I love gaming. I’m a big fan of the Zelda universe (if you know, you know), and when a new release comes out I can quite happily disappear onto the sofa for hours. It’s immersive, incredibly well designed, and just the right level of addictive. Good games pull you in because the experience itself is rewarding, not just because you are collecting points or completing tasks.
For that reason, you might assume that I’m a big supporter of gamification at conferences. In reality, I’m a quite skeptical. Event technology has evolved so much over the past few years that many event apps now include gamification features as standard. Delegates can earn points for completing activities such as connecting with other attendees, visiting exhibition stands, attending sessions, or sometimes simply arriving at the event. On the surface this can look extremely successful. App activity increases, engagement statistics go up, and post event reports are filled with impressive looking data about the number of interactions that have taken place.
The difficulty is that gamification often attracts people who enjoy playing games rather than people who are genuinely engaging with the purpose of the event. The statistics may increase, but the depth of engagement does not necessarily follow. Connecting with another delegate through an app rewards the act of making the connection, but it does not guarantee that a meaningful conversation has taken place. The numbers look good, but the substance behind them can be rather thin.
This becomes particularly important when you look at the experience from the perspective of sponsors and exhibitors. Gamification can increase the quantity of leads collected during an event, which is attractive to marketing managers who are understandably focused on measurable engagement. However, I’ve heard from many exhibition sales teams that these interactions rarely translate into an increase in genuinely valuable prospects. People scan badges, collect their points, and move on to the next stand. The behaviour is driven by the mechanics of the game rather than a real interest in the product or service being presented.
There is also the risk that gamification alienates a portion of the audience. Many people attend conferences to learn something new, meet peers in their field, or have meaningful conversations about shared challenges. If the event starts to feel like a competition or a treasure hunt, some delegates can see it as gimmicky or even slightly childish. That may sound harsh, but it reflects the reality that not everyone wants to play a game when they attend a professional event.
In many cases the real issue is that gamification is used as a solution to the wrong problem. If the programme is weak, networking opportunities are poorly designed, or the event lacks a clear sense of purpose, adding points, badges, and leaderboards will not fix those issues. At best it creates a short burst of activity that looks positive in a dashboard. At worst it becomes a distraction from the content, conversations, and relationships that should be at the centre of the event experience.
There are also some practical challenges with implementation. Games that are overly complicated or poorly explained tend to confuse participants rather than encourage them to take part. Leaderboards often end up dominated by a small number of highly competitive early adopters, which can discourage everyone else who quickly realises they have no chance of catching up. And if the technology itself is unreliable or difficult to navigate, frustration can replace engagement very quickly.
There are even some interesting psychological factors at play. Behavioural researchers refer to something called the “over-justification” effect, where external rewards such as points or prizes can actually reduce a person’s intrinsic motivation. In simple terms, people stop doing something because they want to do it and start doing it because they feel they should. That shift can undermine the very engagement that the game was designed to encourage in the first place.
None of this means that gamification can never work. When it is carefully designed and genuinely integrated into the overall experience of an event, it can add energy and a sense of fun. But that requires a clear understanding of the behaviours you are trying to encourage and how the game supports the wider objectives of the conference.
The reality is that the best conferences do not rely on games to manufacture engagement. They create it through compelling content, thoughtful networking opportunities, and experiences that people genuinely want to take part in. Ironically, good event design is not so different from good game design. The most successful games are immersive because the experience itself is rewarding, not because players are collecting points.
Events should aim for the same thing. Because if people are only engaging with your conference to earn points, they probably are not engaging with your conference at all.