Matthew Ovington - Snakes and ladders: Trust and motivation in online gaming
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Matthew Ovington - Snakes and ladders: Trust and motivation in online gaming

on

  • 306 views

The building blocks of online trust are relatively well understood, especially with regard to eCommerce. Brand values, high street retail presence and customer-friendly policies all play a part in ...

The building blocks of online trust are relatively well understood, especially with regard to eCommerce. Brand values, high street retail presence and customer-friendly policies all play a part in establishing trust in our online online gaming products. However, with online casino gaming, where the outcomes of games such as roulette or slots are governed by chance players are rightly sensitive to any real (or imagined!) house advantage. Establishing trust is only part of the solution. Trust must be nurtured in order to develop long and lasting relationships. The aim of this talk is to highlight findings with regard to what things engender feelings of trust and motivation in relation to online gaming.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
306
Views on SlideShare
306
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • What I’m going to talk about today are some of the things we’ve learnt at Paddy Power, some of the challenges that still exist and the ones we’re stilling working to overcome.
  • The vast majority of people play the game, or gamble, primarily as a form of entertainment. Gambling has ups and downs. Like a game of snakes and ladders, sometimes you’re up and sometimes you’re down. It’s not all snakes. There are ladders too. We can assess the “fairness” of this game visually. There are wins and losses. It wouldn’t be any fun if you simply kept going backwards.
  • Casinos are different – “the house always wins” is a proverb familiar to everyone. And while it’s memorable and true it’s a bit more complicated. There is a latent distrust of casinos, a sort of unspoken understanding that, while the games are “legal” they may not be fair - It’s a business after all -the odds are stacked against the punter - this doesn’t stop people from trying their luck.
  • So you know the house always wins – but all houses are not equal. It can be hard to determine which casinos (physical or online) are offering the player the best chance of winning. They all offer the same games, but not all games are the same. And this is where we need to dip into 2 concepts you’ll be vaguely away of, and you attitudes towards at least one of them will be entirely personal, and to do with your attitudes towards risk – RTP and Volatility.
  • RTP can be thought of as a measure of generousity.
  • Volatility is harder to explain precisely without getting into standard deviations and such. One of the reasons roulette is so popular is that it’s a game that people inherently understand the volatility off – Outside bets are “low volatility” – almost as many people win as lose on a given spin. Inside bets are “high volatility” – most people lose, but one person just might win big. Volatility can be considered as evenness. Roulette is one of the few games that people understand almost by instinct, and are thus able to play comfortably.
  • So when you visit a casino, unless you’re willing to do your homework or stick to roulette, it can be difficult to assess how fair the games are. The same goes for online casinos and egaming sites. With eGaming, available over the internet, on mobile a whole additional set of trust factors come into play.
  • But first – a little bit of context. A study in 2009 compared bith Canadian and International attitudes to internet gambling – over12000 people were surveyed outside Canada, 8000 in Canada. Looking at the biggest concerns for Canadian players and trust concerns rank in the top 5, but they’re not the biggest concerns.
  • Compare that to the survey of international users – where all of the top 5 concerns relate to trust. Once you’re amenable to gaming online, your biggest worries relate to trust and primarily the “fairness” of the games. So how do you determine if the games are fair?
  • Pre-interactional filter – attitude to eGaming
  • Interface properties – familiarity, credibility, safety and security
  • Companies that have retail operations have an advantage – we’re immediately familiar. Paddy Power, Ladbrokes, William Hill are all well known. It’s far harder for online only to become established.
  • When you don’t have that you have to rely on “Interface Properties” – branding and usability. These are the “first impressions”. Unfortunately at a superficial level “interface properties” are relatively easy to imitate.
  • Security and safety
  • Pre-interactional filter – attitude to eGaming Interface properties – familiarilty, credibility, safety and security Information content – winners, recommendations, social proof, game information Relationship management – Free play, game mechanics, payouts, respecting wishes, player edication
  • How do we confirm games are fair? Showing other people have won? Seeing other people playing them? Helping people pick a game they’ll enjoy and giving them the information they need.
  • A plain list – factual but dull.
  • One of the ways to assess whether the casino is fair or not is to see if other people are winning. The reality of the winners stories is important – users were skeptical of stock photography, as it hints at a disconnect between reality and fantasy and strikes the wrong chord. Highlighting the huge jackpots also seems unattainable – the combination accentuates the unreality.
  • Maria bingo used to show winners on a map – people were skeptical. They’ve since discarded this feature in favour of a far simpler approach
  • Maria bingo used to show winners on a map. They’ve since discarded this feature in favour of a far simpler approach
  • Pre-interactional filter – attitude to eGaming Interface properties – familiarilty, credibility, safety and security Information content – winners, recommendations, social proof, game information Relationship management – Free play, game mechanics, payouts, respecting wishes, player edication
  • One of the biggest user concerns related
  • Pre-interactional filter – attitude to eGaming Interface properties – familiarilty, credibility, safety and security Information content – winners, recommendations, social proof, game information Relationship management – Free play, game mechanics, payouts, respecting wishes, player edication
  • What I’m going to talk about today are some of the things we’ve learnt at Paddy Power, some of the challenges that still exist and the ones we’re stilling working to overcome.

Matthew Ovington - Snakes and ladders: Trust and motivation in online gaming Matthew Ovington - Snakes and ladders: Trust and motivation in online gaming Presentation Transcript

  • Welcome to UCD2012 Sponsored by Supported by
  • 2pm Saturday 10th November Matthew Ovington Snakes and Ladders: Trust and motivation in online gaming Abstract: The building blocks of online trust are relatively well understood, especially with regard to eCommerce. Brand values, high street retail presence and customer-friendly policies all play a part in establishing trust in our online online gaming products. However, with online casino gaming, where the outcomes of games such as roulette or slots are governed by chance players are rightly sensitive to any real (or imagined!) house advantage. Establishing trust is only part of the solution. Trust must be nurtured in order to develop long and lasting relationships. The aim of this talk is to highlight findings with regard to what things engender feelings of trust and motivation in relation to online gaming. Thi s doc ument and i t ’ s c ont ent i s Copyri ght ©2012 [ M t hew Ovi ngt on and UCD UK Li m t ed. at iSupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 2
  • “The house always wins.”(over a statisticallysignificant period of time)
  • Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 5
  • RTP% (Return to Player %) •European Roulette has an RTP of 97.3% – 37 numbers (0-36) 18 red, 18 black, 1 green – 100/37 = 2.7% • Inside bet (number) pays 35/1 (2.7%) • Outside bet (colour) pays evens (48.6%) • 2.7% is the “house edge” or “margin” • 97.3% is “returned” to playersSupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 6
  • VolatilitySupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 7
  • • Biggest Concerns – Canadian Users 1. Poorer social atmosphere (no crowds, socially isolating) 2. Too easy to spend money 3. Safety of deposits, Wins paid out promptly 4. Lack of face-to-face contact 5. Too convenient Wood, R.T. & Williams, R.J. (2009) Internet Gambling: Prevalence, Patterns, Problems, and Policy Options. Final Report prepared for the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre, Guelph, Ontario, CANADA.Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 9
  • • Biggest Concerns – International Users 1. Assessing the fairness of games 2. Safety of deposits, wins paid out promptly 3. Lack of face-to-face contact 4. Illegality 5. Poorer social atmosphere (no crowds, socially isolating) Source: Wood, R.T. & Williams, R.J. (2009) Internet Gambling: Prevalence, Patterns, Problems, and Policy Options. Final Report prepared for the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre, Guelph, Ontario, CANADA.Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 10
  • Source: Egger, F.N. (2001). Affective Design of E-Commerce User Interfaces: How to Maximise PerceivedTrustworthiness. In: Helander, M., Khalid, H.M. & Tham (Eds.), Proceedings of CAHD2001: Conference on AffectiveHuman Factors Design, Singapore, June 27-29, 2001: 317-324.Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 11
  • Source: Egger, F.N. (2001). Affective Design of E-Commerce User Interfaces: How to Maximise PerceivedTrustworthiness. In: Helander, M., Khalid, H.M. & Tham (Eds.), Proceedings of CAHD2001: Conference on AffectiveHuman Factors Design, Singapore, June 27-29, 2001: 317-324.Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 12
  • • Is it legit? • Rely on “perceptions” of Interface Properties • Credibility – “first impressions” • Brand • Familiarity • Aesthetics • Security and SafetySupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 13
  • FamiliaritySupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 14
  • Aesthetics
  • Safety and securitySupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 16
  • Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 17
  • Source: Egger, F.N. (2001). Affective Design of E-Commerce User Interfaces: How to Maximise PerceivedTrustworthiness. In: Helander, M., Khalid, H.M. & Tham (Eds.), Proceedings of CAHD2001: Conference on AffectiveHuman Factors Design, Singapore, June 27-29, 2001: 317-324.Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 18
  • • Is it fair?• “Confirmation” of information • Winners • Social Proof • Game Recommendations • Game InformationSupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 19
  • Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 20
  • Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 21
  • Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 22
  • Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 23
  • • Winners • Attainability • Perception of the unattainability of massive jackpots • Credibility • Avoid stock imagery • Curate real stories • Up to date, credible contentSupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 24
  • Social proofSupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 25
  • Social proofSupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 26
  • • Social Proof • Weak positive effect of large numbers. • Minority of players view it as a negative.Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 27
  • Suggested games
  • Suggested gamesSupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 29
  • • Suggested Games • Players suspicion of “recommendations” or “top games”. • “I wouldn’t take tips from a bookie.” • Sensitive to “hustle”.Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 30
  • • Game InformationSupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 31
  • Source: Egger, F.N. (2001). Affective Design of E-Commerce User Interfaces: How to Maximise PerceivedTrustworthiness. In: Helander, M., Khalid, H.M. & Tham (Eds.), Proceedings of CAHD2001: Conference on AffectiveHuman Factors Design, Singapore, June 27-29, 2001: 317-324.Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 32
  • • “Is my money safe?” • Low friction deposits, withdrawals & payouts. • “Am I being treated fairly” • Bonuses • Customer service • Respecting wishes • Player protection measures • RegulationSupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 33
  • “Facts and Fair Dealing”Support ers Spons ors Organi s er 34
  • Questions @matthewovington Thi s doc ument and i t ’ s c ont ent i s Copyri ght ©2012 [ M t hew Ovi ngt on and UCD UK Li m t ed. at iSupport ers Spons ors Organi s er 35
  • Welcome to UCD2012 Sponsored by Supported by