Playson’s 2026 Growth Plan: Scale Without Losing Quality

Playson ended 2025 in a position most iGaming suppliers want but few can hold: six straight months ranked #1 iGaming supplier in Europe (per Eilers & Fantini, as referenced in the interview). That’s not a vanity metric. It’s a stress test that proves something harder—reliability at volume.

Now the interesting part. Playson’s stated 2026 plan is to increase releases to 30+ titles while keeping what Vsevolod Lapin calls “boutique-level craftsmanship.” Most companies get this wrong. They scale output and quietly ship mediocrity. Players notice, operators notice, and retention takes the hit.

This post sits inside our series on “Kif l-Intelliġenza Artifiċjali qed tittrasforma l-iGaming u l-Logħob Online f’Malta” because Malta-based iGaming companies are facing a very specific problem: global growth inside a regulated industry. Playson’s 2026 strategy is a clean example of what works—and where AI in iGaming can actually help (and where it can backfire).

What Playson’s 2025 performance signals for 2026

Answer first: Playson’s 2025 results suggest their growth wasn’t accidental—it was operationally engineered, and 2026 will reward companies that treat scale as an internal systems problem, not a content problem.

Playson highlights three 2025 anchors: 20 game releases, expansion in regulated markets (Brazil, Italy, Portugal), and the launch of the Power Chance Jackpot suite. On paper, those read like standard “we grew” bullet points. In practice, they point to a deeper capability: shipping consistently while adapting to jurisdiction-level requirements.

Why “#1 supplier” matters more than marketing

A top supplier ranking (especially sustained) usually reflects a mix of:

• Game performance (engagement and revenue per user)
• Stability (fewer incidents, smoother integrations)
• Partner confidence (operators give better placement to content that converts)
• Release discipline (predictable cadence, fewer delays)

If you’re a Malta operator or supplier planning 2026, this matters because it reframes the goal. It’s not “release more.” It’s release more without increasing risk.

The Malta angle: global markets, local execution

Malta remains a hub because it combines talent, licensing know-how, and proximity to European markets. The downside is that Malta-based businesses are competing on two fronts:

1. Product quality and speed
2. Compliance and responsible gaming posture

Playson’s year shows a playbook that fits Malta’s reality: win in mature Europe while positioning for growth markets like Brazil.

Scale + quality is a systems problem—and AI can help if used correctly

Answer first: Scaling game releases from 20 to 30+ requires tighter pipelines, better QA, and faster decision-making; AI adds value when it reduces cycle time without weakening controls.

Lapin frames 2025 as a year of “adaptability and scale,” including process refinement and team expansion. That’s the part people skip. You can’t “creativity” your way into shipping 30+ games a year. You need repeatable systems.

Here’s where AI becomes practical for iGaming companies in Malta—not as hype, but as infrastructure.

1) AI-assisted production: faster iteration, not faster guessing

AI can shorten the “idea-to-test” loop in game studios by supporting:

• Concept exploration (themes, feature combinations, narrative variants)
• Asset workflows (tagging, versioning, consistency checks)
• Playtest synthesis (summarizing session notes, clustering player feedback)

The win isn’t “AI designs the game.” The win is designers get to more playable prototypes faster, and producers get clearer signals about what to cut early.

A blunt rule I use: If AI makes it easier to ship, you must also make it harder to ship the wrong thing. That means better gates, not fewer.

2) AI in QA: catch patterns humans miss

When release counts go up, QA becomes the bottleneck. AI can help by:

• Flagging recurring bug patterns across builds
• Detecting anomalies in game telemetry (e.g., sudden RTP drift indicators, unexpected feature trigger rates)
• Predicting high-risk areas based on historical defect density

This is especially relevant for Malta-based suppliers working with multiple operators and aggregation platforms. Small integration quirks multiply fast.

3) AI for compliance adaptability (the unglamorous advantage)

Lapin points to regulatory evolution (Brazil and Peru) and maturity in European jurisdictions. This is where AI earns its keep.

AI can assist with:

• Regulatory change monitoring (summarizing consultation papers, mapping changes to internal requirements)
• Jurisdiction rule mapping (feature availability, messaging requirements, limits)
• Audit readiness (document classification, evidence retrieval)

Used properly, this reduces the “compliance tax” of growth. Used poorly, it creates a new risk surface (black-box decisions regulators will challenge).

Player behavior is shifting: faster, goal-oriented gameplay wins

Answer first: Players are trending toward shorter loops and clearer goals, which is why mechanics like Hold and Win and collection features keep showing up—and why personalization must be handled carefully.

Playson notes a move toward “faster, goal-oriented gameplay” with mechanics such as Hold and Win and collection-based features. If you run acquisition or CRM for an operator, you’ve probably seen the same pattern: players respond to visible progress.

Why progress beats complexity

Many retention strategies over-index on adding more features. The reality? Players stick when they can answer these in 10 seconds:

• What am I trying to achieve right now?
• How close am I?
• What happens if I get there?

That’s why jackpots and collection mechanics work: they provide direction.

Where AI fits in player engagement (and where it doesn’t)

AI-driven personalization can improve:

• Next-best offer (bonus type aligned to play style)
• Content recommendations (games with similar volatility preferences)
• Timing (message windows that match player habits)

But iGaming is not retail. The ethical line is closer. The moment personalization becomes “pressure,” you’re creating regulatory and brand risk.

A practical standard for Malta operators: optimize relevance, not compulsion. If your model’s success metric is purely “more deposits,” you’re building a compliance problem.

The real 2026 challenge: trust under AI acceleration

Answer first: As AI spreads into design, marketing automation, and risk decisions, player trust and regulator trust become the competitive moat.

Lapin calls out the core challenge directly: balancing innovation with regulation and maintaining player trust amid AI evolution. That’s the most honest line in the interview.

Trust is built through visible behaviors:

• Clear, consistent responsible gaming tools
• Transparent communication (especially around limits and bonus terms)
• Fair treatment in KYC/AML flows
• Fast support that solves issues without ping-ponging the player

AI can strengthen this or destroy it.

A concrete example: safer AI in CRM

If you’re using AI-driven marketing automation in Malta, build guardrails like:

1. Suppression rules for at-risk segments (cool-off periods, loss-chasing patterns)
2. Explainable triggers (operators can justify why a player received a message)
3. Human review for edge cases (VIP escalation, affordability signals)
4. A/B tests that include harm metrics, not just revenue metrics

Here’s the stance: If you can’t explain your model to a regulator, you shouldn’t deploy it to players.

A practical “Scale Without Chaos” checklist for Malta iGaming teams

Answer first: You can grow like Playson wants to grow in 2026, but only if you treat AI as part of governance, not a shortcut.

Use this as an internal readiness checklist going into Q1 2026 planning:

Product & studio operations

• Do we have a release calendar that QA and compliance signed off on?
• Are we tracking post-launch defects per title and feeding them back into production?
• Can we quantify “quality” (crash rate, session length, feature engagement) per release?

AI & data

• Do we have a documented model inventory (what models exist, what they do, who owns them)?
• Are training datasets permissioned and auditable?
• Can we roll back AI-driven changes quickly if something goes wrong?

Marketing & player engagement

• Are personalization models constrained by responsible gaming policies?
• Do we measure retention without turning every campaign into a deposit push?
• Are we set up for multilingual content workflows that don’t create translation risk?

Compliance & trust

• Can we show evidence for decisions (why a promo was issued, why an account was flagged)?
• Do we have a clear escalation path when AI flags a player as high risk?
• Are we ready for jurisdictions that demand more reporting, more controls, and faster response?

If you can answer most of these confidently, scaling to 30+ releases (or scaling acquisition in multiple markets) becomes realistic.

What to watch in early 2026

Playson’s plan—more titles, expanded jackpot family, quality held constant—isn’t just a supplier story. It’s a signal of where the competitive bar is heading for Malta’s iGaming ecosystem.

The winners in 2026 won’t be the teams shouting loudest about AI. They’ll be the teams using AI to:

• reduce production friction,
• speed up compliant market entry,
• make marketing more relevant,
• and protect player trust.

If you’re building your 2026 roadmap now, the question worth sitting with is simple: where does AI reduce risk and improve quality at the same time—and where is it tempting you to cut corners you’ll pay for later?