Intrinsic In-Game Placement for B2B and Industrial Brands

Intrinsic placement is worth buying when a title's audience is older than the channel's reputation suggests, and worth refusing when it is not. For an industrial or B2B account I buy PC and console racing, football, simulation and strategy titles, and I decline mobile hyper-casual supply every time a partner offers it, which on a first proposal is most of what arrives. Between a third and half of the placements in that first proposal come back out after I watch them render. Vetting before pricing: I play the title, or screen-record somebody who does, and grade each placement the way a measurement vendor would: share of screen, angle of incidence, continuous seconds in view, and whether the player has any attention left at that moment. A perimeter board in a football sim behaves nothing like a roadside billboard in an open-world racer, and neither behaves like a wall panel in a shooter's spawn room. Anything that renders only off-axis, at distance, or across a loading transition leaves the deal before a CPM is discussed. You get the rejected list with the recordings attached, which is the part of this work most shops never show you. Supply, and who actually holds the title: Anzu, Bidstack, Frameplay, Gadsme and Adverty hold different catalogues, and the publisher you assumed sits with one of them usually sits with another, or direct. I confirm the path to each title before it appears in a plan. Deals are built as private marketplace IDs and activated on your own DV360 or Trade Desk seat, so in-game spend reconciles inside the same reporting as your search and paid social instead of arriving as a PDF from a vendor at month end. Measurement, and its limits: Every deal runs with IAS or DoubleVerify in-game measurement enabled, reported against the MRC's in-game guidance rather than a supplier's private definition of an impression. I report average continuous exposure in seconds alongside measured impressions, because the second number moves when a placement is bad and the first one does not. Brand lift, where the budget carries it, runs through a survey panel matched to the title's audience, not a recall claim written by the seller. What this channel will not do: It will not do account-based targeting. Anyone offering you a named-account segment inside a game world is selling a modelled lookalike with a title list stapled to it. It will not carry a product demonstration, a form fill, or anything that asks a player to read more than four words. It will not produce attributable pipeline inside a quarter, and if that is the number the budget is held against, say so now and we will not start. Not included: Creative origination. I specify formats, safe areas and legibility thresholds, and I will reject artwork that fails them, but the artwork comes from your studio or agency. Also excluded: rewarded video, playables, interstitials and in-game audio. Those are different buys with different arguments, and I will not run them as filler to hit a reach number. Who this is not for: A consumer brand buying scale, where a generalist gaming agency will serve you better and cheaper. A team whose brief is the word awareness with no second sentence. And anyone who needs the plan to include every title their CMO has heard of. The shortlist is usually four to six titles and it stays that way through the quarter unless the exposure data says otherwise. Polish and DACH supply I negotiate directly, in Polish where that gets a better answer. Everywhere else I buy through the platform and say so in the plan.