That is a real export. The same single HTML file the editor builds for an ad network, animations and all — only the store redirect is held back.
Insert Coin – Comparison
A tick-and-cross table on a neon panel — THIS ONE against THE USUAL — closing on 'same genre, not the same game'.
What this screen does
The table sets your game beside an unnamed competitor and marks each row with a tick or a cross. It works because comparison is what the viewer was going to do anyway: anybody seeing an ad for a game in a genre they already play is silently asking how it differs, and this card answers that directly instead of hoping they infer it.
Naming the rival 'THE USUAL' rather than a real product is the deliberate choice. It sidesteps the legal exposure of naming a competitor, and it works better — every viewer fills in whichever game they are bored of, so the card compares favourably against a different rival for each person who sees it.
'SAME GENRE. NOT THE SAME GAME.' is the thesis in five words. It concedes the similarity, which is what makes the claim credible, then insists on the difference.
'Everything above, checked by 2M+ players' is doing something careful — it attaches social proof to the specific claims in the table rather than to the game in general. That turns a list of assertions into a list of assertions other people have verified.
'Free to start · 60 MB' answers cost and commitment at the button, where a viewer who has just been persuaded looks for the catch.
Best for
- Games entering a crowded genre where the audience already plays something
- Products whose advantages are concrete and listable — no ads, offline play, no energy timers
- Campaigns aimed at lapsed players of a competitor
- Any category where the incumbent has a well-known, specific weakness
- Non-gaming apps too, wherever a feature comparison is the honest pitch
Making it yours
- Pick rows where you genuinely win. A table with a cross in your own column is fatal, and a table of trivial wins is worse than none.
- Keep the comparison anonymous. Naming a competitor invites both a legal response and a rebuttal.
- Limit it to four or five rows — a long table stops being read and starts being scrolled.
- Use the viewer's language for each row, not your internal feature names.
- Make the proof line specific to the claims rather than a general rating.
- Revisit the table when a competitor ships. A comparison that was true last year is a liability this year.
Next steps
Templates are a starting point, not a constraint. The documentation walks through changing one into your own ad and exporting it.