The distinction between a supplier and a strategic partner is often treated as a marketing framing. Haroldo Jacobovicz uses it as a technical argument. In gaming, he contends, the difference between a provider that understands the ecosystem and one that does not produces measurably different outcomes — not only in the quality of the solution but in a company’s ability to anticipate what the next problem will be before it arrives.
Jacobovicz is a Brazilian entrepreneur who has built companies in telecommunications and computer virtualization. His entry into gaming infrastructure followed an analytical period during which he examined which sectors created the most demanding requirements for virtual computing. Gaming produced a clear answer, and his current business offers virtual machines directly to players. Early in that work, Haroldo Jacobovicz noted that gamers, more than most user groups, were actively willing to provide feedback, suggestions, and criticism — functioning as co-creators rather than passive consumers. That engagement creates a feedback loop that benefits providers embedded in the ecosystem.
Brazil’s gaming market is among the largest in the world. More than 103 million people play online games. Women represent close to half of all players. Nearly three-quarters of the population engages with gaming in some form. The 2024 legislation that formalized gaming as a cultural sector and provided tax incentives has given the market greater regulatory stability, which in turn has attracted investment from international companies treating Brazil as a serious, long-term market rather than a peripheral opportunity.
The technical requirements that define gaming infrastructure are strict and non-negotiable. Latency must stay below 80 milliseconds for cloud gaming services to function acceptably. Competitive play pushes that requirement to 20 to 50 milliseconds. Demand spikes — tenfold increases in concurrent players triggered by major updates — require infrastructure that can absorb sudden volume without degrading performance. Traditional cloud architecture, built for steady business workloads, handles neither constraint well.
Edge computing is the structural answer Jacobovicz returns to consistently. Distributed processing nodes positioned across the network reduce data travel distances and enable regional scaling. For Latin America, which lacks sufficient distributed infrastructure relative to its gaming population, edge deployment addresses the region’s most significant performance bottleneck. Real-time data analytics follows: processing player behavior data during live sessions, rather than after the fact, allows developers to respond to actual conditions dynamically.
Security in gaming operates across three overlapping domains that must be addressed simultaneously. Virtual economies handle real money; account protection is a financial matter. Gamers expect security measures that do not interrupt their experience. Competitive fairness requires defenses against cheating that would otherwise degrade the product’s core value. Few existing solutions handle all three without making trade-offs that compromise one domain in favor of another.
The companies that succeed in this market, Jacobovicz argues, will be those that learn the gaming industry from the inside — understanding developers’ specific challenges, product cycles, and player expectations — rather than treating gaming as a standard enterprise client for generic cloud capacity.