backtop

Print 44 comment(s) - last by wallijonn.. on Mar 13 at 4:27 PM
Game developers and ad agencies are working together to implement more in-game ads

Due to the increasing cost of game development along with a high potential to raise revenue, more game publishers are utilizing different forms of in-game advertising.  During the 2007 Game Developers Conference in San Francisco, in-game ads were brought up during several sessions -- one session focused solely on the dynamics of in-game ads.

In-game advertising, specifically with the plasticity of dynamic in-game ads, will be something that gamers will have to get used to in future games, said a game developer with a large U.S.-based game publisher said during GDC.

PlayStation Home, announced during Phil Harrison's keynote at GDC, will also make use of dynamic in-game ads.  Users can own an apartment with TVs that can show movie trailers for future movies, the content will be updated without the user needing to do anything.

Massive Inc. will have more than 100 titles with in-game ads before 2008, according to the company.  Games such as Crackdown, MLB 2K7 and Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 are just a handful of games that will have ads from companies and organizations such as NBC, Dell, Intel, and Verizon in them.

Reactions to the growing trend of in-game ads being implemented was an interesting one.  The general consensus of those we spoke to mentioned they didn't mind as long as the ads didn't interfere with gameplay.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
WTF?
By AMDfreak on 3/9/2007 4:05:41 PM , Rating: 5
If the ads are non-intrusive and fit the context of the game (a Coke machine or Dell computer in FEAR for example), then I'm kinda ok with it. However, if I'm expected to pay $50+ for a new game that has obtrusive ads then that's a game I wouldn't even pirate much less pay for. It's for that reason that I don't play Battlefield 2142.




RE: WTF?
By Souka on 3/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: WTF?
By goku on 3/9/2007 8:21:53 PM , Rating: 3
you're an idiot. BF2142 would not have cost $75 because it required no work compared to BF2... BF2142 is the worst example of the companies being greedy.


RE: WTF?
By Samus on 3/10/2007 2:53:41 AM , Rating: 1
The only ad's I ever see in BF2142 are Intel ad's.

And they're appropriately placed on BILLBOARDS on the side of the roads.


RE: WTF?
By GI2K on 3/11/2007 6:55:01 AM , Rating: 2
I haven't seen any yet, is it server dependent?


RE: WTF?
By GI2K on 3/11/2007 6:56:56 AM , Rating: 3
BF2142 has nothing to do with BF2... heck there’s more differences between BF2142 and BF2 than between BF2 and BF 1942...


RE: WTF?
By KingofCamelot on 3/11/2007 3:11:27 PM , Rating: 2
You have no idea what you are talking about. BF2142 runs on a slightly modified and bug-fixed BF2 engine. Other than that it is just a giant futuristic mod, with most of the effort being put into texturesm, models, and levels.

BF2 on the other hand was a major rewrite of much of the BF1942 engine, as well as new content creation, plus creation of the stats backend/system. You can't compare the two.


RE: WTF?
By Zeatrix on 3/11/2007 5:47:12 PM , Rating: 2
Since when was graphics all you needed. Sure the game used a pre-excisting engine but it was modified a lot. And take a look at the market these days. How many games comes with a completely brand new engine? How many Doom 3 / Unreal / Source games do we see?

Making a game on an allready existing engine is not done out of greed, it's done for time and cost savings. Why make a complete engine and only use it once? Both BF2 and BF2142 payed for the development of the engine, and just so you know, BF2142 started development long before BF2 was done, it wasn't just a 1 year quick dev...


RE: WTF?
By KingofCamelot on 3/11/2007 7:20:39 PM , Rating: 2
I never said they should have made a new engine or anything of the sort, I was just pointing out that the poster was incorrect in saying the two games had "nothing to do" with each other. Quite to the contrary, I think its a great idea to continue updating engines that work and using them. But, charging $50 for a game that could have almost been made as a free mod, and then adding in in-game advertisments, is greed, plain and simple.

DICE/EA, however, are greedy bastards who couldn't give a shit once you've bought the game. Lets see, for BF2142 they have so many different ways of sucking out more money: booster packs, in-game advertising, ranked server rentals.


RE: WTF?
By Chocolate Pi on 3/11/2007 11:36:43 PM , Rating: 3
Calling it a mod is nothing short of ignorant. 2142 deserves to be called its own game.

I had a love-hate thing going with Battlefield 2: It was full of bugs, and had horrible balance issues. Transport copters were invincible flying cows, and the jets were unstoppable bombing machines that could easy wipe out entire squads in a single run. Some kits were more times than not useless, others like the medic were way overpowered... The vehicles made strides towards teamwork, but had similar balance issues (The APC could easy best a tank head-to-head.) Battlefield set new standards for teamwork in massive FPS games, but that's about it.

2142, meanwhile, should go down as one of the greatest multiplayer FPSs of all time. The balance is nearly perfect, the only people complaining were the pilots who can't go 50-2 anymore. All the kits are useful, and customizable to boot. Gameplay is a lot more tactical and rewards teamwork more. Also, Titans as a general concept are very well implemented.

If 2142 is a "$50 mod", then by all means, point me in the direction of some more of these $50 mods so that I may purchase them immediately.


RE: WTF?
By KingofCamelot on 3/12/2007 1:20:44 AM , Rating: 2
If you're into teamwork, then by all means you should check out the Project Reality mod for BF2. Requires much more teamwork than BF2 ever could.

^ Thats a plug by the way, although I do really suggest that you check out the mod, you'd probably like it.

Which brings me to my next point. Being a developer on the Project Reality mod, I like to consider myself a tad bit less "ignorant" than most when it comes to the BF2 engine, modding it, and the BF2142 engine. As I said before, and as many in the BF2 modding community will tell you, BF2142 is nothing more than a big mod for BF2, just as BFV was a big mod for BF1942. That doesn't mean that it can't be good on its own.

Its basically just a mod with some tweaks to the core game engine. Nothing you couldn't do if you had source code, such as in HL2. Basically DICE took many of the suggestions from modding on BF2 and put them into BF2142, and then never bothered to back-port them into BF2. I *think* the last BF2 patch was even compiled on an early verson of the BF2142 code base.


RE: WTF?
By dajeepster on 3/9/2007 5:35:16 PM , Rating: 2
I haven't even noticed ads in Battlefield 2142. maybe i'm just too concerned with being shot....


RE: WTF?
By rippleyaliens on 3/10/2007 2:05:22 PM , Rating: 2
DITTO,
While playing the game, i completely forget that there is any advertisements. Game is fast paced enough, that you would REALLY have to look for any type of advertisement. UNless it is some sub-liminal ones, lol.. (maybe that explains my crave for white castles, lol)


RE: WTF?
By iNGEN on 3/9/2007 5:43:20 PM , Rating: 2
I like the ads in BF2142!


RE: WTF?
By rbfowler9 on 3/10/2007 12:38:09 PM , Rating: 2
I don't see why the whole fuzz about it. You pay £100 for a 90-minute football match ticket and there's ads everywhere, by the pitch, stands, scoreboards and the player's jerseys.
Ad revenue could have helped keeping alive subscription services such as Motor City Online, allegedly shut down by EA for being a low profit service, despite having more than 25k subscribers at one time.


RE: WTF?
By PWNettle on 3/12/2007 2:05:13 PM , Rating: 2
You might pay $100-200 to go see a single match in some sport (with ads everywhere), but I don't, so the analogy doesn't fit. Not to mention that you pay $200 and put up with ads because the players are getting paid multiple millions of dollars each per year AND the owners are still getting rich.

A lot of gaming involves immersion or escaping from every day junk - like advertising in your face everywhere you turn.

I'd be less inclined to buy games that feature in-game/in-content advertising.

If games are costing so much more to produce, then charge more for them. I'd rather pay $5-10 more per game than have games ruined by in-game/in-content ads.

Or, I dunno - game devs could focus less on graphical overkill and bloat and more on creating solid gameplay and releasing games that aren't bug invested piles of dung (PC gaming world, at least).


kind of annoying.
By danskmacabre on 3/9/2007 3:42:26 PM , Rating: 3
I may get used to it, or I might just get so annoyed by it I might not but that developer's games anymore.
It depends how intrusive it is.

To a degree it might add atmosphere to certain games.




RE: kind of annoying.
By HaZaRd2K6 on 3/9/2007 4:00:54 PM , Rating: 4
I think it depends solely on the game itself. I don't at all mind seeing ads in MLB 2K7 or games like that, but if I start seeing ads for McDonald's plastered around the F.E.A.R. gameworld, then I'll be slightly more than annoyed. Likewise, an ad for Heckler & Koch would be welcome. It depends totally on whether or not an ad is a) intrusive (as danskmacabre said); and b) appropriate.


RE: kind of annoying.
By scrapsma54 on 3/9/2007 5:02:29 PM , Rating: 2
To add to that, games were it is gaudy and ruins gameplay like BF:2142, are unacceptable. Why do they need changing adds for a game that's already on shelves?
Do they need sponsors for that game or another game we may not even like. I think Game devs are taking this too far and not realizing how this affects customers. Yes, some games its ok, But if I just bought half life 2 episode 2 and I find out that
there are Gaudy McDonald Logo's on the trash bins, even in someones house, then that is dumb. however,games like lego star wars are basically just ads them selves and do not interfere with the games aesthetic. One more example is subtlety. If ads seem like they are within the era or theme of the game, Like counter strike, there is an ad for Wendy's and its popped on the side of a deserted building.


RE: kind of annoying.
By dajeepster on 3/9/2007 5:33:18 PM , Rating: 2
or ads by Playboy and Victoria'sSecrets would be nice :D


RE: kind of annoying.
By kitchme on 3/10/2007 6:36:02 PM , Rating: 2
I'd say. Ceaser IV and Intel or Cingular ads don't go well together.


RE: kind of annoying.
By kitchme on 3/10/2007 6:39:11 PM , Rating: 2
Oops, I meant Caesar IV


If it ain't broke, don't fix it
By fk49 on 3/9/2007 5:43:59 PM , Rating: 2
The recent update to Counter-strike 1.6 stuck in-game ads for Valve products all over the map and inserted them into the scoreboard and spectator screens.

I can understand increasing this tactic in newer games but do they really need to screw up the old ones with these eyesores? Imagine playing Starcraft with ads for Old Spice in spawn...




By brenatevi on 3/9/2007 7:42:01 PM , Rating: 2
Conversation before a Zergling eats a Marine:

Z: What scent is that?

M: Old Spice.

Z: smells good. Hope you marinated in it for a while.

Z eats M.


RE: If it ain't broke, don't fix it
By rudy on 3/10/2007 3:19:51 AM , Rating: 2
I don't follow your logic, the reason HL1 based games are getting ads is because they are 8 years old and so many people have not paid anything since the original $30 or less CD they bought. They are still running servers to distribute the content and list servers for a game they are down to getting like $4 a year for. So they figure this is how they will start to generate money on it. Rather then piss people off with the new game they just paid $50 for and have only been playing a couple years. I would imagine most companies don't feel any shame in this after 5 years of a product which should be EOL.


RE: If it ain't broke, don't fix it
By dvinnen on 3/11/2007 4:05:32 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. I still play 1.6 and can't get upset over it. I payed 20 bucks for my CD key like 4 or 5 years ago. That same CD key allows me to keep d/ling the game off steam content servers even without the cd. I figure I've eaten a good chunk of that 20 bucks over the years in just reformatting.


Why does it have to be *in-game*
By devolutionist on 3/9/2007 8:45:27 PM , Rating: 2
Why does the ad have to appear during gameplay? The perfect spot for it in BF2142 or any other map/level-based game would be to show it while the next map is loading. THAT is a logical place for ads.




By zeroslugfm on 3/9/2007 11:32:32 PM , Rating: 2
and that's a good point. But what really interests me is when those said companies complain that their ads are appearing in less populated areas of a game and/or dislike their logo appearing on a burned out building. Not to mention that soon enough we may be linking horrific images of war with that cute new animated movie coming this spring~ ;)

Also how exactly would companies be able to measure the amount of exposure that their ads are getting? Will there be a frag meter? See who can die the most under the golden arches? It's an interesting idea~


By Thorburn on 3/11/2007 6:09:08 PM , Rating: 2
A VERY good point in my opinion.

Perfect place for someone like WD or Crucial to stick in an advert along the lines of "Taking too long, why not buy a Raptor/more memory"


RE: Why does it have to be *in-game*
By akyp on 3/12/2007 10:02:49 PM , Rating: 2
Good idea. Or show it when the player has just died and waiting for respawn.


Some games it works, other is doesnt.
By cmurphy2266 on 3/9/2007 6:24:58 PM , Rating: 3
Games like Battlefield 2142, it actually works, i like it in that game, because it fits in the city levels with billboards. I like it in BF2142. But games like CS1.6 (which they just added) it is just intrusive. There is an add when you open up the scores, and in a competitive game like that, it just gets in the way.




By someguy123 on 3/10/2007 1:21:45 AM , Rating: 3
not only that, but in the counter-terrorist spawn on de_dust2 there is a GIGANTIC futuristic half life 2 ad on the freaken wall.

also, why is it in 1.6? the game is eight years old and cost next to nothing (compared to current gen) to make. valve is also making a ridiculous amount off of steam.....its just another sign of greed on valve's part.


By the Chase on 3/9/2007 7:44:10 PM , Rating: 2
Well gamers don't have to get used to them, they just don't buy that particular game. The gaming industry is HOPING that gamers will swallow this crap so they can increase their profits.

Can't say that I blame them at all- good idea if it works- but I'm researching before I buy and saying no to any game that has them.

Anyone want to buy a brand new 8800GTX?




By wallijonn on 3/13/2007 4:27:56 PM , Rating: 2
I agree wholeheartedly.

As a parent I do not want to see adds for junk foods and soda pop, thank you very much, nor would I want Little Johnny looking at boobies. If my profile starts showing ads for tampons, dental creams, hip replacements, AARP ads, etc., then I don't want to be reminded either.

Come on, let's be realistic - sooner or later some ad is going to pop up saying that your credit card payment was due two days ago, or that your mortgage interest rate is going up, so re-finance with XYZ Refinance company. In fact, any advert which you get over the phone or through email spam will more than likely find a way onto your computer.


This is nothing more than greed.
By MrRomo on 3/10/2007 7:24:41 PM , Rating: 2
The argument that games need ads to progress and be profitable is silly. Think about it.
What do the big hits cost to develop? say 80mil-100mil? Maybe that’s a tad high. Now look at the sales numbers and multiply it by the games price at half (say around $20). Big profit.
Now consider that WOW is going to be the bench for a lot of future releases. Why? That’s $20 for the game, $14 for the monthly subscription, $30 for the expansion. Multiply that by 8.5mil (number of active wow accounts). Then add 4.5mil (number of active accounts that have been online for over a year), times $14 (monthly fee), times 12(months in a year). Grand Total: $1.3 billion. Sure it cost something to run the servers, do updates, etc... but that is nothing compared to that amount of revenue. Seriously, thinking that games need ads is funny.
With that said, hey if i owned a software company, and i could take an additional mil from Mickey D's to throw up billboard in my game? No Brainer. Would I need to do it? No.
Is it going to happen to all games? Magic 8ball? All signs point to yes.




RE: This is nothing more than greed.
By KernD on 3/10/2007 10:57:53 PM , Rating: 2
Your taking the only game in the world that has any chance of ever making a billion dollar of revenue in a year... and every year for that matter, but all the other games have chances of failing to make it up to cost, when you make a game based on a big movie for example, it cost something to have the rights to make it, sure you save on marketing, but if the movie fails, likely the game will too. But guess what, when it fail, all the disc and boxes are still manufactured, that's a big loss for the editor. Do you know how Atari died? they made to many copies of a crappy E.T. game if I remember correctly, that cost them a fortune to make, and most ended up in a landfill, but today making CDs cost less, but making the whole package still cost something. Big companies try to estimate how many copies it's likely to sell to avoid having to do any re-print of the games.

The cost of development is huge, the salary of all those employees for 2 years is allot of money, and the hardware isn't given away for free too, they pay for it the same way we do, and they buy gamer PCs not 800$ ones.

More money should help get better quality games, and could also help smaller company to make end meet.

But that being said, I also want them to do it in the right way, the first thing is to use the loading screen I think, and those screens with McDonnalds arches look horrible...


By noobius on 3/10/2007 12:49:55 AM , Rating: 3
Hi all,

This is an interesting topic and i am actually doing a small research on gamers' reaction towards this! I would greatly appreciate it if you would give me 5mins of your time to fill out my research survey! For those who wish to get a copy of the research results when i am done with it, please leave an email behind, and i will email you the results when i have finished the project (in abt 2 months).

Due to me only having a limited account with Zoomerang.com, the research survey is broken up into 2 parts.

Survey Part 1 URL
http://www.zoomerang.com/survey.zgi?p=WEB2268RVJZJ...

Survey Part 2 URL
http://www.zoomerang.com/survey.zgi?p=WEB2268RWBZJ...

Please express your true views and thanks to everyone who's reading this, regardless of whether you did the survey :)

Cheers all,
Joseph
University Student
National University of Singapore




Agreed
By medavid16 on 3/9/2007 4:36:58 PM , Rating: 2
I think it all depends on how the advertisement is used.

If this can one day drive down prices of games? hell yeah, i'll support it. But if it's going to slow me down, if I'm FORCED to stare at an ad for 10 seconds and unable to do anything else (like if it's a forced watch before a level, but if it's during loading where I would be waiting anyways it's ok).

all depends how it's implemented.




Does the advertising even work?
By osalcido on 3/9/2007 5:35:36 PM , Rating: 2
Has anyone who has seen an in-game ad ever really been persuaded to buy it?

Admittedly, the only in-game ad I have seen thus far is the Intel ad in Battlefield 2142.. my computer already runs BF2142 just fine why the hell would I need to purchase anything from Intel? Be smart with your advertising dollars, Corporations!

On the other hand, seeing that big M for Mcdonalds in the article image really did make me crave a Big Mac now...honestly. I guess I'm just hungry..




well..
By LumbergTech on 3/9/2007 7:48:44 PM , Rating: 2
it depends on the game to me..if its a baseball game or something then i dont really care....but to me this seems like a really really bad move..its going to ruin the possibility of games as art......what if the mona lisa had a big coca cola logo on it? this just seems like a really bad move in terms of moving gaming forward as a legitimate liberal art type thing as opposed to a corporate monster that feeds the idiotic masses




Cost of Production
By Sypakine on 3/10/2007 2:47:29 AM , Rating: 2
For those expecting (or wishing) game prices to be reduced as a result, it is important to note that creating new revenue streams such as in-game advertising is partially a reaction to increased budgetary costs. Making video games, specifically the blockbusters mentioned (such as Half-Life 2, Battlefield 2142, Halo, F.E.A.R. and many more) has become far more expensive.

Taking this into consideration, I do not fault developers employing these measures. As has been noted, however, it is both preferable and in the best interests of the developers to do so tastefully, integrating the ads such that they do not detract from the game play.




By theprodigalrebel on 3/10/2007 5:11:14 AM , Rating: 2
Remember all the radio commercials and funny billboards in the GTA games? Ex. The Mibatsu Thunder - because after you get struck by lightning...there is thunder. Giggle cream, salivex, ammunation etc. all had really funny commercials.

Maybe they can work the ads to better gel with the mood/nature of the game?




Idea for In-game ads
By FITCamaro on 3/11/2007 11:49:18 AM , Rating: 2
I bet you all wouldn't complain if the porn industry were to start putting ads for their "products" in games....

Doesn't have to be people humping on a billboard, just a pic of a scantily clad seductress and a web site address.

Besides, what bigger market for porn is there than gamers?




Why do they complain...
By Aikouka on 3/12/2007 7:31:49 AM , Rating: 2
... about the price to develop games when it seems games coming out these days are horridly and shoddily programmed! I've been a PC gamer for awhile and it seems so much more than ever the new concept is release-n-patch rather than release a quality product and patch any errors that weren't found in quality assurance.

So in other words, they complain about the development costs, yet the consumers are footing the bill for shoddy products and now they want more money from in-game ads? I'm a bit annoyed at paying $50 for buggy games, but now $50 for a game that makes them extra money and is still buggy? :/




"I mean, if you wanna break down someone's door, why don't you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone!" -- Jon Stewart on Apple and the iPhone











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki