Play your favorite game and earn
Zorka.Agency ran YouTube integrations for the play-and-earn rewards app Buff, with creators running the app in the background while playing, reporting 11M+ views at a 6% engagement rate.
Case in 60 seconds
Buff, a play-and-earn rewards app for gamers, needed a performance-driven launch campaign, which is how the case study states the objective, with no market named beyond multi-region.
A rewards app that runs while somebody plays does not need explaining so much as showing in use, which is the reading behind creators keeping it in the background rather than scripting a pitch.
Let creators run Buff in the background while they play, with welcome gifts carrying the registration ask rather than a scripted product read.
Creators ran integrations on YouTube across multiple regions, keeping Buff running in the background of their gameplay while welcome gifts drove registration; no creators, counts or dates are named.
Zorka.Agency reports 11M+ views at a 6% engagement rate and claims higher CTR and lower CPM than scripted norms, without publishing either figure or the norm it is compared against.
Strategy Breakdown
The primary strategy-learning section — interpretation, not a press-release summary.
Creative & Execution System
Assets & channels
- YouTube
Partners
- Zorka.Agency (lead_agency)
Results & Evidence
| Metric | Value | Result type |
|---|---|---|
| CTR and CPM versus scripted norms | Higher CTR and lower CPM than scripted norms. | performance |
| engagement rate | ER 6% | engagement_rate |
| views | views 11M+ | video_views |
Why Zorka.Agency's strategy worked
- 1
An always-on utility suits background integration rather than a scripted read, because the product is visibly doing its job while the creator plays and needs no separate demonstration.
- 2
Attaching a welcome gift to the registration step gives a rewards app the same first payoff it sells, so the ask matches the product instead of interrupting the stream.
- 3
Claiming higher CTR and lower CPM than scripted norms without publishing either number or the benchmark leaves the comparison unusable, since how the rates were calculated is not stated.