The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Advertising In Games
Wezoin
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
Sorry if you guys have already discussed this, but I did a search/checked the first couple pages and couldn't find anything on it, so here goes:
Do you feel that advertising in games serves any benefit to the player?
Most people complain that it doesn't bring the price of the game down below the "standard" (Though I realise there are certain cases where this is not true) However, I would argue that, in a way, the price is reduced. I believe that most companies that use advertising in games take the expected revenue from said advertising and use it to improve the game (before release.)
For example, if for every $5million they planned to make they were willing to spend $1million on making it, without the advertising revenue they may have planned to make $10million, but with it perhaps $20million. This would, effectively, increase the quality of the game (assuming that the money is invested into effective development time) as they would have $4million budget rather than $2million. (Although, I highly doubt EA does this, but I'm quite positive Ubisoft would have)
Another argument for advertising in games is realism, there are ads in real life, and why not have real ads in games? Sure it's fun to see a fake ad for "Flinstones Chewable Viagra" but in more serious games this doesn't work, and having a "FakeCola" machine can really remove from the atmosphere. The illusion of realism comes from being able to identify items that exist in real life, and when those items have known brands on them, it can only add to realism.
A counter-point to this one is Pepsi ads in Battlefield 2142, but if you think about it, Pepsi is one of the biggest companies around right now, it's actually very likely that they will be around (not saying CocaCola will die out or anything) for a long time yet, maybe not in the soda industry, as it's likely a new form of popular drink will emerge, but the company name will still be represented. (Besides the point but, anyone bitching about the ammount of realism portrayed in a sci-fi game should be shot.)
Do you feel that advertising in games serves any benefit to the player?
Most people complain that it doesn't bring the price of the game down below the "standard" (Though I realise there are certain cases where this is not true) However, I would argue that, in a way, the price is reduced. I believe that most companies that use advertising in games take the expected revenue from said advertising and use it to improve the game (before release.)
For example, if for every $5million they planned to make they were willing to spend $1million on making it, without the advertising revenue they may have planned to make $10million, but with it perhaps $20million. This would, effectively, increase the quality of the game (assuming that the money is invested into effective development time) as they would have $4million budget rather than $2million. (Although, I highly doubt EA does this, but I'm quite positive Ubisoft would have)
Another argument for advertising in games is realism, there are ads in real life, and why not have real ads in games? Sure it's fun to see a fake ad for "Flinstones Chewable Viagra" but in more serious games this doesn't work, and having a "FakeCola" machine can really remove from the atmosphere. The illusion of realism comes from being able to identify items that exist in real life, and when those items have known brands on them, it can only add to realism.
A counter-point to this one is Pepsi ads in Battlefield 2142, but if you think about it, Pepsi is one of the biggest companies around right now, it's actually very likely that they will be around (not saying CocaCola will die out or anything) for a long time yet, maybe not in the soda industry, as it's likely a new form of popular drink will emerge, but the company name will still be represented. (Besides the point but, anyone bitching about the ammount of realism portrayed in a sci-fi game should be shot.)
Wezoin on
0
Posts
Honestly it all looked a bit half-hazard and out of place. I can see the theory behind it, and I don't think I would have minded so much of the ads looked as if belong there. It's like you're heading through a grimy studio and all of a sudden you see an ultra clean fresh poster for the latest movie tacked to the wall in an odd place. Or a TV screen which only seems to be showing just that one image (I guess somebody's media centre crashed?).
One thing I will say is that I recognise how this can help some companies pay off the cost of creating the game. However, I feel that with time when this becomes more prevalent, we should also see regulation of the adverts seen in games similar to how they're regulated on TV or in other forms of media. I'm not sure how it's done in the US, but in the UK there are restrictions put in place for what types of ads are shown when, and how blatant the product placement is. People don't accept really blatant product placement on TV (partly because it just looks plain stupid when it happens), especially when it detracts from the show, I feel the same should apply to games as well.
For example, in a TV program, I'd rather see somebody holding a six pack of Budweiser than a six pack of BEER. As long as the characters don't drone on and on about how refreshing Bud is, it looks more realistic for them to be drinking a beer that I could go down to the liquor store and buy.
That's kind of my point. If it's incidentally in the game, then it ought to be OK. But if a health pick-up in game is re-labeled as "A nice refreshing, stimulating can of Coke (TM)" and your in-game transport has changed from a hum-vee or a hovertank to a concept design car for the next Ford Fiesta, then I think it's safe to say there are problems.
So essentially, what happened with Splinter Cell Double Agent is ok? (Ie, Lambert drives a Chrysler 300, the PDA is a Nokia, and there are billboards sitting around) Also, I've never played the full version of Battlefield 2142 but, from what I understand, isn't the only form of advertising billboards?
I haven't played either game, but the stuff in Splinter Cell sounds okay.
The stuff is BF2142, however, I'm not sure. Are these billboards only in urban settings or can you randomly find them in the woods (if there are woods)? As long as they're in appropriate places and not positioned in such a way as to be saying "LOOK AT ME BECAUSE I AM A BILLBOARD THAT MAKES EA MONEY" I don't have a problem with it.
I mean, game companies are in it to make money. As long as the're tasteful about it I'm not going to bitch at them for it.
However, when the game developers adds fucking spyware into this game to see how long I look at these billboards for... well, that just leaps over the line.
[spoiler:cdff055254]Fuck EA.[/spoiler:cdff055254]
Now, charge me $49 for a game and put in ads that don't even fund future patches for the game?
Get your ads the fuck out of my face.
For instance, in the new James Bond movie there are some scenes that really scream "PRODUCT PLACEMENT" and the camera is angled in such a way as to definitly catch the advertisements and brand names.
If its done like that i dont mind, because i dont mind noticing adverts and their intentionality. It has to be done specificially for the game though.
Really i dont mind.
You can see the bill boards where I'm assuming they'll eventually go. Right now they blend in, but only because what's on the billboard(a recruitment poster for the armies fighting the war) uses the same general color palette as everything else.
Hopefully they'll keep it like that, because as is, it's pretty unobtrusive.
On the black screen
I'm also sure that most advertisers wouldn't recognize the words "subtle and tasteful" if they stripped nude, painted themselves orange, and danced on top of a piano singing "subtle and tasteful are here to stay."
Apologies to Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman