Game providers in the WW Games casino catalogue

73 studios, listed here in order of how many titles each contributes. The order is the catalogue's own: the studios at the top are the ones a player will meet most often.

The list is published in full because a count is not checkable and a name is. Most operators evaluating a platform have two or three studios that decide their market — a Mexican launch that cannot offer Pragmatic Play, or a crypto brand without Hacksaw Gaming and Nolimit City, starts at a disadvantage no amount of catalogue size makes up for.

If the studio you need is not on this list, say so before signing rather than after. Some can be added, some cannot, and which is which depends on the studio rather than on us.

Four groups: slots, which are most of it; live dealer tables; crash and instant-win games; and classic table games and video poker. The balance leans towards slots and crash, which is what a crypto-facing brand needs.

Regional strength matters as much as the category. PG Soft and Spadegaming are the names an Asian audience looks for, Igrosoft and Gaminator the ones a CIS audience does, and MGA Games and Red Rake Gaming are built for Spanish-speaking markets.

No. Each studio sets its own territory rules, and those rules interact with the licence you operate under. A studio in this catalogue is a studio we can offer, not one that is automatically live in your country.

This is true of every platform in the category, and a vendor who tells you otherwise is describing the catalogue rather than your launch. Certification requirements in regulated markets narrow it further: a studio may hold a certificate for one jurisdiction and not for the next.

The practical step is the same with any vendor. Write down the two or three studios your traffic actually converts on, name your markets, and ask for confirmation in writing before you sign. Licensing is the operator's responsibility, and what you hold decides part of this answer.

Yes. Studios and aggregators you hold agreements with are connected alongside the catalogue and appear in the same library, with the same search, filters and categories.

A player sees one catalogue rather than a bolted-on section, which matters more than it sounds: a separate tab for your own provider is a tab most players never open.

Teams that have negotiated their own terms with a studio usually want to keep them, and there is no reason for a platform to stand in the way. The integration work is part of the launch rather than a separate line item — the pricing page sets out what the setup fee covers.

It is the number of titles live across these 73 studios. It matters far less than which studios are behind it: a catalogue of 40,000 games without the three studios your players ask for is still the wrong catalogue.

Title counts are the easiest number in this industry to inflate, because the same game in five currencies, or a studio's whole back catalogue including titles no one plays, all count. That is why the studio names are published here and the total is stated once.

The figure worth asking any vendor for is different: how many titles are live in your market, under your licence, after territory rules are applied. It is a smaller number than the headline on every platform, ours included.

It is the platform's own provider filter, with nine entries removed: the "all providers" option, three namespaces the catalogue exposes instead of a studio, one duplicate, and four codes whose studio could not be identified.

Publishing those nine would have made the number 82 instead of 73. They were removed because a knowledgeable reader can tell which entries in a provider list are not studios, and a padded list costs more credibility than the extra count is worth.

The order is the catalogue's own, by how many titles each studio contributes. If a studio is missing that you can see in our demo, or listed here and missing in the product, write to business@wwgames.tech and we will fix the list.