Define the wallet authority
Record which system owns the balance, how currency precision is represented and what happens when a debit, credit or combined settlement cannot complete.
Supplier evaluation framework
Compare evidence,
not sales language.
An aggregator, a single studio and a direct games API can all be valid choices. The useful comparison is not who has the loudest claim; it is which operating model fits your wallet, engineering, product and support responsibilities.
Comparable evidence
Give every supplier the same scenarios.
Start with one simple game and one time-sensitive format. Run the same session, wallet, replay, interruption and reconciliation scenarios for every candidate. Ask each supplier to identify the record that proves the final state rather than accepting a feature label as evidence.
Repeat the same request
Force timeouts and retries. Confirm that a repeated request reaches one final financial result and that both teams can locate it through stable identifiers.
Reproduce a round
Ask for the active configuration and round inputs. Verify what can be recalculated independently and what still depends on supplier-controlled records.
Operating model
Compare the work that remains after the demo.
A broad aggregator can reduce the number of commercial relationships while introducing another operational layer. A direct supplier can offer a focused integration but still requires lifecycle, support and release ownership. The right choice depends on your internal platform and target markets; no category wins every decision by default.
For FastGamesAPI, use the same standard. Confirm every capability in the current technical material, test it in the supplied environment and carry only accepted evidence into the commercial agreement. Do not treat this page as a performance, availability, certification or time-to-live guarantee.
- List the endpoints and callbacks touched by one complete round.
- Name the owner for configuration, incident response and release approval.
- Map test evidence to the corresponding contract responsibility.
- Separate included scope from roadmap or optional work.
Decision record
Make the final comparison auditable.
A short decision record should explain what your team tested, which evidence was accepted, which assumptions remain and who owns the open questions. That record is more useful than a generic feature matrix when engineering, compliance and operations review the choice later.
Before selection
Use one scoring scale for wallet fit, recovery, round evidence, observability, support, change management and commercial clarity.
Before production
Repeat the accepted failure scenarios with production-like permissions and record the rollback and escalation owners.