Gamgard responsible gambling review of the
Fantasfida fantasy daily sport game
Report prepared for
Game Network
May 2016
Report prepared by
Dr Richard Wood
Responsible gambling research and consultancy
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.gamres.org
300 Main St West, Suite 300, Hawkesbury,
Ontario, K6A 2H7, CANADA
1
Interpreting and utilizing the results of Gamgard 3.0
Gamgard 3.0 examines ten risk factors that have been shown to influence the risk of
gambling type games for vulnerable players. Gamgard also contains four items that
relate to responsible gambling features that have been shown to reduce gambling
risks. Each of the scoring items has an explicit non-ambiguous operational definition
to help a game assessor reach an objective assessment of each game examined.
Gamgard has been constructed so that all of the risk factors are added together,
following which the scores for responsible gambling features are subtracted from
the total to give an overall risk rating for the game. The final risk rating will be
either:
Gamgard 3.0 risk ratings
Very Low
Low
Medium
High
Very High
Score
20 or less
21 to 40
41 to 60
61 to 80
81 to 100
The overall Gamgard 3.0 score indicates whether or not a game may require some
further examination for potentially harmful features. A high score by itself does not
necessarily indicate that a proposed game is harmful. That is, the scores are
indicative and not literal. However, a high score should initiate further investigation
of the individual characteristic scores to identify areas that may be problematic and
require further attention. In this way Gamgard works as a guide to aid responsible
game design. Similarly, it is important to note that a high rating does not necessarily
imply or mean that a game should not be introduced into the marketplace or be
abandoned. If a game is identified as having some high scoring features there are a
number of options and strategies that can be considered and implemented:
(1) Change one or more of the risk factors of the game, and/or introduce
responsible gambling features in order to lower the score: It is possible to use
Gamgard 3.0 to identify the specific problematic features of a game in order to
adjust the game accordingly. For example, if the game scores very high on event
frequency, then measures can be introduced to slow the game down, and lower the
overall score. If a game scored high on continuity of play then breaks could be put in
place between the end of one game and the start of another.
(2) Employ more market protection and preventative strategies: If a game score is
considered too high, other protective and preventative responsible gambling
initiatives might be introduced to limit, control, or minimise the impact of the game.
For example, an online game may be restricted in terms of the hours that it is made
available.
2
(3) Abandon the game: In some cases the game may be abandoned or require such
serious modifications that the game becomes unfeasible, unprofitable and/or
unattractive to players.
Results from the examination of the proposed game
Using the parameters supplied by Game Network, the Fantasfida fantasy daily
sports game was assessed using Gamgard 3.0 to identify the potential risk to
influence problematic gambling in ʻ vulnerableʼ players.
Before the responsible gambling features were considered, the basic game rating
was 41 (out of 100) putting it at the bottom of the medium risk category. However,
the final risk rating of the game including responsible gambling features was 38 (out
of 100) identifying the game as having a low-risk for vulnerable players developing
problematic gambling. The risk scores for each risk factor are presented in the score
sheet below. Due to the low risk rating of this game, no changes to the game are
recommended.
3
4