Robbins and Latsky state, “There’s this race to the highest ROI categoryβ¦casino, match3, etc. Because the UA spend required to bring those games to mass market scale forces you out of innovative content and into these tried-and-true play patterns.” Yet, this is how *all* markets work!
As capital expenditure rises, it seeks less risky returns. Venture capital is a perfect example; investors need more market traction at each successive investment stage to write bigger checks. “Tried-and-true” genres like match-3 (M3) run dry of innovation as they mature. Instead, innovation inherently evolves through specialization. M3 is the prime example! M3 naturally splintered into specialized subgenres over the past five years, like 3D match, match-2, and match-pair (e.g., Tile Busters).
An evolution into specialization isn’t unique to mobile; it’s how all knowledge works. Philosophy first covered the entire range of knowledge before splitting into natural philosophy and political philosophy. Natural philosophy splintered into math, astronomy, chemistry, etc. Specialization is not stagnation; it is the expected end state when ideas diffuse and the easy wins are mined.
Mobile innovation first splintered, like all knowledge, but itβs ATT, not whale hunting or top-grossing, that’s impeding further innovative growth. Reducing platform fees might help everyone’s margins, but won’t spark new innovation.