How to Pitch Games and Startups (in 3D!)

Get these three things right to unlock infinite money...

May 01, 2025

Indie Retro News: 3D Monster Maze - 1981/2 Sinclair ZX81 game arrives on the ZX Spectrum in full colour — 3D Monster Maze (1981 J. K. Greye Software - colour remake for the ZX Spectrum 48K by Richard Dodds, 2018)

Much of the games industry pitching advice out there is way too granular and can lead to a sort of box-ticking neurotic framing which ultimately feels stale and doesn't reflect how anybody really thinks about games or business.

If you're new here, this is me. I have seen pitches as a publisher, Indie Fund partner, assessor for public grant funding and very minor angel investor - I am not a billionaire hotshot VC so please go and read someone wealthier than me with more problematic political opinions if you want that perspective.

Let's take a look from three sides…

1. Funders have incentives

You need to understand who you are talking to.

Publishers (and other product financiers) want a short-term, reasonably de-risked return on investment in a single IP which fits into their portfolio and brings them prestige. They care about a team insofar as they can ship a quality game in a drama-free manner. They are often constrained by both capital and team bandwidth - they need to see how a given project fits into their upcoming roadmap.

Equity investors want a longer-term, higher return on investment in a business which can build scalable and defensible enterprise value and is on course for a future liquidity event. They will often care more about supporting a team than an individual product - they want that team to develop a defined advantage. They also like prestige but this is more of the "we made a correct early contrarian call which returned our fund" than the "we had our logo on this cool game" variety. They will often have more capital to deploy than a publisher, but are constrained by the size, timescale and risk profile of the fund they are currently operating.

Grant funders have a highly specific remit which is dictated by their charitable objects (if a charity) or similar core objectives - they usually think in terms of impacts and outcomes rather than revenues or value. Ambitious marquee projects are great but grant funders are highly averse to reputational risk - they can't make the same PR moves as a publisher to mitigate this and so want agreeable grant recipients who are careful about audience engagement and presentation.

In 99% of cases you can reliably discover the incentives of a given funder by…

a) reading their website

b) just fucking asking them

…so do it!

2. People engage emotionally

Now you understand who will be receiving your pitch and what they want, you need to take their feelings into account from the outset.

Much as investors like to posture as being hyper-rational, they are most often the direct opposite and also make final decisions the same way everyone does: with their gut.

Product

If you are pitching a game, that game needs to hit hard with a strong Catch. Is it cosy, shocking, scary, exciting, mysterious, evocative…what is it? What is the compelling, inescapable, all-consuming reason that someone needs to play it? We need to be dealing in broad brush strokes, powerful sentiments, anime speeches, sunsets, fireworks and explosions.

This absolutely is not an invitation to meander around the game's narrative and setting. You are not selling a film or TV show - people play games and experience them directly - so investors need to know how a game will create those feelings through its mechanics. Story, world, lore, characters, multiplayer features, user-generated content, special control systems…everything else is secondary to the gameplay itself.

If I understand what your game should make me feel and the process by which it will achieve that, I can then picture myself playing it. I can evaluate that image against a prototype; if the audience is someone other than me (and it probably should be) I can visualise their reactions.

Equity

If you are pitching a company, you need to frame it as a narrative - a line not a dot. The investor needs to build a compelling story in their mind, one in which you are able to make use of all of the resources, tools and opportunities at your disposal to make a concrete change. How are you going to confront some seemingly unassailable obstacle in the market, learn to defeat it and eventually come out victorious?

Some companies have a focussed distinctive advantage, such as technology, IP or distribution - if you're lucky enough to be one of these then this is what you need to hammer home at this stage. If not, you still need to think about how to paint a clear, emotive picture of how you will win.

If you are describing customer needs or wants, I should feel them keenly - I should be able to empathise even if I don't share them personally. "Of course that should exist - I need to help make that happen!" is the emotion you want to evoke in your investor. It also helps if there are early flickers of the path to acquisition or IPO - this will probably be uncertain initially, but if there are early themes that can be drawn out to "everyone will want a piece of this company one day" then your story will become a page-turner.

Grant

For grant funding, you need to convey your alignment with the values that the fund represents. If the funder can trust you to do good things with their money, as well as viewing you as competent, humane and engaged, you'll have a great foundation. The best pitches for grant funding convey ambition coupled with calm, organised consideration.

Grant funders want to root for your success and visualise you making a difference - they want to understand your motivations and feel secure about them.

3. Evidence closes the deal

The best investors trust their rational brain to audit their excitement about the next shiny thing. Once you have engaged your audience emotionally, you need to give them something tangible to hold onto while maintaining momentum. When doubt and anxiety kick in as they are writing the cheque, what number or bullet point will they point to in your deck and say "I can't afford to pass this up"?

Product

For games, the most powerful form of evidence is audience validation. If you have people playing your game right now, for a long time, over many sessions and leaving positive feedback then you have just made your potential publisher's life infinitely easier. Closed betas, demos, prologues, free versions, Itch builds, web versions…whatever it is, you need to figure out some way to get your game in front of real players.

The next tier is Wishlists or some other concrete intent-to-buy metric. One caveat here: launching a store page without publisher assistance can be a gamble for some studios; mistakes here can be very costly.

Most game devs are unfortunately atrocious at coming up with relevant comps for their games in order to size their market: if you are using other titles as direct benchmarks, pick mostly non-outliers and be extremely clear about how they relate to your game.

Break down what the audience for those games wants and doesn't want: all of the information you need for this is public and readily accessible; you can do a lot worse than starting with Steam reviews. It's fine to learn from outliers but don't rely on them to make your case - your understanding of a genre or style of game needs to be nuanced and fine-tuned.

Publishers care hugely about dev risk - team members with direct, relevant experience in the key roles can help provide evidence of mitigation.

Equity

For companies, you want to demonstrate traction without data overload - you don't want to break the emotional pace you built up from the outset. Does your evaluation of the market make sense and can you demonstrate forward motion? Are you making productive use of your IP or is your prize tech already driving compelling products?

Specifics are always better - it should be possible to go directly from your data to an understanding of immediate human impact. Again, if you use comparators, make sure to be explicit about how they relate to your company.

Team matters even more here: who are you, what have you done before and why are you in this for the long-run? Can I be convinced you will really solve the problem? Would your team be attractive to an eventual buyer?

Grant

If you're seeking grant funding, are you already performing the activities that the funder is looking to support? Can you define the constituency who will benefit from the intended impacts or can you show a thorough plan for how you will reach the ideal outcome? You will also need to make a clear case for why the funding is required. How is your company a safe, valid, valuable vehicle for this money that needs to be deployed for the public good?

Here the issue is not dev risk but delivery risk - will the things happen in a compliant, considered and professional manner?

3D Vision

Most of this advice really boils down to "have a real thesis and show your working". Yes, you need to communicate with passion, clarity and honesty but if you don't have something worth selling then it will never feel tangible.

Real results compound:

Games in fruitful genres that understand the needs of players tend to gain traction on their own.
Companies that are truly growing attract further growth.
Organisations that are geared up to make an impact don't need to devise elaborate fantasies to receive grant support.

Focus on the needs of both your customer base and those of potential funders - if you understand how to frame your company as an efficient, vivid and substantial vector for joining these together then pitching will largely take care of itself. Everything is about real people navigating the world in three dimensions.