More Advertising in Your Next Xbox Game

ejwong writes "TheGameFeed is reporting on Microsoft's plans to offset Xbox360 game costs with more in game advertising under its subsidiary, Massive. In-game ads are gaining popularity and the wave isn't going to stop. Publishers see this as a huge potential for increased game revenues to help offset the rising development costs for the Xbox 360, PS3 and Wii. The question is how far will they go, and how much are gamers willing to take?." From the article: "If you plan on picking up an Xbox 360 title this month, then you're probably picking up one with Massive's in-game ads. Titles such as Crackdown, Def Jam: Icon, MLB 2K7, and Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 are all part of the Massive network showing off ads from Dell, Intel, Discovery Channel, Intel, NBC, Verizon and even the Navy among others. "

Just like cable TV

[maynard (3337)]

We pay an obscene amount of money for the content, and then pay again in eyeballs for advertising. Anybody feeling screwed yet?

Re:

[debozero (209948)]

"...Anybody feeling screwed yet?"

Yes and I wish games would start supplying free dinner tickets at least this way I can get dinner before I get screwed.....

My favorite is theaters

[spun (1352)]

I still like to see certain movies in the theaters, but in order to get a good seat, you need to get there early and submit to a constant barrage of advertising that you just paid $9+ for the privilege of watching.

Re:

[susano_otter (123650)]

You paid $9 for the privilege of watching the movie.

You paid time and advertising viewership for the privilege of getting a good seat. If the good seats aren't worth that much to you, show up later and let the chumps suffer through the commercials from the best seats in the house. If it is worth that much to you, then admit to yourself that you're making a profitable business transaction, congratulate yourself on your good business sense, and complaining that you're being robbed. Why be sad when you could

Re:

[spun (1352)]

Can't I complain about it in the hopes of creating an anti-advertising backlash that drives theater owners into removing the commercials? Think about it, I am providing a valuable service by complaining. In our free market system, businesses don't know what they're doing wrong or right unless someone tells them. Usually, they have to pay someone to tell them. I am giving it away for free. I and many people I know go to movies less frequently because of the annoyance factor. If they got rid of the commercial

Re:My favorite is theaters

[MeanderingMind (884641)]

That always bothered me as well. Aren't they targetting the wrong demographic? You're telling the people who have just paid $9 to see the film that they should see films in theatres. Which is... where they already are and what they're trying to do. The people who pirate the film aren't likely to be there, they saw it 3 days before it arrived in theatres.

Re:My favorite is theaters

[HTH NE1 (675604)]

What about all those ads about how piracy is wrong and "you wouldn't steal a car"?

You could just jump out of your seat, yell, "The hell I wouldn't!" and run out the exit as if you're going out to the parking lot to steal everyone else's cars.

Bonus: go with a friend who will stay behind and laugh loudly for awhile, then exclaim, "Wait, my car is out there!" and run out after you.

For the win, park a truck just outside the exit with big speakers and start playing the sound effects of cars starting up and rapidly driving off, maybe with some window breaking and various car alarm sounds that fade out into the distance, and see how many more people rush out.

For the David Copperfields, you have about 90 minutes to rig up an illusion of an empty parking lot before everyone leaves the theater.

Re:Just like cable TV

[sfnate (1049552)]

This is the thin wedge of advertising--let it in and it will grow to dominate the virtual landscape in the same why it dominates the real. No question. Those who argue that the market will correct any excesses are a bit naive. One of the reasons I gave up television altogether was that the advertising was completely out of control. The advertising won't stop or be curtailed by these gaming companies once they realize it's going to pump a lot of money into their coffers--they'll come to depend on the revenue stream like a crack addict and will keep expanding the ad space by degrees, slowly so you won't notice what you're losing and unconciously become accustomed to it. And just like on TV the shows are there to keep your eyeballs focused until the next ad appears, games will become yet another way to keep you sitting still and passively taking in adverts. At least with Tivo you can fast forward--I don't think a similar workaround will be available to gamers. Charge me a price that covers your costs and keep the ads out.

Re:

[Admiral Ag (829695)]

Some of it is just plain undignified.

For example, in Fight Night 3 one of the trainers that you sometimes need to use is the Burger King Mascot. I kid you not, you have that idiotic looking king instead of someone who looks like Eddie Futch or Angelo Dundee. It looks really lame when Marvelous Marvin Hagler is escorted to the ring by a foam headed fast food character. What's next? Sugar Ray Robinson being given advice between rounds by a giant green M&M?

My own feeling is that we should send the Marvelou

Console gaming

[linvir (970218)]

Seems that every day, another piece of news shows up telling me that I got out of console gaming at exactly the right time.

This generation just gets more underwhelming by the minute.

Re:

[User 956 (568564)]

This generation just gets more underwhelming by the minute.

What, you mean you don't like the new hit show, "Ow, My Balls!"? (Brought to you by Carl's Jr.)

Re:Console gaming

[linvir (970218)]

I have a whole great big rant about how the upcoming generation sucks far more than most

Let me guess:

• Needless obsession with "realistic" graphics
• Market saturated by cookie-cutter sequels, remakes and franchises
• Too little focus on fun
• Fear of innovation
• Games now cost a fortune to make
• A bunch of other stuff

I bet I have the same rant as you.

but it just makes me sound like an old man

It certainly does. I showed my cousin our old Amstrad CPC464 the other day. He was not impressed by the tape deck, the five minute loading times, or the simplistic gameplay. I think there's a happy medium though, somewhere around the SNES era.

I have a guess...

[RightSaidFred99 (874576)]

Gamers will be willing to take it until the point where they won't, then the producers will stop at exactly that point. Yeah, I know, it's not rocket surgery.

Games are getting more and more expensive to produce. This seems like a reasonable extra revenue stream, unless taken to extremes. The market will adjust itself so it's not taken to extremes.

Re:

[gstoddart (321705)]

Gamers will be willing to take it until the point where they won't, then the producers will stop at exactly that point

No, the industry will stop for a while. Then, once you get a little more accustomed to the reaming you're getting, they'll expand the program again. Companies don't stop trying to get more money for the same or less.

Yeah, I know, it's not rocket surgery.

*laugh* That's one of the best mixed metaphors ever!!

The market will adjust itself so it's not taken to extremes.

The market also adjusts

Re:I have a guess...

[edwardpickman (965122)]

The profit margins are very high on successful games. This isn't about profit as you mentioned it's about "extra" profit. This comes out of brainstorming sessions where execs are trying to figure out how to squeeze a bit more profit out of a game. It's the same logic as putting 49 olives in a jar instead of 50. It's nickell and diming to make money all the while screwing the customer. It's also like putting four or five trailers in front of DVDs. Generally they are from the same company so they are just taking advantage of free advertising. I paid for the DVD so why should I be subjected to their ads everytime I watch the DVD? The joke is with DVDs they aren't even selling the space they are annoying the hell out of me just to take advantage of a captive audience.

I am going to research if a game has ads

[0racle (667029)]

If it does, I will not buy it.

Re:I am going to research if a game has ads

[naoursla (99850)]

... unless the game is really cool. ... or fun.

I am going to research if a game has ads and if it does I will not buy it unless it is really cool or fun.

Or all of my friends are playing it.

Right. But that's it. It the game is really cool, fun or if all of my friends are playing it then I'll put up with the ads, but otherwise I am NOT buying ANY game with ads.

Unless it has a good demo.

So that's cool, fun, lots of friends, and a good demo. But otherwise NO ADS!

Although sometimes I buy a game because it has a pretty box.

Or maybe it includes a strategy guide or a book of concept art. I'm really into concept art.

But I'm drawing the line there. Cool, fun, friends, demo, box, books. If you do not have one of those and you put ads in your game then I WILL NOT BUY IT.

Unless it is really inexpensive.

Re:

[jspectre (102549)]

yeah. until you're in the middle of your frag fest and suddenly the game pauses.. and an advert starts to play..

"busy killing your friends? take a short break to go down a refreshing glass of joe-kola.. this game of death-killer-2000 brought to you by joe-kola.. kill more people hyped up on joe-kola, it's what the killer craves.. it's got electrolytes! we now return you to your slaughter"

and the game unpauses..

"i remember when games didn't have commercials.. no. really, they didn't!"

Re:

[0racle (667029)]

Exactly how am I a hypocrite, because you believe I must have games with ads in them?

Yes I believe ad's break a game, I believe they ruin a show or movie as well. If I wanted to see ads I would watch TV. I wouldn't read a book that started off "Brought to you by Subway" either.

You asked why I wouldn't buy a game that had ad's in it. I don't want to see them, that's why.

Re:

[linvir (970218)]

How is it illogical? He doesn't want ads in his games, so he's going to vote with his wallet. Makes sense to me, though I doubt I'd go as far. Whether or not adverts interfere with enjoyment is subjective. You can't just tell him that adverts in videogames don't bother him. It doesn't work like that.

And why do you think he's a hypocrite? There is no evidence of this. None. What the hell?

Re:

[ShieldW0lf (601553)]

I haven't been to the movies in quite a long time. When I do go to the movies, I go see IMAX features.

I allow my daughter to watch commercial free childrens television, for which I pay. She is getting a bit old for the programming, so I'll probably disconnect the cable soon. She has her own computer, and I encourage her to make movies and music of her own with her webcam and microphone. She's too active to sit around mindlessly watching a screen.

I haven't bought a music cd in over 5 years. Instead, I h

Re:

[MaineCoon (12585)]

2142 did not snoop web browsing habits; a few blogs misread the disclaimer and claimed it did, but the disclaimer was somewhat different than the reactionaries made it out to be. DICE clarified things (it only reported what ads you saw in the game), and others investigated it, and nobody produced any evidence that the game did anything at all outside of the game itself.

If you want to argue a point, don't use deliberate misinformation that has been publicly proven to be false.

I dont have a problem

[adamstew (909658)]

I don't have any problem with in game ads. If it helps them generate revenue for future development, that can only help create incentive for future games.

Plus, with some games, it makes them more realistic...to have an actual Pepsi, Nike, Pizza Hut, etc. ad in the game rather than just "liberty city pizza".

I would only have a problem with it if the ads took over the game, or they were intrusive on the game play.

For example: If it's just a subway sign, or billboard in a FPS, or those signs hung up around the stadiums in sports games...those are fine...

But if the game actually cuts to a commercial between loading screens...then that's not cool at all.

Re:

[SeeManRun (1040704)]

I actually prefer having non existant advertisements. It allows the creators to be more creative with how they have an advertisement for a fake company. Makes it fun to look at the adds because they are creative. I can't remember exactly which games, but I know I have seen some hilarious ones. Duke Nukem comes to mind, but it was so long ago I can't remember. One way to protest this would be to either write software that shuts off the network connection while playing a game (of course single player onl

Re:

[MeanderingMind (884641)]

If it helps them generate revenue for future development, that can only help create incentive for future games.

There are lots of companies making games across the entire spectrum who aren't considering in game ads. That's why I conclude there's something fundamentally wrong with companies with a profound interest in the practice. I have two possibilities in mind for why they'd want this.

1) It's a new source of revenue, and they're so inefficient with their budget that any money they can get will help save t

so..

[mastershake_phd (1050150)]

Microsoft's plans to offset Xbox360 game costs with more in game advertisingBR>

So the games are going to be cheaper right?

Re:

[MeanderingMind (884641)]

If this is the case, I really think the companies should consider a sustainable model of production. The rate at which the production of these art assets gets out of hands appears to be at least geometric in expansion. It looks to me like companies have spent too much time trying to sell consumers on impressive graphics, but have outpaced their ability to properly generate them. This is now hurting them, and they're looking to throw the cost of their mistake onto the consumer.

Intel

[HTH NE1 (675604)]

From the article:

"showing off ads from Dell, Intel, Discovery Channel, Intel, NBC, Verizon and even the Navy among others."

But will there be ads from Intel?

It's not only the immersion spolied

[iampiti (1059688)]

Besides the immersion being spoiled (at least for me), just think how out of place the ads are going to feel a few months from now.
When I saw that huge axe ad in burnout i thought what's doing it there? it's just so big and outstanding.
Please stop the advertisements in games!

Getting popular?

[fotbr (855184)]

Maybe with marketing. But not with any gamer I've talked to.

None of those games are going to be cheaper to buy because of their ads, which is the only way the gaming community is going to like this. If I can get what would have been a $50 game for $20 because it has ads, I might consider buying the game. But I'm not keen on paying "full" price for a game with ads.

Re:

[fotbr (855184)]

Sorry, I don't agree -- PC games have long been about the same price as console games ($40 - $60), yet have supported a far more complex range of hardware, including higher resolutions than HDTV, and have done so for several years.

Adverts in Crackdown?

[Lightwarrior (73124)]

What? I own Crackdown, and I haven't seen a single in-game ad for any real world products - mentioned or otherwise.

Re:

[Xzzy (111297)]

Open your eyes then dude, because every billboard in the game has an advertisement on it.

Dodge seems to be the most popular one.

Product Placement or Game Displacement?

[gurps_npc (621217)]

I see no problem with Product Placement Adds (Billboard inside the game that you can see, maybe even shoot up etc.)

But I would demand my money back if they did the kind of crap the movies let people get away with (Ads where trailers used to be, etc.)

What's The Problem

[wolff000 (447340)]

As long as the ads are done well I don't care if they are in my game. We see all kinds of stuff in games that would normally have an ad on it in real life. I don't know how many games have fake ads for products that don't exist to ad to the realism. It doesn't make a difference to me if the vending machine my character walks by says Soda or Cocoa-Cola. Honestly if done correctly in game advertising could really add to the realism of games. Yes it could be very easily overdone and become invasive but if done correctly it could improve games. How you say? Extra income! If the game developers themselves got cash for incorporating real world products in games they could spend more money developing the games and afford to hire better talent. This could be a very good thing for games then again if done wrong it could be the worst thing ever. Only time will tell.

Re:What's The Problem

[crabpeople (720852)]

"We see all kinds of stuff in games that would normally have an ad on it in real life"

So, in real life, ads are everywhere. With no debate as to whether or not this is desireable, you have concluded that the practice should naturally be ported to games.

Hows this for a compromise: Less ads in real life, to bring them down to an ingame level.

 

"Yes it could be very easily overdone and become invasive"

Could be? Thats the entire POINT of advertising!

Re:What's The Problem

[cliffski (65094)]

why stop with games then? why not do this in movies too? and books, and plays, and music?
I think pink floyds dark side of the moon would been better if they had managed to get 'pepsi' into the lyrics don't you think?
And why have lammas bread in lord of the rings, when frodo could have just feasted on a pizza hut pizza instead?

Seriously, games are in some ways an artistic endeavour, they should be designed to be fun, and immersive. Anything that compromises that ideal will make a worse game. Do I *really* think this level will play / feel / look better with yet another vending machine in it? Or has my boss told me we need 16 coke machines in the game, and so I don't have a choice in the matter?

Don't let the ad dollars become a factor in map design. And trust me they DO become a factor. I've worked on games with billboard ads, I've heard the design decisions change to fit in more billboards.
I will NEVER put ads in my games.

lj post

[Turn-X Alphonse (789240)]

May as weell just link to a post I made on Livejournal. It says everything and has screenshots to boot

http://community.livejournal.com/gamers/2152581.ht ml [livejournal.com]

When $70 isn't enough for a game.

[necro2607 (771790)]

Oh, so I guess the $70 CDN I dropped for Crackdown wasn't enough, they have to make even further revenue by showing advertisements in my game?

If they're going to start using these irritating not-too-decent tactics to make money, I'd like to see a reduction in the exhorbitant friggin prices for games. Give me a break, it's not like Microsoft is strapped for cash. But hey, no worries, right? I guess now I know not to buy any titles related to this "Massive" subsidary.

Re:

[mandelbr0t (1015855)]

Publishers see this as a huge potential for increased game revenues to help offset the rising development costs for the Xbox 360, PS3 and Wii.

Excuse me? Rising costs of development? What about all Ballmer's chanting about developers? What's this .NET for if not reducing development costs?

So basically what I'm hearing is that even though we've made staggering breakthroughs in hardware, have an embarassment of good development environments to choose from and 10 years of training professionals on new technology, the cost of development has actually increased? Did the price of cocaine go up or something?

I don't believe this crap for a second. Spoile

In game adds are not bad...

[Broken scope (973885)]

When some of the benefits comeback to the consumer. If im fighting in a city I'm not going to be annoyed by adds that MAKE SENSE IN THE CONTEXT THEY APPEAR. If I'm in a city and they year ingame is 2507 I don't want to see Martha Stewart Spring collection on a billboard.

Advertising in games works when they are advertising a BRAND not a product. If advertisers could accept that then ads would not be obtrusive.

Hmm...

[Pojut (1027544)]

See, I don't really care if there are in-game adverts in games like crackdown...it's a city, it will help it feel more like a real city.

That being said, if they are going to make money from advert companies putting their shit in there, then pass the savings..make third party titles 50 bucks and first party titles 40 bucks.

Also, don't do it like they did in Fight Night Round 3. I know boxing is like Nascar in that most of the money comes from advertising, but fuck. Give that shit a rest.

This is great!

[lewp (95638)]

So that means the games won't be...

Oh... really? Still $60?

Nevermind.

Oddly enough...

[Assmasher (456699)]

...ads in a game like CrackDown actually (maybe I'm crazy but at least to me) more immersive in that it seems a bit more of a 'real world' setting type. I'm not explaining this very well, but it seems very much in line with the urban setting of CrackDown (heck they have to decorate those boards with something anyhow.) Now, if I see ads for the R600 in Oblivion...

marketing everywhere

[miyako (632510)]

I mourn the fact that the floodgates have been opened, because I think this will lead to the inevitable decline of the quality of games. For the moment- sure, it doesn't hurt anything, it might even add realism by having actual products in the game, but how long until some game developers are sitting around going "ok, so then we have this level where they walk through a forest and..." "what are you thinking bob? a forest? we can't stick ads in the middle of a forest, how 'bout a 10 minute long cutscene where they are on a subway instead, and ads flash by" "But Jim, the game takes place in 1047AD!" "Hmm, you're right, this whole setting needs to be changed"...etc. Of course, that's the more subtle way that ads will ruin games, the obvious fact is that advertisers don't f*cking realize that people get tired of their f*cking ads, and they keep pusing more and more intrusive ads on us. For people who say "ads will only go as far as players are willing to put up with them" - see the internet. People develop pop-up blockers and flash blockers and ad blockers to avoid ads, and marketers just keep comming up with new ways to spew their crap forth into our minds- single mindeldly bent on infesting every single facet of our lives with ceaseless messages to buy buy buy their soda and pills and toothpaste.

Oh so what

[Bluesman (104513)]

If it bothers you, just don't buy the game.

Buy a cool, refreshing Coca-Cola instead.

Brought to you by Magnavox, and Pepsi

[Omestes (471991)]

Advertising is really beggining to reach the level of absurdity. I can understand the line of reasoning behind putting advertisements on non-cable TV, but this strange trend to put advertisements into content that the consumer already has paid for boggles my mind. Yes, advertising to cover the costs free services makes sense, but when it goes towards a pay service it is nothing but greed and trying to sodomize your customers for more money.

I stopped going to baseball games because our stadium here is so peppered in ads that it distracts from the game (heck, when ESPN or such is broadcasting the game, sometimes they even pause the game for ads on TV). Our local school buses (whats left to them, most kids now being forced to use our shoddy public transportation) have ads on them. You buy a new computer and it is covered with useless services which pretty much amount to the same thing as ads. Hell its beginning to seem that a good portion of online "user" content is nothing but ads. Avertisers are now turning to strange manipulations like sending nice looking women to bars to through our nonchalant comments like "Man, my new copy of MICROSOFT WINDOWS VISTA makes me steamy and hot!".

What ever happened to quality selling a service?

I really think that ubiquitous advertisement is having bad consequences on people psychologically and sociologically. Advertisements depend on people not using judgment, and encouraging snap judgments based on no information, which, last I checked, is not a desirable trait. Second they further fragment society into little classes. "I'm a Nike person, who likes Coke, and runs Windows!", "Oh yeah? I'm a Reebok person who drinks Mountain Dew, and has a Mac!" Call it brand loyalty or idiocy. Hell I even knew a girl with the Nike swoosh tattooed to her arm (willingly, Nike has nothing to do with it), she didn't understand my laughing at her like it was the most absurd thing I've ever seen. She really thought that "Nike" meant something (not the goddess, the corporate symbol), which is the ultimate goal of these companies.

To get a little postmodern here, advertisements try to manipulate us to live in some realm of arbitrary symbols. They try to manipulate us in all ways except rationally. The whole game is creating a need where none really exists, and this extends beyond individual products, to the whole class of consumerism. We actually beleive, now, that we need various consumer goods to survive, and we need to update these every product revision. Take cell-phones for example, how often have people told you that they couldn't live without them? We don't need consumer goods to survive. We don't need to upgrade them daily.

The new form of ads are even subverting the best way to find quality products, word of mouth. How can you trust anyone when shills are spending millions creating artificial word of mouth? I'll continue blocking all ads online, not watching television, and staying away from sporting events, and boycotting services with obnoxious ads (as opposed to innocuous or clever ones saying what a service actually does).

Yes, you can tell that this whole issue pisses me off.

Re:Brought to you by Magnavox, and Pepsi

[Omestes (471991)]

But aren't ads just really a part of culture, our shared experiences?

Yes and no. They manipulated parts of our culture, existing only for the profit on one small group of people and not the culture as a whole. They are made up, and not organic, and while some might dismiss that as pedantic, I think that authenticity is a very important concept. Most cultural displays exist for a reason good for the culture as a whole, but ads only exist to manipulate people. Advertiser dehumanize us, and use us as mere tools, which is hard to see in a positive light.

Why would they EVER let us have a choice? It's like automatic check-out in supermarkets, they can save money by firing employees and forcing their customers to do their job, with no benefit to the consumer what so ever. We take it because we have to, since there are generally LONGER lines now at check-out. If a discount was passed down to the consumer (ever) I wouldn't mind, but it is forced on us since we don't exist as people, only as nice little "money units" to be manipulated at will.

Perhaps I'm old fashioned and don't like people playing games with me, or using me for their ends with no benefit to me.

It's here to stay, and I bet if you went back and read op-ed pieces from newspapers 100 years ago there'd be people complaining about how ads have "reached the level of absurdity."

And perhaps they were right, and it has just been getting steadily worse since. I know its here to stay, because people are always apathetic cogs who accept what their given, and thanks to advertising this is a psychological fault that we endorse more and more, why would we ever try to bring free-thought as a virtue into our society, you make more money with sheep, it isn't in anyones best interest to raise a critical society. Notice how the same tools used by advertisers are now used by politicians? And that these manipulation gimmicks actually WORK? This is because we are conditioned towards this idiotic reaction.

Sorry for the rant tone, I'm just getting sick of being an instrument for someone else's ends.

Re:

[Pojut (1027544)]

they went to the same place that 30 cent gallons of gas and 10 cent loafs of bread went....nowhere. They are still right where you left them years ago.

Getting old kinda blows, eh?

"Rising development costs of the Wii"

[Overly Critical Guy (663429)]

The article mentions the Wii in that sentence, yet the Wii is by far the cheapest to develop for, by several hundred thousand, and in some cases a million or more, dollars. I'd say the Wii is the least likely to ever get ads in its games. One more reason to avoid the Dreamcast 360 and Rapestation 3 at all costs.