backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 28 comment(s) - last by rushfan2006.. on Sep 1 at 2:51 PM
Need For Speed: Carbon to have dynamic in-game advertising

EA's next iteration in the Need For Speed franchise will have more than just the occasional self-promoting billboard or tie-in from a specific vendor. Thanks to a recent agreement signed with Microsoft's Massive Inc. and IGA WorldWide, future EA games will feature dynamically changing advertisements.

EA and Massive are partnered to deliver dynamic ads to NFS:Carbon and up to three other games. The EA-IGA deal was written separately to provide ads for their upcoming first-person-shooter, BattleField 2142. Financial terms for both contracts have not been disclosed at this point.

Chip Lange, EA vice president of online commerce, reinforced EA's standpoint that the ads should "not disrupt the player's experience." Advertising will be used not only to generate revenue, but to enhance player immersion in racing and sports games, where "... advertising is not only nice to have, but it's an essential component to create the fiction of being there."

EA representatives claim the ads will be tailored to provide a "realistic brand experience" that is "contextually relevant." The ads can also be directed by region, so players in the USA would be shown different content than players in the UK or Asia. How the data will be collected to determine what is "relevant" to the player is as of yet undetermined, or if the nature of the game itself will be taken into account.

EA is not alone in the concept of in-game advertising. Ubisoft received some backlash from gamers over the inclusion billboards for AXE body spray in Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory, which the protagonist Sam Fisher takes a zip-line into a mission from, and more recently in Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter.  Microsoft has also signed a deal with Massive for in-game advertising, and id Software, famous for its Quake and Doom titles, has openly admitted it is OK with in-game advertising, perhaps signaling a trend for the industry.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
And my EA boycott continues
By Jeff7181 on 8/31/2006 5:27:49 PM , Rating: 2
It's a shame EA is handling the development of Spore. I'd actually buy it if my money would go to a respectable company.




RE: And my EA boycott continues
By CelSnip on 8/31/2006 6:12:36 PM , Rating: 2
It's too bad they're publishing Crysis as well.


RE: And my EA boycott continues
By Jeff7181 on 8/31/2006 11:52:51 PM , Rating: 2
Are they? Damn... so that game's going to crash and require config file tweaking to get it to run on a monitor with anything other than a 60 Hz refresh rate and forget configuration settings?


RE: And my EA boycott continues
By Alphafox78 on 9/1/2006 8:50:14 AM , Rating: 2
I may have to make an exception then, as Im buying Crysis. they arent developing it though, just publishing it?


RE: And my EA boycott continues
By rushfan2006 on 9/1/2006 11:50:57 AM , Rating: 2
Don't know your history with EA but I've been a customer of their games dating back to the 80's when the company was young (and ironic how the times change..they were hailed and well loved back then and easily the most popular game company on the planet). I know they've had employee relations issues, supposedly those have been addressed now. Aside from that just on the games themselves -- some of their titles I didn't like much, but many are very good and I honestly don't know where you guys get your quality issues with their games...they run fine on my system(s).

Lastly, don't sweat it anyway...I believe EA these days publishes more games for other development companies more than developing theirself.

And yeah Crysis looks sweet....looking forward to it.



RE: And my EA boycott continues
By Jeff7181 on 9/1/2006 1:36:58 PM , Rating: 2
- Battlefield 1942 required modifying a config file to get it to run on a monitor using ANYTHING other than a 60 Hz refresh rate. With every patch, you had to go modify it again.

- Official mods for Battlefield 1942 required the same thing. Why couldn't EA just change the 0 to a 1 by default? It's not like it hurt anything to "allow all refresh rates."

- Battlefield 2 has the same problem.

- NHL 2003 ran a script on startup that both McAfee and Norton detected as a malicious script, and would shut down the game. It took months for me to figure out why it was happening and turn off script blocking in McAfee.

- Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2003 forgets display settings.

- Apparently Microsoft is a monopoly because they integrate web browsing software into their OS... but EA is not even though they utilize their massive bankroll to eliminate the competition by buying exclusive rights to NFL team and player names.


RE: And my EA boycott continues
By rushfan2006 on 9/1/2006 2:50:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
- Battlefield 1942 required modifying a config file to get it to run on a monitor using ANYTHING other than a 60 Hz refresh rate. With every patch, you had to go modify it again.


NEVER had this problem and I've played BF 1942 from release, but then my monitor is higher quality than 60 hz so to your credit I can't validate or deny your claim here.

quote:
- Official mods for Battlefield 1942 required the same thing. Why couldn't EA just change the 0 to a 1 by default? It's not like it hurt anything to "allow all refresh rates."


Same as above...no issues for me. But again you make a good point why they couldn't change the 0 to a 1 at default.

quote:
- Battlefield 2 has the same problem.


No issues for me AFTER I patched it.

The next two NHL 2003 and Tiger Woods....I have sports games on PCs...like consoles for that better and I loathe golf with a passion that if channeled could nuke small cities so I'd never touch that game anyway.

quote:
- Apparently Microsoft is a monopoly because they integrate web browsing software into their OS... but EA is not even though they utilize their massive bankroll to eliminate the competition by buying exclusive rights to NFL team and player names.


Well to be honest with you I never fully understand how MS is a monopoly in the purist sense of the word if their are other options. As far as EA and using bankroll to by exclusivity rights with NFL...it may be deplorable to you, but its actual brilliant business sense. If I was Chairman of EA, knowing how hot sports titles sell today, you are damn right I'd nab exclusive rights from the NFL.





By rushfan2006 on 9/1/2006 2:51:42 PM , Rating: 2
*have should of read "HATE". I hate sports games on PCs...


I think ads in games is a good idea
By Lonyo on 8/31/2006 6:18:57 PM , Rating: 2
As long as they are done sensibly to enhance the game experience.
A game like GTA with billboards all over the place would be absolutely fine with realistic adverts.

As long as game developers are sensible in terms of adding ads, I have no issue at all with them, but ads in a game such as Doom would not work at all.

I also don't have an issue with companies getting extra revenue, as long as they pass this onto the consumer in some way, either by reduced prices, or by added value (such as extended support, extra features etc).

All in all this is a good move for gaming, as long as it's non-intrusive.




RE: I think ads in games is a good idea
By jimmy43 on 8/31/2006 7:35:18 PM , Rating: 3
Hmm looks like you're either an EA employee or have been living under a rock for years. This is EA we're talking about. They're going to ram these Ads down our throat, forget gameplay or relevance, and most of all you can be 100% sure that you will see none of the revenue from these ads passed down to you.


By Lonyo on 9/1/2006 8:46:55 AM , Rating: 2
Mostly I don't buy EA products, but they do have markets where they would fit.
Simcity, most sports games etc already have opportunity for ads, or they already contain fake ads.
If EA replace fake ads with real ads, then it improves realism, and doesn't negatively affect the game.
But obviously as I said, the developers need to be sensible with what they do.


By Jeff7181 on 9/1/2006 1:40:31 PM , Rating: 2
LOL... think you hate loading screens now? Wait till you get that damn cell phone commercial with all the idiots screaming at their bill between loading maps in Battlefield 3. :)


By michal1980 on 9/1/2006 7:58:34 AM , Rating: 2
NOOO. No real ads in GTA.

What now on the radio you will hear, 'Obey your thirst... drink sprit?'

Part of the fun of GTA is the fake ads and bill boards.



Hand in Hand
By RMTimeKill on 8/31/2006 4:17:44 PM , Rating: 2
EA walking with Massive... like the Devil walking through hell, a perfect match of software evilness... Anyone seen the EA/Nazi flag lately?




RE: Hand in Hand
By Knish on 8/31/2006 4:26:49 PM , Rating: 3
The only surprising thing about this deal is that they didn't sacrafice a kitten to sign the contract in blood.


RE: Hand in Hand
By RMTimeKill on 8/31/2006 4:31:34 PM , Rating: 2
LOL reminds me of that game, Gone Postal? where you could use the kitten as a silencer O_o


RE: Hand in Hand
By L33tMasta on 8/31/2006 4:41:31 PM , Rating: 2
You mean "Postal". And yea..that was an awesome game.


So EA Games Should be Free Now.
By BladeVenom on 8/31/2006 4:51:31 PM , Rating: 3
Now that they have advertisers paying for the games, all their games should be free now, correct?




RE: So EA Games Should be Free Now.
By MrDiSante on 8/31/2006 5:23:09 PM , Rating: 2
Oh absolutely. And hell's going to freeze over. On an unrelated note, didn't MS buy out Massive recently?


By shamgar03 on 8/31/2006 5:27:33 PM , Rating: 2
Hah this reminds me of the PA when they talk about blizards distrobution of updates: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/06/21
EA exec, "more money for US that is"


By Schadenfroh on 9/1/2006 12:37:24 PM , Rating: 1
It should not be free, many of these games cost millions to develop. In game adware will keep the price of video games from going above $60 as the development costs increase.


Meh
By Homerboy on 8/31/2006 5:43:26 PM , Rating: 2
I don't mind if they keep it where it belongs (they wont) like in sports games; billboards by road-ways, on outfield walls, etc. But I hate the product placements in games where they just shouldnt be. Advertising in games = OK. Product placements != OK.




RE: Meh
By michal1980 on 8/31/06, Rating: -1
RE: Meh
By Suomynona on 8/31/2006 6:28:20 PM , Rating: 2
You've got it the wrong way round. Product placement is when products or branding appear where they should be e.g. on a vending machine, shirt etc. Like you, I don't mind this as, if anything, it helps with immersion into the game world (although I do like the fake brands in the GTA series).

I agree with what you, and it seems everyone else is saying. There is no way in hell I'd purchase a game that featured blatant, out of context advertising. Well, maybe if I got something in return i.e. a far, far cheaper price or the game for free.

EA would try to justify this by saying that spiralling development costs mean it's either advertising or higher prices. The thing is, the prices are going up anyway, despite a lot of EA's recent games being shoddy, cheap ports. EA relies way too much on pushing flashy looking, expensive seeming but in reality cheap and shallow games.

How about relying on the gameplay to sell games? Hiring Michael Madsen (who you say?)to do a voiceover (OK, he's probably not that expensive ;)) for a shitty game will not help it sell one single extra copy. Publishers think this is money well spent? Cut costs. You do not need to spend huge sums of money to make a succesfull game.

Sorry, I just had to get that off my chest. It's probably all bollocks. xD


EA sells.. games?
By Orpheus333 on 8/31/2006 7:34:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Chip Lange, EA vice president of online commerce, reinforced EA's standpoint that the ads should "not disrupt the player's experience."


If only their quality control team had a similar standpoint.

Count me in on the EA boycott, atleast until they stop selling massive hardware hogging glitches as games.




Consoles with Commercials?
By MonkeyPaw on 8/31/2006 7:37:12 PM , Rating: 2
I don't mind a realistic plug on a passing billboard, but I can see the day coming where a game character will say "meet me at the Pepsi Machine." If you go to the Coke machine, you'll get killed.

It's just like in TV/movies when a shameless plug is thrown in ("Fuller, go easy on the Pepsi!")--you'll see right through it. Sponsorship and shameless promotions are already out-of-hand in sports, so I'd imagine that games will start falling away as well. Do you think sponsors want to pay for subtle advertising? Heck no. It won't be long until it's all shoved in your face. If it works for EA, I'd imagine other gaming companies will follow suit.

Like others have said, I would tolerate it if game prices with ads were cheaper, but I seriously doubt that will happen.




It could be worse...
By rupaniii on 8/31/2006 7:58:46 PM , Rating: 2
I'm guessing Microsoft will use XBOX Live as a medium to make money.
They could probably integrate Advertizing into the system and have developers base their games on advertiser provided content.
So, Energizer is a sponsor and you are playing Sonic the Hedgehog, and suddenly the Energizer bunny is an enemy or playable character. Can't say what'll happen to Tomb Raider, i'm hoping for a Bikini Wax advertising in that game. As long as Enzyte isn't advertised druing Grand Theft Auto or James Bond, i'm good.




How they collect the data
By friedrice on 9/1/2006 8:49:04 AM , Rating: 2
If you take a look at EA's new privaticy agreement, you'll notice that you are basically giving EA to collect any type of information from you. This is how EA will provide ads that are relevent to you.




"There is a single light of science, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it everywhere." -- Isaac Asimov

DailyTech Poll
Do you use copy/paste on your smartphone? 




12 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki