Videogames And Car Marketing Intersect

Thanks to the Detroit News for their article discussing how videogames have become a great selling tool for automobiles. The piece discusses the willingness of car manufacturers to see their models used in games, with a few exceptions: "Sony Computer Entertainment America spokesman Ryan Bowling says Ferrari, Porsche and Lamborghini demanded exorbitant licensing fees - but that's why they aren't in Gran Turismo." It also mentions the thorny issue of car damage, with Alex St. John of WildTangent, developer of a Chrysler 'advergaming' title, noting: "In the past, advertisers could never imagine a commercial where you dent a car... But half the fun of a game is driving recklessly." A Chrysler spokesperson explains this change of heart for their new game, saying "...corporate attorneys determined that gaming is enough of a 'fantasy' to make it permissible to damage vehicles."

A revelation

[iq in binary]

Now, instead of the massive amount of people who purchase racing games because of the cars they can drive/customize/bastardize; the market will grow tenfold because of the people who buy racing games because of the ability to destroy said cars. ;)

Re:A revelation

[woohoodonuts]

I understand the premise behind namebrand familiarity... but I have a hard time believing anyone is going to spend thousands of dollars on a car simply because they got to wreck it in a video game like this article suggests.

Sure, maybe just continually seeing one of these cars on the screen will make you turn your head once or twice and chuckle when it passes on the street, but to drop 10, 20, 30 grand on a car because you played it in a video game? Come on, this guy is going to drop 50k on a car just because it's on PS2?
It's not like these are even niche companies looking for a market. Who hasn't heard of Chevy, Ford, Toyota, Nissan? I'm not saying marketing doesn't work... sure, get the name out there as much as possible--but how can you say someone is going to buy a car just because they got to play it in a game?

On top of that, he calls video gaming REALISTIC conditions? Okay, maybe game physics or what have you are accurate... but how in the crazy hell is pushing a button the same as pressing a pedal and feeling your entire body shift? To call video game driving realistic conditions is wishful thinking.

Re:A revelation

[Daetrin]

I think the idea of advertising for big-ticket items like cars isn't to make you go out and buy one right _now_. Primarily they want to make sure that when you're going out to get a new car _anyways_ that you think of them then. They're not as much aimed at promting action as influencing decisions.

A certain small percentage of people are on the edge of buying a car at any given point, so the comercials are aimed primarily at them, but at all the rest of us in a long term campaign of indoctrination.

As for whether marketing even works at all, there have been some cases where very well done or very lucky marketing campaigns have had a significant impact. (For example, to reference a recent slashdot thread, the DeBeers attempt to convince americans to buy diamonds for engagement rings and other romantic jewelry.) However i believe that in most cases the evidence shows that marketing is effective, but only if it's not facing any counter marketning. Which makes it a Prisoners' Dilema type problem. If neither Coke nor Pepsi advertised they could both save a lot of money and probably not affect their market share much. However if one of them decided to stop advertising and the other didn't, the one without advertising would see a loss of sales, so both companies are "forced" to spend millions (billions?) on advertising.

This may extend to different kinds of marketing as well. If Chrysler has it's product features in a fun game they may see a rise in sales from people who were thinking about buying a car, played the game, and were slightly influenced. (It doesn't have to be a _big_ influence, there are a lot of people out there buying cars, and for some percentage of them a small amount of influence can tip the decision.) However if and when other manufacturers start using games as marketing that edge may very well disapear. At that point all of them will be commited to producing these advertising games without actually gaining any real advantage from them, but will be unable to stop as long as their competitors continue.

Re:A revelation

[ksheff]

It's all about putting something associated with your brand in front of eyeballs. Retailers are even paying to put their 'ads' in the virtual landscape of these sort of video games.

Re:A revelation

[kisrael]

However i believe that in most cases the evidence shows that marketing is effective, but only if it's not facing any counter marketning. Which makes it a Prisoners' Dilema type problem. If neither Coke nor Pepsi advertised they could both save a lot of money and probably not affect their market share much. However if one of them decided to stop advertising and the other didn't, the one without advertising would see a loss of sales, so both companies are "forced" to spend millions (billions?) on advertising.
Or, (and I'm not sure if either of us has much solid backing for their opinion,) maybe the Pepsi/Coke "war" isn't quite such a zero-sum game, and that while they're struggling against each other for a larger slice of the pie of all softdrink drinkers, by generating media exposure and getting people to think about drinking refreshment, they're increasing the size of the pie, and more people are drinking soda than would otherwise.

Re:A revelation

[gmhowell]

Much of it is name recognition. Put Chrysler in your head all the time. In a year, when you want to buy a car, some neurons in the back of your head say 'let's start with the Chryslers'.

There's a bit more to it, but lots of advertising works like this.

Re:A revelation

[SnowDog_2112]

The other thing to realize is that people who are car enthusiasts/hobbyists always carry around a top-ten list in their minds. "If I had $30K I would buy a (foo) and add a (bar) and then modify the (wompus)." Having a car in a game will not change somebody's mind, but it lets them live out part of that fantasy and increase the hype.

This isn't about creating demand, it's just another part of the hype machine. Let's say Jim Sixpack has meticulously researched and test driven two comparable cars, but can afford neither right now. He's constantly wishing he had either of them: he has posters of them in his office, he can rattle off the engine specs, he can list the common modifications. Now he buys the next "realistic" car sim, and one of them is in there, and one isn't. He spends the next 8 months racing one of those cars, adding custom touches to it, modifying it, winning race after race in it.

Do you think that might influence his decision of which car to put a downpayment on when his tax refund comes in?

Re:A revelation

[pinkfloyd89]

No one would spend the money just because it was in the game but look at the sucess of the Subaru WRX, a lot of that can be linked to the Gran Turismo series for increasing American's awareness of that car.

Re:A revelation

[iainl]

Its actually a two-step process.

Firstly, companies really do see a boost because their cars are featured in the hot games, just as they do if they are in popular films. Being the drive of choice in, say, Gran Tourismo does at least as much for your credibility with some sections of the market as Tom Cruise chasing the bad guys in it for others. My dream car is the Ferrari F355 Spider, despite its replacement, the F360, being faster, because its so wonderful to drive in F355 Challenge. And if its good for Y

Re:A revelation

[Singletoned]

I have to say that all the cars I dream about buying are ones that I've had a lot of fun driving in the various GT games. The Subaru Impreza, Jaguar XJ220 and even the new Mini Cooper are cars that I loved in GT for racing in their respective classes, and consequently are the cars I love.

Equally, cars that I hated driving in GT are cars that I no longer like (such as the new Beetle).

For a lot of people, their only experience of driving expensive cars is games like GT (I've never driven a Jaguar or Subaru

Re:A revelation

[einTier]

It certainly does. Why do you think the Skyline GT-R is so popular in the United States -- despite the fact that you can't even buy it here? Because it's one of the fastest and most capable cars you can buy in Gran Turismo, along with many other car racing games.

I'm sure that Subaru didn't have to overly market its WRX or Mitsubishi its Lancer Evo when they finally came over here, because the brand recognition was already there. Kids (and adults) had been begging for these cars for years.

Most people

Re:A revelation

[zero_offset]

but you can definately tell that a Dodge Viper, while being hellaciously fast, is difficult to control

Except for the little problem of that not being true. I have put thousands of race track miles on my Viper. I chose the Viper precisely because it is both mind-bendingly powerful and handles extremely well. Yes, you can do things which will get you into trouble, but no more so than with any other car of similar power. I can't even count the number of ex-Porsche owners I've met who moved to the Viper after

Re:A revelation

[einTier]

Don't know if you'll read this, as the article is old, but anyway...

I wasn't trying to imply that the Viper doesn't handle well. It's a great car for the track. What I am saying is that it does take a good level of skill to know how to drive it correctly. The novice driver / Viper crash rate reminds me of the early Porsche 911s. If I had a Viper, I know I wouldn't let others drive it, simply because it's too much car for an unskilled driver.

On the other hand, I know many cars that won't try to trick

Re:A revelation

[zero_offset]

I understand the point you're making, but I'm still inclined to disagree. I would put more emphasis on driver responsibility than attributing any fault (or credit) to the vehicle. A level-headed but otherwise inexperienced driver who doesn't just get himself psyched out over climbing into a Viper (and therefore prone to stupid mistakes because his mind isn't on *driving*) would almost certainly turn better lap times in a Viper than in a Miata. The examples you gave really don't make any sense to me.

The li

Re:A revelation

[einTier]

I think you are still misunderstanding my point. I wasn't trying to insinuate that the Miata is a better car than the Viper. It isn't. I wouldn't be that dumb. Maybe I could have chosen a better car for comparison's sake, but I don't remember an early Porsche 911 (severe lift-off oversteer) being available in Gran Turismo (or Sega GT for that matter).

I know how wide the Viper's tread is. I'm aware of its performance capabilities. When I say more forgiving, how much warning does the Viper give you bef

Re:A revelation

[zero_offset]

I am, in fact, saying a Viper is easy to drive as fast as a Miata. Probably easier, because those limits are much farther away. When you're in a Viper and you approach a Miata's limits, you're maybe two thirds of the way towards the Viper's limits. That was the point I was trying to make.

I wasn't saying it's forgiving of mistakes, I was saying you have to push a lot harder before you're making a mistake which requires forgiveness. :)

Re:A revelation

[einTier]

As always, arguments come down to definitions.

Again, I never said that a novice driver in a Viper would turn slower times than a novice in a Miata. You're still misconstruing my point.

What I did say is that a novice driver in a Miata could find, approach, exceed, and learn the limits of a Miata faster and easier than he could with a Viper. Let me just use some hypothetical numbers that I made up on the spot. Let's assume a course that an expert driver can drive a Miata around in 1:25. He can drive th

Re:A revelation

[paradesign]

Its the best reason for buying Colin McCree 3.

One More Step

[illuminata]

The only thing that they have to do now is put officially licensed cars in the Grand Theft Auto series, and I'll be happy. I'm surprised that they wouldn't want to after its success.

Re:One More Step

[Goldberg's Pants]

Given the steadily building controversy with GTA, I doubt any car manufacturer would want to associate with them.

Back with Need for Speed 3: Hot Pursuit (and High Stakes), unless you downloaded a hack, you couldn't race the Ferrari and... Mercedes? (Ferrari for sure) in the mode where you escape from the police because they didn't want the car associated with illegal acts.

I can only imagine their reaction to Rockstar saying "Say, can we put out your car in Grand Theft Auto?"

Re:One More Step

[illuminata]

I posted that with your idea in mind.

Unless a car company wanted to showcase their security system...

Re:One More Step

[77Punker]

Well, it also stands that in High Stakes the pursuit mode wasn't all that difficult. With the Ferrari or Mercedes (the faster one) available, it would be wayyyy too easy to out run a cop.

Re:One More Step

[meta-monkey]

I'm not sure that's true.

It's a cliche, but it's true: there's no such thing as bad publicity. Automaker gets his car put into GTA 4 or whatever, and when the controversy errupts over whatever horrible thing you do in that game (I don't know...score extra points by punching infants or something...) then it'll be plastered all over the news, including stories about how said automaker sponsors the game. Regardless, said automaker gets his name heard by everybody for free. Sounds like a good deal to me.

Re:One More Step

[Singletoned]

Also, how many people actually associate Ferraris (for example) with careful, law-abiding driving?

Aren't you perhaps more likely to associate them with driving fast and recklessly?

Hell, drug dealers, criminals and businessmen are their target audience (no one else has the money).

Tacky?

[Ratso Baggins]

Using Carmageddon to sell SUV's is a little too far perhaps? but you gotta love the feeling!

Re:GTA 5?

[Goldberg's Pants]

Then some guy mows down a bunch of pedestrians in his car, and not only do Rockstar get sued, but the car maker as well since they're now linked to it... In the lawsuit happy US, I can't see any car makers legal department saying "This is a good idea!"

It'll be a cold day in hell before licensed cars are in GTA.

Re:GTA 5?

[WormholeFiend]

I cant remember when a "the videogame made me do it" lawsuit won.

besides, the car industry has the means to buy the best lawyers of the land.

Re:GTA 5?

[meta-monkey]

I believe the most appropriate vehicle would be the Chevrolet Trantrum [theonion.com].

I'll be the coolest kid on the block...

[foidulus]

With my brand new video game featuring my mom's Ford station Wagon! All the kids will want to hang with me!

No more fast cornering

[Singletoned]

I've always found that that the lack of damage and the atrocious AI meant that you could always corner past the pack by slamming into them sideways on. You could almost take a corner at full speed AND take out an opponent in one movement. If that's gone, I'll be a little disappointed.

Re:No more fast cornering

[Reapy]

That's funny because that is the one aspect of grand turismo that bothers me. It's a simulation game all about driving well, yet you can bounce off the pack of cars, take them out, and speed on to victory, rather then actually racing past them. Heck, even just bumping it's all messed up. I WANT damage. If there was damage, grand turismo would be the best racing game ever.

Licencing costs can decide game content

[Anonymous Coward]

I worked on a recent racing game (that used hotted up average cars rather than Porche or Ferraris probably due to the high licencing costs). The car manufacturers wanted more money if the cars were going to have damage so they decided to cut that feature.

They also become upset if their car under-performed another (even if that was the case in real life) so the cars all seemed to handle the same.

Re:Licencing costs can decide game content

[meta-monkey]

I've wondered about how sports figures feel about their stats in a game. Do you think a lousy football player ever picks up a copy of Madden, and then gets pissed off when he sees the designers gave him a 58 on speed and a 61 on endurance?

Re:Licencing costs can decide game content

[Anonymous Coward]

Would this game be Need For Speed Underground?

Advergaming

[TasosF]

This is basically a branded interactive commercial practice, called advergaming, applied to the automobile sector. There are games out promoting all kinds of products and industries and they're pretty successful. Forrester Research predicts advertising revenues from online gaming will reach $1 billion by 2005.

YAYA [yaya.com], a company that creates such games has a Chrysler case study [yaya.com]on their site that reads:

Results: The game went online Aug. 13 and in its first week attracted 40,000 players, with an average age of 45. Some 42 percent were women. What's turned the head of DaimlerChrysler marketers is the high percentage of users who expressed interest in learning more about Chrysler products. Of the 40,000 Get Up and Go users, 68 percent requested more information. They've also created games for Ford and GM with similar successes.

What I found interesting was a survey (by Harris Interactive and PERT Survey Research) that found 40 percent of the Web sites of the companies they surveyed offered games but that only 12 percent of the consumers surveyed said they wanted games.

1 word: Gran Turismo

[superpulpsicle]

I can't think of another game that markets cars better than Gran Turismo. Come on now, I consider myself a car fanatic and I have never heard of Nissan Skyline until the game came out.

Re:1 word: Gran Turismo

[Bradee-oh!]

I consider myself a car fanatic and I have never heard of Nissan Skyline until the game came out.

Believe me - then you're not a car fanatic. :P

Re:1 word: Gran Turismo

[Hedonist123]

Um, that's two words. I'm such a jerk.

hed.

So it was the lawyers all along?

[Teppy]

I've wondered why the car companies were so anal about this.

Taking PR advice from your lawyer is like taking financial advice from your bookie.

Re:So it was the lawyers all along?

[chrismcdirty]

So I shouldn't have bet on the Eagles?
Damn my bookie!

Too expensive for some, but not others...

[iainl]

"Sony Computer Entertainment America spokesman Ryan Bowling says Ferrari, Porsche and Lamborghini demanded exorbitant licensing fees - but that's why they aren't in Gran Turismo."

Curiously, not only are the first two in PGR2, but can be damaged as well. I guess its all in the priorities, and GT seems more interested in making sure there is yet another variation of the Evo 7 than anything that might handle differently. The third game's overemphasis on boring box saloons that happen to have very large rally

Porsches

[Ty_Webb]

In some games, when Porsche has not granted permission, the game company will go after Ruf [ruf-automobile.de] - a small company in Germany that takes normal Porsches and builds Rufs from them. As of now they are the smallest car manufacturer in the world - a product of the low volume and the fact that the cars they fashion get their own VINs.

However, sometimes Porsche grants permission (PGR2) but in the past they made their own game - 2000's Need for Speed: Porsche Unleashed (website has since closed, and still one of the most realistic car sims). All in all, an interesting topic.

Initial D arcade game is about Japanese car "ads"

[Webapprentice]

Besides Gran Turismo and some GTA, another popular driving game is Initial D

http://www.hitmaker.co.jp/game/INITIALD/

Initial D is based on an anime and manga about people street racing in modified Japanese cars.

The arcade game lets you pick a car, and for an additional purchase, you get a magnetic card to save your progress and win/loss records against other drivers (the arcade unit has 2 seats), among other things.

The whole premise is tuning and modding the car to make it go faster or handle better on s

i'm still looking forward

[WormholeFiend]

i'm still looking forward to the day some gaming company makes a games that has cars which you can actually wrap around a telephone pole, for example, and have the character driving it ejected through the windshield and fragged upon hitting pavement.

that an other realistic accident car-damage and fatalities.

if you have in-game car accidents linked to driver-character mortality, then maybe players could drive more carefully? just a thought.

Re:i'm still looking forward

[Incoherent07]

Since when did mortality ever affect players of video games? Hell, look at MMORPGs... you can be a complete idiot, get pkilled all day long, and it won't affect you in the least except for the loss of half a level and maybe some gold.

Re:i'm still looking forward

[WormholeFiend]

when I played GTA 3 and Vice City without cheating, I tried my best not to die when I had full-armor, and a bunch of well-loaded weapons, cuz dying meant having to restock.

I've never understood the damage policy

[zero_offset]

I can understand why, for example, Ferrari didn't want players using their cars to run from cops in Need For Speed 3. It annoyed me, and I think it probably had the opposite intended effect -- I ended up with a lower opinion of them. After all, I bought the game in order to run from cops (at least in part). But I can at least understand that.

What I can't understand is how they can possibly object to modeling vehicle damage. I just don't see how simulated damage is going to reflect negatively on... well, A