Why gamification strategies fail
At the SiGMA Asia 2025 summit in Manila, a panel of leading figures in gaming technology gathered to dissect a persistent challenge within the industry: why do gamification strategies fail? The discussion, led by Jenny Ortiz-Bolivar of SiGMA Group, brought together Tom Jang Lemke of SavageTech, Felipe Pastenes of Miela, Dan Morrison of Fast Track, and Kate Frolova of SOFTSWISS. Their collective insights unveiled the structural and strategic misalignments that continue to undermine gamification efforts across markets.
Disconnected strategies and poor localisation
Gamification is often introduced with great promise, yet many implementations fall short due to superficial integration, misaligned key performance indicators (KPIs), or user fatigue. Morrison opened the conversation by emphasising the need for synergy between gamification tools and existing data architecture. If you’ve got two streams of strategy trying to touch the player… there’s just a clear disconnect there. He stressed that gamification must be anchored within a broader, unified CRM and marketing framework.
Pastenes supported this, noting that even data must be regionally contextualised. Preferences from Latin America can be very different from preferences from Asia, he observed, explaining how Latin American users typically favour streamlined UX. In contrast, Asian audiences respond positively to layered, multifaceted systems. Gamification efforts that ignore these cultural and behavioural nuances often underperform or, worse, alienate users.
Lessons from failure: free users and zero conversion
A striking example of miscalculated implementation came from Lemke, who recounted his experience with a gamified sportsbook product in Germany. The company onboarded 42,000 users through a free-to-play system that offered lottery ticket rewards. However, none of these users converted to paying customers. Exactly. Zero, he confirmed. The experience reinforced a hard lesson: gamification, when used merely as a superficial hook, cannot replace a compelling product-value proposition.
User-centric design and meaningful engagement
Frolova added that while gamification should be enjoyable, it must also be adaptable to real player behaviour. Forcing users into fixed engagement pathssuch as requiring a minimum bet of 2 in markets where most players stake lesscan backfire. Instead, she advocated for flexible and segmented tools that cater to distinct user profiles, allowing players to engage on their terms.
The rise of badge fatigue and how to counter it
The conversation soon turned to an increasingly common pain point: badge fatigue. Morrison warned against bloated leveling systems where players feel stagnated. They stay on that level for 2, 3, 4 sessions, he said, suggesting mechanisms like time-sensitive level-ups to maintain momentum. Lemke expanded on this with his concept of “zombie badges”rewards that carry no meaning because they are too easily earned. You cannot give out a badge just for using the slot machine one time, he said. His solution was to focus on rarity and visibility, noting that a badge obtained by only 1.5% of users holds far greater value.
Acquisition vs retention: finding the balance
When discussing acquisition versus retention, panellists diverged. Pastenes viewed gamification as a powerful tool for acquisition, particularly when driven by community identity and shared achievements. When [a player] feels proud… hes willing to share, he said, arguing that peer engagement naturally fuels retention. Frolova pointed out that gamified extras visible to first-time users help create stickiness from the first interaction. Morrison, however, cautioned that acquisition-led gamification often brings in low-value users, echoing Lemkes earlier warning about free players who never convert.
Personalisation, culture, and regional advantage
The panel also examined how personalisation intersects with gamification. Pastenes contrasted the competitive focus of Asian users with the community-driven preferences of Latin American audiences. Lemke noted that Asian operators are significantly more receptive to gamification tools than their Western European counterparts. Gamification is so ingrained with [Asian operators] already, he said, attributing this to broader regional familiarity with interactive digital systems.
Strategic advice from the panel
As the session neared its conclusion, Ortiz-Bolivar asked each speaker to share one guiding principle for operators planning their next gamification strategy. Lemke emphasised the need to understand user cohorts, noting that younger audiences aged 21 to 29 are far more responsive to gamified mechanics. Pastenes urged operators to tightly integrate gamification with marketing strategies rather than treating it as a disconnected feature. Morrison reinforced the importance of linking gamification to CRM and behavioural data. Frolova concluded by emphasizing the importance of deep analytics as the foundation for any successful strategy.
A unified message: Gamification is not a silver bullet
Throughout the discussion, one message was clear: successful gamification hinges not on gimmicks, but on relevance, clarity, and cohesion. As Ortiz-Bolivar aptly summarised, Even the best gamification cannot make up for a bad product experience. Operators must focus on delivering authentic, data-informed, and culturally tailored player journeys that earn engagement rather than compel it.
To explore more strategic conversations shaping the iGaming space, follow the SiGMA Asia 2025 agenda and ensure you dont miss upcoming panels that combine data, innovation, and local expertise:
? /asia/agenda
