OTOinsights "Player Engagement and In-Game Advertising"

www.OTOinsights.com 1

Engagement with In-Game Advertising

ARF Measurement 4.0 Conference

June 24, 2009


OTOinsights In-Game Ad Research

In collaboration with researchers at the Indiana University School of Informatics and Microsoft’s Massive, OTOinsights utilized it’s Quantemo Neuromarketing Research Lab to study gamers and their engagement with in-game advertising.

To date, the effort has yielded a white paper titled “Player Engagement and In-Game Advertising” published in 2008:

http://tr.im/otoinsights_ingame2

The firm recently finished it’s second round of research and plans to publish the results in 2009.


Problem – Research Questions


Methods – OverviewStudy #1 (2008)• Focus on sports games

–Early adopters of IGA–Very prevalent advertising

• 11 games chosen–Diverse set of sports–Games at 80% or above

rating unless only one available

• 8 Participants

GamesAvg. Industry

Reviewer Score Median QPIBurnout Paradise 87% .608

College Hoops 2K7 81% -2.074

Guitar Hero 3 86% 2.300

NBA Live 08 73% 1.132

NBA Street Homecourt 83% 1.805

Madden NFL 08 83% -1.939

Project Gotham Racing 4 86% -.609

Sega Rally Revo 77% .124

Skate 87% -.619

Tony Hawk Project 8 82% -.604

Virtua Tennis 3 80% .389


Methods – OverviewStudy #2 (2009)• Focus on NBA LIVE 09

–1 Game Chosen–NBA Live 08 was top ranked game in

Study #1

• Microsoft Massive Collaboration– Half of the subjects played the

standard game with five customized inserted ads, while half will play a modified game with no dynamic IGA

• 27 Participants


Methods – ParticipantsStudy #1• Average age: 27• Sex: 2 female, 6 male• Average video game

experience: 6-10 yrs• Average weekly video

game playing: 7-10 hrs

Study #2• Average age: 27• Sex: 1 female, 26 male• Average video game

experience: 6-10 yrs• Average weekly video

game playing: 7-10 hrs


Methods – Multi-modal


Methods – Process


Analysis – EngagementMost Engaging Least Engaging

Game Avg. QPI

Guitar Hero 3 1.824

NBA Live 2.743

NBA Street 1.969

Game Avg. QPI

Project Gotham Racing 4 -3.927

Tony Hawk Project 8 -1.838

NBA Sega Rally Revo -6.946


Conclusions – Recency Effect

• Recency of an ad improves recall more so than frequency• High impact ads may be located at both frequent

and terminal game play points such as finish lines, save screens, menus, etc.

More Recent Ads Are More Readily Remembered

Avg. Early Ads Remembered

Avg. Early QPI

Late Ads Remembered

Avg. Late QPI

12% .23 88% 1.26


Conclusions – Recency Effect


Conclusions – Placement


Conclusions – Placement

Even though most of our subjects were not familiar with Auto Racing, Potenza was one of the most remembered brands in the study due to its high impact placement.

See next slide for video footage ->


Conclusions – Brand Knowledge


Conclusions – Brand Knowledge

Though partially hidden on the left side of the screen, the Honda brand was still recalled by research subjects that were familiar with Tennis and their offline sponsors.

See next slide for video footage ->


Conclusions – Emotions

• QPI >1 = Higher Brand Recall | QPI <1 = Lower Brand Recall

• Of those with QPIs of 2.0+, brand recognition and recall is above 50%

Developing association with engagement and brand recognition/recall

% Brandsfrom Engaging

Games

Avg. QPIEngagingGames

% Brandsfrom Base Games

Avg. QPIBase

Games

42% 1.08 30.15% .87


Overall Conclusions


Q & A

Jeremi [email protected]@jkarnell

Dan [email protected]@banderlin

OTOinsightswww.otoinsights.com@otoinsights

OTOinsights "Player Engagement and In-Game Advertising"

Technology

Transcript of OTOinsights "Player Engagement and In-Game Advertising"