The comparison is usually made on install rate alone, which understates the difference and misses where the value actually is.
Why playables tend to convert better
The player has already done the thing. They have swiped, merged, aimed, matched. The install is a decision to continue rather than a decision to try.
Self-selection. People who dislike the mechanic drop out during the ad, at no cost to you. A video cannot filter anyone, so it installs them anyway.
No expectation gap. Video ads with no relationship to the game produce installs and immediate uninstalls. A playable cannot misrepresent the loop, because the loop is what was played.
Where video still wins
- Production cost. A video is far cheaper, and for small budgets that decides it.
- Games that are not mechanically interesting in thirty seconds. Narrative, strategy and simulation often show better than they play in that window.
- Reach. Every placement takes video. Not every placement takes playables.
- Testing creative angles quickly. Five video variants is a day. Five playables is not.
The number that actually matters
Not install rate. Retained players per unit of spend. A playable with a lower install rate and far better day-seven retention is the cheaper campaign, and comparing the two on installs alone will tell you the opposite.
What it takes to get one accepted is a separate problem — see playable ad size limits and why builds get rejected.
This is what we do day to day — playable ad production at Factorial Studio.
