Nonlocality enables two parties to win specific games with probabilities strictly higher than allowed by any classical theory. Nevertheless, all known such examples consider games where the two parties have a common interest, since they jointly win or lose the game. The main question we ask here is whether the nonlocal feature of quantum mechanics can offer an advantage in a scenario where the two parties have conflicting interests. We answer this in the affirmative by presenting a simple conflicting interest game, where quantum strategies outperform classical ones. Moreover, we show that our game has a fair quantum equilibrium with higher payoffs for both players than in any fair classical equilibrium. Finally, we play the game using a commercial entangled photon source and demonstrate experimentally the quantum advantage. Nonlocality is one of the most important and elusive properties of quantum mechanics, where two spatially separated observers sharing a pair of entangled quantum bits can create correlations that cannot be explained by any local realistic theory. More precisely, Bell [1] showed that there exist scenarios where correlations between any local hidden variables can be shown to satisfy specific constraints (known as Bell inequalities), while these constraints can nevertheless be violated by correlations created by quantum systems.An equivalent way of describing Bell test scenarios is in the language of nonlocal games. The best-known example is the CHSH game [2]: Alice and Bob, who are spatially separated and cannot communicate, receive an input bit x and y respectively and must output bits a and b respectively, such that the outputs are different if both input bits are equal to 1, and the same otherwise. It is well known that the probability over uniform inputs that they jointly win this game when they a priori share classical resources is 0.75, while if they share and appropriately measure a pair of maximally entangled qubits, they can jointly win the game with probability cos 2 π/8 > 0.75. The classical value 0.75 corresponds to the upper bound of a Bell inequality and the CHSH game provides an example of a Bell inequality violation, since there exist quantum strategies that violate this bound.Looking at Bell inequalities through the lens of games has been very useful in practice, including in cryptography [3,4] and quantum information [5], where, for example, quantum mechanics offers stronger than classical security guarantees in quantum key distribution or verification protocols. Recently, Brunner and Linden made the connection between Bell test scenarios and games with incomplete information more explicit and provided examples of such games where quantum mechanics offers an advantage [6]. A game with incomplete information (or Bayesian game) is a game where the two parties receive some input unknown to the other party [7]. We remark that without more restrictions, quantum mechanics only offers advantages for incomplete information games, i.e., when the parties receive inputs or, in other word...