steam’s top 100 wishlists, while indie publishers use different criteria. The market signal to watch is whether project-finance funds keep expanding as games M&A stays slow; equity investors still have the seven-to-10-year clock.