Most games start with one ad network because it is simpler, and many never change. The cost of not changing is invisible, which is why it persists.
What mediation does
A mediation layer sits between your game and several networks. For each impression it asks them all and takes the best price. The networks know they are competing, which changes what they bid.
The gain is largest exactly where single-network setups are weakest: regions where your one network has thin demand, and times when its advertisers have spent their budget. Those impressions are currently filling at a low price or not filling at all.
Fill rate is the other half
When your single network has no ad to serve, you show nothing and earn nothing. With several in the waterfall, somebody usually has something. A rewarded video that fails to load is worse than low revenue — the player was promised a reward and did not get one.
What it costs you
- Integration work — several SDKs, and each adds to build size
- More places for something to break, and more SDKs to keep current
- Reporting in several dashboards that disagree with each other
- A mediation fee, which is real but usually far smaller than the uplift
Where it is not worth it
Below a certain volume, the setup cost exceeds the gain and the extra SDKs cost you build size for nothing. If your game is small or ads are a minor line next to IAP, one network is the right answer and staying there is a decision, not neglect.
Whatever you run, the sellers have to be declared correctly — see the app-ads.txt mistakes that quietly cost revenue.
This is what we do day to day — app and game monetization at Factorial Studio.
