Pexo
Home/tutorial/How to Make an Interactive Explainer Video: 6 Steps (2026)

How to Make an Interactive Explainer Video: 6 Steps (2026)

Lan He avatarLan He
·Last updated Aug 8, 2026
How to Make an Interactive Explainer Video: 6 Steps (2026)
Summary

Covers six steps from finding the decision that justifies interactivity through tracking which paths viewers actually take. Step 1 gives the test for when branching earns its cost over a linear video. Step 2 covers designing a branch structure that stays maintainable, including why two choice points is usually the ceiling. Step 3 explains scripting segments that work in any order. Step 4 walks through producing the extra footage branching demands. Includes platform choice, LMS and SCORM considerations, path analytics, and five mistakes that make interactive video cost more than it returns. 9 frequently asked questions cover tools, cost, and when linear is better.

How to Make an Interactive Explainer Video

UPDATED: 2026-08-06 By Lan He, Senior Video Producer at Pexo

Making an interactive explainer video takes six steps: find the decision that justifies branching, design a structure that stays maintainable, script segments that stand alone, produce the extra footage, choose a platform, then track which paths get taken. An interactive explainer takes about 30 minutes of production per path.

Quick Version: How to Make an Interactive Explainer Video

  1. Find the decision that makes branching worth the cost.
  2. Design two choice points at most, with two or three options each.
  3. Script every segment to stand alone.
  4. Produce the extra footage branching demands.
  5. Choose a platform that matches where it will live.
  6. Track which paths get chosen and retire the ones that do not.

How to Make an Interactive Explainer Video Step by Step

Step 1: Find the decision worth branching on

Interactivity earns its cost in two situations. First, when viewers arrive with genuinely different needs, such as three buyer types who each care about a different outcome. Second, when the learning comes from making a choice and seeing the consequence, which is what makes branching scenarios effective in training.

It does not earn its cost when added for engagement. A well-targeted linear video beats an interactive one that branches into three mediocre paths, and it costs a third as much to maintain. Ask what the viewer would actually choose between before deciding to build choices.

A hand-drawn card row with one card circled and hatched, three plain cards beside it

Step 2: Design the branch structure

Draw the structure before writing anything: a shared opening, one or two choice points, and a shared close. Two choice points with two or three options each is the practical ceiling, because footage and testing both multiply with every branch.

Converge the paths back together. A structure that branches and never rejoins means every path needs its own ending, which multiplies the work again and makes any later change touch every route. Shared open, divergent middle, shared close is the shape that stays maintainable.

A hand-drawn branch diagram with a shared opening, two choice points, and a shared close

Step 3: Script segments that stand alone

Write each segment so it assumes nothing except the choice immediately preceding it. A segment that references something from an earlier branch breaks for any viewer who arrived by another route, and that failure is silent: nobody reports it, they just stop watching.

Write the choice prompts as the viewer's own question rather than as a menu of topics. "I need to convince my finance team" works better than "Finance", because the viewer is picking a situation rather than categorising themselves.

A hand-drawn script page with three parallel short blocks under a choice prompt

Step 4: Produce the extra footage

Branching multiplies finished minutes. A two-by-three structure can mean two to three times the footage of a linear video, which is why interactive projects are so often scoped optimistically and delivered late or reduced.

Pexo's script-to-video workflow generates each segment from its script, which is what makes the multiplier manageable. Hyperframe holds the presenter, style, and setting identical across every branch, so a viewer switching paths does not see the video change character. Consistency across parallel segments is harder to maintain by hand than the segments themselves.

A hand-drawn split screen: parallel branch segments on the left, a chat interface generating video on the right

Step 5: Choose the platform

Match the platform to where it lives. Hosted tools such as Wirewax, Eko, and Vimeo Interactive suit a website or campaign. Authoring tools such as Storyline and Captivate suit an LMS, where xAPI can record which path a learner took.

Test every path on a phone before release. Interactive video fails most often at the choice moment: buttons too small to tap accurately, a prompt that appears and disappears before it can be read, or a choice that requires reading while the video keeps playing. Hold each prompt and pause the playback under it.

A hand-drawn frame with two large tappable choice buttons

Step 6: Track which paths get taken

Record which options get chosen, where viewers drop out, and whether path choice correlates with the outcome you care about. This is the whole return on building interactivity: linear video cannot tell you which of three concerns a viewer actually had.

Retire branches nobody chooses. A path selected by two percent of viewers is footage you are maintaining for nobody, and cutting it makes every future change cheaper. Export 16:9 at 1080p, plus 9:16 where the piece runs on mobile. Pexo exports both from one project.

A hand-drawn analytics panel showing path selection counts

How to Make an Interactive Explainer Video with Pexo

The six steps above work with any interactive platform. Pexo handles step 4 in a single conversation, which is where the branching multiplier actually bites.

Open the explainer video page and describe each segment: "A 40-second segment for the finance-team path of an interactive explainer, same presenter and office setting as the other branches, focused on cost recovery timelines, calm professional narration." Pexo generates each branch with the presenter and style held identical, then you assemble them in your interactive tool.

Pexo create page for explainer videos showing the description box and preset chips

Adjust any branch by describing the change in the chat, and Pexo regenerates that segment alone without disturbing the others.

For related formats, the product explainer video page covers the linear alternative and training video covers branching scenarios for learning.

5 Mistakes That Make Interactive Video Cost More Than It Returns

1. Branching for engagement rather than for a real choice. A targeted linear video beats three mediocre paths and costs a third as much to maintain.

2. Paths that never rejoin. Every path needing its own ending multiplies the work and makes every later change touch every route.

3. Segments that reference earlier branches. They break silently for anyone who arrived another way, and nobody reports it.

4. Choice prompts as a topic menu. Viewers pick situations they recognise, not categories they belong to.

5. Keeping a branch nobody chooses. Two percent of viewers is footage maintained for nobody. Retire it and everything downstream gets cheaper.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What is an interactive explainer video?

An interactive explainer video lets the viewer make choices that change what they see next: picking a use case, choosing a scenario response, or selecting the depth of detail. The branching is the format; everything else is a normal explainer.

When is interactive worth the cost?

When viewers genuinely have different needs that a single linear video would serve badly, such as three distinct buyer types or a scenario where the learning comes from making a choice and seeing the consequence. Interactivity added for engagement alone rarely pays back.

How many branches should an interactive video have?

Two choice points with two or three options each is usually the ceiling. Every branch multiplies the footage to produce and the paths to test, and viewers rarely explore more than one path anyway.

What tools make interactive video?

Wirewax, Eko, and Vimeo Interactive handle hosted branching. Articulate Storyline and Adobe Captivate handle it inside eLearning with SCORM tracking. The video content itself is produced separately and imported.

How much more does interactive cost than linear?

Roughly proportional to total footage. A two-by-three branch structure can mean two to three times the finished minutes, plus the authoring and testing time. That multiplier is why most interactive projects should start smaller than planned.

Does interactive video work in an LMS?

Yes, when built in an authoring tool that packages to SCORM or xAPI. xAPI is better suited here because it can record which path a learner took, which is the data that makes interactivity worth having.

How do I write for branching?

Write each segment so it stands alone and does not assume what came before, apart from the immediately preceding choice. Segments that reference earlier content break when a viewer arrives by a different route.

What should I track?

Which paths get chosen, where viewers drop out, and whether path choice correlates with the outcome you care about. A branch nobody selects is footage you paid for and should retire.

Is interactive better than linear?

Only when the viewer genuinely has a choice worth making. A linear video that is well targeted beats an interactive one that branches into three mediocre paths, and the linear version costs a third as much to maintain.

Lan He avatar
Lan He

Meet Lan, Senior Video Producer at Pexo, with over a decade of experience turning complex creative workflows into steps anyone can follow. A hands-on video editor and motion designer, he has taught thousands of creators how to ship video without the overwhelm, and he puts dozens of creative tools through real production work each year to see which ones actually hold up. At Pexo, he writes both step-by-step tutorials and best-of tool roundups, screen-recording each workflow himself and ranking tools on what they deliver in a real project rather than on their feature lists.

Pexo Recommend